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

[t68]

Until Chinese carrier fleets start sailing up and down the east coast we won't likely face an air threat of any significance for a long time.

If that were to happen an expansion of Air (extra AAR tankers and EW aircraft E7/P8) & SubSurface (submarines) capabilty will see a marked improvement

Not something I would ever want to see but in a hypothetical world where the Greens form their own government it would be sufficient for the foreseeable future.

God help us if that were to ever happen, we will end up like New Zealand

 

[shanes_world_05]

God help us if that were to ever happen, we will end up like New Zealand

That really hurts -not because you said it but because its true......(sobbing pathetically)

 

[John Newman]

I disagree. Australia has some large population centers which is where 95% of the population lives. Sparsely inhabited areas are not a major concern. There is much more space between a fire front and a house that its less of a issue. Most of the deaths and property lost from fires are around (~100km) the major metro areas. Particularly in the bush, inaccessible hilly areas around a city.



Well they were getting a workout before that, they each did about 30 sorties directly over my home fighting a rather large fire in a remote and rugged area half way between Singleton and Windsor.

There are also ~8 helicopters used for spotting, and spot fires, 2 fuel trucks, a fire truck in a makeshift heliport at a cricket ground at Wilberforce.

The cardboard box thing seems interesting (I have my reservations). With fighting fires the concern is peak capacity. Having the RAAF able to use C27, C-130 or C17 to help out in emergencies would be huge and could save hundreds of lives.


I think that too, but as additional capability or to make it more efficient.

Im not saying that we should depend on the RAAF to fight our fires, but it would be worth looking at it as an addition.

I don't disagree one little bit that this very big island is sparsely populated and the vast majority of the population is centred around the coast, and in big cities too.

But the problem, as I see it, is that those major population centres are still a very long way from each other (as opposed to some smallish, by Australian standards, European country).

It's a bloody long way from Perth to Adelaide, it's a long way from Adelaide to Melbourne and so on and so on.

Currently the growing fleet of C-27J's are based at Richmond NSW, in the not to distant future the full fleet of 10 C-27J airframes will be based at Amberley QLD.

If the C-27J fleet was to be used as the 'primary' response to water bombing when there is a major threatening bushfire, then obviously they would have to be located somewhere within, or close to, the capital cities of each of the States (and Territories too), to be effective.

And that's where I have a problem with the idea that they be used for that task, there just isn't enough of them (10) and the distances between those major population centres are so far apart.

Again, not to say that a capability is not developed where they could act as a backup or in a supporting role, but as a 'primary' response, can't see it happening ever, we would need to double, triple the fleet to be able to handle the Australian fire season and also have them available for their defence role too.

Not trying to pour water on the fire (pun intended, ha ha!!), back up in extreme situations, yes, primary response, no!


I came across this site today, the National Aerial Firefighting Centre (NAFC) website, gives a list of all of the aircraft (fixed and rotary), for the 2015/16 fire season, gives a list of what and where based too:

NAFC Web Site


Cheers,

 

[vonnoobie]

You mention the Romanian Air Force has this system or their C-27's.

Romania is 238,391 km2, which pretty well equates to Victoria which is 237,629 km2.

The whole of Australia on the other hand is 7,692,024 km2, so where do we base the C-27J's during the fire season? Realistically the fleet of 10 airframes would have to be spread around the country during the period of the fire season to be of any real practical use.

I'd imagine you would need at least two airframes based in each state (one operational, one back up), two in WA, SA, Vic, Tas, NSW and QLD, that's 12 airframes and we only have 10 in total!

Not saying that the C-27J's couldn't do the job with the appropriate fire fighting system, it's just that I can't see how in would work in practice when each State would demand that a system be based in their particular state for the fire season.

Still think it would be better for each state to lease their capabilities for the fire season, as they currently do.

Just because we have 'x' amount of states does not mean we require 'y' amount of air frames, You need to base it off of the states likely hood to experience bush fires and the fire fighting services are generally able to predict with some degree of accuracy which area's are in more danger then others.

By rule of thumb Southern Australia generally suffers bush fires from December through to March (4 months) with Victoria and Southern WA experiencing the brunt of them while Northern Australia generally experiences them between April through to September (6 months).

So you wont be required to have all aircraft dispersed across Australia at all times, As it is the C-27J's loaded still have a decent range meaning you can having several located in a single state (ie: Victoria) that could then support surrounding regions (From Vic you could easily cover Tasmania, Southern NSW and Eastern SA) with a 10 ton payload.

