Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
protoplasm
Active Member
One of the more useful missions of the Growler is snooping across a wide range of the EM spectrum. The RAAF is likely to be using the Growlers in this way more than outright electronic attack.
Yes they will. They'll operate exactly the same as the USN assets do. RAAF is trying to convince Government that Growler's are ISR assets first and foremost and shouldn't be considered alongside strike fighters, in the way that AP-3C's and Wedgetails aren't considered part of air combat group.
Thus, the Growler's we've bought, along RAAF's line of thinking, should not be considered part of air combat group, rather Surveillance and Response Group and Air Combat Group's requirement for up to 100 fighters remains in existence.
I consider this message the same as Army calling it's Tigers "armed reconnaissance" helicopters, rather than gunships.
RAAF wants to focus on the Growler's ability in areas other than "attack" for political reasons, entirely unrelated to what they will actually do with their aircraft.
Our Tigers carry Hellfire missiles for destroying armoured vehicles, fortified positions, buildings and high value targets, but the Army's focus for domestic political purposes is to name them primarily as "recce" assets and constantly talk up their abilities in missions other than blowing things up, because "armed reconaissance helicopter" is apparently far more palatable than "aerial death machine" or similar.
RAAF it appears to me, is attempting to achieve much the same objective with this sort of language.
For those who don't know the USAF 18 Agressor Sqn recently went to RAAF williamtown to help 2OCU with the running of FCI course. The defence media gallery (as poor as it is inthe current guise) has some excellent photos from a flight at the following link. There are a few more details at the link as wel.
All Images - FotoWeb 7.0
All Images - FotoWeb 7.0
The Growlers are support platforms argument is because they are under the definitions used to describe our air combat capability. The key thing to understand is what kind of missions aircraft fly not what they look like or a potentially capable of. The Govt. has authorised a need and subsequent funding for the RAAF to sustain four squadrons of strike fighters in service. These aircraft provide the nation with air superiority and strike missions.
Growler is different. It can fly air superiority and strike but its primary missions are intel, surveil and recce (ISR) and electronic attack (EA) to support air superiority and strike. So if one of those four squadrons is equipped with Growler the RAAF and through them the ADF and nation will lose 25% of the air superiority and strike capability. Unless of course the Growlers just fly air superiority and strike missions in which case what was the point?
These ISR and EA missions may require it to fire weapons but so to does the AP-3C and no one considers it an air combat mission when so armed. The key to understanding this argument is to understand the capabilities argument from the Govt’s perspective. It helps to read the annual report in the budget which collates ADF capability in systems and units around the provision to Government of capability.
Growler is different. It can fly air superiority and strike but its primary missions are intel, surveil and recce (ISR) and electronic attack (EA) to support air superiority and strike. So if one of those four squadrons is equipped with Growler the RAAF and through them the ADF and nation will lose 25% of the air superiority and strike capability. Unless of course the Growlers just fly air superiority and strike missions in which case what was the point?
These ISR and EA missions may require it to fire weapons but so to does the AP-3C and no one considers it an air combat mission when so armed. The key to understanding this argument is to understand the capabilities argument from the Govt’s perspective. It helps to read the annual report in the budget which collates ADF capability in systems and units around the provision to Government of capability.
Can’t help but thing the Hornet would look better with that tiger head on the nose rather than the tail over the top of the fin flashes.
I was over on air warriors and read that the life of a growler pilot isn't all work and no play. The growler frames are getting a flogging with BFM and given our pilots are being trained in the US, I assume our growlers will have a similar time
USN may add conformal fuel tanks to F/A-18E/F fleet | Page 4 | Air Warriors
USN may add conformal fuel tanks to F/A-18E/F fleet | Page 4 | Air Warriors
Nice. Agree completely about that media gallery. It's absolute rubbish...
...because we don't have the same force structure as the USN/USAF so there are some differences in doctrine/conops
its also a way to make the aircraft participate outside of traditional roles and set them up for playing and sharing with other ISR assets
King Wally
Active Member
I'm under the impression the RAAF will accept their first 2 F-35's next year. With a plan to base them in the states and I asume have our pilots go over there for training and testing? Does anyone know what the full story with this plan is?
