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

[blueorchid]

"9.72 The Government has decided to increase our air transport capability through the acquisition of two additional C-130J Hercules aircraft and up to ten light tactical fixed-wing aircraft to replace the DHC-4 Caribou aircraft. These new aircraft will complement the current air transport fleet of four C-17 and 12 C-130J aircraft. The older C-130H aircraft will be retired. The Government will ensure that these new light tactical fixed-wing aircraft will have significantly greater range, speed and payload than the retiring Caribou transports. Extra lift capability will be provided by the five KC-30A multirole tanker-transport aircraft. "

Sorry I fail to see how replace 36 aircraft with up to 12 creates creates an increase in our transport capability:unknown

Cheers

 

[Marc 1]

"9.72 The Government has decided to increase our air transport capability through the acquisition of two additional C-130J Hercules aircraft and up to ten light tactical fixed-wing aircraft to replace the DHC-4 Caribou aircraft. These new aircraft will complement the current air transport fleet of four C-17 and 12 C-130J aircraft. The older C-130H aircraft will be retired. The Government will ensure that these new light tactical fixed-wing aircraft will have significantly greater range, speed and payload than the retiring Caribou transports. Extra lift capability will be provided by the five KC-30A multirole tanker-transport aircraft. "

Sorry I fail to see how replace 36 aircraft with up to 12 creates creates an increase in our transport capability:unknown

Cheers

I don't see where you get your numbers. There are presently 8 x C130H's and 14 x Caribous - 22 airframes (Current Royal Australian Air Force Aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.) Of the 14 Caribous, I think only around 6 or 8 are acually maintained in flying condition, so 12 brand new state of the art airframes to replace 8 tired Hercs and maybe 8 very tired hard to maintain 'bous... Seems like a good idea to me.

 

[swerve]

And the KC-30s can take a lot more cargo & pax than a Herc, & move them much faster, albeit only to decent runways & only underfloor cargo. But by relieving the C-17s & Hercules of such loads, to good airfields, they'll leave more tactical airlift free to do what only it can do.

 

[winnyfield]

And the KC-30s can take a lot more cargo & pax than a Herc, & move them much faster, albeit only to decent runways & only underfloor cargo. But by relieving the C-17s & Hercules of such loads, to good airfields, they'll leave more tactical airlift free to do what only it can do.

But still only 5 KC-30s.

Hopefully this gets revised.

 

[PeterM]

what are the options for the 10 "light tactical fixed-wing aircraft to replace the DHC-4" - perhaps C-27J or C-295M?

what about the seven large high-altitude, long-endurance UAVs? the ADF pulled out of the Global Hawk program so presumably that isn't an option, is Predator/Reaper a viable option?

It looks like the RAAF has decided against the wing kits to extend to service life of the APC-3C Orion with the decision to purchase 8 new aircraft. The obvious option is the P-8 Poseiden. Are there any other viable options?

Could the RAAF find a customer to sell the Orions (perhaps to the RNZAF)

 

[splat]

what about the seven large high-altitude, long-endurance UAVs? the ADF pulled out of the Global Hawk program so presumably that isn't an option, is Predator/Reaper a viable option?


I thought the aus government just delayed by a few years aus involvement or purchase with global hawk.

 

[Ozzy Blizzard]

what about the seven large high-altitude, long-endurance UAVs? the ADF pulled out of the Global Hawk program so presumably that isn't an option, is Predator/Reaper a viable option?

I thought the aus government just delayed by a few years aus involvement or purchase with global hawk.

Predator/Reaper are not HALE UAV's. I think Global Hawk is both still on the table and still top of the list, we just couldn't afford to continue to participate in the program.

 

[PeterM]

from aviation week http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/gene...ralia Drops Global Hawk Plans&channel=defense

Australia Drops Global Hawk Plans

Mar 2, 2009

By Bradley Perrett

Australia has dropped plans to buy the Northrop Grumman RQ-4 Global Hawk for maritime surveillance, citing program delays that would have created a workload clash with the proposed introduction of Boeing P-8 Poseidons mid next decade.

