Redlands18
Well-Known Member
There hasn’t actually been a order announced yet, just a FMS clearance from the US State Department of a possible order. So we need to wait for the official order announcement to find out the purchase timeline.
Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
John Newman
The Bunker Group
Good article on the WarZone about exercise Cope North:
Check Out All The Airpower On Guam For Exercise Cope North In This Exclusive Satellite Image
There are some great group photos and aerial shots too, featuring all of the aircraft, including RAAF Classic Hornets, E-7A and KC-30A.
And talking of the KC-30A, she is a big girl, a real big girl, and in fact her length and wingspan are larger than the B-52H in the centre of the photos.
Cheers,
Check Out All The Airpower On Guam For Exercise Cope North In This Exclusive Satellite Image
There are some great group photos and aerial shots too, featuring all of the aircraft, including RAAF Classic Hornets, E-7A and KC-30A.
And talking of the KC-30A, she is a big girl, a real big girl, and in fact her length and wingspan are larger than the B-52H in the centre of the photos.
Cheers,
It hasn’t been integrated onto F-35 yet. Only B-1B and Super Hornet.
Will likely go onto F-35 under Block IV / V upgrades.
DEFENSE STUDIES: Boeing Held Talks with the RAAF to Supply the T-7A
I don't know if the Hawk 127 is due for replacement or not, but Boeing are doing there best to promote their T7 to the local area. I would imagine the Hawk is getting a wee bit long in the tooth.
I don't know if the Hawk 127 is due for replacement or not, but Boeing are doing there best to promote their T7 to the local area. I would imagine the Hawk is getting a wee bit long in the tooth.
John Newman
The Bunker Group
It was only about 12 months ago that the Hawk 127 fleet completed their major midlife upgrade, still plenty of life left in the old dog (not so old dog!).
But there is a project noted in the 2016 DIIP for their future replacement, the project is called the 'Lead-in Fighter Training System' and has a budget of $4b-$5b, the program time frame covers the years 2022-2033.
I don't think it's accurate to suggest they are 'getting a wee bit long in the tooth', yes the fleet is coming up to 20 years old, but with the recent upgrade, I would think there is still a good 10 years or so of service life left in the Hawk fleet.
Anyway, I'm sure that when the time does come to start the replacement project that the T-7A will probably find itself up near the top of the list of candidates.
Cheers,
That'll give Boeing, SAAB and the USAF enough time to sort out any bugs that the T-7A will throw up, especially that it will have a high software content.
It will be an interesting process to see what will replace the Hawk. That there are no twin-seat trainer versions of the F-35 could mean that there will be a requirement for a more high-performance jet trainer sooner rather than later. I know that most of the transition work for the F-35 will happen in a simulator but it still seems a bit of a jump going from something like a Hawk into the cockpit of an F-35.
t68
Well-Known Member
Sorry guys just to go a little of topic.
I noticed that Germany has cancelled the MQ-4C Triton drones and are replacing them with manned Bombardier Global 6000 for SIGINT because of concerns of them flying in European airspace, but that got me wondering when are the Gulfstream G550 SIGINT aircraft were due to arrive for the RAAF or have they and I missed it and have the been given a type designation yet, its been a few years now.
I noticed that Germany has cancelled the MQ-4C Triton drones and are replacing them with manned Bombardier Global 6000 for SIGINT because of concerns of them flying in European airspace, but that got me wondering when are the Gulfstream G550 SIGINT aircraft were due to arrive for the RAAF or have they and I missed it and have the been given a type designation yet, its been a few years now.
MC-55A Peregrine. Here's a decent article that neatly ties up all the bits of info you're likely to find with searches:
ADBR November-December Issue
Summary: Fourth and last airframe delivered to USAF 'Big Safari' group late last year with all external lumps and bumps already in place, such as the underside 'canoe' fairing. Next few years will see Big Safari integrating all the classified equipment and sensors. Very secretive work done there so don't expect much further news for a while. First delivery scheduled for early 2023. Additional aircraft delivered roughly one per year until I would suppose late 2025.