I'm also under the impression our next 12 F-35's wont arive till around 2019/2020 so what ever this system is with the 2 initial F-35's I asume its a long multi year program we have in the works? Asumedly at some stage they will migrate to Australia as we get our own similators and infrastructure ready?
I'm also under the impression our next 12 F-35's wont arive till around 2019/2020 so what ever this system is with the 2 initial F-35's I asume its a long multi year program we have in the works? Asumedly at some stage they will migrate to Australia as we get our own similators and infrastructure ready?
weegee
Active Member
Hey guys I saw this on the net and was wondering if things have progressed? or is this the same process that was going on a few weeks ago and the Age has just been slow to pick up on it?
Boeing|Australia|Pentagon|Sale|Billion
Boeing|Australia|Pentagon|Sale|Billion
A decision is to be made this summer.
The point of the notification to Congress is to alert them to the potential sale, not an actual sale. The first sentence of the notification says it all
In order for Australia to make an informed decision by the summer they had to get an official price quote from the USG, hence the subsequent Congressional notification.
The point of the notification to Congress is to alert them to the potential sale, not an actual sale. The first sentence of the notification says it all
http://www.dsca.osd.mil/PressReleases/36-b/2013/Australia_13-05.pdf
In order for Australia to make an informed decision by the summer they had to get an official price quote from the USG, hence the subsequent Congressional notification.
Air Force Brat
Member
Wally, those initial two F-35As will be based at the Schoolhouse at Eglin AFB, Florida, where a majority of transitional training is being conducted, with all of the partners receiving maintainer and pilot training concurently, so that once we all achieve IOC, we will all be on the same page and be able to maintain and operate the F-35 to its full potential aerodynamically as well be able to exploit the Weapons systems to full advantage. BRAT
weegee
Active Member
More talk of the supers saying a decision from Aus will be made soon!
U.S. sees Australia decision on F/A-18 jets by summer | Reuters
I wonder what LM think when they see all this info about the supers going hear and there and everywhere because of the SO CALLED delays in production etc.
I bet they wish they could release some classified information on how well the plane performs and production targets etc just to shut everyone up haha
U.S. sees Australia decision on F/A-18 jets by summer | Reuters
I wonder what LM think when they see all this info about the supers going hear and there and everywhere because of the SO CALLED delays in production etc.
I bet they wish they could release some classified information on how well the plane performs and production targets etc just to shut everyone up haha
King Wally
Active Member
The more I looked into it the more I hope the Aussie gov stay's patient and focuses on the F-35. Totally think the 24 Supers we got in 2010 was a smart move but I cant see how adding more in the coming years could be a better strategic move then just focusing on the F-35. We need just a little more patience and its going to pay off for a lot of years I recon. I also dont really see the cost savings of the SH, looking at the numbers anyway the savings apear to be minimal.
3.7 Billion for 24 Super Hornets/Growlers + equipment
or as a comparison......
about 10 billion for 60 F-35's + Equipment (based on the latest South Korean deal)
http://www.defencetalk.com/south-korea-requests-f-35-joint-strike-fighter-aircraft-47352/
Last edited:
Trackmaster
Member
Just wondering if anyone else noticed a RAAF KC-30A being used as Julia's personal aircraft while in China. Thought the BBJ 737 would have done the job as it has in the past. I wonder if this is a way to remove some of the VIP SQN and use the tankers instead thus taking them away from their one of their primary taskings.
Cheers
Cheers
The BBJ isn't big enough to carry around the media entourage. So the govt. traditionally hired a second plane to follow the BBJ or the journos using local flight. This has in the past created some problems from planes breaking down to one crashing resulting in death and injury.
The A330s were always acquired like the B707s they replaced as multi role tanker transports. And come fitted with a full deck of seats and underfloor cargo capability. One of their roles is troop lift and if they don’t mind slumming it in business class seats VIP transport. There was an unsolicited offer that circulated at the cocktail party level of fitting one of the A330s with a seating arrangement more suited to VIP travel.
No
they already have the right assets in place.
eg an E6 Looking Glass + other critical bits and pieces.