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

[Morgo]

Cyber capabilities a key focus of 2022-23 Defence Budget | ADBR

Australia’s capability to conduct offensive and defensive cyber operations will vastly increase with a near $10 billion increase in funding to the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD) over the next decade.…

adbr.com.au

As bitter as it might be I'm largely supportive. An enlarged and more capable ASD, able to conduct any variety of mission globally, is a better asset to have than the RPAS (as useful as increased ISR, OS and maritime surveillance may be).

The decision seems to allign with US intentions and plans. While there is hope for their use in a peer environment, as the TB2 shows, it remains less flexible and overall capable compared to ASD as a whole.

...

Alternatively perhaps this is a vote of confidence in the Ghost Bat (still the best platform name ever)?

 

[ADMk2]

Less than a week ago the proposed FY23 budget showed that USAF would cease buying MQ-9As and would transfer others to another US agency - assumed to be CIA. ADF has recently selected the Boeing Insitu Integrator/Blackjack and RAAF has ordered MQ-4C Tritons. Do we really need an intermediate and potentially vulnerable UAV in this post insurgency world?

You may have noticed the impact that armed UAV’s have played in recent peer on peer conflicts? Their supposed vulnerabilities, don’t seem quite so obvious to me now that apparently they clearly can fly and operate effectively in the face of supposed invincibility of Russian IADS / EW / Cyber capabilities…

As always, it’s about force protection measures, employ them soundly and creatively and many of these capabilities can be employed to maximise their strengths.

I had hope this news was a bad April fools joke, but seemingly not…

Clearly the important lessons of peer v peer warfare are being observed by defence officials and our government…

 

[cdxbow]

Less than a week ago the proposed FY23 budget showed that USAF would cease buying MQ-9As and would transfer others to another US agency - assumed to be CIA. ADF has recently selected the Boeing Insitu Integrator/Blackjack and RAAF has ordered MQ-4C Tritons. Do we really need an intermediate and potentially vulnerable UAV in this post insurgency world?

Very different craft, neither of those mentioned carry weapons. The Rq21 is a small tactical drone sans weapons, it's been dropped by the USMC for the V-Bat which is a much easier craft to use, not needing all the gear to launch and retrieve like the Blackjack needs. I hope the ADF is looking a the V-Bat as a small tactical drone. .

The Triton is a large HALE drone, again not weaponised. if you look at the cost of the Triton it's very expensive and thus far has been produced in small numbers.

So each is very different to the Sky Guardian. I hope the report is wrong.

 

[ADMk2]

Alternatively perhaps this is a vote of confidence in the Ghost Bat (still the best platform name ever)?

It may well be. Doesn’t change the fact we are unlikely to see operational “Ghost Bats” in anything approaching the near-term…

Yet another peculiar decision when we are constantly told how rapidly our strategic position is deteriorating…

One might have thought a responsible government would rapidly increase capability in such a situation, not cancel it outright or else plan for it’s delivery so far into the future it won’t make a lick of difference, should their own proclamations prove true…

 

[ADMk2]

Very different craft, neither of those mentioned carry weapons. The Rq21 is a small tactical drone sans weapons, it's been dropped by the USMC for the V-Bat which is a much easier craft to use, not needing all the gear to launch and retrieve like the Blackjack needs. I hope the ADF is looking a the V-Bat as a small tactical drone. .

The Triton is a large HALE drone, again not weaponised. if you look at the cost of the Triton it's very expensive and thus far has been produced in small numbers.

So each is very different to the Sky Guardian. I hope the report is wrong.

As of now the only other known drone / loitering munition project for ADF besides Triton and RQ-21 for Army (and the RAN equivalent system) are under Project LAND 159 and judging by the scope of this project, such systems (assuming they too aren’t rissoled) are aimed at the lowed end, soldier portable element of the spectrum…

A very disappointing decision and one completely out of touch with real world military threats.

