Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates

[The Big I]

I didn't say that the F-35 was a dud I ask what if the F-35 was a dud.

If you read the rest of what I wrote you would noticed I didn't say anything about the F-22 great plane but I don't think we need it the F-35 will do a much better job

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

The aircraft is already flying in all its versions.

Achem... point of order. Only the F-35A (AA1) has flown as yet (unless i misssed some news, have been away for the weekend) and the F-35B (BF2) has been compleated and is doing captive engine tests and the like, but it has not flown. The LRIP F-35C (???) has not been compleated AFAIK.

And I am talking US dollars, not Australian dollars.

Thats not a massive differece these days.

The Super Hornets will do a great job replacing your old Hornets.

The F/A-18F Bk II's will be replaceing the RAAF's F-111 fleet in No. 1 & 6 Squadrons, not the F/A-18C/D fleet which is currently planned to be replaced by F-35A's from 2015. There were rumors that the previous government had an interest in annother purchase of 24 F/A-18F BII's + 6~8 EA-18G's as a replacement for F/A-18C/D's instead of conducting the CBR programme.

And frankly, the USAF phased out the F-111s after the first Gulf war more than fifteen years ago. When you finally get the Lightnings, you will be able to use the Super Hornets as Growlers.

We probably should have replaced our PiG's with Strike Eagles in the late 90's instead of operating an orphan, strike limited platform, but things are allways clearer in hindsight. When we do get our F-35A's i doubt the whole 24 Rhino's will be converted to EA status, we have a standing requirement for ~100 platforms which will not be met unless we keep the F/A-18F's in addition to the 100 Lightnings. In any case 24 EA-18G's is overkill for a 4~5 squadron orbat, 6~10 would be plenty.

The United States of America don't have any other plans. America is expecting to order over 2,000 of the Lighning IIs. And while there are available Eurofighters and Griffens, don't expect to replace 75 Hornets by 2015.

You could argue that EF-2000 Tranche 2 would be less risky and could no doubt make the 2015 date, the platform is allready operational. However the additional capability provided by the F-35A was deemed to be worth the extra risk.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Thanks GD...

 

[weasel1962]

Re:

Deleted

 

[winnyfield]

The USAF is not replacing their F-15s one-for-one with the F-22. Should be a sign that the F-35A is more than adequate. Exact details haven't come out yet so it's all speculation.

As for Aussie procurement; SH will go ahead but that might make DoD buy the F-35 in batches - not such a bad idea as you can control costs.

 

[stray_kiwi]

The USAF is not replacing their F-15s one-for-one with the F-22. Should be a sign that the F-35A is more than adequate. Exact details haven't come out yet so it's all speculation.

Not replacing the F-15s one for one with F-22's could also be a sign of the rather hefty price tag the F-22 has, or the quantum leap in capability of the Raptor, or simply a change in US defense policy. Any number of reasons could be just as plausible as the F-35A being "more than adequate", but since the JSF is intended to replace the F-16 one would expect it should be able to perform air to air duties at least as well as the F-16, enabling them to supplement the F-22 if required.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Not replacing the F-15s one for one with F-22's could also be a sign of the rather hefty price tag the F-22 has, or the quantum leap in capability of the Raptor, or simply a change in US defense policy. Any number of reasons could be just as plausible as the F-35A being "more than adequate",

I agree with you on that one, the small number of F-22A's being pocured probably has more to do with the stupidly high price tag.

but since the JSF is intended to replace the F-16 one would expect it should be able to perform air to air duties at least as well as the F-16, enabling them to supplement the F-22 if required.

Well if it was "just as good" as the platform it was replaceing the whole JSF programme would have been a gigantic waste of time wouldnt it? I mean you could just buy more F-16 Block 50/60's at half the price. I think the leap in capability the F-35 over the F-16 will be comperable to the leap in capability the F-22A provided over the F-15.

 

[stray_kiwi]

Well if it was "just as good" as the platform it was replaceing the whole JSF programme would have been a gigantic waste of time wouldnt it? I mean you could just buy more F-16 Block 50/60's at half the price. I think the leap in capability the F-35 over the F-16 will be comperable to the leap in capability the F-22A provided over the F-15.

I was referring to the air to air capability of the F-35. If JSF is a great deal better in the strike role than the F-16 does it need to be vastly superior in air to air combat as well in order to be viable?