A half dozen located in WA and VIC in December-March and similar numbers located in WA and Queensland/NSW in April-September would be more then capable of providing the needed support, If not then why not also acquire the MAFFS? They are easy bolt on bolt off kits for the C-130's that are in use by several nations.

 

[Volkodav]

I don't disagree one little bit that this very big island is sparsely populated and the vast majority of the population is centred around the coast, and in big cities too.

But the problem, as I see it, is that those major population centres are still a very long way from each other (as opposed to some smallish, by Australian standards, European country).

It's a bloody long way from Perth to Adelaide, it's a long way from Adelaide to Melbourne and so on and so on.

Currently the growing fleet of C-27J's are based at Richmond NSW, in the not to distant future the full fleet of 10 C-27J airframes will be based at Amberley QLD.

If the C-27J fleet was to be used as the 'primary' response to water bombing when there is a major threatening bushfire, then obviously they would have to be located somewhere within, or close to, the capital cities of each of the States (and Territories too), to be effective.

And that's where I have a problem with the idea that they be used for that task, there just isn't enough of them (10) and the distances between those major population centres are so far apart.

Again, not to say that a capability is not developed where they could act as a backup or in a supporting role, but as a 'primary' response, can't see it happening ever, we would need to double, triple the fleet to be able to handle the Australian fire season and also have them available for their defence role too.

Not trying to pour water on the fire (pun intended, ha ha!!), back up in extreme situations, yes, primary response, no!


I came across this site today, the National Aerial Firefighting Centre (NAFC) website, gives a list of all of the aircraft (fixed and rotary), for the 2015/16 fire season, gives a list of what and where based too:

NAFC Web Site


Cheers,

Thanks John, that's a very informative page, I had no idea we had / brought in so many assets for fire season.

Reading the list, as well as the Caylin web site I must say I can still see a hail Mary role for the ADF in this, i.e. another King Lake etc. where the local and state authorities are over extended and calling for any help they could get.

What comes to mind is the RAAF fire fighting school is at Amberley, as are / will be the RAAF platforms suitable for using the Guardian system, its not too much too much of a stretch to see this being maintained as a niche capability. They have their subject matter experts and most experienced people in fire fighting, HADR, coordinating with civil authorities, tactical / low level drops, rapid response / deployment. Think of how often Australia has been able to get a Herc, C-17 or Bou out in response to HADR, SAR, terrorism etc. the same should apply to this capability.

 

[John Newman]

Thanks John, that's a very informative page, I had no idea we had / brought in so many assets for fire season.

Reading the list, as well as the Caylin web site I must say I can still see a hail Mary role for the ADF in this, i.e. another King Lake etc. where the local and state authorities are over extended and calling for any help they could get.

What comes to mind is the RAAF fire fighting school is at Amberley, as are / will be the RAAF platforms suitable for using the Guardian system, its not too much too much of a stretch to see this being maintained as a niche capability. They have their subject matter experts and most experienced people in fire fighting, HADR, coordinating with civil authorities, tactical / low level drops, rapid response / deployment. Think of how often Australia has been able to get a Herc, C-17 or Bou out in response to HADR, SAR, terrorism etc. the same should apply to this capability.

Hi mate, thanks for that (and a happy new year to you!!)

I'm not poo pooing the idea of the ADF (and specifically the RAAF), having a role in fire fighting (during the fire season), it's just that I can't see that the ADF with the assets at hand could become the primary source for such an effort.

Yes that list from the NAFC website is interesting, makes it very clear about how many assets, fixed and rotary, that are deployed about the country.

By all means the ADF and RAAF can and does play an important role, but still it's not the primary role and as the Federation is still made up of States and Territories that wish to run their own shows, then that's how it probably going to be run well into the future too.

 

[John Newman]

Just because we have 'x' amount of states does not mean we require 'y' amount of air frames, You need to base it off of the states likely hood to experience bush fires and the fire fighting services are generally able to predict with some degree of accuracy which area's are in more danger then others.

By rule of thumb Southern Australia generally suffers bush fires from December through to March (4 months) with Victoria and Southern WA experiencing the brunt of them while Northern Australia generally experiences them between April through to September (6 months).

