So, what happens if a new Rudd Labor government does ignore ADF’s professional choice, and requests a likely new US Democrat White House to export F-22As to Australia? If Kevin Rudd asked (Clinton or Obama) for the F-22A there’s a realistic chance RAAF may end up with that aircraft, instead of the F-35A it wants.
Doubtful. JSF offers $5 billion in home workshare for Australia. If it does well that figure goes up to $9 billion. The fact:
-Lockheed made a interactive CD search engine for LOEXCOM people to
fill in risk questions for export of a "B" model (export config)
F-22... The CD is called the "Technology Reliability Britannica." Type
in an F-22 component and it shows you Lockheed Martins assessment of
that component export risk.
-Lockheed Martin made various functions/components into the F-22
design to reduce technology compromise. Numerous protections with the
specific aim of making the F-22 design export friendly.
-DOD directed Lockheed Martin to study a second-tier, F-22
B-configuration export variant for other countries considered close
friends of the U.S. USAF was informed of this.
-Also stated in this paper:In April 2000, the Clinton Administration
announced it would give special export status under the ITAR to both
the UK and Australia—this would exempt these two countries from most
arms-export controls. This move would put these countries on par with
Canada, at that time the only country to enjoy this level of ITAR
status.
Any export limits on F-22 are to keep it away from places like Israel so the tech doesn't bleed to China. Not all pigs are equal. The silly funding law is easy to brush aside.
A positive risk assessment was done by industry for F-22 export to Australia. No matter as the JSF brief had $$$$$ of home workshare involved.
It’s service within the Australian-SEA geography and realistic/credible ‘opposition’ levels within the region that is relevant (that’s if we regard democratic neighbours as a threat, which seems to be the implicit presumption of most partisan advocates). The riotously abstract theoretical air power nightmares, continually conjured up as straw-men, by APA/Kopp, are completely irrelevant; i.e. a 33 klb AL-41F Flanker that does not exist in-service anywhere, and even if it did, with only 50% Internal fuel the T:W ratio is still only 1:1.32 and that’s less than a current in-service Malaysian MiG-29C/S @ 1:1.33-so why the deluge of hype and panic? RAAF HUG Hornets are quite capable of shooting down any MiG-29 in BVR A-to-A combat. T:W ratios and kinematics have practically nothing to do with that!
Big deal. Now tell me when the F-111 entered RAAF service and when the F-18 entered RAAF service. The big problem is that any capability bought today may have to last YEARS. Screw this up with silly poorly thought out purchases like the Super Slow Hornet and all the sudden $22billion for Super and JSF adds up to real money for a country that only has a population over 20 mil or so. China is putting money into local countries up north. A bit here a bit there and other places. ( Look it up )
As mentioned above, China’s primary interests are threefold. The first is to develop close ties with Dili as part of an on-going strategy of expanding Beijing’s influence in Southeast Asia while simultaneously lessening that of other powers, including the United States, Australia and Japan. Second, a close relationship with Dili limits Taiwan’s economic and political space in the region. Third, China is keen to exploit East Timor’s natural resources, especially oil and gas, but also copper, zinc and rare blue marble. Access to East Timor’s energy resources would provide China with an additional opportunity to diversify its sources of energy imports thereby enhancing the country’s energy security. A fourth, more-peripheral interest for China is that East Timor is a member of the Community of Portuguese Language Countries, which Beijing has been courting for a variety of reasons
http://www.jamestown.org/publications_details.php?volume_id=415&issue_id=3789&article_id=2371248
That isn't much now but PRC is putting money into a lot of things.
I find this interesting too...
http://www.iht.com/articles/2002/11/06/rgas_ed1_.php
Spending LESS money on keeping F-111 and having F-22s makes more sense. And looking slowly at alternatives to extending F-111 life even more or some other replacement down the pike. Again here, reason doesn't mean much as JSF is home workshare upt $9 billion worth and everything else doesn't count. There will be no logic here of capability of x y z.... only money.
By 2016 Australia will already have developed a formidable expeditionary capability, quite able to defend Australia, and of deploying a significant concentrated force, at long range.
This will be quite a magic trick I would like to see. I hope you don't mean the Canberra class. As those have limited survivability without strong air cover in any "expeditionary" form. Seeing as the Air Warfare Destroyer seems to want to go AEGIS this doesn't sound too good either as unknown chunks of that should be assumed to be compromised to the PRC due to poor U.S. security on the project. Explain to me this "expeditionary" force.
Given F-35A will have advanced BVR (Beyond Visual Range) capabilities exceeding those an updated 4th-generation Sukhoi BVR fighter could expect to survive against-a sound expectation, given what’s known of F-35A, plus RAAF BVR doctrine, combined with networked support and numerous off-board sensors-the fundamental
Unknown, given the fact that JSF is the "Buick of Stealth" ( you did want the low price didn't you?) and is narrow band stealth. I doubt it will be a slam dunk to go up against a Flanker. I think a Flanker will have some challenges, however I don't think it is a given all the way around that JSF will dominate. One negative stealth event and it is pretty naked. F-22 can contempt of engage if given a negative stealth event. Not to mention the F-22 stealth is of higher quality, and much more all aspect. And in super cruise the F-22 at 60k can throw an AMRAAM much longer.