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I was referring to the air to air capability of the F-35. If JSF is a great deal better in the strike role than the F-16 does it need to be vastly superior in air to air combat as well in order to be viable?

I believe so. Remember it will be the premier A2A asset of the USN. Anyway the platform isnt strike oriented, the whole idea of a multirole platfrom is to do both roles equally well without dramatically compromiseing the other. Therefore the advances in A2G capability should be matched by the advances in A2A capability or the platfrom is not truely multirole in the same maner as the F-16/F-18 which it was designed to replace. Anyway have a look at the effect that VLO, the AN/APG 81, EOTS, DAS and one of the most advance EW suites in the world would have in the A2A environment. I think the F-35A~C will be a very lethal air superiority fighter considering the capabilities it brings to the table.

 

[rossfrb_1]

WRT
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23365937-31477,00.html
"Audit shoots holes in F-35 costings

Patrick Walters, National security editor | March 13, 2008

THE RAAF could be forced to drastically rethink the timetable and strategy
for acquiring up to 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in the wake of a US
government report, which points to lengthy development delays and cost
blowouts in the multi-billion-dollar project....."

I can only imagine that the superhornet purchase for the RAAF is now looking a lot solider (if it ever was on shaky ground).
And that a follow on purchase of more is a lot more likely.
Given that the Labor defence white paper is due out by the end of this year , I would have thought that it should be well placed to consider such things.
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/FitzgibbonTranscripttpl.cfm?CurrentId=7448


Oh yeah, for anyone who hasn't seen this - I'd suggest that some in this forum should take their blood pressure pills before reading it.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23360092-31477,00.html
"Audit shoots holes in F-35 costings

Patrick Walters, National security editor | March 13, 2008

THE RAAF could be forced to drastically rethink the timetable and strategy
for acquiring up to 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in the wake of a US
government report, which points to lengthy development delays and cost
blowouts in the multi-billion-dollar project.


Ex-RAAF chiefs doubt JSF case

Patrick Walters, National security editor | March 12, 2008

A GROUP of seven senior ex-RAAF officers has called for an independent review of statements made by Defence Department officials to a Senate inquiry on Australia's future air combat aircraft.
The group, led by retired air vice-marshals Peter Criss and Brian Graf,
has written to the Senate foreign affairs and defence committee arguing
that the Defence Department has not fully explored the case for alternatives to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter,
which is planned to become the RAAF's main strike fighter beyond 2014. ...."

 

[phreeky]

I'm sure I saw something on the new this morning along the lines of the super hornet purchased now confirmed to be going ahead. But it was Channel 10 morning news....

 

[Tasman]

According to an article in the Adelaide Advertiser the government will proceed with the Super Hornet purchase and an additional 32 are being offered to cover expected delays with the F-35.

THE Rudd Government will reluctantly proceed with plans to buy 24 F/A-18 Super Hornet fighters from the U.S. Navy for $6 billion.

And the Government has been offered another 32 of the Boeing-built aircraft in case it needs to plug any future air combat capability gaps.
The move coincides with the release of a new U.S. Government audit report that raises major concerns about the cost and delivery schedule for the stealth Joint Strike Fighter.

Australia is in line to buy $16 billion worth of the so-called fifth-generation fighters.

In its latest report on the $500 billion project, the U.S. Government Accountability Office warned the overall cost had been understated by $40 billion and it was running between 12 and 27 months late.

"We do not think the official JSF program cost estimate is reliable," the GAO said.

Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon said he was concerned about yet another JSF delay and cost blowout.

Mr Fitzgibbon told The Advertiser the previous government had made a "huge leap of faith" on the JSF delivery timetable and had jeopardised Australia's regional air power superiority.

"There has been no air capability planning over the past decade," he said.

"Air combat superiority is the key to our defence and it is no secret that it won't be long before countries in South-East Asia get access to fifth-generation aircraft."

The Super Hornets, which were hurriedly ordered by the Howard government defence minister Brendan Nelson against RAAF advice in late 2006, was the first project dealt with under the Labor Government's major air combat capability review.

The initial phase of the review is examining the nation's air combat requirements for the period 2010 to 2015.

Mr Fitzgibbon warned Boeing and the U.S. Navy that he would cancel the project if the review found that such a move was not in the national interest.

Last week the Government cancelled a $1 billion plus contract to provide Sea Sprite helicopters for navy frigates.