 

[Tasman]

Australia’s MQ-9B SkyGuardian project axed

Defence has confirmed the scrapping of the multi-billion-dollar projects to fund its latest investment in new cyber capability. Matt Yannapoulos, associate secretary of the Department of Defence,

www.defenceconnect.com.au

Defence Connect reports confirmation of the MQ-9B cancellation.

Tas

 

[Redlands18]

Australia’s MQ-9B SkyGuardian project axed

Defence has confirmed the scrapping of the multi-billion-dollar projects to fund its latest investment in new cyber capability. Matt Yannapoulos, associate secretary of the Department of Defence,

www.defenceconnect.com.au

Defence Connect reports confirmation of the MQ-9B cancellation.

Tas

ADBR and ADM have as well.

 

[ADMk2]

ADBR and ADM have as well.

Just what defence needs at this time.

A couple more servers being pwned and a few database leaks, will surely turn the tide in state v state warfare…

Ooh look, here comes an inbound Chinese DF-21, well boys, better break out the metasploit package for it…

 

[ddxx]

Alternatively perhaps this is a vote of confidence in the Ghost Bat (still the best platform name ever)?

So far, are there any numbers available in terms of weapons capacity / payload weight for the MQ-28A?

On a side note, I've been wondering if a folded wing tip might be an interesting idea to explore in a future extended range variant? A bit like with the F-35C. Boeing has experience with folded wings, most recently on their commercial 777-X. It's a neat way to add range via fuel efficiency with minimal change.

 

[ADMk2]

So far, are there any numbers available in terms of weapons capacity / payload weight for the MQ-28A?

On a side note, I've been wondering if a folded wing tip might be an interesting idea to explore in a future extended range variant? A bit like with the F-35C. Boeing has experience with folded wings, most recently on their commercial 777-X. It's a neat way to add range via fuel efficiency with minimal change.

F-35C doesn’t have folded wing tips?

It has folding wings due to being a carrier launched aircraft but that has nothing to do with range. If anything it reduces it, due to the wings being necessarily heavier…

 

[hauritz]

It would seem an odd decision at a time when UCAVs have proven their effectiveness in combat and we need capability that can be delivered quickly. I am yet to see any actual reason given.

I doubt it is financial since the project was budgeted for and I haven't seen anything to suggest the costs are blowing out. The MQ-9B itself is a proven platform. I can only guess at things like mission creep that may have already rendered this aircraft unsuited for the sorts of roles it was envisioned for.

Another possibility is that it is largely just duplicating capability that is being provided by Triton. The Triton is unarmed, but it has more than double the endurance, is faster and has nearly 5 times the range. Perhaps we may see an increase in the number of aircraft being purchased.

Another possibility is that they have found another role for the Ghost Bat or are already considering a variant to the Ghost Bat. The Sea Bat (yes there is such a creature) that was marinized, given better endurance, and a weapons bay could perhaps be a reasonable alternative for Australia.

 

[WaveWalker]

The reason why Boeing put folding wings on the 777-9X was to extend range through efficiency. The weight of the fold mechanism is 800kg in total. The benefit is far greater.
It was built with the fold in order to keep the wingspan less than 65m, which is the size of a standard airport gate.

 

[ADMk2]

It would seem an odd decision at a time when UCAVs have proven their effectiveness in combat and we need capability that can be delivered quickly. I am yet to see any actual reason given.

I doubt it is financial since the project was budgeted for and I haven't seen anything to suggest the costs are blowing out. The MQ-9B itself is a proven platform. I can only guess at things like mission creep that may have already rendered this aircraft unsuited for the sorts of roles it was envisioned for.

Another possibility is that it is largely just duplicating capability that is being provided by Triton. The Triton is unarmed, but it has more than double the endurance, is faster and has nearly 5 times the range. Perhaps we may see an increase in the number of aircraft being purchased.

Another possibility is that they have found another role for the Ghost Bat or are already considering a variant to the Ghost Bat. The Sea Bat (yes there is such a creature) that was marinized, given better endurance, and a weapons bay could perhaps be a reasonable alternative for Australia.

Triton isn’t going to be a great capability for the armed MALE UAV role I wouldn’t have thought, being designed for a completely different role, unarmed and far more expensive.