Here is what the F-22 will do when you put JDAM GBU-32 on it or SDB.... win wars like nobody's business. In this form you have to stop the thing. With a legacy jet.... good luck. The battle space speed at super cruise and being able to loft SDB and JDAM at super-sonic release at 50-60k and you have some serious range that contempt of engages most known SAM systems. After that it still has 2 AMRAAM on board and 2 AIM-9 for clean up if needed. However that isn't as important as the sortie rate. An F-22 with super cruise will sortie rate the hell out of JSF. More targets serviced per day per air frame. Not all and certainly most targets do not require a 2000lb warhead. After large SAMs and airpower are killed off JDAM-ER from F-111 could be dropped or any 2000lb JDAM non-ER and medium SAMs, trashfire, AAA, MANPADS couldn't even engage it. Kick the door down with F-22 and F-111 will do the remaining clean up. Not an especially hard exercise to pull off.
USAF already knows that F-22 can go into stiff IADS where an F-35 would have trouble. This is already documented.
Approximately 64 F-22A is not going to be enough airframes for both availability and sustained coverage, regardless of Mach 1.7 supercruise,
Wrong. F-22 has to be stopped when carrying JDAM or SDB. The enemy has to react to that strike package. Their airfields will be at considerable more risk. The kill ratios in exercises already show that smaller numbers of F-22 are more than enough to break an incoming force. Easy.
However, 100 x F-35A, supplemented with BVR capable UCAV would be at least as good, and far cheaper in availability and credible continental approach coverage terms. Especially, if for instance, a post 2020-25 reusable scram-jet, or ordinary jet UCAV could be boosted aloft, via ground-to-air rocket, from anywhere along Australia’s coastline, offshore territories, or even from ships, at any time, then recovered for reuse, via parachute and helicopter.
64 F-22 aren't enough yet you are willing to throw away something in the J-UCAS category or better UCAV at over 30 million a shot? We have lost over 1/3 of our Predators in Iraq and Afcrapistan. Advanced UCAVs you talk about for A2A work will have to seriously prove itself before a defence force (budget) like RAAF wants to pony up the money for something like that. Good luck x2. F-22 is grossly expensive but no problem mishapping out a super sized stack of tacos.
nfloorl: $$$$$$
The F-22A has no heavy weight long-range standoff weapon that can reliably smash a modern major naval unit, at a low-risk engagement ranges. With only 50 kg (only 110 lb) of energetic explosives, an SDB (small diameter bomb) is too low-energy to do major damage to a modern naval unit
False. You may want to learn up on what a torpeado does on an under the keel shot. SDB has penetration like a BLU-109. Fuse it right and it will cut right through and pop under the keel. Destroyer size or smaller mission kill. Also define major naval unit. Most today are thin tin that can be mission killed very very easy. SDB is cheap compared to the wonder weapon ASuW things like Harpoon etc. Your economy of scale is getting pretty bad. SDB II will make this even more fun for pretend navys. F-22 also has the stealth and battlespace mobility to stand up to any future AEGIS knockoffs made by the PRC.
JDAM is not a low-RCS weapon (like JSOW or JASSM on the Hornets and F-35A) and thus can be engaged and destroyed by a modern layered naval SAM and CIWS system, before a bomb can land on the ship.
Yet to be proven. Funny how other ships with SAM systems etc on Navy targets get waxed because of the human element. Oh it's a big threat however if you are the STARK, Sheffield etc. This doesn't deliver on the promise. Robo-cruiser (Vincennes) took out an airliner. Not too great for buck rogers performance ships. More: Shoot first, shoot enough. In order to do what you are suggesting you have to emit. If you are in EMCON you might not even pick up an F-22 flight and then you have to deal with the concept of saturation. You have to stop ALL of the incoming weapons. If it is a PRC AEGIS knockoff tech, it's only a matter of time before it goes bye bye.
But besides this, the F-22A does not have a GMTI surface-attack radar, with which to continuously update the JDAM’s aim-point in flight as the target moves and manoeuvres away from the original launch-time aim point. JDAMs, and several new precision-tracking attack weapons can only attack a ship via tricking the weapon’s GPS guidance system into think that a GMTI radar generated
Block upgrades to F-22 no problem. Super Hornet proved the concept of special datalinked JDAM shapes. JSTARS did it a few years earlier. Not a hard thing to do. Give me SDB II and I just have to get close before it goes terminal. At the end of the day these weapons are cheaper than traditional big ASuW warshots.