Cheers
According to ADF Serials three airframes have already been acquired and are awaiting modifications.
ADF Serials - Pergrine
It seems these aircraft are green airframes. The fourth is yet to be identified.
t68
Well-Known Member
With hindsight now coming into it and that article was discussing the size of the aircraft cabin for the role, I'm wondering if it would have been more beneficial to combine the new ISR of the MC-55A with the role of E7 with additional Wedgetails now that the UK are going ahead with there own E-7 AEW&C.
Not being from the wing wiper school of thought I'm not sure if its practical or not, it might be along the lines of different track patterns flown for the role. Anyone able to enlighten me if that's the case.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #6,772
It might not have been an option from a technical perspective. One of the reasons for the cancellation of the US E-10 programme, which was originally be a single aircraft replacing the E-3 Sentry, the E-8 JSTARS, and RC-135 Rivet Joint and possibly some other SIGINT/ELINT capabilities was that the sensors aboard the B767-based aircraft interfered with each other, as well as competing power requirements.
On one hand, it could be very handy to have a single platform able to harvest the desired signals/returns, on the other transmissions from one on board system could easily skew or interfere with another on board system.
Exactly. They're airborne listening posts, not the place to be transmitting high power signals which will mask the incoming low power transmissions and emanations that provide their reason to exist
oldsig
John Newman
The Bunker Group
I don't think the RAAF is in any desperate need or rush to replace the Hawk fleet, yes there is a project that starts in a few years (2022-2033), but we probably won't see a complete transition from the recently upgraded Hawk (to whatever replaces it), for at least another 10 years or so.
It's worth looking at all of the F-35 partner nations (and FMS customers) and have a look at their current fast jet trainers, the RAAFs 'updated' Hawk 127s stand up very well. The UK uses Hawk, the USN uses the T-45 carrier version of Hawk, Canada if it ever gets on board is also a Hawk user, Finland (if it chooses F-35) is also a Hawk user too. The USAF will still be using the very very old T-38 for many years to come too.
Not saying that a modern fast jet trainer isn't important (and probably going to be more important in the years ahead), but it appears today (not just with F-35), that so much of the very specialised training required is performed in very advanced simulators and other modern training aids.
Cheers,
Yep, I wouldn't be in any great hurry. The RAAF have shown to be quite canny in their acquisition planning and execution in recent times, so I would think that they are already casting their eye around looking at what's available. In reality I think that they will be following very closely the USAF T-7A project, because on paper it offers a lot more capability than the other two trainers on the market, the KAI T/F-50 and the AerMacchi M346. I would even argue that it's a generation ahead of those other two, in that it's the full training package first and an aircraft second. Of all of the air arms in the FVEYS & NATO, the RAAF will appreciate and exploit that the most, because I strongly believe it's way ahead of the USAF and other air arms in understanding and utilising the capabilities of the 5G realm.
Todjaeger probably nailed the technical reason for not doing so but yes that part of the article did make a couple of very odd comparisons.
I don't think cabin size will be a limiter at all. The article mentions and compares the CAEW versions internal layout but the MC-55A will be quite a different animal from that particular aircraft, with a totally different role. AEW&C aircraft do require more thinking heads present because they're having to observe and then act on that information in real time. The Peregrine is a straight up spy plane, wholesale hoovering up masses of signal information. All that information is going to be disseminated in air conditioned comfort in some innocuous looking building at Edinburgh. It's either going to beam it off board via sat com or physically bring back a bunch of full drives or perhaps some combination of both. Many of the systems would be operated remotely, from the ground. I would expect the only people you're likely to have on this thing is two sets of aircrew and a couple of people keeping an eye on the racks of electronics with a few reclining rest chairs to take turns in sharing that 14 hour load. We can only make guesses though!
The extreme range with a long time on station is a major plus that suits this type of aircraft very well and it's specs in that regard take it way beyond most commercial airliners.
