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

[jack412]

We did plan for a 2018 delivery, this may have thrown me from your paste and what was said "with three operational squadrons planned to enter service beginning around 2020" Smith said Hornets 2020-2022 and Super Hornets 2030-35
They have already ordered the long lead time parts for block 8 / 2016, so 2017 can be our first order for the remanding 12 of the 14, if we did 6 in 2017 and 6 in 2018. we could get a 2018-19 delivery.
Perhaps there will be a clarification announced soon

 

[Jezza]

RAAF with 24 Growlers and 12 Super Hornets. My question is to why that mix.
Wouldn't 24 Supers with 12 Growlers be a more sensible mix.

 

[Volkodav]

RAAF with 24 Growlers and 12 Super Hornets. My question is to why that mix.
Wouldn't 24 Supers with 12 Growlers be a more sensible mix.

That is what we are getting, the 12 new build Growlers will be instead of modifying the 12 prewired in-service aircraft. I believe the idea is to maintain the original 24 as a gap filler while the new Gs will be an additional force multiplier.

 

[Milne Bay]

That is what we are getting, the 12 new build Growlers will be instead of modifying the 12 prewired in-service aircraft. I believe the idea is to maintain the original 24 as a gap filler while the new Gs will be an additional force multiplier.

With the possibility of 24 Growlers down the track when the F-35A's come on stream.
By the time the last of the F-35's have arrived there will have been time for the pre-wired Shornets to be taken off the line and converted without disrupting operations too severely. Can't spare them to be converted ATM, and it seems we need the Growlers soonish.
MB

 

[ADMk2]

RAAF with 24 Growlers and 12 Super Hornets. My question is to why that mix.
Wouldn't 24 Supers with 12 Growlers be a more sensible mix.

It would be...

That's why the decision is for 1 Squadron to stay exactly the way it is now with 18 Super Hornets nominally on strength and for 6 Squadon with 6 Super Hornets nominally on strength.

The new decision will see 6 Squadron run 12 Growlers alongside it's existing 6 Super Hornets.

The existing "pre-wired" aircraft will stay in the medium term as Super Hornets and 12 new Growlers will be purchased.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

RAAF with 24 Growlers and 12 Super Hornets. My question is to why that mix.
Wouldn't 24 Supers with 12 Growlers be a more sensible mix.

It depends what they are doing. The current planned mix of 24 F and 12 G supports a strike fighter squadron (one out of the RAAF’s four) and an electronic warfare capability with the required number of aircraft for training. In the future if the full allotment of 100 F-35s is acquired there will no longer be the need for the Super Hornet/Growler fleet to provide a strike fighter squadron as all four will be F-35. But with a potential increase in GBAD threat in the region the electronic warfare capability could need additional numbers to meet the increased need of countermeasures. Therefore 12 F and 24 Gs would double said capability and without cutting into the Growler fleet for flying training on the Super Hornet platform. The 12 non Growler Super Hornets would provide this training capability in addition to a useful two seat capability for a range of strike needs.

 

[the road runner]

AG i am curious to your remark in the RAN thread regarding Maritime patrol aircraft.
Is a 3 MPA to 1 Sub ratio the ideal number? I do recall a number of you guys being very impressed by the P-8 MPA.

I assume Australia would be better off purchasing more P-8 than the 8 we will possibly be purchasing.What would be the ideal number of P-8 for the RAAF?

Cheers

 

[ADMk2]

It depends what they are doing. The current planned mix of 24 F and 12 G supports a strike fighter squadron (one out of the RAAF’s four) and an electronic warfare capability with the required number of aircraft for training. In the future if the full allotment of 100 F-35s is acquired there will no longer be the need for the Super Hornet/Growler fleet to provide a strike fighter squadron as all four will be F-35. But with a potential increase in GBAD threat in the region the electronic warfare capability could need additional numbers to meet the increased need of countermeasures. Therefore 12 F and 24 Gs would double said capability and without cutting into the Growler fleet for flying training on the Super Hornet platform. The 12 non Growler Super Hornets would provide this training capability in addition to a useful two seat capability for a range of strike needs.

And backseat rides for politicians...

 

[protoplasm]

Richmond open for civilian flights

RAAF base could be stopgap Sydney airport

From: AAP
May 10, 2013 10:18AM

THE federal government has flagged the Richmond air force base northwest of Sydney as a stopgap solution to provide the city with a second airport.

Infrastructure and Transport Minister Anthony Albanese has released a technical study into the suitability of Wilton, southwest of Sydney, as a possible airport site to complement the existing airport at Mascot.

The study also looked at whether the RAAF base could accommodate limited civil operations.

It found that if the base was opened up it could eventually cater for about five million passengers annually.

But Mr Albanese said NSW would still need a second greenfield airport.

"Sydney needs a second airport sooner rather than later and there are limited options for a greenfield site," Mr Albanese said.

Various NSW business and community groups have previously voiced their support for a second airport to be built at Badgerys Creek.

