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

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
I guess I am confused. Twelve of pre-wired Shornets were already converted to Growlers and the debate is about what to do about the lost EA-18G. Were their only 12 pre-wired Shornets?
Yes, but none were converted. The article was published in 2012!

oldsig
 

SpazSinbad

Active Member
Australia to convert 12 Super Hornets into EA-18G Growlers
The estimated cost to convert the 12 prewired Aircraft was $1.5b, i think i remember it cost an extra $40m to prewire the last 12 Supers but i can't find any proof of this.
There is perhaps some confusion. I'll have to dig out numbers so here is the first effort. A dozen new build Growlers cost 1.5 Billion then Oz dollars according to 2013 White Paper. I'll have to dig out 'pre-wire costs later - no time....
"...to ensure air combat capability through the transition to the Joint Strike Fighter, the Government is announcing today that it will purchase twelve new-build Growler aircraft.

The Growler is the electronic warfare variant of the Super Hornet. This capability purchase will allow Australia to retain its existing 24 Super Hornets in their current air combat configuration whilst also maintaining 12 Growler aircraft. The cost of this purchase is estimated at around $1.5 billion over the next four years and will be contained in the forthcoming budget and included in Defence’s four year forward estimates....": http://www.pm.gov.au/press-office/transcript-remarks-launch-2013-defence-white-paper
"...The Government has also decided to acquire 12 new-build EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft instead of converting 12 of Australia’s existing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft into the Growler configuration. 12 Growler aircraft will enhance significantly the ADF’s electronic warfare capability and, together with the JSF and the Super Hornet, will form a formidable air combat force capable of controlling both the air and electronic environments. A decision on replacing the Super Hornets with additional JSF aircraft will be made closer to the withdrawal of the Super Hornets, which is not expected until around 2030...." Prime Minister and Minister for Defence – Joint Media Release – 2013 Defence White Paper: Air Combat Capability
"2016 INTEGRATED INVESTMENT PROGRAM Capability Stream: Strike and air combat pages 96-97
...Table 7: Summary of key investment decisions from FY 2016–17 to FY 2025–26...
...E/A-18G Growler Airborne Electronic Attack Capability (12 aircraft) Approved $2.1bn...
...Growler Electronic Attack Enhancements 2016–2035 $5bn–$6bn..."
http://www.defence.gov.au/Whitepaper/Docs/2016-Defence-Integrated-Investment-Program.pdf (5Mb)
"...All 12 [Growler] aircraft will have been delivered to Australia by the middle of 2017, and initial operational capability is due to be achieved in mid-2018. Final operational capability is set to follow in mid-2022." 28 Feb 2017 http://www.defensenews.com/articles...pate-in-development-of-next-generation-jammer
"Cost of 'Growler' jets blows out to $1.7b David Ellery 07 Aug 2012 ...Although the Australian government will not commit to Growler until next month at the earliest, it has already spent $55 million on the capability which has been strongly championed by members of the ADF senior leadership group. Of this, $35 million was allocated in February 2009 to hardwire 12 of the 24 Super Hornets ''for but not with'' the Growler package. A further $20 million was allocated by Defence Minister Stephen Smith in March this year to fund ''long lead items".... [long article with some obtuseness that can be difficult to fathom] Cost of 'Growler' jets blows out to $1.7b
 
Last edited:

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
So the lost EA-18G was a separate acquisition from the Shornet fleet? If so, how many Growlers were bought?
Yes, Spaz has covered it but in summary, we bought 12 F-18F followed by 12 F-18F which were prewired for conversion to Growlers. Later it was decided to just go ahead and buy the Growlers immediately

A44-201 to A44-212 are standard F-18F
A44-213 to A44-224 are F-18F with extra wiring. These were to be converted when the F-35 entered service but instead...
A46-301 to A46-312 are the EA18-G

The prewired block are rather more than just wired. Sensor bulges and other external fittings were also installed - for example when they first arrived you could identify the second block aircraft (A44-213 et seq) by the slightly lower position of the serial number which appears to have been moved below the new (EF-18) fairing between the tail plane leading edge and trailing edge of the wing.

oldsig
 

hauritz

Well-Known Member
I would say that the withdrawal from service of a Rhino for conversion to a Growler is less of an issue now than it was a few years ago. The driving factor now would be to find the most economical solution to replacing the lost Growler.