As for the JASSM. That is a pretty expensive shot to use on most naval targets unless you have a U.S. like inventory.
One thing also is there is another JSF anti-ship missile being looked at which would be very nice for it. And would in fact be the way to go IMHO. If your enemy ship is truely SAM fearsome you may want to stand off a bit with Buick of Stealth. The SDB ASuW method above might expose it to a negative stealth event. Don't know.
Be interesting to see what the price per shot of this is:
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2007/02/lockheed-kongsberg-partner-to-bring-nsm-to-jsf/index.php
But is even worse than this, because the F-22A doesn’t actually have any precision surface attack sensors, with which to even independently detect a ground or maritime target-at all!
Funny that is mentioned because they are going to put that into the next block. Don't know about GMTI but for land attack radar assisted (refinned) cords for JDAM a la B-1, B-2, etc must be the goal. Again, GMTI isn't a hard leap for F-22 block upgrades.
Also re: sensors. F-22 has growth room built in for a right and left cheek AESA array. Wasn't put in because of cost targets. And also growth space for IRST. ( again not put in so as to meet initial price targets ). Not a problem for growth. JSF on the other hand doesn't have any space... or weight margins left for growth.
The F-22A doesn’t carry any heavy long-range low-RCS standoff cruise or glide weapon, with which to safely smash an opponent’s air force, on the ground (the easiest and safest place to destroy one), from a high survivability strike range. The SDB is again, too small to provide sufficient destructive effect, on the full range of target types. JDAMs may be sufficient though, but the F-22A is again reliant upon external GMTI radar, or laser geo-location, to derive a secondary real-time GPS coordinate of enemy aircraft imaged (by other support platforms) at a targeted air base, etc. And again, the F-22A can’t do any of this by itself,
Wrong... and .... wrong. SDB will kill most target types. expect 60 mile range from 60k ft if not more. Safe enough. The upgrade I mentioned with NO GMTI is good enough to refine target cords and do the job to hand off to the JDAM on the rack. BTW, according to B-1 pukes, radar assisted JDAM bombing is scary accurate. If it is a fixed target no problem. Also a Hi res shot from AESA will be good enough to frag an airbase. No problem. Once air and big radar and SAMs are down... big deal... F-111 can kill anything left and the remaining threats won't be able to reach up to 35k or more. This is one reason USAF doesn't need JSF. Once big threats are killed off. Legacys can high alt bomb and kill off any piece of equipment you want. I can touch you, but you can't touch me.
And again, the airfield’s point-defence radar and SHORAD network could potentially track and engage JDAM bombs before they hit a target. In short, unless RAAF F-22A has a stealthy weapon, it can not destroy the air defence network radars-first-in order to effectively attack airbase targets with its JDAMs. F-22A’s have more stealthy SDBs, that may be able to degrade and destroy air defence radar sites, but even then, the never ending problem of detecting and geo-locating these for the SDBs, has to be done by some other supporting targeting platform.
Fantasy imagination on your part. If it emits, F-22 will geo locate it. Done and done. The idea that someone is going to light off expensive SAMs going after PGMs makes my day. Geo located and dead.
Such basic detection, identification and precise ground-attack weapon guidance tasks are beyond the capability of a hyper-expensive RAAF F-22A!
Wrong as mentioned above.
The F-22A could more accurately be described as a ’dumb-bomber’, because it has no first-hand view of what it may or may not be dropping weapons on. This bombing mode is taking a ‘Networked-Joint-Combat’ paradigm down a ridiculously inefficient and precarious path. F-35A completely negates any such external sensor or targeting support dependency.
This is called being way out of your skillset on your writing. Again targeting as I described above.
Consequently, RAAF F-22A will struggle and will fail to rapidly and decisively degrade and destroy a SEA opponent’s ability to wage war and project heavy Naval and ground forces. F-22A can not achieve that independently. If RAAF’s precision targeting support capabilities were destroyed or substantially attrited (say, via SLCM attack on UCAV operations centre and hard stands) or comms support channels were degraded, our hyper-expensive F-22A ‘bomber’ would progressively become quite useless-the RAAF capability for precision bombing would evaporate! i.e. ADF still has the aircraft and the bombs, it just can’t drop any on a target.
While I sincerely hope it NEVER happens. Everyone is in for a big education if the ballon goes up in Iran on what and how F-22 kicks down the door.
What you also forget is that a solid much more inexpensive and practical plan has F-111 as a back up. It won't be engaged by anything dropping JDAM and JDAM-ER and LGB from up high after F-22 kills off any big threats.
Enough on your strike warfare babble as most of it is wrong. Lets move on to something even more important.... CRUISE MISSLE Defence. F-22 with superior battle space mobility and AMRAAM C series can cut off and stop a portion of cruise missile attacks much better than a slower JSF... and oh by the way shorter range AESA used by JSF. F-22 also has a better chance to pop the shooter. (minus a sub shooter of course
)