So you wont be required to have all aircraft dispersed across Australia at all times, As it is the C-27J's loaded still have a decent range meaning you can having several located in a single state (ie: Victoria) that could then support surrounding regions (From Vic you could easily cover Tasmania, Southern NSW and Eastern SA) with a 10 ton payload.

A half dozen located in WA and VIC in December-March and similar numbers located in WA and Queensland/NSW in April-September would be more then capable of providing the needed support, If not then why not also acquire the MAFFS? They are easy bolt on bolt off kits for the C-130's that are in use by several nations.

"fire fighting services are generally able to predict with some degree of accuracy which area's are in more danger then others".

You're not serious are you? They can predict with some degree of accuracy?

The only thing that is 'predictable' about the Australian fire season is the 'unpredictability' of where the fires are going to occur.

How do you predict the possibility of lightning strikes that start many fires? How do you predict the idiots that start fires in the worst of conditions? How???

Have you been involved in unpredictable fires? I have, and it's not pleasant to say the least.


Many years ago I lived in a very leafy area of North/West Sydney, and out of the blue we had a very hot dry Westerly wind come up, some idiot started a fire on the Western side of the bushland and all the houses on the Eastern side of the bush (where my house was) were threatened, fortunately the fire front was stopped short, but you should have seen all the burning embers in the air.

My ex Sister-in-Law had a house in Canberra when they had their devastating fires, one minute they were told the fire front was many many hours away, then within half an hour they were told 'get the hell out!', they managed to gab a few boxes of possessions, they got out with their lives, but lost everything, and I mean everything (have you picked through the ashen remains of a relatives house? I have, not very nice).

My ex In-Laws went through the threat a number times when they lived in the Blue Mountains west of Sydney.

Three years ago I was on holidays in Victoria and drove the 'Great Ocean Road', three years ago it was wet as when we drove it, so what happened there in the last few weeks?

Two years ago I was on holidays in Tasmania when the fire season was on, and when we drove from Hobart to Port Arthur there had just been a major fire, we drove through all the little towns that had been burnt out.

Those are things that you just don't forget! Predictable? NO! Unpredictable? YES? And that's just my personal experience.


Have a look at all the assets, fixed and rotary that are currently deployed around the country:

NAFC Web Site


There are more than 120 assets deployed around the country by the various States and Territories, and it is their responsibility to do so, again, we live in a federation, we have States and Territories that run their own show, it's not the Commonwealths primary responsibility.

It's up to the various States and Territories to decide how much resources and where those resources are deployed, some fire seasons, the threat will be low, some it will be high, I really don't think its a good idea for the ADF and RAAF to become involved at a 'primary' level, not one little bit.

But again, it's not to say that the ADF and RAAF can't provide support or an 'emergency' or surge capability, of course it can, but it just doesn't have the assets to be able to be 'everywhere' and 'all the time' it just doesn't.


Bottom line, fire season is anything but predictable, its completely unpredictable!

 

[Bluey 006]

IMHO At the end of the day Defence's mission is to "defend Australia and its national interests" and clearly extreme loss of life and property as result of bushfires is not in the national interest. Like others said though, it follows a process of escalation local-state-federal and as a last resort ADF.

I'd like to see ADF called in a little earlier but rather than the C-27J perhaps the C-17 is a better option for this purpose. No need to worry about basing. I believe AIAC16 had some discussions about using C17 for fire fighting.

Also,see link - C17 Water bombs

 

[vonnoobie]

"fire fighting services are generally able to predict with some degree of accuracy which area's are in more danger then others".

You're not serious are you? They can predict with some degree of accuracy

Actually I am serious, Bushfires don't just happen willy nilly in any random area and they rush everything out to a particular spot, They build up extra asset's in regions most at risk.

They look at various resources to map our which area's are at higher risk of fire danger, One such area that they mapped out was the region the the Great ocean road is along.

And if things work out for CSIRO we will have an even better predictive capability through there in development program 'Spark' that will not only narrow down even more closely whats at most risk but will predict more accurately (Currently done by humans) how the fires behave by feeding in all available environmental data quite possibly allowing the various authorities to act before a situation changes for the worse. It has already been released, Just time to see how well it works.

 

[t68]

IMHO At the end of the day Defence's mission is to "defend Australia and its national interests" and clearly extreme loss of life and property as result of bushfires is not in the national interest. Like others said though, it follows a process of escalation local-state-federal and as a last resort ADF.