Most of the expense of converting a Rhino may well have been acquiring the parts needed for the conversion. From what I have read they lost two ALQ Jamming pods but the rest of the equipment from the burnt out Growler might be salvageable.

If Boeing of General Electric are culpable for the loss of the Growler than a reasonable settlement could be for Boeing to convert one of the existing Rhinos using parts from the written off aircraft at their own expense.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Just so everyone is clear as to what happened
Around 2006-07 Australia ordered 24 F/A-18F to replace the F-111s in 82 wing. In 2009 it was decided to prewire the last 12 Aircraft for possible conversion at a later date to EA-18Gs. In 2013 Australia ordered 12 new build EA-18Gs instead of converting the F/A-18Fs. For a grand total of 36 Aircraft.
 

SpazSinbad

Active Member
I want to know why there is an assumption about salvageable parts from the burnt Oz Growler and why they can be re-used. Sure some parts may be usable but if there is any doubt about their robustness for use in actual flying aircraft then they will remain on the ground as school avionic toys. In good time we will be informed about ANY replacement for the lost Growler. Why speculate when there is not enough information? Sure there may be options however I'll insist that a pre-wired Super Hornet has never been turned into a Growler. Why do WE need to be guinea pigs for that seemingly fraught process.

BTW thanks for the info about 2nd Shornet batch 'oldsig127'. The wing of a Growler compared to Shornet is also said to be different (can't recall exact details).
 

hairyman

Active Member
Further to the upgrade to the FA-18F and Growlers, I have read where Australia will follow the US Navy with whatever upgrades to our Growler fleet, but wont upgrade our Super Hornets.
Dont ask where I have read it though.
 

oldsig127

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
BTW thanks for the info about 2nd Shornet batch 'oldsig127'. The wing of a Growler compared to Shornet is also said to be different (can't recall exact details).
All I can recall is that the EA18-G wing has no wingtip launch rail (and none can be fitted) which is replaced by the ALQ-218 RWR/ELINT/ESM. I assume that this means some physical differences in the wing tip area which would require rebuild/replacement if they were to be converted.

While the pods make a Growler obviously a Growler, the two F-18F blocks wings aren't visually different to a nosy ex-soldier from usual snooping range which is not to say that there aren't extra access panels etc that I haven't noticed!

oldsig
 

SpazSinbad

Active Member
That is 'correct' (I do not know about upgrading our Shornets - yay or nay). Australia is helping develop NGJ Next Generation Jammer with USN etc. and the Australian Government promise is that our Growlers will stay in lock step with USN Growlers (there is reference to this already on this thread IIRC). At beginning of the 2017 a 250 million dollar agreement was signed with USN about NGJ development. AND AHAH our Growlers WILL GET BLOCK III upgrades according to second excerpt below.
Australia Receives First EA-18G Growler 01 Mar 2017
...Minister Payne today also announced that Australia will partner with the United States to develop a next-generation radar and radio jammer for the Growler. “This is a $250m investment by the Turnbull Government that will future proof the Growler’s capability,” Minister Payne said. “As this is a rapidly evolving area we will work in partnership with the United States Navy to develop the next generation jamming capability, which will ensure that these aircraft remain at the technological forefront throughout their service life.”... 01 Mar 2017 Australia Receives First EA-18G GrowlerDefenceTalk.com | at DefenceTalk
"...Always evolving
The RAAF intends to stay in lockstep with the US Navy as it upgrades its Growler fleet. Apart from the Next Generation Jammer, the US Navy’s larger Growler Block II spiral upgrade program will add numerous other enhancements that mirror those of the Super Hornet Block III. “Every couple of years there will be a new capability upgrade. Similar to the F-35 where they talk about their block upgrades, Growler will also have block upgrades,” GPCAPT Churchill said...." Australian Aviation Magazine June 2018 No.360
 
Last edited:

hairyman

Active Member
Six Page ARTICKLE about our RAAF Growlers from OzAvMag Jun 2018 mentioned above in excerpt, now attached herein. STARTING FROM SCRATCH ANDREW MCLAUGHLIN

Thanks for posting that Spazsinbad. The only thing I can add to my post above is the reason as to why the Super Hornets are not being upgraded is because they are to be replaced by F35's in the future.
 