It was also really strange that the article mentioned the cruising speed of the aircraft to "keep pace with fast jet strike" which seems laughable as that's really not how this thing will operate. Think the author might have confused the passive role of this for the active role of... something else.
Cheers
John Newman
The Bunker Group
One thing that does impress me in the comparison of a G550 airframe vs 737-700 airframe is the rather spectacular stats of the G550.
G550 range: 12,500km (E-7A 7,040km, according to the RAAF website)
G550 operational altitude: 51,000ft (E-7A 41,000ft, according to the RAAF website)
G550 endurance: 14 hours (E-7A 10 hour mission*, according to the RAAF website. *Yes the E-7A has flown much longer missions, but of course that requires the aircraft to be aerial refuelled too).
What all that tells me is if you require an airframe to be able to travel very long distances, stay on station (without aerial refuelling) for a long time, and at a rather high operational altitude (G550 altitude is 10,000ft more than E-7A, it's on par with MQ-4C operational altitude), then the G550 appears to be the perfect solution.
The plan by the RAAF to become a Fifth Generation Air Force is well on track (in my opinion), to become a fully networked force (and across the broader ADF) is just around the corner.
By around 2025 or so, the RAAF orbat will consist of: F-35A, EA-18G, F/A-18F, E-7A, MC-55A, P-8A, MQ-4C, MQ-9B and supported by KC-30A, etc.
Pretty bloody impressive, not just by RAAF standards, but by global standards too.
Cheers,
John Newman
The Bunker Group
For those of us (and I suspect most of us?) who like to know how the RAAF acquisition of the F-35A fleet is progressing, ADF-Serials is a good place to look (there are times when info is updated before official Government/RAAF announcements):
ADF Serials - F-35 Lightning
The RAAF ended 2019 with 18 airframes in its possession, 13 based here in Oz and 5 still based in the US at the joint training base.
So far this year, the RAAF has also received -019 and -020 (reportedly in January), it would also appear that -021 and -022 have been completed and have been test flown (no announcement of official handover as yet).
The RAAF is due to receive 15 F-35A this year (from LRIP 12), it would appear that 4 have been completed, which leaves another 11 to be delivered by years end (brining the total to 33 airframes).
All ticking along nice and smooth (wonder what the zombies at APA think of all of this? HA HA!).
Cheers,
ADF Serials - F-35 Lightning
The RAAF ended 2019 with 18 airframes in its possession, 13 based here in Oz and 5 still based in the US at the joint training base.
So far this year, the RAAF has also received -019 and -020 (reportedly in January), it would also appear that -021 and -022 have been completed and have been test flown (no announcement of official handover as yet).
The RAAF is due to receive 15 F-35A this year (from LRIP 12), it would appear that 4 have been completed, which leaves another 11 to be delivered by years end (brining the total to 33 airframes).
All ticking along nice and smooth (wonder what the zombies at APA think of all of this? HA HA!).
Cheers,
Boagrius
Well-Known Member
I remember around the time AIR6000 was first floated, the catch-cry was that the RAAF (and ADF more broadly) faced a "block obsolescence" problem with multiple aircraft types becoming obsolete simultaneously. Seems this problem has been addressed rather well in the intervening years.
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #6,780
One of the things about the mission endurance limit for the E-7 Wedgetail, and the P-8A Poseidon for that matter, is that there is a limiting factor other than 'just' fuel, namely another liquid carried aboard IIRC, that cannot be replenished in flight.
I have never gotten confirmation of what the liquid is, or what its role aboard the aircraft is, but I have suspected for some time that it is a liquid coolant which gets consumed/boiled off by the radars and other avionics. I also seem to recall that the time limits were 15 and 18 hours, though which one was for the Poseidon and which was the Wedgetail I do not recall.
Depending on the systems used by the G550 platform, there might be a significantly lesser demand for additional cooling, or for that matter power generation.
One other thought which comes to mind is more a question about what other aircraft of roughly the same size/capacity of the B737/A320 have flight characteristics which are more comparable to that of the G550?
From what I remember, there is not really anything given that the MTOW of an E-7 is nearly twice that of a G550.