ADF General discussion thread

[John Newman]

I am not sure if there are any red flags around JSM. F-35 Block 4 has been delayed and is not ready yet. JSM requires block 4.

So far Japan and Norway has ordered JSM. Japan actually ordered before Norway! Norway ordered the JSM in October of last year. I believe that's when series production started as well.

The sibling of JSM, the NSM (Naval Strike Missile) has so far been ordered by Norway, Poland, the US (both Marines and USN), Malaysia, Germany, and Romania. Canada has stated it will be integrated into their new frigates being built. The NSM is delivered both ship-launched and launched from land (Poland, US Marines, and Romania(?)).

The JSM has a unique competitive advantage in that it fits into the F-35 weapons bay, maintaining the low RCS of the F-35. The NSM does not have a similar advantage over ship and truck-launched competitors, still it has sold quite well.

Finland recently decided that they will buy the F-35. No orders have been made yet, but the JSM was included in the weapons package in the offer from LM.

I believe the main reason why JSM has not sold so much yet, is simply because of timing. I would wait until the end of 2023 (perhaps even longer) before drawing any conclusions about the commercial success of the JSM.

I tend to agree.

Kongsberg appears to be going well with NSM, and JSM has been selected by Norway and Japan, there are suggestions that Finland will procure JSM, and the jury is still undecided regarding Australian procurement.

And I tend to agree that it’s a timing issue, until Block 4 is integrated into the F-35, well there’s probably no pressure for others to commit to orders.

Will JSM eventually be integrated to Super Hornet? Potentially in the future, but at the moment we’ll see LRASM for the USN and RAAF (and JASSM-ER).

Anyway, if F-35A and C users want an AShM that can be carried internally, JSM is currently the only game in town.

 

[Boagrius]

Anyway, if F-35A and C users want an AShM that can be carried internally, JSM is currently the only game in town.

...and if that's not needed, quantity has a quality all of its own (6 weapons per jet )

 

[ngatimozart]

There are claims being made about what the B-21 can and can't do. How do we know these? Do some people on here have access to highly restricted information? At the moment there is sweet stuff all in the open about the B-21, not even an official graphic. No details about speed, capability, range, anything. Yet people are making all these pronouncements on what it can and cannot do based on what? Nothing. It's all pure speculation and fart juice. So dial back the fantasy crap and get back to reality.

 

[aussienscale]

I tend to agree.

Kongsberg appears to be going well with NSM, and JSM has been selected by Norway and Japan, there are suggestions that Finland will procure JSM, and the jury is still undecided regarding Australian procurement.

And I tend to agree that it’s a timing issue, until Block 4 is integrated into the F-35, well there’s probably no pressure for others to commit to orders.

Will JSM eventually be integrated to Super Hornet? Potentially in the future, but at the moment we’ll see LRASM for the USN and RAAF (and JASSM-ER).

Anyway, if F-35A and C users want an AShM that can be carried internally, JSM is currently the only game in town.

And I also like the NSM MLV option, ties in rather nicely with NASAMS with both sharing the same systems, another op for commonality

NSM Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV)

NSM Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV)

www.kongsberg.com

 

[Bob53]

Again.

Does the RAAF want to get to China?

This just feels incredibly misguided.

Regards,

Massive

it is an idiotic statement. Australia would want to attack mainland China…. There is one thing to defend from an attack but I can’t image any war planning that involves the ADF sending planes to attack mainland targets.

 

[swerve]

Harpoon's never been the only western anti-ship missile. The only one integrated on US aircraft, perhaps.

 

[Boagrius]

Harpoon's never been the only western anti-ship missile. The only one integrated on US aircraft, perhaps.

To clarify - it was the only one available to RAAF jets for some time. Simply glad to see more variety on the horizon.

 

[Pusser01]

And I also like the NSM MLV option, ties in rather nicely with NASAMS with both sharing the same systems, another op for commonality

NSM Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV)

NSM Missile Launch Vehicle (MLV)

www.kongsberg.com

Noting the NSM has been or is in the process of being validated for carrying by the MH60R, I wonder if the RAN could see this as a possibility to arm their own helos in the future. Cheers.