Ghost Bat might be the intended replacement. It fits in well with the ‘never never’ capability acquisition timeline this Government clearly prefers despite the strategic agenda it is pushing, so I’d guess that’s probably the reason.

That and the current cyber infatuation.

 

[John Newman]

I don't know. The Mods might allow him to stay for a while as entertainment winding you up

Winding me up? Ha ha, very good!

I get enough from you, you old Kiwi bastard!!

 

[T.C.P]

Ah yes, Bob is back with another country saving suggestion to free us from his most hated aircraft (Australian article sourced via Defence subscription) :
"Australia must ramp up air defence, particularly as China’s ‘Mighty Dragon’ is far superior
ROBERT GOTTLIEBSEN
8:14AM MARCH 31, 2022

When Peter Dutton became defence minister almost exactly a year ago our defence equipment standing in the region was complete joke. The termination of the French submarine disaster and its replacement with access to US nuclear technology started our nation on the long road to gain defence respect.

But we will never gain full respect in the region while we have no worthwhile air defence particularly as the Chinese “Mighty Dragon” – the Chengdu J-20 – is far superior to any other aircraft regularly operating in our region.

Until now being competitive in regional skies seemed an unattainable goal because the only aircraft that rivals the J-20 is the American F-22 and the US ceased production of the F-22 believing the Joint Strike Fighter- F-35 would fill the gap. We agreed to buy the JSF-F35 and it was a disastrous mistake by both the US and Australia.

Suddenly an amazing never to be repeated opportunity has arisen. I plead with Peter Dutton and his assistant minister Andrew Hastie plus shadow defence minister Richard Marles (whom the opinion polls say will be defence minister in a few weeks) to make investigating this opportunity the highest national defence priority.

According to the authoritative US defence newsletter War Zone, the US Air Force is seeking to retire 33 F-22A Raptor Stealth fighters which would reduce its total F-22 fleet size from around 186 to some 153.

The US relationship with Australia is now close as displayed by the AUKUS deal that sees us in time acquiring submarines with US nuclear technology. Currently only the UK has access to this technology.

The US has been similarly been very protective of its F-22 technology but in the wake of AUKUS would almost certainly be interested in considering an Australian proposal to lease the 33 F-22 aircraft. There are three obvious questions:

Why is the US looking to retire the F-22? Can we update the aircraft so that it is competitive with the J-20 and does an aircraft out of production in the US have a future?

The F-22 first flew around 1997 and was the only fifth-generation fighter in existence and gave the US global air superiority. But it was expensive and at the turn of the century its primary adversary, the Soviet air force, was in trouble. The US air budget was stretched by wars in Iraq and Afghanistan plus the 2008-10 recession.

US defence people believed the US could develop a much cheaper and better fifth generation aircraft — the JSF. But the JSF failed in those aims and China developed the J-20 as a rival to the F-22 – an event no one in the US thought possible.

Fast forward to 2023. The JSF-F35 in its present form has limited capabilities and cannot fly at the height achieved by the J-20. it is also unreliable, has limited flying range and is very expensive.

The US Air Force has slashed its purchases of the JSF by one third until a new Block4 software system is developed which it hopes will fix some of the problems. . Australia has taken delivery of part of its order but our aircraft need that new software (which we will pay for) and even then it will be vulnerable to the J-20

The US Air Force wants to purchase more F-15 EX Eagle 11 24 fighter jets which are ready for combat. This is an aircraft that first flew 36 years ago – well before the F-22 – but has been updated.

Meanwhile, one of the F-22 bases was hit by a cyclone and because it is not being manufactured, the F-22 is something of an ugly duckling. The F-22 jets on the chopping block are all older versions and are largely relegated to training and other non-combat duties.

The US air force says that it would take $US1.8bn ($A2.40bn) over the next eight years to bring those jets up to the latest standard – funds that it wants to spend on ‘fixing’ the JSF-F35 and upgrading other F-22’s.