The first Super Hornets are due in RAAF service by 2010 to coincide with the retirement of the ageing F-111 fleet.

Defence officials warned that cancelling the order would cost taxpayers at least $400 million in penalties.

Senior U.S. Navy officials, including the head of the Hornet project office, were in Canberra last month to offer the Government the extra 32 aircraft.

At present Australia is just a partner in the JSF development phase, but will have to decide by next year whether to proceed with $16 billion worth of the stealth planes.

Australia is due to take delivery of its first JSF aircraft in 2014. A Lockheed Martin spokesman said the project remained on track and on budget.

"We are moving forward on our schedule," he said.

http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,23365290-5006301,00.html

It should be noted that no source is quoted and this is the same paper that reported last year that a fourth AWD would be ordered by the navy! If true, however, it would seem that commonsense has prevailed.

Tas

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

According to an article in the Adelaide Advertiser the government will proceed with the Super Hornet purchase and an additional 32 are being offered to cover expected delays with the F-35.



http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,23365290-5006301,00.html

It should be noted that no source is quoted and this is the same paper that reported last year that a fourth AWD would be ordered by the navy! If true, however, it would seem that commonsense has prevailed.

Tas

The GAO report does strengthen the case for a further Rhino purchase. Note the number of aircraft is 32, meaning 24x F/A-18F BII and 8 EA-18G perhapse? Maybe Magoo can comment on that one. Such cost over runs and timetable slips are prety stock and standard for a project of this complexity and scope, so this is hardly suprising.

In any case a 50/50 orbat is not ideal IMO, but it will allow us to buy later block F-35's at a cheaper price and possibly take up Boeings "6th gen" offer by 2030, if of cource that is deemed available for export, comes in on time and on budget.

 

[Aussie Digger]

According to an article in the Adelaide Advertiser the government will proceed with the Super Hornet purchase and an additional 32 are being offered to cover expected delays with the F-35.
http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/story/0,22606,23365290-5006301,00.html

It should be noted that no source is quoted and this is the same paper that reported last year that a fourth AWD would be ordered by the navy! If true, however, it would seem that commonsense has prevailed.

Tas

No source for Australia proceeding with the Super Hornets is given and the article contradicts itself mid-way through...

Another shining example of the rigorous attention to detail which the broadsheets apply to their work...

Given the Air Combat Review is barely 3 weeks old, I very much doubt whether anything has been decided yet...

 

[Aussie Digger]

WRT
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23365937-31477,00.html
"Audit shoots holes in F-35 costings

Patrick Walters, National security editor | March 13, 2008

THE RAAF could be forced to drastically rethink the timetable and strategy
for acquiring up to 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in the wake of a US
government report, which points to lengthy development delays and cost
blowouts in the multi-billion-dollar project....."

I can only imagine that the superhornet purchase for the RAAF is now looking a lot solider (if it ever was on shaky ground).
And that a follow on purchase of more is a lot more likely.
Given that the Labor defence white paper is due out by the end of this year , I would have thought that it should be well placed to consider such things.
http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/FitzgibbonTranscripttpl.cfm?CurrentId=7448


Oh yeah, for anyone who hasn't seen this - I'd suggest that some in this forum should take their blood pressure pills before reading it.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23360092-31477,00.html
"Audit shoots holes in F-35 costings

Patrick Walters, National security editor | March 13, 2008

THE RAAF could be forced to drastically rethink the timetable and strategy
for acquiring up to 100 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters in the wake of a US
government report, which points to lengthy development delays and cost
blowouts in the multi-billion-dollar project.


Ex-RAAF chiefs doubt JSF case

Patrick Walters, National security editor | March 12, 2008

A GROUP of seven senior ex-RAAF officers has called for an independent review of statements made by Defence Department officials to a Senate inquiry on Australia's future air combat aircraft.
The group, led by retired air vice-marshals Peter Criss and Brian Graf,
has written to the Senate foreign affairs and defence committee arguing
that the Defence Department has not fully explored the case for alternatives to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter,
which is planned to become the RAAF's main strike fighter beyond 2014. ...."

I suppose we can but wait and see. Note the manufacturer and DoD don't agree with the GAO's assessment (nothing new there).

GAO has been found wanting in any number of "assessments" it has made, not least with the Super Hornet itself...