There is a set protocal for when ADF is deployed for HADR within continental Australia, the national interest is whatever the PM decides at the time, admittedly puting resource for flooding is an easier task than firefighting, but if the ADF has the capabilty and the states ask for the resources to become avalible I don't see the problem.

 

[MickB]

Thanks John, that's a very informative page, I had no idea we had / brought in so many assets for fire season.

Reading the list, as well as the Caylin web site I must say I can still see a hail Mary role for the ADF in this, i.e. another King Lake etc. where the local and state authorities are over extended and calling for any help they could get.

What comes to mind is the RAAF fire fighting school is at Amberley, as are / will be the RAAF platforms suitable for using the Guardian system, its not too much too much of a stretch to see this being maintained as a niche capability. They have their subject matter experts and most experienced people in fire fighting, HADR, coordinating with civil authorities, tactical / low level drops, rapid response / deployment. Think of how often Australia has been able to get a Herc, C-17 or Bou out in response to HADR, SAR, terrorism etc. the same should apply to this capability.

Thanks for all these for informative replys to my original question. I thought this would be a logical extension to the increasing purchase and use of ADF assets for HADR missions.
For JN I don't think anyone seriously considered that the RAAF should take the primary role, just back up existing services when needed.

 

[Bluey 006]

the two new EW/ISR Gulfstream G550's the DOD just brought. Does anyone know what capability the are intended to fill or what DMO project they are assigned too.

Are the whispers true that its to replace the Orion's EW role or is this a new capability.

 

[Oberon]

the two new EW/ISR Gulfstream G550's the DOD just brought. Does anyone know what capability the are intended to fill or what DMO project they are assigned too.

Are the whispers true that its to replace the Orion's EW role or is this a new capability.

It's a classified project which the US seems to have inadvertently disclosed when announcing the purchase of the capability for Australia from L3.

Yes, it would be to replace the capability currently provided by a specially equipped AP-3C aircraft which has been publicly rumoured for several years now.

As the saying goes: there is no such thing as a secret in the Defence department particularly in procurement matters.

 

[protoplasm]

Drop JSF for US F-22 Raptor: former RAAF officer recommends

Drop JSF for US F-22 Raptor: former RAAF officer recommends

I know we've all heard this rubbish many times before, and it's been published in various forms over the years. My question is about the names of those quoted in the article. Are they new anti-JSF voices, or just people who I haven't heard of yet because I was ignoring much of the past anti-JSF material?

 

[SpazSinbad]

Drop JSF for US F-22 Raptor: former RAAF officer recommends

I know we've all heard this rubbish many times before, and it's been published in various forms over the years. My question is about the names of those quoted in the article. Are they new anti-JSF voices, or just people who I haven't heard of yet because I was ignoring much of the past anti-JSF material?

I can only guess because your link is subscription only - wot I do not have. Anyway this is useful maybe:

Reviving F-22 Raptor production a ‘non-starter’ 20 Jan 2016 James Drew
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/reviving-f-22-raptor-production-a-non-starter-421019/

Former RAAFie CHAPpie has submitted this idea to upcoming Oz Senate F-35 enquiry in the first of seven submissions there: WgCmdr Chris Mills: (ret'd - APA & Repsim)

http://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=cb696c8f-26b1-494c-ab8e-0555ef0fd7b4&subId=407251 (PDF 2.8Mb)

Submissions – Parliament of Australia

 

[StingrayOZ]

Retired Wing Commander Chris Mills said the F-35 was never designed to achieve air superiority and was outclassed by advanced new Russian aircraft entering service in regional air forces.

In a submission to a Greens-instigated Senate inquiry examining acquisition of the F-35, he said the F-22, now in service with the US Air Force, was designed to dominate the skies.

Production of the F-22 ended in 2011 and in any case US law specifically bans exports.

Mr Mills said the answer to providing Australia and other western countries with a superior future air combat capability was to bring the F-22 back into production.

“To those who say it can’t be done, my answer is that USAF has kept all the production tooling with capacity for several hundred new aircraft to be built,” he said.

Expert urges RAAF to drop JSF for F-22 | SBS News

This is insanity.

You might as well ask the US to start production of the space shuttle or the SR-71. Or the F-111.

