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

[CAGSATCO]

Same old problem the RAAF has always had. CAS comes last on the list of multiple roles a single type is supposed to do. I remember the Mirage days when a pair of Mk82's was it.. The F-111 at the time had only dumb bombs and there was nothing else but god luck. The RAN might be in the area with a couple of A-4's as a bonus.

The RAAF has not had a balanced fleet since 1945.:daz

Sad really when one considers all of the $$$$$ spent,,,,

 

[t68]

With the current government on the verge of becoming the Australian couch party and leaving the economy in a diabolical state what implications does that leave a new government? In light of the current fiscal problems Tony Abbott is on record as saying that a coalition government will review the 100 JSF and double the amount of Super Hornets, how likely in view of current events and the poor shape of the economy will that happen. We already have the infrastructure in place for Super Hornets and the USN will be keeping the SH relevant out till the late 2030.Would it be in the RAAF best interest to push out the buy of JSF with an additional buy of Rhino’s, decommission the most shagged legacy hornets then buy later a more mature version of JSF aircraft?

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

Afghanistan is drawing down Juliar has stated that the current budget will not see any cuts to front line service, cant she see that cutting the budget it affects the training cycle for defence not only in its budgetary cycle but effects it for at least a generation as major equipment takes between 5/15 years to mature.

 

[Volkodav]

With the current government on the verge of becoming the Australian couch party and leaving the economy in a diabolical state what implications does that leave a new government? In light of the current fiscal problems Tony Abbott is on record as saying that a coalition government will review the 100 JSF and double the amount of Super Hornets, how likely in view of current events and the poor shape of the economy will that happen. We already have the infrastructure in place for Super Hornets and the USN will be keeping the SH relevant out till the late 2030.Would it be in the RAAF best interest to push out the buy of JSF with an additional buy of Rhino’s, decommission the most shagged legacy hornets then buy later a more mature version of JSF aircraft?

Cookies must be enabled. | The Australian

Afghanistan is drawing down Juliar has stated that the current budget will not see any cuts to front line service, cant she see that cutting the budget it affects the training cycle for defence not only in its budgetary cycle but effects it for at least a generation as major equipment takes between 5/15 years to mature.

Ok up front I can't stand Gillard and believe she is pretty clueless as far as defence and foriegn affairs are concerned however I think you need to read through what you have just posted as you appear to have basically panned one mob for doing or planning to do pretty much what the other mob say they plan to do if elected.

My other issue is the constant knocking and talking down of the Australian economy.

Could things better if we had a different PM and treasurer? Maybe.

Is the economy in pretty good shape when looked at in a global context? Yes.

Is the Economy in a pretty good state due to the efforts of various Australian governments since the 1980's? Yes.

Are I'll informed people and those with a personal agenda talking things down? A resounding yes.

Should those people look at the facts before flapping their mouths and making things worse than they need to be?

 

[CAGSATCO]

An easy option would be to expand the 4 Sqn FAC activities with say another 12 armed machines [AT-6 or the like]. They would have the ability to conduct FAC training as well as light attack support if needed. We seem to be worried that the "bad guys" will knock down anything less than a F-18 etc. Take A/Stan as an example the fighting is real but there is no enemy air or real SAM threats. This may well be the case in future engagements. Attack helos are good but offer limited endurance and are expensive to operate. Some Light/recce/attack machines such as the AT-6 or A-29 Tucano would work well. In fact the A/Stan AF is getting some [one day]. Australia would be well placed to operate the type. If support is needed in any other of our local areas then we already have the gear and expertise. We still live in the fantasy world of "fitted for but not with" which is another way of saying we don't want to spend the money. We'd rather waste our funds on billion dollar Seasprites and other such one off dud projects.

Wake up Australia...

 

[Gordon Branch]

An easy option would be to expand the 4 Sqn FAC activities with say another 12 armed machines.... Attack helos are good but offer limited endurance and are expensive to operate.

Ever since I heard 4 Squadron was being reactivated I have wondered about what sort of FAC aircraft you could use.

In a very simplistic analysis I came up with the following:

Crew of two because two sets of eyes are better than one in this environment.
Advanced sensor suite - For 24 hour finding and fixing the enemy plus a laser range finder illuminator.
A weapon suite including a gun for engaging targets of opportunity and self-defence.
The ability to hide in the terrain of the battle area.
Commonality with an in service piece of equipment would be nice.
Communications suite to integrate into the network battlespace.

A very quick analysis shows the ARH Tiger would appear to tick all those boxes. In fact FAC seems to be one of the missions the ARH was designed for. Ignoring for a moment the inter-service rivalries, an additional buy of, say, 6-8 Tigers flown by the RAAF would seem to fit the FAC bill.

