I noticed today that the Defence Minister anounced that C17, No7 had arrived last week.
Do we know when No 8 is due in Australia?
By all accounts a successful project
S
Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
I noticed today that the Defence Minister anounced that C17, No7 had arrived last week.
Do we know when No 8 is due in Australia?
By all accounts a successful project
S
Nick underscore
Member
Just given as before EOY15.
All open RAAF projects seem to be at a good run rate currently.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Bit of interesting news I saw on the Flight Global website:
US Navy begins certifying new anti-ship missile on Super Hornet - 8/22/2015 - Flight Global
The USN is currently certifying LRASM onto their Super Hornet fleet and plans to be operational with them around 2019, with a reported range of 900+km, certainly a big leap over the capabilities of Harpoon.
Yes of course this doesn't necessarily mean that LRASM is destined for service with the RAAF, but with the USN doing all the integration work, it certainly does open the door to follow suit and not have to go it alone with integration costs if it did intend to do so.
Certainly going to be interesting times ahead to see where the RAAF goes with its long range ASM, there are certainly going to be a number of options available, JSM, LRASM, possibly a powered JSOW (if it does go into production).
US Navy begins certifying new anti-ship missile on Super Hornet - 8/22/2015 - Flight Global
The USN is currently certifying LRASM onto their Super Hornet fleet and plans to be operational with them around 2019, with a reported range of 900+km, certainly a big leap over the capabilities of Harpoon.
Yes of course this doesn't necessarily mean that LRASM is destined for service with the RAAF, but with the USN doing all the integration work, it certainly does open the door to follow suit and not have to go it alone with integration costs if it did intend to do so.
Certainly going to be interesting times ahead to see where the RAAF goes with its long range ASM, there are certainly going to be a number of options available, JSM, LRASM, possibly a powered JSOW (if it does go into production).
kind of interesting as with a software and payload tweak tweak it could come under MTCR
Where are you gettimg that 900+km range from? Link please.
Or are you assuming LRASM has the same range as JASSM-ER? It definitely won't as fuel was sacrificed to accommodate the additional LRASM electronics. As posted some time ago in the USN thread, LM has revealed range will be more in line with JASSM.
Or are you assuming LRASM has the same range as JASSM-ER? It definitely won't as fuel was sacrificed to accommodate the additional LRASM electronics. As posted some time ago in the USN thread, LM has revealed range will be more in line with JASSM.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Link is below:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Anti-Ship_Missile
Yes of course it is only Wiki (and yes I probably should have said 'according' to Wiki, ok??). Anyway, according to the link above the range will be: 500 nmi (580 mi; 930 km).
Either way, if the capability is closer to JASSM (as opposed to JASSM-ER), the range will still be considerable, and especially compared to Harpoon.
FormerDirtDart
Well-Known Member
The 500 nmi referenced in wikipedia for the LRASM is pulled directly from the Congressional Research Service Report: U.S. Air Force Bomber Sustainment and Modernization: Background and Issues for Congress, April 23, 2013 (Pg 32) http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a590775.pdf
But, in reading the the Wikipedia article, one will also see that it references a Flight Global article stating:
Lockheed LRASM completes captive carry tests - The DEW Line
Air launched LRASM got the designation AGM-158C from the Naval Air Warfare Center.
Lockheed Martin's LRASM Anti-Ship Missile Just Got its U.S. Navy Designation: AGM-158C
Lockheed Martin's LRASM Anti-Ship Missile Just Got its U.S. Navy Designation: AGM-158C
Last edited:
The USN has begun integration testing of the LRASM with the SH
Navy begins LRASM, F/A-18 integration testing | NAVAIR - U.S. Navy Naval Air Systems Command - Navy and Marine Corps Aviation Research, Development, Acquisition, Test and Evaluation
Not to belabor the point but that reference includes this link which lists LRASM range as approx 300nmi. This seems more in line with LM's hints of reduced range vs JASSM-ER. In any case, it does represent at least a threefold increase in range over Harpoon, not even factoring in way better ability to find and prosecute it's target. The Navy's missile competition will bear watching.
LRASM Long Range Anti-Ship Missile AGM-158C OASuW Increment 1 Lockheed Martin DARPA United States US Navy technical datasheet specification pictures photo video
Reports have now been confirmed with 49 pc-21s + simulators to be purchased and based at RAAF East Sale from 2017
CONOPS for the US,
they are extensive users of T6 for counter insurgency work - and at last count had 60 plus frames being used across multiple agencies for hunting and killing roles....
winnyfield
New Member
Isn't that the PC-12 (single engine, passenger)?
The PC-21 is basically a bigger PC-9/T-6. Presumably a larger payload capacity more useful for JTAC training.
nope, they're using 4-5 different aircraft with the same engine. common engine between various agencies but variety of platforms due to slight operational differences between some of the agencies.
one agency uses them in pairs, another uses them for solo strike.
weegee
Active Member
I've just come across this on news.com.au.
RAAF tanker jet refuel F-35A Joint Strike Fighter in midair
Good to see that things are moving along nicely as far as development is concerned for various assets.
Oh and I love the bit at the end "the so called fifth generation fighter" good old Ian McPhedran haha
RAAF tanker jet refuel F-35A Joint Strike Fighter in midair
Good to see that things are moving along nicely as far as development is concerned for various assets.
Oh and I love the bit at the end "the so called fifth generation fighter" good old Ian McPhedran haha
Just reading where Mr Trudeau, the new Prime Minister of Canada is threatening to cancel the Canadian order for 65 F35 aircraft, an order which has already been reduced substantially. The reason is the cost of the aircraft, and the current belief by some that it is not as superior as it is being made out by its manufacturers.
If Canada does pull out, the increase in cost to other purchasers may cause others to pull out. Italy has already changed its order from 131 to 90. It could have a snowball effect.
At what stage in proceedings would Australia be inclined to cancel out? I woud suggest that the RAAF would only decrease its order and keep the F35 as a strike aircraft. But how dear would these aircraft have to be for us to change our order?
If Canada does pull out, the increase in cost to other purchasers may cause others to pull out. Italy has already changed its order from 131 to 90. It could have a snowball effect.
At what stage in proceedings would Australia be inclined to cancel out? I woud suggest that the RAAF would only decrease its order and keep the F35 as a strike aircraft. But how dear would these aircraft have to be for us to change our order?
Australia is not cancelling it
both sides are committed to it
I'm ready to shoot myself on this issue
Someone will sit Trudeau down and brief him properly on the cost of the aircraft and point out that the difference isn't anywhere what he's been claiming and he'll have a road to Damascus moment I suspect. I don't think there's any way he can arrange a fair and open competition, complete with offsets and get the replacement into operation before the Hornets really start dropping out of the sky - unless they do some really expensive maintenance...
In any event, Lockmarts assessment of the price drift if Canada drops out is something like a million dollars a copy extra. Say $88m or less on a URF basis. That's less than the publicly disclosed prices in other deals for Tiffy, Rafale etc.
Super Hornets might come in a bit cheaper if they're ordered while the line is open.
t68
Well-Known Member
From memory GF I think you have mentioned that their is a get out clause or I read it somewhere, I guess he is alluding to the tipping point to pull out but an extra million per copy will not be it.
The potential cancellation of a smaller order than we are making in an overall enormous fighter project, may lead us to cancel or reduce our order?
Why? How?
The hysteria over this is getting ridiculous. Did the 'world' end when France pulled out of the 'European Combat Aircraft' project?
Smacks of many who think a 65 aircraft order is of vastly greater magnitude than it really is. If it were any project other than F-35 it would be significant. For a project that is building at LEAST 2000 aircraft?
Not so much...