 

[Tasman]

No source for Australia proceeding with the Super Hornets is given and the article contradicts itself mid-way through...

Another shining example of the rigorous attention to detail which the broadsheets apply to their work...

Given the Air Combat Review is barely 3 weeks old, I very much doubt whether anything has been decided yet...

I agree with what you say AD. Regrettably, attention to detail in defence reporting has not been a feature of our major newspapers in recent times and the Adelaide Advertiser online service seems to make a habit of breaking stories without quoting sources. The 4th AWD "order" was a good example.

So far as the extra 32 SHs is concerned the Defmin would have to use a lot of spin to sell the idea (if he was to actually agree to it!) given his earlier criticism of the aircraft. It has been noticeable, however, that he has moved away from criticising the aircraft itself and is concentrating on attacking the process followed by the previous government.

Tas

EDIT

Just saw the same story in the Sun Herald and Ian McPhedran is the writer. Ian is usually one of the more reliable writers, IMO.

The headline was a joke. It read:

"Hornet jet fighter costs to skyrocket" (it is actually the F-35 where costs are under question) and the photo refers to the "fifth generation Super Hornet."

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23365302-662,00.html

I doubt McPhedran had anything to do with the headline or photo caption but the editor obviously doesn't know the difference between a Super Hornet, Hornet or F-35 other than the fact that they are fighters!

Tas

 

[RubiconNZ]

So far as the extra 32 SHs is concerned the Defmin would have to use a lot of spin to sell the idea (if he was to actually agree to it!) given his earlier criticism of the aircraft. It has been noticeable, however, that he has moved away from criticising the aircraft itself and is concentrating on attacking the process followed by the previous government.

Tas

You know as disappointed as I was with the outcome of the election I was resolved it somewhat with the thought as with many that at least it would allow fresh perspective, and though mistrust of politicians is embedded in Western cultureI was mildly optimistic, now through all the back tracking, and blame game I am quite disappointed with the continued point scoring and finger pointing, the Super hornet being one of many,

I am astounded that still, reading comments on ABC news etc, of those that mock the Super hornet purchase in favor of the F-22, to me its like buying a Phillips head screwdriver for a regular screw, both are screwdrivers but for different purposes, well thats my rant,

On a positive not I see the 4th C-17 has been accepted for service, now that was a successful project
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/entree.pl?prod=91956&shop=dae

 

[Tasman]

On a positive not I see the 4th C-17 has been accepted for service, now that was a successful project
http://www.defense-aerospace.com/cgi-bin/client/entree.pl?prod=91956&shop=dae

There are a few people like Hugh White who would disagree, arguing that the RAAF doesn't need 'giant" transport aircraft.

I agree that this was a very successful 'fast track' project and the aircraft are already proving their worth. If only the present government would fast track the extra Chinooks that the army badly needs along with additional Penguin equipped Seahawks to fill the capability gap in the navy.

Tas

 

[RubiconNZ]

I agree that this was a very successful 'fast track' project and the aircraft are already proving their worth. If only the present government would fast track the extra Chinooks that the army badly needs along with additional Penguin equipped Seahawks to fill the capability gap in the navy.

Tas

Indeed, lets hope the Government turns out to be hypocritical enough to see the need for fast tracked projects

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Just saw the same story in the Sun Herald and Ian McPhedran is the writer. Ian is usually one of the more reliable writers, IMO.

The headline was a joke. It read:

"Hornet jet fighter costs to skyrocket" (it is actually the F-35 where costs are under question) and the photo refers to the "fifth generation Super Hornet."

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,23365302-662,00.html

I doubt McPhedran had anything to do with the headline or photo caption but the editor obviously doesn't know the difference between a Super Hornet, Hornet or F-35 other than the fact that they are fighters!

Tas

I wouldnt expect much better from the sun, its kind of a joke down (or up as it happens) here as being a quick IQ test, becasue if you enjoy it more than the other broadsheets, then you must have a <80 IQ.

I agree that this was a very successful 'fast track' project and the aircraft are already proving their worth. If only the present government would fast track the extra Chinooks that the army badly needs along with additional Penguin equipped Seahawks to fill the capability gap in the navy.

If there wasn't all the hubub about capability the SH will turn out to be just as sucsesfull. Production lines humming along, proven platform, off the shelf identicle USN platforms. Theres no way we'll see any cost over runs or late deliveries on this one.