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

[Volkodav]

I would suggest there are minimum command, administration, security, intelligence, liassion, as well as multiple other support overheads that such a deployment requires, irrespective ofhow many aircraft are deployed.

A commercial operator would simply contract in the support they need, it doesn't (or shouldn't) be expected to work like that for defence, especially not a high end asset such as an E7

 

[Bob53]

Block 2 Ghostbats ? This article discusses development but looks like details are being held tightly as we should probably expect.

Government accelerates Ghost Bat program - Australian Defence Magazine

The Albanese government has directed Defence to deliver options to accelerate development of the Boeing Australia MQ-28A Ghost Bat autonomous air vehicle “without delay”.

www.australiandefence.com.au

 

[Bob53]

ASPI article discusses possible ways forward gif the RAAF fighter fleet. The Super Hornet flies on | The Strategist

 

[StingrayOZ]

ASPI article discusses possible ways forward gif the RAAF fighter fleet. The Super Hornet flies on | The Strategist

Honestly for the value of money, I wouldn't be surprised to see Block III upgrades. Block III will do pretty much everything and be a capable platform going forward. Given where the TR-3/Block IV drama and the existing production bottleneck with the F-35, the Superhornet starts to look pretty low risk and pretty capable. Is the replacement Superhornet we are getting just block II or Block III?

 

[Redlands18]

Honestly for the value of money, I wouldn't be surprised to see Block III upgrades. Block III will do pretty much everything and be a capable platform going forward. Given where the TR-3/Block IV drama and the existing production bottleneck with the F-35, the Superhornet starts to look pretty low risk and pretty capable. Is the replacement Superhornet we are getting just block II or Block III?

What replacement Super Hornet? We are getting a replacement Growler, is that what you meant?

 

[John Fedup]

What replacement Super Hornet? We are getting a replacement Growler, is that what you meant?

The ASPI article only mentions upgrades to existing jets, no replacements.

 

[hauritz]

ASPI article discusses possible ways forward gif the RAAF fighter fleet. The Super Hornet flies on | The Strategist

Makes sense to hang onto them as long as possible. Same airframe as the Growlers so no benefit in replacing them as far as logistics and maintainence is concerned.

 

[John Newman]

New Super Hornets? What the??

Me thinks someone has been into the Rum Store supplies a bit too early today.

Hmmm.....

 

[John Newman]

What replacement Super Hornet? We are getting a replacement Growler, is that what you meant?

Actually there was a report earlier this year that the attrition replacement Growler has already been delivered:

Attrition replacement Growler delivered to RAAF | ADBR

A new Boeing EA-18G Growler has been delivered to RAAF Amberley, boosting availability and returning the RAAF’s electronic attack aircraft fleet to a full complement. The aircraft was acquired as…

adbr.com.au

 

[StingrayOZ]

Actually there was a report earlier this year that the attrition replacement Growler has already been delivered:

Yes, sorry, I got everyone very excited.

I wasn't aware the attrition replacement growler had been delivered. Fantastic. I figured once ordered, it mean the SH and Growlers would stay for a while. There futures are interlocked with each other IMO, I think they both serve useful purpose into the future. Block III makes them quite impressive. Australia has a large fleet of F-35, and we have the E7 and other enabling aircraft.

 

[John Newman]

Talking of the RAAF and Super Hornets, I came across this article about a week before the ASPI article (possibly the ASPI article was based on it?):

RAAF Eyes Super Hornet Extension, Future Competition | Aviation Week Network

The new plan means the Lockheed Martin F-35A Lightning II is no longer guaranteed to win a follow-on order.

aviationweek.com

An RAAF senior sir is quoted as saying the Super Hornets will stay in service until the mid 2030s. That raises a few interesting questions.

If we go back a few months to the 2023 Albo DSR, there is virtually no information to any structural changes to the RAAF.

About the only things I could find were recommendations to add long range land strike, and maritime strike, weapons to the F/A-18F and F-35A fleets (not exactly new news, all was flagged previously by the ScoMo Government), and secondly an acceleration of development for the MQ-28A (again, not exactly ground breaking news either).

One of the big failings of the DSR (among many), was no release of an updated public version of the 2020 FSP.

And talking of the 2020 ScoMo FSP, there was a project that had been on the books for a long long time.

That project was called “Additional Air Combat Capability” (previously called the “4th Squadron of F-35A” or a similar name).

That project had a timeline from approx 2026 to approx 2031, and a budget allocation of between $4.5b-$6.7b.

That was the project to replace the Super Hornets, clearly that’s not happening now.

My question is, what happens to that $4.5b-$6.7b allocation? Does it just disappear like a fart in the wind?

Now before anyone says “that money will likely be allocated to MQ-28A”, that might only be partly true. Again going back to the 2020 ScoMo FSP, there was a project for that.