Takao

The Bunker Group
I want to know why there is an assumption about salvageable parts from the burnt Oz Growler and why they can be re-used. Sure some parts may be usable but if there is any doubt about their robustness for use in actual flying aircraft then they will remain on the ground as school avionic toys.
Interesting that this theory (pull 'stuff' out of crashed airframe into new one) was in the Black Hawk acquisition, but airworthiness standards dictated otherwise. Hence (partially) A25-303.
 

John Newman

The Bunker Group
Upgraded Growlers?

I think it's clear that the Growler fleet will be kept in lock step with the USN fleet (as others here have mentioned), the Growlers would appear, at this stage, to have a full RAAF service life ahead of them (30+? years), including NJG and whatever Blk III mods the USN performs to their Growler fleet.

As to a possible replacement for the crispy Growler, well that's something that we probably won't know about for a while (year or so?), no doubt there will eventually be recommendations to Govt by the RAAF to replace or not, and again we don't know if the initial buy of 12 airframes included attrition.

Upgraded Super Hornets?

Well that's where the crystal ball is very cloudy and murky too! Firstly I wouldn't expect a decision on the replacement of the Super Hornet fleet until around the mid 2020s, lets not forget the RAAF will have it's hands full with the conversion of the Classic Hornet fleet to F-35A between now and late 2023 (when the last F-35A is due), I think the last thing the RAAF would want to do is 'tinker' with a relatively small fleet of aircraft that will be 'the main game' at least until the F-35A fleet reaches FOC.

I would imagine that the Super Hornet fleet will still have the various 'incremental' Blk II upgrades that happen (if I remember correctly the RAAFs Super Hornet fleet has recently gone through an upgrade to keep in lock step with the USN).

But even 'if' the Government does decide to retain the 24 Super Hornets in operations for a full service life, the path from Blk II to Blk III is going to be long and slow regardless.

The USN currently has between 650-700 Super Hornets and Growlers, all Blk II except the first 130 or so Super Hornets which are Blk I.

Things are going to get pretty messy for a decade or so, the USN will have Bk I, II and III all in service at the same time, existing build and new build to Blk III standard, and also on top of that is the Service Life Modification (SLM) program that is just starting to, which will extend the lives of the oldest (most used) airframes from 6000hrs to 9000hrs.

Long Live the Super Hornet!

Here's a couple of other links to read:

Block III Super Hornet upgrades to begin this spring

And this:

http://australianaviation.com.au/20...-to-extend-us-navy-super-hornet-service-life/

And this too:

http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...r-plan-for-the-f-a-18e-f-super-hornets-future


As I said, things are going to get pretty messy for a while to come until all the various life extension and Blk upgrade programs settle down, which will be well into the mid 2020s in my opinion.

I imagine that the Government/RAAF keeps performing the incremental Blk II upgrades to the fleet (to at least keep in step with USN Blk II airframes), but beyond that, if they do decide to keep the Super Hornet fleet, it also has to look at the SLM program and Blk III upgrades that could see a substantial number of the fleet 'out of service' while those programs are being performed, is it worth it??

Personally, I hope the decision is made in the mid 2020s to proceed with the 4th Sqn of F-35A (18 airframes plus the 10 attrition airframes, total 28), and retire the Super Hornet fleet without wasting all that money on SLM and Blk III.

And at the very least keep the 12 pre wired Super Hornets as both a possible expansion of the Growler fleet and future attrition replacement airframes, as to the 12 standard Super Hornet airframes, sell them back to the USN or break them down for spares.

