"ADF believes" or rather the DEFMIN and his advisors
Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Ahem, yes. Quite...
Perhaps they should have decided on the C-27 a few years ago, then...
a completetly unrealistic amount for the job,that by the way is 100% due to the australian publics complete and utter denial of wanting to assume responsibilty for their nations defence,as opposed to hiding behind the surrogate parents.we have to suffer before we as a nation will pay defence the proper attention it deserves.politicians are'nt in the driving seat when it comes to defence policy,their just implementing the collective will of a juvenile nation called australia...by the way,hello to you all.
Last edited:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
SMART BOMBS SCORE ANOTHER HIT IN EXTENDED RANGE TESTS
The JDAM-ER is a conventional JDAM, enhanced with an Australian-designed wing kit, based on technology licensed from the Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO).
“This round of testing builds on the initial proving of the wing attachment in August 2006 under the Capability and Technology Demonstrator (CTD) program managed by DSTO,” Mr Snowdon said.
“DSTO developed the gliding mechanism in a wing attachment that enables the 500-pound JDAM weapon to accurately find long-range targets, giving the launch aircraft a fire-and-forget capability at a safe standoff distance, well out of harm’s way from enemy threats on the ground.”
The JDAM-ER wing kit was developed by Boeing’s Hawker de Havilland subsidiary from DSTO’s original technology called ‘Kerkanya’ (an Aboriginal word for Kestrel Hawk).
The recent tests, conducted at the Woomera Test Facility in South Australia by the Aerospace Operational Support Group on Royal Australian Air Force F/A-18 Hornet aircraft, demonstrated further performance enhancements of the system.
“By increasing range and accuracy, the delivery of the weapon will be more effective, allowing a single aircraft to engage multiple targets while the extended range also increases the survivability of the aircrew and the aircraft launching the weapon,” Mr Snowdon said.
The latest tests were conducted under the scope of a Defence Materiel Organisation, Industry Division Minor Project to further develop the JDAM-ER into a usable product.
Mr Snowdon said the successful tests highlighted the value of CTD arrangements in maturing good ideas by combining industry and Defence resources.
Consideration will now be given to further develop the wing kits for commercial production.
“If the wing kits are commercially viable, there is likely to be significant Australian industry involvement in the manufacturing activities,” Mr Snowdon said.
Media note: Still images will be made available at www.defence.gov.au/media/download. Vision will be fed to the Federal Parliament House Press Gallery later today.
I hope these DO prove "commercially viable". They seem like a cheap way to gain a more effective capability for RAAF, if and when needed.
Best of luck, AOSG...
Ozzy Blizzard
New Member
Any word on the size of the expanded engagement envelope under normal conditions? I wonder what sort of stand off range you could get with one of these puppies at 30kft.
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Between 40 and 60k's I hear, depending on altitude, launch speed etc. Which turns the already excellent JDAM into a pretty formidable (not to mention cheap) standoff weapon.
This kit can be used for 500lbs or 1000lbs JDAM bomb series, giving a fair bit of flexibility (the bombs can be standard HE, inert "concrete" bombs or BLU penetrator series).
I hope RAAF places an order for the kits. No Government could have a problem with this. Wholly indigenous design, manufactured entirely within Australia and a cheap way of providing a capability enhancement for the RAAF...
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
"Released at 27,000 ft and 0.68 Mach, the weapon will fly in excess of 67 nmi (120 km). " (Nb for the Kerkanya AND According to Kopp:mock)
http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-GTV-Kerkanya.html
http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-JDAMPt2.pdf bit on the ER at the bottom, once again from Kopp.
I remember reading this report of his back in the day in AA, it did sound interesting.
Surfinbird
New Member
Dude, there is no way a glide bomb JDAM can equal the capability of a JSOW or JASSM. JSOW and JASSM can penetrate threat air defences because they are stealthy and in the case of JASSM fly a nap of earth approach. Glide bomb JDAM can be shot down by any reasonable air defence system. What a glide bomb JDAM can do is extend the reach of a strike fighter flying a typical close air support mission (assuming the ROE allows) in places like Afghanistan.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,492
No, it does not equal the capability in a stand-off weapon like JASSM. However, giving a 'dumb' or GPS/LG bomb a stand-off range of 40-60km generally does keep the delivering platform safely outside the range of any defending manpack SAMs. It also can give greater safety vs. more comprehensive SAM systems that would be towed or vehicle-mounted. Such systems can make use of larger (and longer ranged) missiles capable of threatening a striking aircraft, along with a radar & queuing system that can be used at night, etc. These very same systems are the ones that might, repeat might, intercept the glider equipped bombs. I say 'might' because depending on the defender's ROE, as well as the system capabilities and setup, the bombs might not be considered a threat worth using a missile against. Or the radar & targeting system might detect and ignore the ordnance due to having the wrong target profile, etc.
A stand-off capability itself is not usually an advantage in CAS situations, because in those situations the pilot or WSO sometimes needs to be able to use the Mk I eyeball to see the target. Being 40k+ away makes that problematical.
It would be interesting to see if the wing kits are adapted for the MU90 and/or whatever lightweight torpedoe the RAAF and RAN starts to use from aircraft. IIRC LM or perhaps Boeing was thinking of dropping torpedoes from MPA at altitude using wing kits. At present using a parachute system, I believe the P-3 Orion needs to descend to ~12k ft to safely/effectively deploy a torpedoe. This increases fuel consumption as the aircraft would need to repeatedly ascend and descend from cruising altitude, as well as putting additional stress on the airframe, not to mention reduces the effective sensor horizon of the aircraft when it is at a lower altitude. Using a glider system, an MPA could potentially remain at altitude for longer periods of time, as well as allow for delivery of ordnance to greater ranges. This could make things quite interesting if the torpedoes are also keyed for use vs. surface shipping as well.