That project was called “Teaming Air Vehicles”, the timeline was from approx 2027 to 2040 and beyond, it also has (or had) a rather huge budget allocations of $7.4b-$11b, not exactly beer money, hey?

With no updated public version of the FSP, what projects are still in? What projects are out?


What other little surprises does Albo and his idiot mates have in store for the RAAF?

 

[old faithful]

TEXT DELETED. NO NEED FOR THIS ON HERE.

Ngatimozart

 

[phreeky]

My question is, what happens to that $4.5b-$6.7b allocation? Does it just disappear like a fart in the wind?

That money wasn't sitting burning a hole in someone's pocket. It is allocated from forecast revenue and (likely) debt.

So not only is it not actually saving money, but it's money that was possibly never there (without borrowing).

I think it's fair to assume that budget surplus/deficit projected a few years ago is very different to what those projections are now.

I think the more important question is "is the 4th F35 squadron now off the cards?" Or even more importantly again, "how are we covering the capability that the 4th squadron was intended to provide?"

 

[John Newman]

That money wasn't sitting burning a hole in someone's pocket. It is allocated from forecast revenue and (likely) debt.

So not only is it not actually saving money, but it's money that was possibly never there (without borrowing).

I think it's fair to assume that budget surplus/deficit projected a few years ago is very different to what those projections are now.

I think the more important question is "is the 4th F35 squadron now off the cards?" Or even more importantly again, "how are we covering the capability that the 4th squadron was intended to provide?"

Obviously the money isn’t sitting in a bucket ‘today’, blind Freddy knows that.

But that’s not the point is it?

It was budgeted for, and planned to be allocated to be spent in the years 2026-2031 for a specific project, yes?

So again I ask, what happens to that planned budget allocation??

 

[phreeky]

So again I ask, what happens to that planned budget allocation??

Probably just end up less in debt.

 

[John Newman]

Probably just end up less in debt.

But that’s not how our system of Government works.

Every year the Federal Government sets a budget and expenditure target for the coming financial year (eg, 1 July this year, through to 30 June the following year), they also have a thing called the ‘forward estimates’.

Basically they set real dollar expenditure for year ‘one’ and planned expenditure for years ‘two to four’.

And as we know defence projects span many many years, therefore future budget allocations are set to cover those future years.

Anyway ......

 

[Stampede]

Obviously the money isn’t sitting in a bucket ‘today’, blind Freddy knows that.

But that’s not the point is it?

It was budgeted for, and planned to be allocated to be spent in the years 2026-2031 for a specific project, yes?

So again I ask, what happens to that planned budget allocation??

Fair question John ,but I don't have the answer.

Looks like 1 Sqn will be that "forth Squadron" with Super Hornets way into the mid 30's; with three front line Sqns of F35A's in 3,75 and 79 Squadron's going forward.

Same old same old.

Nothing new in the DSR, but maybe some clarification through silence that we are not getting anymore F35s anytime soon and the Hornets I'd speculate will get an upgrade.

I did look under the couch cushions but couldn't find the allocated coin.

Others may have an idea or better luck looking at their own couch.

Trust what ever coin was funded stays with the RAAF.


Cheers S

 

[Aardvark144]

Fair question John ,but I don't have the answer.

Looks like 1 Sqn will be that "forth Squadron" with Super Hornets way into the mid 30's; with three front line Sqns of F35A's in 3,75 and 79 Squadron's going forward.

Same old same old.

Nothing new in the DSR, but maybe some clarification through silence that we are not getting anymore F35s anytime soon and the Hornets I'd speculate will get an upgrade.

I did look under the couch cushions but couldn't find the allocated coin.

Others may have an idea or better luck looking at their own couch.

Trust what ever coin was funded stays with the RAAF.


Cheers S

3, 75 and 77 not 79

 

[Stampede]

3, 75 and 77 not 79

Correct.

Thanks S

 

[Anthony_B_78]

If we go back a few months to the 2023 Albo DSR, there is virtually no information to any structural changes to the RAAF.

Just to add to the discussion, not disagreeing with you, but I was recalling as I read your post that there was welcome reference to growing aircrew numbers.

Listed under "Air domain force structure design priorities" are these two points:

8.42 Air Force must increase the numbers of critical positions and implement a scalable aircrew training system to meet aircrew requirements across the force, commensurate with operational requirements.

8.43 Air combat crewing requires a new approach which is consistent with our strategic circumstances. Air Force must develop a plan to increase aircrew numbers to ensure that air combat and P-8 maritime squadrons have the crewing to operate all available aircraft at high tempo. This will substantially increase preparedness in the mid to long-term.

I don't have any particular insight into the current state of play, but it would not surprise me at all if the RAAF was somewhat undermanned when it comes to aircrew in air combat squadrons compared to, say, the USAF.

Out of interest, I do recall the USAF have (had?) a basic formula of 1.25 pilots per aircraft in a squadron, plus the CO. e.g. A squadron with 24 aircraft (which use to be the standard) would have 33 pilots.