Anyway, just my opinion of course too!

Cheers,
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
Future of the Super Hornets. Well personally I don't mind them and would prefer to hold off any decision on them till say 2030 by which stage we will know one way or the other if it is worth replacing them with more F-35's or if there is any viable 6th gen aircraft well under way. I understand there is a major benefit to having a singular type especially for the smaller air forces but if you can afford it there are also benefits to having a two type fleet allowing you to get thew newest and best (if all goes right with the R&D) every 15 or so years rather then every 30 or so. Our birds still have a lot of life in the so no need to rush any decision.

That said, If we do get extra F-35A's keep the pre wired Hornets for Growler attrition/spares and sell the remaining 12 to any possible future friendly user or back to the USN. Hell keep them parked here and sell them the parts directly.
 

SpazSinbad

Active Member
6 page PDF of article quoted from attached below. I did not know it can carry FIVE pods if required.

Australian Aviation Magazine July 2018 "Putting the GRRRR in Growler" MAX BLENKIN
"...To have remained in service so long, ALQ-99 must do a lot right. But the ALQ-99’s technology is analogue-based in a digital age, and reported problems include poor reliability, regular failure of the built-in test facility, high drag resulting in reduced aircraft performance, and interference with the Growler’s APG-79 AESA radar. In Australian and US service, the ALQ-249 Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) will replace the ALQ-99, a limited number of which the RAAF acquired through the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) deal in which Australia acquired its 12 Growlers. The ALQ-99 is not a single unit which does everything. Depending on the mission, a Growler could carry up to five of the 450kg 4.5m pods on wing and centreline hardpoints, but a typical Growler loadout is two configured for the mid-band of the frequency spectrum, and one for the low-band. The ALQ-99 stands out for its little nose propeller which is a ram air turbine to generate power, rather than drawing power from the aircraft itself.... ...The baseline Growler came with the familiar ALQ-99 pods plus the onboard ALQ-218 electronic surveillance and electronic attack suite...." Australian Aviation Magazine July 2018 "Putting the GRRRR in Growler" MAX BLENKIN
 

Attachments

hairyman

Active Member
When I was a kid in the Air Training Corps (RAAF Cadets), the RAAF had Lincoln bombers and Vampire jets, both British origin. These were replaced with the Canberra Bomber and Avon Sabre (British and US) which in turn were replaced by Mirage (French) and Flll (US) The Mirage replaced by the F18, (US) which are now being replaced by the F35 (US), while the F18F has replaced the Flll. In m opinion, we should be looking around for a more suitable aircraft than the Super Hornet to take on the role previously ndone by the Flll, the Canberra and the Lincoln bomber. The Super Hornet and the Lightening ll both have similar roles, in as much as both have very limited payloads etc. The Americans are looking at a bomber or light bomber, the Germans are looking to upgrade their Eurofighters to carry bigger loads as a replacement for their Tornado ( which would have been the perfect replacement for the Flll) and the Brits are working on an aircraft to replace their tornados.
We should be examining these three options, with a view to joining in on the development of the chosen aircraft, and replacing the F18F with them.
 

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
There are a few problems though with acquiring a different type.

1. Europe isnt actually designing anything that could be described as a bomber in any form. There programs range from using UAV's with Typhoons and replacing with F-35s. The program related to the Typhoon has actually been pushed back and is intead being now utilized as a replacement its self for the Typhoon in the future.

2. The US LRS-B is a great aircraft but its a big bastard and a very costly one. At $550m a piece the government wouldnt even look at the brochure.

The only aircraft that could fill a role similar to the F-111 would be the Tornado or the F-15.

Tornado isnt in production so a restart would be costly for a design heading towards the end of its life while second hand aircraft would have limited hours and risky.

F-15 good aircraft in production so while there isnt anything wrong with the plane its self there is another factor.

WE would go from having 2 combat aircraft types/families to 3. 2 aircraft types we can handle, 3 would stretch and likely break the RAAF, Does more harm then good for a capability that can now for the most part still be filled with our current or future long range munitions.
 
Top