Problems might include cost and range but it seems like an idea worth looking more closely at.

 

[ADMk2]

Ever since I heard 4 Squadron was being reactivated I have wondered about what sort of FAC aircraft you could use.

In a very simplistic analysis I came up with the following:

Crew of two because two sets of eyes are better than one in this environment.
Advanced sensor suite - For 24 hour finding and fixing the enemy plus a laser range finder illuminator.
A weapon suite including a gun for engaging targets of opportunity and self-defence.
The ability to hide in the terrain of the battle area.
Commonality with an in service piece of equipment would be nice.
Communications suite to integrate into the network battlespace.

A very quick analysis shows the ARH Tiger would appear to tick all those boxes. In fact FAC seems to be one of the missions the ARH was designed for. Ignoring for a moment the inter-service rivalries, an additional buy of, say, 6-8 Tigers flown by the RAAF would seem to fit the FAC bill.

Problems might include cost and range but it seems like an idea worth looking more closely at.

A C-130J Harvest Hawk package would be capable of much the same mission, employing the targetting capability (AN/AAQ-30 Target Sight System, thermal sighting and targetting, employment of laser guided weapons etc) from the AH-1Z Cobra helicopter (effectively the same as the Tiger gives us) and a mix of Hellfire missiles (already in-service within ADF) and Griffin missiles (new acquisition).

The original USMC contract was for $21.4m for 2x Harvest Hawk kits added to C-KC-130J...

Given we have C-130J's deployed in theatre such a modification would be relatively cost-effective and would maximise the use of assets we already have available in theatre. The level III Harvest Hawk capability includes a modular 30mm Bushmaster II cannon as well as Hellfire and Griffin.

I can easily see half a dozen level III kits, plus integration and support coming in at well under $100m, but would seem to fit the bill (increased ISR, plus combat deployable CAS capability) perfectly. With the new "Derringer" door launcher for the Griffin missile, the Harvest Hawk C-130J's retain most of their cargo carrying capability too...

The ability to support a special operations insertion and then hang around at medium altitude providing ISR, limited strike and CAS support, would seem to be a very useful capability...

 

[t68]

Ok up front I can't stand Gillard and believe she is pretty clueless as far as defence and foriegn affairs are concerned however I think you need to read through what you have just posted as you appear to have basically panned one mob for doing or planning to do pretty much what the other mob say they plan to do if elected.

My other issue is the constant knocking and talking down of the Australian economy.

Could things better if we had a different PM and treasurer? Maybe.

Is the economy in pretty good shape when looked at in a global context? Yes.

Is the Economy in a pretty good state due to the efforts of various Australian governments since the 1980's? Yes.

Are I'll informed people and those with a personal agenda talking things down? A resounding yes.

Should those people look at the facts before flapping their mouths and making things worse than they need to be?

I agree the way it is written could have been worded better, but it is a fact that policy of this current government will have a dramatic effect on the way the next government on how it spends on defence or any other program just like the Howard government left their legacy for the current government. What the coalition if and when it wins goverment sets out to do is no different what K Rudd did his government reviewed the Super Hornet decision when Labour they where pushing F22 Raptor in place of F111 only difference Howard left them war chest for their pet projects and the current government has spent all of it and are now scrambling to look like they are great economists by slashing other areas.

I for one don’t have a problem if they set back the JSF buy later in the program for a more mature platform where all the kinks have been ironed out. Also the economy is only stable enough if confidence in it is in place, with the hung parliament and no confidence in our PM had the policy they are pursuing the economy is only safe as a house of cards, remove one to many cards and it all comes crashing down.

 

[Marc 1]

A C-130J Harvest Hawk package would be capable of much the same mission, employing the targetting capability (AN/AAQ-30 Target Sight System, thermal sighting and targetting, employment of laser guided weapons etc) from the AH-1Z Cobra helicopter (effectively the same as the Tiger gives us) and a mix of Hellfire missiles (already in-service within ADF) and Griffin missiles (new acquisition).

The original USMC contract was for $21.4m for 2x Harvest Hawk kits added to C-KC-130J...

Given we have C-130J's deployed in theatre such a modification would be relatively cost-effective and would maximise the use of assets we already have available in theatre. The level III Harvest Hawk capability includes a modular 30mm Bushmaster II cannon as well as Hellfire and Griffin.

I can easily see half a dozen level III kits, plus integration and support coming in at well under $100m, but would seem to fit the bill (increased ISR, plus combat deployable CAS capability) perfectly. With the new "Derringer" door launcher for the Griffin missile, the Harvest Hawk C-130J's retain most of their cargo carrying capability too...