Given the US is looking to retire the aircraft, Australia’s base leasing costs should be nil but the aircraft need up grading and new facilities will be required. Air Power Australia’s preliminary estimate of the cost is $US10bn, spread over some years. It sounds a lot but we can stop delivery of the JSF and maybe the US will fund some if the huge costs of making our existing JSF more useful.

Once we are working with the Americans on modernising the F-22 we might be able to show them how the JSF manufacturing pipeline could be used to make F-22’s.

The bureaucracy in both countries will be a problem, especially in Australia.

Peter Dutton’s biggest mistake as defence minister was not to clean out the management that led us into our defence mess. They are still there so whether the defence Minister be Dutton or Marles he will not have the talents in the public service to take the opportunity. Advice and help outside the public service is available."

This reads like a badly written fan fic. lol. I remember the overall F-35 hate back in the 2012 days, but in 2021, this is just sad. Just ignoring everything else, the author notes and understands that the F-22 is no longer manufactured, but cannot comprehend that any retired aircraft will be used for cannibalization to keep the others going? In his made up fantasy world, how does he expect the US to give them up when they clearly have a need for them?

 

[vonnoobie]

The reason why Boeing put folding wings on the 777-9X was to extend range through efficiency. The weight of the fold mechanism is 800kg in total. The benefit is far greater.
It was built with the fold in order to keep the wingspan less than 65m, which is the size of a standard airport gate.

You are talking about blended winglets and they have been a thing for decades, Boeing started putting them on some of their 737-800's back in 2001. The first known design of it dates all the way back to 1897 and has been studied and tinkered with since.

They are a fixed device that does not fold or bend beyond standard flex built into the wing design, they do provide a solid benefit however if they are suitable for an aircraft that could potentially be required to perform high G combat manoeuvres is unknown. Every aircraft with them tends to be commercial in nature or pure cargo aircraft (ie: some C-130's have them).

If you wanted to throw them on the C-130's, C-17's, P-8's, E7A's etc not a problem all for it but the GB? well that will require R&D first.

 

[WaveWalker]

No I’m talking about the folding wings on the -9X and I stand by my post, particularly given I have a multi year involvement in the future introduction of this type into a major airline.
I do stress I am talking about the -9X specifically, though I do know that the benefit of the fold is definitely better than the winglets on the A350 variants. Not by much, but it’s there.

 

[vonnoobie]

No I’m talking about the folding wings on the -9X and I stand by my post, particularly given I have a multi year involvement in the future introduction of this type into a major airline.
I do stress I am talking about the -9X specifically, though I do know that the benefit of the fold is definitely better than the winglets on the A350 variants. Not by much, but it’s there.

Ok now I know what you are talking about and I can say with 100% certainty no. For what reason at all would we even bother? The concept for the folding wingtips on the 777x is to give it a greater lift area during flight while folded up when on the ground to fit into all the existing terminals that the current 777's use. They have locking pins that fix them into the folded position during flight so there is no manual control in flight to raise them up or down for what ever reason.

It is simply a space saving device, that's it. Very comparable to the folded wings on USN and USMC ship based fixed wing aircraft. Unless we are making a ship based version of the GB it is a pointless waste if time, money and valuable weight.

 

[Goknub]

Beyond the decision to prioritise cyber which I can understand given our threat environment I also believe armed UAVs such as Skyguardian are falling between different capability requirements that make them less worth the investment.

Armed UAV like Bayraktar and Predator A are useful because they are cheap enough to be essentially expendable. Ghost Bat and its kind justify a higher cost by being more survivable. Skyguardian falls in the gap of being too expensive to expendable yet not survivable enough.

I would predict a divergence between expendable propeller UAVs and survivable jet UAVs.

 

[John Fedup]

The reason why Boeing put folding wings on the 777-9X was to extend range through efficiency. The weight of the fold mechanism is 800kg in total. The benefit is far greater.
It was built with the fold in order to keep the wingspan less than 65m, which is the size of a standard airport gate.

The latter reason was the driver for folding wings. Better efficiency is a bonus.