-Cheers
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Why on Earth would you need a 40k plus standoff range for a CAS mission in a place such as Afghanistan?
Even a "standard" JDAM munition (equipped with body-lift strakes) possesses a glide range in excess of 12 miles. In an environment where there is virtually no surface based threat to fighter aircraft, I can see no use for such a long ranged weapon, merely because of the weapons range.
JSOW, btw is only a glide weapon too at present...
How many JDAM/JSOW's have been shot down in Iraq, Bosnia, Syria and Lebanon (Israeli use)?
They've all had credible air defence systems?
A JDAM IS a relatively small target. It's radar return is going to be minimal due to it's small overall. EO/IR tracking is going to be difficult at best. Again due to it's overall size and it's a GPS receiver, not a transmitter, meaning it's free from active electronic emissions.
It travels at high subsonic speeds (assuming high altitude and supersonic or near supersonic launch speeds) and it's cheap in the overall scheme of things, meaning many can be employed for the same cost as a more expensive (and yes, capable as well) missile system.
Australia is acquiring the "triumvirate" of "J" series weapons (namely: JDAM, JSOW and JASSM) for it's fighter aircraft and whilst there is some overlap in capabilities they each bring something distinctive to the fight, that makes them worthwhile.
These wing kits build on that capability for JDAM in the same way that anti-shipping capability, extended range and 2-way data-links will bring additional capability to our JSOW and JASSM weapons capabilities.
Arguing JDAM can be "shot down" doesn't seem to be a very credible argument based on the lack of same happening in real world environments.
People thought JDAM's would be easy to "jam" too...
I guess the "jammers" should have considered HOJ before they tried... :nutkick
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #1,495
For a strike yes. However IMV CAS would be in support of troops already engaged on the ground calling in air support, against often moving targets.
Granted targeting pods can increase range (or allow FLIR, etc) and orbiting UAVs can designate, the area where I see the best use of a standoff bomb truck is for fixed or semi-fixed targets. Particularly since there is an increased move towards lower cost GPS guidance systems which at present do not really have a MTI capability.
And depending on the UAV, it could be used as the launching platform.
-Cheers
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited:
Surfinbird
New Member
Dudes, long weapons range is important for current CAS roles because it enables a single fighter to cover a larger area. However with current ROEs (at least in Iraq) in many cases the fighter has to be right over the target and confirm visually what it is bombing before weapons release. But in Afghanistan a single fighter orbit equipped with glide bombs can service two bomb requests simultaneously on targets that may be 100km away. Otherwise the fighter would have to queue the attacks which would mean a 15-30 minute delay for the second target. Which would really suck for the guys calling in the strike.
Loitering is the name of the game in contemporary CAS operations. Maybe if you’re in a high intensity conflict it’s not the same but then you are unlikely to be using JDAMs for CAS and would be back to quick strikes with rockets, missiles and snakeyes.
JDAMs are vulnerable to high intensity GBAD threats because of their comparatively high RCS and low speed. SA-15 or a modern frigate would have little problem shooting down a few JDAMs targeted at it or something it was defending. Just because Iraq and others without a full spectrum of contemporary GBAD systems were unable to shoot down JDAMs does not mean it won’t happen. So glide bomb JDAMs are not going to be replacing JSOW and JASSM for use against defended targets no matter what ranges DSTO can achieve.
Loitering is the name of the game in contemporary CAS operations. Maybe if you’re in a high intensity conflict it’s not the same but then you are unlikely to be using JDAMs for CAS and would be back to quick strikes with rockets, missiles and snakeyes.
JDAMs are vulnerable to high intensity GBAD threats because of their comparatively high RCS and low speed. SA-15 or a modern frigate would have little problem shooting down a few JDAMs targeted at it or something it was defending. Just because Iraq and others without a full spectrum of contemporary GBAD systems were unable to shoot down JDAMs does not mean it won’t happen. So glide bomb JDAMs are not going to be replacing JSOW and JASSM for use against defended targets no matter what ranges DSTO can achieve.
weasel1962
New Member
Deleted
Last edited:
Surfinbird
New Member
Dude please excuse me for saying this: But you're a freakin idiot! Nah I don't mean that, really. I think you're just caught up in this as some kind of Alpha Male dominance display so need to keep flogging the argument. However if your logic is so watertight why is the Usaf buying JASSMs at all?
Come on lets face it those 23,000 JDAMs haven't exactly been dropped on high end enemy air defence systems! What kind of hope do the Mujids of Burkastan have of shooting down anything?
And then the Falklands? How many glide bombs did the Argies use in the Falklands? None, it was all very low, very close bombing. If they had used some glide bombs then Sea Dart and Sea Wolf could have gotten some more kills.
Look there is a reason the SDB and the JSOW look the way they do and its not to impress the chickas. Its to achieve a low RCS so they can sneak their way into the target in their long glide bomb trajectory. Now on the other hand an add on glide bomb kit to a Mk 80 series bomb with its nice rounded front end is a big RCS.
Sure its a great weapon but as I said to begin with - its not a replacement for JSOW and JASSM. For good reason.
weasel1962
New Member
Re:
Deleted
Deleted
Last edited: