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

[phreeky]

Well we've used allies and private sector/contractors for 'surge' capability during deployments before - just because we now have a decent airlift capability inhouse should not rule that out.

'Peacetime/Wartime' is obviously a grey line with deployments of various capacities always at play, however to suggest we always have a force for a worst case scenario is dreaming.

What I was suggesting is that an airlift capability to deal with typical workloads (i.e. small contribution to a distant conflict, a peacekeeping mission, some disaster relief) is in most peoples minds a sensible level, and once you start looking at intense conflicts then no doubt there'll be plenty of other places to spend that money. Do we not now have the strategic airlift capability to meet the above?

We've built up not just the C-17 fleet but MRTT, a healthy C-130J fleet and C-27Js coming into play - surely if money were to be spent on more airlift (if airlift at all) it would be on CH-47s? To throw the money at a type just because the production line has closed seems crazy to me unless it truly continues to be the area of most need and I'm struggling to believe it.

 

[John Fedup]

Well we've used allies and private sector/contractors for 'surge' capability during deployments before - just because we now have a decent airlift capability inhouse should not rule that out.

'Peacetime/Wartime' is obviously a grey line with deployments of various capacities always at play, however to suggest we always have a force for a worst case scenario is dreaming.

What I was suggesting is that an airlift capability to deal with typical workloads (i.e. small contribution to a distant conflict, a peacekeeping mission, some disaster relief) is in most peoples minds a sensible level, and once you start looking at intense conflicts then no doubt there'll be plenty of other places to spend that money. Do we not now have the strategic airlift capability to meet the above?

We've built up not just the C-17 fleet but MRTT, a healthy C-130J fleet and C-27Js coming into play - surely if money were to be spent on more airlift (if airlift at all) it would be on CH-47s? To throw the money at a type just because the production line has closed seems crazy to me unless it truly continues to be the area of most need and I'm struggling to believe it.

There is absolutely nothing on the horizon that will replace the C-17 for at least 30 years and likely longer. As long as operations don't exceed current rates and hopefully decline somewhat then Australian and British heavy lift are in reasonable shape. Canada's 5 jet fleet, IMO, is too low and should have been increased to 8. Even if Canada decided to do this tomorrow the remaining jets have likely been spoken for. I am not sure how many more orders are out there but clearly the new users and others have finally come to realize how beneficial this jet is. Boeing likely should have built a few more whitetails but given all the problems with the Dreamliner I guess this option was just too expensive at the time.

 

[StingrayOZ]

IMO the C-17 have been very worthwhile purchases. They have certainly been very busy since we acquired them, and would be busy for the foreseeable future. IMO they are the most useful thing RAAF have purchased.

I do worry about the CH-47 for Australia. Which have always been busy and now very few in number. Particularly when we have both LHD's available I think the CH-47 would fill a new niche on top of its already busy workload. But army would have to argue for more.

 

[t68]

I do worry about the CH-47 for Australia. Which have always been busy and now very few in number. Particularly when we have both LHD's available I think the CH-47 would fill a new niche on top of its already busy workload. But army would have to argue for more.

Agree would like to see the existing D's remanufactured or get on board the CH-47* Cargo Helicopter Alternate Procurement Strategy (or CHAPS) program

I also still think that we should have a mixed RAAF/Army Special Operations Aviation forces under SOCOMD with a mix of Blackhawks CH47 C27J and with either DAP Battlehawks or Tiger/Viper

 

[KiwiRob]

There is absolutely nothing on the horizon that will replace the C-17 for at least 30 years and likely longer. As long as operations don't exceed current rates and hopefully decline somewhat then Australian and British heavy lift are in reasonable shape. Canada's 5 jet fleet, IMO, is too low and should have been increased to 8. Even if Canada decided to do this tomorrow the remaining jets have likely been spoken for. I am not sure how many more orders are out there but clearly the new users and others have finally come to realize how beneficial this jet is. Boeing likely should have built a few more whitetails but given all the problems with the Dreamliner I guess this option was just too expensive at the time.

About 30 of the USAF's C-17's were built because Congress wanted them built (political pork) not due to any requirement of the USAF, so the USAF has more than they require, I'm sure that they will probably release some to friendly nations some time in the future.

 

[John Fedup]

About 30 of the USAF's C-17's were built because Congress wanted them built (political pork) not due to any requirement of the USAF, so the USAF has more than they require, I'm sure that they will probably release some to friendly nations some time in the future.

I believe the USAF closed down at least one C-17 base and Congress has been ragging them for this. Although the possibility for a sell off of surplus jets might happen, the USAF (and America) would be better served by storing the jets not needed and bring them back as existing units come too expensive to maintain. Lets face it, a replacement is not likely for decades.

 

[ngatimozart]

About 30 of the USAF's C-17's were built because Congress wanted them built (political pork) not due to any requirement of the USAF, so the USAF has more than they require, I'm sure that they will probably release some to friendly nations some time in the future.

Based on what? If the USAF decide to release any from service it will be the oldest most utilised airframes and they would be put into reserve or sent to the Boneyard for storage precisely because no more are being built.

 

[KiwiRob]

Based on what? If the USAF decide to release any from service it will be the oldest most utilised airframes and they would be put into reserve or sent to the Boneyard for storage precisely because no more are being built.

Simples they have a lot more than they needed or ever wanted.

The USAF have in the past released aircraft to friendly nations, even aircraft no longer in production. I don't see the C-17 being an exception.

You have already mentioned Boeing is keeping all the tooling, a new production line could be set up some time in the future, just like the C-5B's which entered production some 10 years after the C-5A line closed in 1973.

 

[John Fedup]

Simples they have a lot more than they needed or ever wanted.

The USAF have in the past released aircraft to friendly nations, even aircraft no longer in production. I don't see the C-17 being an exception.

You have already mentioned Boeing is keeping all the tooling, a new production line could be set up some time in the future, just like the C-5B's which entered production some 10 years after the C-5A line closed in 1973.

It is pretty doubtful the C-17 line would be reopened after 10-15 years. The USAF is flying 40-50 year old aircraft (B-52, KC-135) and there is talk of the B-1s going on for another 20 years. The fact is there is little money for new programs and a future strategic lifter is really low on the priority scale. The extra C-17s dumped on the USAF by Congress are going to look pretty good in 2035!:

 

[Volkodav]

It is pretty doubtful the C-17 line would be reopened after 10-15 years. The USAF is flying 40-50 year old aircraft (B-52, KC-135) and there is talk of the B-1s going on for another 20 years. The fact is there is little money for new programs and a future strategic lifter is really low on the priority scale. The extra C-17s dumped on the USAF by Congress are going to look pretty good in 2035!:

Probably getting off topic for the RAAF thread but a modern Herc replacement is IMO more likely than the US restarting C-17 production. It will be interesting to see which way the USAF goes with the inevitable C-130 replacement, turbofan, turboprop, definitely STOL but maybe even VTOL. Will it be larger, same size or smaller, something like the KC-370, perhaps an aircraft more like A400 or even a throwback to aborted AMST project that produced the YC-14 and YC-15 (think mini C-17).

 

[John Fedup]

Probably getting off topic for the RAAF thread but a modern Herc replacement is IMO more likely than the US restarting C-17 production. It will be interesting to see which way the USAF goes with the inevitable C-130 replacement, turbofan, turboprop, definitely STOL but maybe even VTOL. Will it be larger, same size or smaller, something like the KC-370, perhaps an aircraft more like A400 or even a throwback to aborted AMST project that produced the YC-14 and YC-15 (think mini C-17).

Yes, the only future lifter project that will happen anytime soon is a tactical lifter replacement for the C-130. Clearly a VTOL would be desirable if it had decent range and payload capacity for ever increasing heavy armored vehicles. I guess we need a new thread for this.

 

[t68]

Yes, the only future lifter project that will happen anytime soon is a tactical lifter replacement for the C-130. Clearly a VTOL would be desirable if it had decent range and payload capacity for ever increasing heavy armored vehicles. I guess we need a new thread for this.

There already is one but I have seen no updates to the project, this is the last I have seen regarding the replacement.


https://www.defencetalk.com/forums/...try-answer-c-130-replacement-questions-12828/

https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportu...12c3ab214cffa29f23eaf6d9bae&tab=core&_cview=1

 

[swerve]

Probably getting off topic for the RAAF thread but a modern Herc replacement is IMO more likely than the US restarting C-17 production. It will be interesting to see which way the USAF goes with the inevitable C-130 replacement, turbofan, turboprop, definitely STOL but maybe even VTOL. Will it be larger, same size or smaller, something like the KC-370, perhaps an aircraft more like A400 or even a throwback to aborted AMST project that produced the YC-14 and YC-15 (think mini C-17).

Mini C-17? Not by chance. After the AMST project was scrapped, the basic design of the YC-15 was enlarged to produce a strategic transport with some tactical abilities - & you know what that turned into.

 

[Volkodav]

Mini C-17? Not by chance. After the AMST project was scrapped, the basic design of the YC-15 was enlarged to produce a strategic transport with some tactical abilities - & you know what that turned into.

Ah huh and one of the prototypes was used in the C-17 development program. As I understand it both the YF-14 and 15 met or exceeded all requirements but strategic transport was seen as more urgent, hence development of the C-17 and updated C-130s to cover off the tactical mission.

 

[Nick underscore]

Spotted this else where and I know some on here mentioned this as a potential add-on capability for the RAAF.

Oto Melara palletised (463L) M61A1, for the C-27J (MC-27J Praetorian). Operates through the side paratroop door. Italian's ordering x6 for 2016/17 delivery, to support SF units.

Also under development from another company is the palletised 'C4ISR' module.

Oto Melara reveals C-27J gunship system

Looks handy

 

[Jezza]

Any truth that VH-EBH and VH-EBI are to go to the RAAF after a maintenance
lay up in Singapore.
Both aircraft are leased expired.

330-202 with GE CF6-80E1A4 Engines.
Both aircraft are under 8 years old.
New VIP fleet for RAAF.?

 

[Oberon]

Any truth that VH-EBH and VH-EBI are to go to the RAAF after a maintenance
lay up in Singapore.
Both aircraft are leased expired.

330-202 with GE CF6-80E1A4 Engines.
Both aircraft are under 8 years old.
New VIP fleet for RAAF.?

Where did you hear this rumour?

 

[Punta74]

Any truth that VH-EBH and VH-EBI are to go to the RAAF after a maintenance
lay up in Singapore.
Both aircraft are leased expired.

330-202 with GE CF6-80E1A4 Engines.
Both aircraft are under 8 years old.
New VIP fleet for RAAF.?

Just had a look & Seems to be a fair bit of talk in a few aviation forums that follow the same rumour. Makes sense to take up the lease option.

Qantas Airbus A330 Fleet Refurbishment - Page 7 - Sydney Airport Message Board

 

[Nick underscore]

Any truth that VH-EBH and VH-EBI are to go to the RAAF after a maintenance
lay up in Singapore.
Both aircraft are leased expired.

330-202 with GE CF6-80E1A4 Engines.
Both aircraft are under 8 years old.
New VIP fleet for RAAF.?

I saw this on another forum. Is there any truth? Both are owned by CIT aerospace.

If realised, I wonder if there if there is consideration for MRTT conversion.

Btw - Another great find there Jezza (again)!

 

[Richo99]

reports that RAAF to get PC21

I wonder what tipped the balance in favour of the pc21, when the us uk canada and nz all chose the t6

Lockheed Martin wins Air 5428