The Australian defense force does not have the resources to introduce both aircraft at once, and so it has chosen the indispensable manned surveillance aircraft over the unmanned one. The decision means that Australia will cease to be a partner in the U.S. Navy program for deploying the Global Hawk in the maritime role, a program called the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS).

The move also suggests an increasingly cautious approach to program management by a defense force that has suffered from unusually serious project foul-ups over the past decade.

“The delivery schedule for the United States Navy’s BAMS program has slipped and resulted in the earliest possible in-service date for the BAMS aircraft moving out to 2015,” says Defense Minister Joel Fitzgibbon.

“Introducing such an advanced new aircraft at this time would have caused incredible workforce pressures on the Australian Defense Force, particularly given the requirement to transition the Air Force’s AP-3C Orion fleet to a new manned surveillance aircraft [the Boeing P-8 Poseidon] in the same time period,” the minister says.

Australia isn’t ruling out deploying the drones for maritime surveillance in the future, and will monitor progress BAMS and similar programs.

In announcing the decision Australia stresses that it has no doubts about the viability of BAMS.

“The Australian government has every confidence that the United States Navy BAMS program will deliver a very capable, uninhabited aircraft. However, at this stage in the development of this project, it is in Australia’s best interests to not knowingly risk incurring the unmanageable workforce chaos that would result.”

Australia has chosen the Poseidon to replace its updated Lockheed Martin P-3C Orions.

 

[alexsa]

I don't see where you get your numbers. There are presently 8 x C130H's and 14 x Caribous - 22 airframes (Current Royal Australian Air Force Aircraft - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.) Of the 14 Caribous, I think only around 6 or 8 are acually maintained in flying condition, so 12 brand new state of the art airframes to replace 8 tired Hercs and maybe 8 very tired hard to maintain 'bous... Seems like a good idea to me.

Strictly speaking there are 12 C-130H and 14 Caribous noting four of the hercs are being used for spares. So we are talking 26 airframes.

The fact they are tied is due to the delay in replacing them and should not be seen as a justification for a reduction in airframe numbers or trying to sell it as an increase.

 

[Marc 1]

Wrong topic

 

[winnyfield]

Predator/Reaper are not HALE UAV's. I think Global Hawk is both still on the table and still top of the list, we just couldn't afford to continue to participate in the program.

The Global Hawk program is a bit of mess. A bigger predator/reaper 'C' model was recently announced so it might have a shot. Some Israeli stuff too.

Though might be few years off. After AP-3 Orion replacement.

 

[gf0012-aust]

Strictly speaking there are 12 C-130H and 14 Caribous noting four of the hercs are being used for spares. So we are talking 26 airframes.

The Bous have been pulled IIRC. Last flight was in AF News a few weeks ago. Although they might get a Lazarus under current circumstances.

 

[StingrayOZ]

The Bous job will be taken over by most likely the C27J and Chinooks. 10x C27J's would be useful addition costing less to operate than the Herc for smaller loadouts. But it should be more like 16 airframes. But then again, Im sure the C-17 add a great deal to Aus total lift capability so Im sure someone could work out the figures of before and after.

There may be additional KC-30's ordered once it becomes more proven but I think the argument will become which do we want additional of C27J, KC-30, Chinooks (or a C-17 if it is still an option).

 

[Aussie Digger]

The Bous job will be taken over by most likely the C27J and Chinooks. 10x C27J's would be useful addition costing less to operate than the Herc for smaller loadouts. But it should be more like 16 airframes. But then again, Im sure the C-17 add a great deal to Aus total lift capability so Im sure someone could work out the figures of before and after.

There may be additional KC-30's ordered once it becomes more proven but I think the argument will become which do we want additional of C27J, KC-30, Chinooks (or a C-17 if it is still an option).