The ability to support a special operations insertion and then hang around at medium altitude providing ISR, limited strike and CAS support, would seem to be a very useful capability...

Veery nice idea... We get to add massive capability (persistence being the main nice-to-have) for bugger all additional cost.

 

[jack412]

We also have tankers with a big empty fuselage that we could roll in some undefined support, to add another layer when needed

 

[ADMk2]

Veery nice idea... We get to add massive capability (persistence being the main nice-to-have) for bugger all additional cost.

I agree, my worry is that it would be considered too "niche" and that it wouldn't seen as "gucci" enough by capability planners, who will undoubtedly wish to jump on the Predator bandwagon in the new White Paper / DCP and that would eat up all the funding...

 

[Tasman]

Caribou Replacement

The budget papers confirmed that the Caribou replacement is still on the shopping list but also stated that the C-130H Hercules will be withdrawn early. As the yet to be ordered new aircraft is to replace some of the capabilities provided by the C-130H as well as the long gone Caribous are there ramifications regarding the type chosen? Not withstanding problems arising from the USAF cancellation of the type it still seems to me that the C-27J is the most suitable to take on these roles.

"Early retirement of the C-130H aircraft: $250 million from the early retirement of the C-130H aircraft, which is being retired early in order to minimise costs associated with maintaining and operating the ageing fleet. Current activities undertaken by the C130H aircraft fleet will be redistributed across the remaining Air Force air mobility fleet, including C-130Js, C-17s and the replacement for the Caribou aircraft."

Defence Ministers » Minister for Defence – Budget 2012-13 Defence Budget Overview


Tas

 

[ngatimozart]

The budget papers confirmed that the Caribou replacement is still on the shopping list but also stated that the C-130H Hercules will be withdrawn early. As the yet to be ordered new aircraft is to replace some of the capabilities provided by the C-130H as well as the long gone Caribous are there ramifications regarding the type chosen? Not withstanding problems arising from the USAF cancellation of the type it still seems to me that the C-27J is the most suitable to take on these roles.

"Early retirement of the C-130H aircraft: $250 million from the early retirement of the C-130H aircraft, which is being retired early in order to minimise costs associated with maintaining and operating the ageing fleet. Current activities undertaken by the C130H aircraft fleet will be redistributed across the remaining Air Force air mobility fleet, including C-130Js, C-17s and the replacement for the Caribou aircraft."

Defence Ministers » Minister for Defence – Budget 2012-13 Defence Budget Overview


Tas

With regard to the USAF cancellation of the C27J the House Armed Services Committee has denied the USAF any money to divest or retire the C27J or to prepare to do such in 2013 and after 2013 the USAF will be subject to a series of reporting requirements. http://www.defensenews.com/article/...nt-Request?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|FRONTPAGE

 

[John Newman]

Well its official, the C27J has been chosen:

Defence Ministers » Minister for Defence and Minister for Defence Materiel – Joint Media Release – New Battlefield aircraft for the Air Force

And they will be based at Richmond too.

All makes sense now, retire the remaining C130H aircraft, save a bit of money and make space for the C27J's.

Interesting on the cost too, has been put at $1.4Billion.

 

[Tasman]

Well its official, the C27J has been chosen:

Defence Ministers » Minister for Defence and Minister for Defence Materiel – Joint Media Release – New Battlefield aircraft for the Air Force

And they will be based at Richmond too.

All makes sense now, retire the remaining C130H aircraft, save a bit of money and make space for the C27J's.

Interesting on the cost too, has been put at $1.4Billion.

This is a very good decision IMO. My reservation is that there will be a 3 year gap following the early retirement of the C-130H over and above the existing gap created following the retirement of the Caribou 3 years ago. The RAAF (or more perhaps accurately the government) seems to be expecting an awful lot from the 'interim' King Air 350s...

Tas

 

[SpudmanWP]

Maybe they can lease the USAF C-27Js.

Hopefully the US Army can restart it's program and NEVER let the USAF back in.

 

[John Newman]

I've been thinking about a few things since I put my post up earlier today about the go ahead for the C27J's (yes I know its dangerous to think too much!!)

Just to recap what we already know:

The US will cease purchasing C27J's after the 38 contracted aircraft are delivered and is trying to work out a way to divest itself of them.

Alenia, for its part, has said that it wont support any of the 38 US aircraft if they are sold on as "second hand" but will support "new" FMS purchases.

My questions are:

Will the RAAF's 10 aircraft be produced once all of the 38 US aircraft are completed? (I don't know how many years production of the US aircraft are left to go?)

Or is there a possibility that the US could give up "production slots" to us and allow the 10 RAAF contracted aircraft added to the end of the production run?

This would keep Alenia happy, get its full production out of both the US and Australia orders and allow the RAAF to get earlier delivery too.