The Wilton study found that the development of an airport at Wilton is possible, but would involve environmental and engineering challenges.

"The challenges are not insurmountable but we do need to better understand their scale and scope," Mr Albanese said in a statement on Friday.

"Importantly, this study gets the facts on the table."

Speaking to the ABC on Friday morning, he said the report showed that an airport at Wilton would cost more and take longer to build than an airport at Badgerys Creek.

Wilton is about 80km from Sydney, while Badgerys Creek is only about 55km away.

The NSW government has previously backed a second airport built at Canberra with a high speed rail link between the nation's capital and Sydney.

On Friday, NSW Treasurer Mike Baird dismissed the federal government's Wilton report as "talk".

"Until Canberra says, 'here is our firm and final proposal and here is the funding that goes with it' ... I think that we just have no hope but to ignore it," Mr Baird told ABC radio.

He said better use should be made of the existing Mascot site.

Tourism and Transport Forum (TTF) acting CEO Trent Zimmerman said the federal government's report effectively ruled out Wilton as a potential site.

"This issue has been in a holding pattern for 50 years - it's time we landed a decision, and that means committing to Badgerys Creek," Mr Zimmerman said in a statement.

The TTF was not opposed to using Richmond as a temporary stand-in but "its use should not further delay the decision to secure Badgerys Creek".

Mr Zimmerman said Sydneysiders could get more out of the Mascot airport by raising the cap on hourly aircraft movement restrictions.


From those in the know, how hard is it going to be if the decision is taken to allow airlines to fly out of Richmond, is it even possible?

 

[John Newman]

One of the things I was looking to find out in last nights Budget was the money allocated for the 12 new build Growlers.

And there it was, $2.94 Billion.

We've previously seen the various 'estimates' given in the DSCA notifications:

* May 2012 - $1.7Billion for the 12 conversion kits, spares, etc, and all the EW pods.

* February 2013 - $3.7Billion, new build of 12F's and 12G's, spares, etc, but no mention of EW pods.

And also two weeks ago at the White Paper announcement, Def Min Smith was asked by a Journalist what was the actual cost of the additional 12 Growlers.

Smith's reply was "Rule of thumb it's $1.5-$1.6B", the Journalist then asked "That's all up is it?" Smith's reply was "For the 12 Growlers, yes, and capital cost."

When I read that in that transcript, I thought, that can't be right for the total package.


So there we have it from last night, $2.94 Billion.

Doing some simple maths (and yes I know that it's not that simple because it's a project cost and not just the airframes and EW pods), but that works out to be near enough to $250m to put each of the 12 fully configured Growlers on the flight line.

Would it be fair to say that a fully configured Growler is around double the cost of a standard F/A-18F?

Sort of makes the cost of an F35A seem cheap in comparison!

 

[King Wally]

One of the things I was looking to find out in last nights Budget was the money allocated for the 12 new build Growlers.

And there it was, $2.94 Billion.

We've previously seen the various 'estimates' given in the DSCA notifications:

* May 2012 - $1.7Billion for the 12 conversion kits, spares, etc, and all the EW pods.

* February 2013 - $3.7Billion, new build of 12F's and 12G's, spares, etc, but no mention of EW pods.

And also two weeks ago at the White Paper announcement, Def Min Smith was asked by a Journalist what was the actual cost of the additional 12 Growlers.

Smith's reply was "Rule of thumb it's $1.5-$1.6B", the Journalist then asked "That's all up is it?" Smith's reply was "For the 12 Growlers, yes, and capital cost."

When I read that in that transcript, I thought, that can't be right for the total package.


So there we have it from last night, $2.94 Billion.

Doing some simple maths (and yes I know that it's not that simple because it's a project cost and not just the airframes and EW pods), but that works out to be near enough to $250m to put each of the 12 fully configured Growlers on the flight line.

Would it be fair to say that a fully configured Growler is around double the cost of a standard F/A-18F?

Sort of makes the cost of an F35A seem cheap in comparison!

The disparity between what Smith quoted was the cost and the budget allocation is staggering to say the least. What on earth is going on there? Does that budget include servicing, training and infrastructure to support the Growlers once purchased or something?

 

[John Newman]

The disparity between what Smith quoted was the cost and the budget allocation is staggering to say the least. What on earth is going on there? Does that budget include servicing, training and infrastructure to support the Growlers once purchased or something?

I think what Smith was doing was either just being a Politician, saying they cost less that they are going to or he just doesn't know!

Seriously, I think he was just being 'selective' in his words, he does that a bit, it's probably fair to say that $1.5-$1.6b is the cost of 12 'basic' Growler lite coming off the Boeing production line without all of the extra Electronic Warfare pods, etc.

If you go back and look at the original DSCA announcement from last year, the estimated cost to upgrade to the 12F's and obtain all the EW pods was around $1.7b.

So if you add those two figures together, remove the upgrade cost to the 12 F's, and do new build instead, then that probably comes in around the $3b mark, and that's what had been budgeted.

 

[Trackmaster]

I think what Smith was doing was either just being a Politician, saying they cost less that they are going to or he just doesn't know!