Pre- C-17 RAAF airlift (not including leased aircraft, retired B-707, King Air 350, helo, AP-3C Orion or VIP flight load carrying ability nor any retired airframes in Bou fleet).

Maximum C-130H payload for RAAF - 12x 19,090kgs (229080kgs).

Maximum C-130J-30 payload for RAAF - 12x 19,958kgs (239496kgs).

Maximum Caribou payload for RAAF - 14x 4000kgs (56000kgs).

Total: 524576kgs.


Future RAAF airlift capacity (not including KC-30A or any aforementioned aircraft).

Maximum C-17III Globemaster payload - 4x 77519kgs (310076kgs).

Maximum C-130J-30 payload for RAAF - 14x 19,958kgs (279412kgs).

Maximum C-27J Spartan payload - 10x 11,500kgs (115000kgs).

Total: 704488kgs.


No contest really...

 

[StevoJH]

Not exactly on topic, but how come the Dash 8's that work for customs are operated by a Private company and not by Customs themselves? Does the company own them or does customs own them?

I was just wondering if their operation is integrated in any way with the operations of the RAAF's P3's and what, if any, changes in their use would occur during a regional crisis or war situation. They have a nice big surface search radar on their belly, though probably nothing in the way of defensive countermeasures.

 

[vija]

Not exactly on topic, but how come the Dash 8's that work for customs are operated by a Private company and not by Customs themselves? Does the company own them or does customs own them?

I was just wondering if their operation is integrated in any way with the operations of the RAAF's P3's and what, if any, changes in their use would occur during a regional crisis or war situation. They have a nice big surface search radar on their belly, though probably nothing in the way of defensive countermeasures.

Yes their operation is integrated with the P3s every day for border surveillance. Wartime they would get the hell out of there.

 

[battlensign]

The Dash 8's are likely to be owned and operated by the private company and merely contracted by Customs - much like the RAN & RAAF Learjets.

Brett.

 

[hairyman]

Goodaye fellas, my first post on Defence Talk.
I see where the Canadians are revisiting the Buffalo, apparently going to produce a modernised version. This would be an ideal replacement for the Caribou, would it not?:nutkick
http://www.australiandefence.com.au/...A70050568C22C9
"How many Buffalos make a Caribou? 09 Apr 2009 Canada's Viking Aircraft is to offer its new or upgraded turboprop-twin Buffalo NG STOL tactical transport to Australia as a replacement for its fleet of Caribou light tactical airlifters. Viking has acquired the type certificate for the de Havilland Canada range of aircraft from Bombardier Aircraft. The Viking Buffalo NG is on offer to Canada to meet the requirements for a search and rescue aircraft. The Buffalo, in its original form, are now used for the work. It will also compete against the Alenia C-27J Spartan for the order. - APAR"
As previously posted.

 

[uuname]

This was posted back here:
http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/a...news-discussions-updates-6007-116/#post172191

Corrected link to ADM archive:
ADM: How many Buffalos make a Caribou?

I think it's an interesting idea. If they really are that much cheaper than a more modern design, it may be worth thinking about. (Of course, you'd need to ensure you compare running costs, service life, etc)

Australia already has quite a few large cargo aircraft with a range of capabilities, but they are all expensive (and highly important) assets.

Getting a low-end option would give a lot more flexibility. It may sound harsh, but the Air Force really could stand to own more planes that it can afford to lose.

Still, I'm not 100% convinced these aircraft can be delivered on time and on budget- until they start rolling off the production line, it's a risky option.

 

[hairyman]

Can anyone tell me how the original Nomad aircraft were used? Were they in the inventory of the Army or the RAAF?
Reason for the inquiry is that Gippsland Air have obtained the production rights to the Nomad, and apparently are going to build an improved version the Nomad II, with different engines, avionics, etc. (It would need to be improved from what I remember.) If it was successful it may be suitable for the Army air wing. Comments?