Giving up production slots is not something new, we have seen it in very recent times with the 6 C17A's and the 24 F/A18F's. Production slots were given up to allow delivery in the time frame we wanted and the additional aircraft ordered added to the overall production.

I don't know if there is the money to get earlier delivery, or the desire (but would be a way of closing the gap between the retirement of the C130H and the C27J's).

Interested to know what you all think.

 

[the road runner]

Alenia, for its part, has said that it wont support any of the 38 US aircraft if they are sold on as "second hand" but will support "new" FMS purchases.

My questions are:

Will the RAAF's 10 aircraft be produced once all of the 38 US aircraft are completed? (I don't know how many years production of the US aircraft are left to go?

From your link that you posted earlier.

Initial logistic support, including training for aircrew and maintenance personnel will be provided through the FMS program, utilising the system that has been established in the US. Defence will seek a separate agreement with the C-27J manufacturer, Alenia, in order to ensure that RAAF can operate, maintain and modify the aircraft throughout its planned life.

I got the impression we will get EX US C-27J and a training package thru FMS.
The Bold text seems to me to indicate the Government will get a Guarantee off Alenia to ensure the Commonwealth can get spare parts ,modify and maintain our C-27J

With a number of Governments around the world cutting defence spending ,Alenia would be happy to supply parts ect to a fleet of 10 A/C than see the USA scrap the 38.

Some money is better than no money for Alenia.
Can i just add,about bloody time

 

[Tasman]

I don't know if there is the money to get earlier delivery, or the desire (but would be a way of closing the gap between the retirement of the C130H and the C27J's).

With getting a budget surplus its number one priority I doubt the Australian Government will want to hurry up the purchase. As it is the government is on a winner. It gets a tick for announcing the decision to order the C-27Js to show it is still committed to defence and it gets a tick for saving money by putting off delivery until 2015... The PM was hammered re the defence cuts on the 7:30 Report on TV last night so the announcement that a new project has been approved was politically timely!

Tas

 

[John Newman]

From your link that you posted earlier.

Initial logistic support, including training for aircrew and maintenance personnel will be provided through the FMS program, utilising the system that has been established in the US. Defence will seek a separate agreement with the C-27J manufacturer, Alenia, in order to ensure that RAAF can operate, maintain and modify the aircraft throughout its planned life.

I got the impression we will get EX US C-27J and a training package thru FMS.
The Bold text seems to me to indicate the Government will get a Guarantee off Alenia to ensure the Commonwealth can get spare parts ,modify and maintain our C-27J

With a number of Governments around the world cutting defence spending ,Alenia would be happy to supply parts ect to a fleet of 10 A/C than see the USA scrap the 38.

Some money is better than no money for Alenia.
Can i just add,about bloody time

I think the initial purchase and ongoing support are two separate issues.

I don't agree that we will be getting 10 ex US C27J's without an increase in overall production.

Alenia, at this stage at least, has made it clear that if any of the 38 US ordered aircraft offered for sale will NOT be supported, but will support additional FMS sales.

Somewhere down the track Alenia may or may not change its position.

So I read that as meaning that the US production will now be 48 aircraft (eg US 38 and RAAF 10), thus complying with Alenia's current position.

What I'm interested to know, is if the 10 RAAF airframes will be produced at the end of the US production run or slotted somewhere in between the total production run.

As to the support, yes the initial FMS purchase will provide the training support but at some stage during the 30 year life of the aircraft there will obviously be a transition from US support to Alenia due to the US not operating the aircraft at some point in the future.

 

[John Newman]

With getting a budget surplus its number one priority I doubt the Australian Government will want to hurry up the purchase. As it is the government is on a winner. It gets a tick for announcing the decision to order the C-27Js to show it is still committed to defence and it gets a tick for saving money by putting off delivery until 2015... The PM was hammered re the defence cuts on the 7:30 Report on TV last night so the announcement that a new project has been approved was politically timely!

Tas

Tas,

Agree with you 100%.

Yes on Fudget (opps, meant Budget) Nite, the Government was putting on a "dog and pony" show about how great they were to get the budget back into surplus, making cuts here and there, how they are saving us all from economic ruin like the rest of the world!

But I don't think that I can ever remember something like this happening before (big cuts one nite and two days later "big" spending announcement), usually there has been the usual announcements of "cuts" and equally major "new" puchase decisions all on the one night.

I think the other "political" reason for the "later" announcement on the C27J's, is that the "RAAF Air Power Conference" is on in Canberra.

Makes the Def Min look good walking in and announcing a bright shiny new purchase!!

All the BS aside, in my opinion, it is good that "finally" this announcement has been made.