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

K

Kirkzzy

New Member
Does anyone agree with the extra Super Hornets outlined in the coalition defence policy, would it be worth it? Initial reports said they would be cutting the F-35 order to make up for it, although Abbot was quick to deny it. (This was months ago)

Just wanted to know as 48 aircraft for interim purposes seems like a fair bit.
 
K

Kirkzzy

New Member
lopez said:
Are we actually getting 48? Or is that just the coalitions policy?
Click to expand...
Coalition's policy and they will most likely win next election anyway... that is unless people love the return to surplus, our emissions start going down and our internet pages load in 0.0001 seconds. And if the coalition got a leader like Turnbull then they'd probably win by an even larger margin (polls show he has the most support to be coalition leader from the entire populace, yet liberals still favour Abbot) as you would see right leaning Labor voters jump to the Libs.
 
U

uuname

New Member
It seems something may have come up related to the battlefield airlifter (AIR 8000 Phase 2).

To recap, the Govt is apparently looking at both the C-27J and the C295

Govt requests pricing & availability for a RAAF C-27J buy | Australian Aviation Magazine
Defence confirms cost & availability request for C295 too | Australian Aviation Magazine
Alert 5 » C295 and C-27J fight to replace RAAF’s Caribou - Military Aviation News

The RAAF apparently have a strong preference for the C-27J.

Australia’s air force has made it clear publicly that it prefers the Alenia C-27J over the Airbus Military C295.
Click to expand...
Brown says the issue the air force has with the C295 is there are some types of Australian army military vehicles that the C295 is unable to transport. He cites as an example the army’s new G-Wagon all-terrain vehicles.
Click to expand...
RAAF Wants C-27J Rather Than C295 | AVIATION WEEK

However, I've also seen a few news items like this recently:

The Air Force wants to cut the C-27J cargo plane program to save money.

An internal Air Force recommendation to scrap the C-27J program in its yet-to-be-finalized 2013 budget draft has touched a nerve within the Army, which once ran the program, and the Air National Guard, which now operates the twin-turboprop planes.
Click to expand...
C-27J may be on chopping block - Air Force News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Air Force Times

Air Force Chief Acknowledges Coming Cuts, and Cites the C-27J Spartan | Defense Media Network
C-27J battle splits Air Force, Guard - Air Force News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Air Force Times

Nothing has happened yet, but it does seem there is a chance that the US will dump the C-27J. Not just stop purchasing it, but actually get rid of them.

Now under a substantial budget crunch, Air Force leaders have proposed eliminating the aircraft from the service's inventory and conducting the mission with C-130s.
Click to expand...
U.S. Army Won't Fight if C-27J Is Canceled - Defense News

If hopping on the US logistics train is a major advantage of the aircraft, should this provoke a re-think? Or is it still the best aircraft for the job?
If the US does seek to dispose of the C-27J, would Australia look at getting some second-hand aircraft rather than new ones? (It's not as if they are exactly old, after all...)
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
Very clever & very underhand politicking by the USAF. It never wanted the C-27J. The army wanted it. The USAF tried to kill the programme, & when it failed, jumped aboard to stop the army having its own fixed-wing transport. It then successfully took over the whole programme, getting all the aircraft under its control. If it now pulls the plug, the US army will doubtless cry 'foul', & may (probably correctly) accuse the USAF of planning this all along.
 
V

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
swerve said:
Very clever & very underhand politicking by the USAF. It never wanted the C-27J. The army wanted it. The USAF tried to kill the programme, & when it failed, jumped aboard to stop the army having its own fixed-wing transport. It then successfully took over the whole programme, getting all the aircraft under its control. If it now pulls the plug, the US army will doubtless cry 'foul', & may (probably correctly) accuse the USAF of planning this all along.
Click to expand...
That almost sounds like the Joint Harrier Force. Call me a cynic but when you look at the very similar path taken by the RAF, gain control, limit application, then kill for budgetary reasons. The Harrier only took longer because it was a proven in service system.
 
S

south

Well-Known Member
Cynic.

Hardly - given the money available under UK SDR it was either the GR4 Tornado to get the Axe or the Harrier... Harrier made more operational sense. If the money was there, they wouldn't have cut it. Its the same with a whole bunch of RAF Capabilities..