BTW Who is Chris Mills?
Wing Commander Chris Mills AM RAAF (Retd)

Another former RAAF officer, retired Wing Commander Anthony Wilkinson, a former F-111 navigator, said JSF’s range was too short and its bombload too small for it to be a proper strike aircraft. “I would argue that defence planners have lost the plot,” he said in his submission.

So Australia should acquire F-22 for air superiority and some sort of dedicated bomber like the F-111?

Of course with glide kits, bombs can travel hundreds(500+km) to hit a destination you no longer have to fly over and optically sight the target underneath the aircraft. You no longer have to drop many bombs when one SMD gps guided bomb will hit the target.

Modern missiles work OTH and BVR. Again, the game has changed. I'm surprised people will get up and use their real name and embarrass themselves by spouting this garbage.

So they were trying to convince the Greens to acquire F-22 and an unnamed dedicated bomber? At some point you really do have to stop listening... Both labor and Liberals are happy with the F-35 decision. I see this as a call to get people the medical help they need.

 

[Oberon]

Mills says "the answer ........... was to bring the F-22 back into production". I didn't think we had that sort of leverage in Washington! <rolls eyes> The cost of such a development would be jaw dropping.

 

[SpazSinbad]

Labor could have NOT voted to hold the enquiry. They used 'weasel words' & strongly endorsed the F-35 in the process; so I wonder what deals have been done with the GREENS to justify it all. Perhaps we may find out more about the intended use of the F-35 in RAAF service. Perhaps we will know more eventually than the long delayed White Paper now 2016 will inform us soon?

 

[John Newman]

Expert urges RAAF to drop JSF for F-22 | SBS News

This is insanity.

You might as well ask the US to start production of the space shuttle or the SR-71. Or the F-111.

BTW Who is Chris Mills?
Wing Commander Chris Mills AM RAAF (Retd)



So Australia should acquire F-22 for air superiority and some sort of dedicated bomber like the F-111?

Of course with glide kits, bombs can travel hundreds(500+km) to hit a destination you no longer have to fly over and optically sight the target underneath the aircraft. You no longer have to drop many bombs when one SMD gps guided bomb will hit the target.

Modern missiles work OTH and BVR. Again, the game has changed. I'm surprised people will get up and use their real name and embarrass themselves by spouting this garbage.

So they were trying to convince the Greens to acquire F-22 and an unnamed dedicated bomber? At some point you really do have to stop listening... Both labor and Liberals are happy with the F-35 decision. I see this as a call to get people the medical help they need.

The first thing I thought was, "this guy must be one of the Air Power Australia muppets", and guess what, I was right!!!

Not often these days they crawl out from under their little rock and say something, what a joke, a complete joke!!!

Maybe what we should really do is scrap the F-35, don't worry about telling the US to start the F-22 production line, instead we should tell the US to give us a whole bunch of their proposed LRS-B's instead.

After all the LRS-B is 'only' going to cost around US$500m per copy, easy to afford once we get the Government to increase the Defence budget from 2% of GDP to around 10% of GDP.

No problem, easy done (it's not the 1st of April is it??)

 

[alexsa]

I can only guess because your link is subscription only - wot I do not have. Anyway this is useful maybe:

Reviving F-22 Raptor production a ‘non-starter’ 20 Jan 2016 James Drew
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/reviving-f-22-raptor-production-a-non-starter-421019/

Former RAAFie CHAPpie has submitted this idea to upcoming Oz Senate F-35 enquiry in the first of seven submissions there: WgCmdr Chris Mills: (ret'd - APA & Repsim)

http://www.aph.gov.au/DocumentStore.ashx?id=cb696c8f-26b1-494c-ab8e-0555ef0fd7b4&subId=407251 (PDF 2.8Mb)

Submissions – Parliament of Australia

I love it ..... His arguement starts with the example of within visual range combat between an F-5 and a Mirage (he was proud of his gun camera win). And the .... you will get no warning .... Is quite right which supports the basic tenant of the F-35, and data fusion more widely, information is life.

All rot, you simply need kinematic performance (followed by a massive IR plume), weapons carried on hard points (along with sodding great fuel tanks ..... Hang on doesn't that limit your speed) and an RCS the size of a house with information distributed over seperate systems.

Sheer brilliance. Pity is that my viewing of senate inquiries is that there is not a lot of technical knowledge by those holding the enquiry and some of them .... To be honest .... Are not the most appropriate individuals to conduct too make recommendations.