 

[ngatimozart]

Noting the NSM has been or is in the process of being validated for carrying by the MH60R, I wonder if the RAN could see this as a possibility to arm their own helos in the future. Cheers.

Is it? It's a 407Kg missile so just on 130kg heavier than the Mk-54 LWT. If so would be a good addition to the Romeo capability set.

 

[Pusser01]

Is it? It's a 407Kg missile so just on 130kg heavier than the Mk-54 LWT. If so would be a good addition to the Romeo capability set.

There have been a few articles that suggest India is purchasing the NSM as part of the weapons fit out for it's future fleet of MH60R's. I haven't been able to find any yet as whether trials have commenced. Cheers. https://www.sps-aviation.com/experts-speak/?id=535&h=Indian-Navy-Getting-MH-60R-Seahawks

 

[Todjaeger]

Is it? It's a 407Kg missile so just on 130kg heavier than the Mk-54 LWT. If so would be a good addition to the Romeo capability set.

The NSM suggests that Kongsberg developed it as a follow-on/replacement for their Penguin AShM, with the NSM being ~25 kg heavier than the Mk 2 Penguin AShM, which it is cleared for use from SH-2 Seasprite helicopters.

 

[vonnoobie]

This Norwegian Anti-ship missile will make Indian MH-60Rs Lethal – Indian Defence Research Wing

Is an actual item that India is acquiring with another article indicating the UK is looking at it. It is called the NSM-HL and turns out been marketed since 2019.

 

[John Newman]

Up to this point, the question of AShM choice for the ADF has reminded me of the very old quote attributed to Henry Ford:

“You can have any colour car you want, as long as it is black”, and up to this point black equals Harpoon.

Over the years the ADF has had Harpoon integrated to F-111C, AP-3C, P-8A, F/A-18A/B, F/A-18F, FFG, FFH, DDG, Oberon class and Collins class.

Moving forward from this point, apart from Harpoon, there is a wider choice currently available, LRASM, JSM and NSM, and potentially other options more into the future too (hypersonic developments).

But....

It’s obviously going to come down to operational requirements, and also importantly, ‘who else’ might look at integration of those weapons.

LRASM - is also a USN air launched weapon, but testing/development has or is being investigated for VLS and box launch.

JSM - Norway and Japan (possibly Finland) on their F-35A.

One more point on JSM, I wouldn’t be surprised if Norway looks to integrate onto their P-8A, that could open up possibilities for the RAAF P-8A fleet too.

NSM - currently operational with other nations as a land and ship based solution, and potentially helicopter too.

One more potential for LRASM and JSM is as a submarine launched weapon too.

Lot’s of options, and an argument for the ADF to operate more than one type of AShM too.

The other old saying “Horses for courses”.

Cheers,

 

[spoz]

The NSM suggests that Kongsberg developed it as a follow-on/replacement for their Penguin AShM, with the NSM being ~25 kg heavier than the Mk 2 Penguin AShM, which it is cleared for use from SH-2 Seasprite helicopters.

And also from USN Seahawks: https://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?id=OIP.BApIpF08Y4gfrOmQCjQNhQHaF7&pid=Api&P=0&w=231&h=185

 

[ngatimozart]

Up to this point, the question of AShM choice for the ADF has reminded me of the very old quote attributed to Henry Ford:

“You can have any colour car you want, as long as it is black”, and up to this point black equals Harpoon.

Over the years the ADF has had Harpoon integrated to F-111C, AP-3C, P-8A, F/A-18A/B, F/A-18F, FFG, FFH, DDG, Oberon class and Collins class.

But Harpoon has passed its use by date. For all intents and purposes it is now obsolete and no longer viable in a modern near peer conflict, especially against an IADS. It doesn't have the LO or the smart capabilities to redirect and replan its attack like the 5 Gen missiles can. Why waste money on a capability that isn't going to deliver, except to provide target practice for the enemy?