Given the RAF of just 20 years ago (91 Gulf War) had something like 30 Fast jet squadrons and soon they will be down to about 7(?) something had to go. In the last 10 years they have phased out Jags, Harriers, F3 Tornado's, Cuts in the GR4 Tornado Fleet, etc...

the UK (all services) are hurting badly...
 
StingrayOZ

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Surely the US dumping the C-27J won't kill its chances for Australia.

One of the big positives of the C-27j was that is shares much with the hercs and everyone operates Hercs. And there should still be a quite a few C-27j operators anyway. I think C-27 will win on merits, the US logistics is just icing on the cake.

I find it funny that if its cancelled, they will perform the missions with the much more expensive to purchase and operate c-130.

I think they way the RAAF, RAN and the Army have separated aircraft is a smart one. RAAF will choose the fixed wing stuff for lift. Army chooses helos for lift, Navy looks after its own bizzare stuff that usually requires as separate model for separate maritime uses.

I find it hard to believe that the US would actually get rid of airframes its already got. Thats a big decision and a hard one to argue for. If they do get rid of them, I would imagine Australia would be a prime target as a buyer. Wonder if we could get all of them and the logistics for them too ;)
 
T

Tee_Centre_10

Member
Was the logistics train a big factor with the apparent RAAF preference for the C27J over other factors?
With the USAF only intending to buying 30/40/50 odd (correct me if this is incorrect, but I don't think it was too many) mostly for ANG and USAFE (same roles the C-23 is used for), I'm not certain it was ever going to have the same kind of deep support from the USAF that the C-130J is with 150+ roaming the globe.

Is the USAF taking management tips from Microsoft now, because this is a nice little twist on the Embrace, Extend and Extinguish method of killing competition. And doesn't the USAF have a history of killing handy tactical airlifters when they feel threatened, specifically the DH4 Caribou when they took them over post-Vietnam?

If the need is there for the RAAF then it will still be there if the USAF dumps the C-27J, so I can't see it makes much difference other than they might have a second look at the C-295. I think either wouldn't be a bad choice, just that you'd want to do a serious think about whether the C-27J's advantages are worth the higher purchase and operating costs.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
If the Yanks drop the C-27J altogether, then maybe the C-27J name should be dropped. How does Alenia G.223 sound? :D

There are 7 non-US buyers so far, but they've only ordered about 45.
 
R

rand0m

Member
As per the news section (and well expected) Australia is looking to purchase 10 C27J & associated equipment. The document also listed the 12 C-130H will soon retire (I believe several already have?), does the purchase of the C27J cover both the Caribou & C-130H or will we be looking at a separate aircraft to cover the 12 hercs? Is the C27J capable of moving ASLAV's or Bushmasters?
 
M

Milne Bay

Active Member
rand0m said:
As per the news section (and well expected) Australia is looking to purchase 10 C27J & associated equipment. The document also listed the 12 C-130H will soon retire (I believe several already have?), does the purchase of the C27J cover both the Caribou & C-130H or will we be looking at a separate aircraft to cover the 12 hercs? Is the C27J capable of moving ASLAV's or Bushmasters?
Click to expand...
It is my understanding that the extra C-17's are absorbing the lift capacity of the C-130H's. I don't think any extra C-130J's are in the pipeline, and that the missing capacity provided by the C-27J's will take over many missions that were being done by the C-130H's in any case.
I think the aim is to make the RAAF more efficient in transport, by utilising the appropriate platform for the tasks at hand and minimising aircraft being flown half empty.
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
rand0m said:
As per the news section (and well expected) Australia is looking to purchase 10 C27J & associated equipment. The document also listed the 12 C-130H will soon retire (I believe several already have?), does the purchase of the C27J cover both the Caribou & C-130H or will we be looking at a separate aircraft to cover the 12 hercs? Is the C27J capable of moving ASLAV's or Bushmasters?
Click to expand...
I believe these are providing some relief for the -H model Hercs...

http://multimedia.airforce.gov.au/images/1024x768/C17-01.jpg
 
J

jack412

Active Member
Merry Xmas to all

Australia's special gift to clown club, Woomera is working on an export F-22E [export]

[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZVMSgwa46S8"]Flight of the "Archon SF1" Aircraft. - YouTube[/nomedia]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top