Seriously, I think he was just being 'selective' in his words, he does that a bit, it's probably fair to say that $1.5-$1.6b is the cost of 12 'basic' Growler lite coming off the Boeing production line without all of the extra Electronic Warfare pods, etc.

If you go back and look at the original DSCA announcement from last year, the estimated cost to upgrade to the 12F's and obtain all the EW pods was around $1.7b.

So if you add those two figures together, remove the upgrade cost to the 12 F's, and do new build instead, then that probably comes in around the $3b mark, and that's what had been budgeted.

News Ltd is carrying a story that we have jumped back on-board the Triton program.

I expect this is the first of a number of announcements in the next few days, as the Budget money is doled out.

The Navy will probably get replenishment ships...what wll the Army pick up? Maybe armoured 4WDs, produced in a marginal seat in Victoria?

Australia to sign on to drone program | News.com.au

 

[King Wally]

You literally just beat me to posting that link by 1 minute!

The Tritons are surely a smart move. Although the Global Hawk family seams to be in a little strife lately justifying their existence I notice. For what we need to do patrolling long range maritime approaches up north these endurance drones seam to fit the bill.

 

[ADMk2]

The disparity between what Smith quoted was the cost and the budget allocation is staggering to say the least. What on earth is going on there? Does that budget include servicing, training and infrastructure to support the Growlers once purchased or something?

It's the cost of 12 new build Growlers. The Growler kits, plus the cost of modifying the Super Hornets was worth $1.7b alone.

The extra 12 fighter aircraft, plus extra infrastructure, support and training assets is the $1.24b difference.

 

[Trackmaster]

It's the cost of 12 new build Growlers. The Growler kits, plus the cost of modifying the Super Hornets was worth $1.7b alone.

The extra 12 fighter aircraft, plus extra infrastructure, support and training assets is the $1.24b difference.

Is there a $$ figure on how much was spent wiring 12 of the original order for the Growler fit?
And is there any noticable performance penalty from the extra weight carried?

 

[John Newman]

Is there a $$ figure on how much was spent wiring 12 of the original order for the Growler fit?
And is there any noticable performance penalty from the extra weight carried?

The cost was reported as being $35m.

As far as performance, I remember reading at the time, that it was stated that it was only a penalty of a few % in overall range for the aircraft, that was all, nothing significant, I think the weight was an additional few hundred kg's.

As much as I would liked to have seen an all F35A fleet (+ Growlers), at least the decision in the end means that the approved plan of 72 F35A's continues and we get 12 new build Growlers and the Super Hornets don't have to be pulled off the flight line for conversion.

Look at it this way, in the future, if a Government decides to expand the Growler Fleet, there are 12 airframes that have been prepared for that conversion.

And it also means that we have airframes that could be used for possible Growler attrition replacements too, $35m is not much to have paid in the big picture.

 

[ADMk2]

Is there a $$ figure on how much was spent wiring 12 of the original order for the Growler fit?
And is there any noticable performance penalty from the extra weight carried?

I think John is right. It was only in the vicinity of 100-200kgs in extra weight, from recollection. The performance penalty wasn't so great I understand and might be alleviated in years to come with stronger F414 engines anyway, if the USN goes down that path as has been mooted many times (and given RAAF has stated an intention to follow the USN fleet capability-wise.)

I think the fact that we're retaining the strike fighter capability of the full fleet of 24 aircraft significantly outweighs the poor decision making made in recent years overall.

 

[John Newman]

I think John is right. It was only in the vicinity of 100-200kgs in extra weight, from recollection. The performance penalty wasn't so great I understand and might be alleviated in years to come with stronger F414 engines anyway, if the USN goes down that path as has been mooted many times (and given RAAF has stated an intention to follow the USN fleet capability-wise.)

I think the fact that we're retaining the strike fighter capability of the full fleet of 24 aircraft significantly outweighs the poor decision making made in recent years overall.

I just dug out a copy of Australian Aviation from August 2009.

In Andrew McLaughlin's article on the roll out of the first Super Hornet, the relevant paragraph is:

"The wiring weighs less than 100kg and incurs a less than 2 per cent range penalty, a seemingly small price to pay for the flexibility this may offer down the track."

So there you go, not really a particular big issue at all.

And yes your right, considering all the poor decision making, this decision is probably the best outcome that could have been expected.

And again as I said above, it gives a number of options, either future conversion of additional airframes and also the ability to have attrition replacements available if necessary too.

 

[Abraham Gubler]

It isn't the end of the world but to write this off as a non issue is totally wrong. The extra weight makes a difference in agility end of story (not to mention range and fuel cost). No aircrew in their right mind would fly the second batch F/A-18F into battle if they could fly first batch aircraft.

However 10 years from now the most likely fate of these aircraft is to be rolled through a Growler upgrade. Lets just hope that somewhere in the Growler package is some money for some XM11S so the RAAF can actually train against a GBAD threat. Should have been brought 15 years ago but later is better then never.