 

[ddxx]

But Harpoon has passed its use by date. For all intents and purposes it is now obsolete and no longer viable in a modern near peer conflict, especially against an IADS. It doesn't have the LO or the smart capabilities to redirect and replan its attack like the 5 Gen missiles can. Why waste money on a capability that isn't going to deliver, except to provide target practice for the enemy?

Agreed - I don’t think it’s a NSM vs LRASM question. And the USN certainly doesn’t think so either.

I’d be happy to bet on a mix of both. For Naval combatants, NSM will be in the deck launchers, and, a couple (or more) of LRASM will be in the Mk-41.

And the air-launched versions of both are perfectly compatible with current equipment. A P-8 loaded up with LRASM will be a massive boost, especially when able to connect in to both Aegis, JORN, UAV and Satellite data.

Different missiles, different weights, different ranges. Possible targets are different too.

 

[John Newman]

But Harpoon has passed its use by date. For all intents and purposes it is now obsolete and no longer viable in a modern near peer conflict, especially against an IADS. It doesn't have the LO or the smart capabilities to redirect and replan its attack like the 5 Gen missiles can. Why waste money on a capability that isn't going to deliver, except to provide target practice for the enemy?

Mate, I think you’ve missed, or misunderstood, the point of my post regarding Harpoon.

I made the point that “up to this point” Harpoon has been the one choice, but moving forward there are other choices, multiple choices, eg, LRASM, JSM and NSM.

But Harpoon isn’t going to disappear tomorrow, it will still be in inventory for many years to come, it will have to be maintained until replaced.

Not suggesting we invest in more (mate, maybe you’ve spent too much time in the rum store tonight? Ha ha!).

 

[Gooey]

Not suggesting we invest in more (mate, maybe you’ve spent too much time in the rum store tonight? Ha ha!).

Although maybe NZG should have ... 20-30 years ago.
But that's ok, we are in a strategically benign environment and that will never change. If it were too, we'd get plenty of warning to grown NZDF capability because thats a simple thing to do. Just look at 2 Div. Flash to bang in under 12 months. Don't worry about air or sea control. Bayonet charges in the streets of Crete. Jerry doesn't like it up em.
And of course our mates across the ditch will help us out.
She'll be right.

 

[ADMk2]

Agreed - I don’t think it’s a NSM vs LRASM question. And the USN certainly doesn’t think so either.

I’d be happy to bet on a mix of both. For Naval combatants, NSM will be in the deck launchers, and, a couple (or more) of LRASM will be in the Mk-41.

And the air-launched versions of both are perfectly compatible with current equipment. A P-8 loaded up with LRASM will be a massive boost, especially when able to connect in to both Aegis, JORN, UAV and Satellite data.

Different missiles, different weights, different ranges. Possible targets are different too.

Will be an interesting choice, but L-M and Thales aren’t doing this out of charity…

Lockheed Martin and Thales Australia Finalize Teaming Agreement to Develop Sovereign Weapons Manufacturing Capabilities in Australia

MELBOURNE/CANBERRA, Australia, April 21, 2021 – Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT) and Thales Australia have finalized a teaming agreement advancing the delivery of an Australian guided weapons...

news.lockheedmartin.com

 

[Bob53]

Interesting article on Egypts purchase of the K9 howitzer. Many parallel’s with Australia’s purchase with local construction plans.

I know there are different ways of reporting purchase costs but Egypts cost is $1.7B for over 200 howitzers and scores… whatever that means of support vehicles including K10 supply vehicles. From memory Australia is getting 30+15 for around $700M. There is a stark difference in cost and number of guns.
Can anyone explain why for double the spend Egypt is getting close 7x the number of guns?

Why did Egypt choose to buy South Korea’s K9 howitzer?

Egypt expressed interest in updating its artillery systems in 2009, but efforts were postponed for nearly a decade amid the Arab Spring. Now the African nation has chosen a system by Hanwha.

www.defensenews.com