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

[downunderblue]

It appears that Anduril is developing quite a close relationship with the ADF

Anduril seems to be the SpaceX of the US Defense Industry with Palmer Luckey clearly taking the Elon mantle.

Only last week he was on Bloomberg (see below ) announcing the Baracuda-M range of cruise missiles stating it "is the most producible cruise missile on the market today: 50 percent less time to produce, 95 percent fewer tools, 50 percent fewer parts—at a fraction of the cost”.

It's amazing how far they have come in a really short space of time. Have a listen to Luckey speak. He seems to have real conviction. I especially like the brashness of this comment: "I don't think the U.S. needs to be the world police. It needs to be the world's gun store".

Assume they could help along the GWEO?

Does anyone want to dare him on Twitter? 500 cruise missiles in 6 weeks or for free, anyone?

 

[MARKMILES77]

Significant buy of Anti-Radiation missiles for the R.A.A.F.
Is this the second purchase?

Australia – Advanced Anti-Radiation Guided Missiles-Extended Range | Defense Security Cooperation Agency

www.dsca.mil

 

[hauritz]

It appears that Anduril is developing quite a close relationship with the ADF, This new contract for the defence of RAAF Darwin is quite a development and I’m sure that the public domain won’t get any information about how the system works.

Anduril Signs 3 Year Contract with RAAF to Deliver Autonomou

It would be even more effective if this capability includes the port area as well.

Anduril does indeed seem to be developing a close relationship with the ADF. First of all AUVs for the navy and now this.

Boeing probably needs to cast a wary eye towards Anduril. Their UCAV design was downselected by the USAF for the Air Force Collaborative Combat Aircraft Program ahead of the Ghostbat. At the same time Boeing says it refuses to commit to fixed price contracts because there is no money in it. On the otherhand Anduril policy is that air defence must be smarter, more affordable, and reusable which seems much more in synch with the DSR philosophy.

Other budget concious products they offer are rocket motors, Barracuda missiles and of course various UCAVs. Most of which would be of interest to the ADF.

 

[Severely]

Australian innovation just keeps surprising me. From first hearing about Bae Strix to this.

 

[ADMk2]

A key difference being that the US has a sensing footprint, including satellite constellations, that is significant and AFAIK considerably greater than what Australia can manage on it's own. Between the coverage likely available, as well as time, IMO it is quite likely that the US either already has a list of potential targets/locations and their strike priority, or could at least put one together fairly quickly. Australia OTOH would likely have to rely upon the US for such information, or perhaps just the list itself.

A potential downside to relying upon others for such intelligence might be that the focus from the American perspective might be different than what Australia might wish to focus upon, and could therefore not pass something which would have been important to Australia.

Now I am not stating that Australia should not get a strike capability like the JASSM-XR might provide, I am just leery Australia devoting the coin and resources establishing a strike capability that is largely or perhaps entirely dependent on outside (i.e. non-Australian) capabilities to function.

Apart from Wedgetail, JORN, other terrestial radar capability, Triton, MC-55A, Growler, Collins class, our space based ISR capability, UAS based wide area surveillance and targetting capability, the Australian Geospatial Intelligence Enterprise, Defence Intelligence Agency ASD, ASIS as well as coalition feeds, we haven’t really got any long range ISR and targetting capabilities and therefore such missiles are a waste of time…

Really?

I think some reading is overdue…

https://www.defence.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-05/defence-geoint-2030-strategy-web.pdf

Enabling, force-multiplying capabilities: The glue holding the ‘integrated, focused force’ together

The modern era of warfare requires increasingly complex “enabling” capabilities that serve as the “connective tissues”, allowing the Australian Defence Force to deliver combat power across the domains. Getting them right will be critical and, in some ways, they’re the unsung heroes of the...

www.defenceconnect.com.au

Australian Defence Force Embraces Long-range Fires | Defense.info

It’s a fact: in any conflict the fighter with the longer reach has a definite advantage. The Australian Defence Force is trying to create that advantage for itself by spending up to $27 billion on 12 new families of long-range missiles between now and 2034 and investing another $21 billion in...

defense.info

However this isn’t to state that evening is fine and dandy and nothing more needs to be done on this front. On the contrary the Defence Targetting Enterprise announced under DSR was done deliberately with a view to improving defence capability to support long range strikes as our overall capability improves and was funded to the tune of $7.6b, so clearly neither ADF nor Government are unaware of the requirement to support such capabilities, but writing it off as “leaving it to others” is a very interesting take, given the above realities…

 

[ADMk2]

The thing with a lot of fixed targets is that they are fixed and we know where they are already without too much help….ports, airfields, rail terminals satellite imaging is available in almost real time particularly if the US is assisting. .

Google Earth can find them, so long as ADF remembers to pay it’s monthly subscription…

 

[Stampede]

Australian innovation just keeps surprising me. From first hearing about Bae Strix to this.

Strix is certainly a very interesting aircraft.

A dead end concept, or a revolution in design with a bright future???
Time will tell.
Somehow I have a feeling this unique aircraft has a big future.
If true, I can envisage this concept evolving into different sizes both smaller and larger than the original.

Fingers crossed.

Cheers S

 

[Bob53]

Strix is certainly a very interesting aircraft.

A dead end concept, or a revolution in design with a bright future???
Time will tell.
Somehow I have a feeling this unique aircraft has a big future.
If true, I can envisage this concept evolving into different sizes both smaller and larger than the original.

Fingers crossed.

Cheers S

What’s interesting to me is the change from hover to vertical flight has no moving parts (to fail). Looks like it’s controlled by pitch and power variation between the engines. Interesting. Certainly won’t be stealthy though.

 

[Oberon]

Has Australia ever used its KC30 for evacuation flights? I’ve only ever heard of them using C130s

 

[StevoJH]

Has Australia ever used its KC30 for evacuation flights? I’ve only ever heard of them using C130s

Evacuation flights from where?

C-17 is probably a much more robust platform for evacuation flights. Especially if you aren’t 100% confident on the status of the runways and taxiways.

From memory the most recent evacuation flights have been from secure enough area’s that Qantas charter’s have been sufficient.

 

[Aardvark144]

Has Australia ever used its KC30 for evacuation flights? I’ve only ever heard of them using C130s

Op Beech in October 2023 - ADF utilised both KC30 and C-17

 

[MARKMILES77]

The War Zone reporting Australian bases supported the USAF B2 strike on Yemen.
Unclear whether just tankers operated from Australia or whether the B2s operated either out of or into Australia after the mission.

Questions Linger Over Australia's Role In B-2 Spirit Strikes On Yemen

We now know that Australian air bases were used to support the Yemen strikes, although officials are tight-lipped about which aircraft types used them and how. We now know that Australian air bases were used to support the Yemen strikes, although officials are tight-lipped about which aircraft...

www.twz.com

 

[John Fedup]

The War Zone reporting Australian bases supported the USAF B2 strike on Yemen.
Unclear whether just tankers operated from Australia or whether the B2s operated either out of or into Australia after the mission.

Questions Linger Over Australia's Role In B-2 Spirit Strikes On Yemen

We now know that Australian air bases were used to support the Yemen strikes, although officials are tight-lipped about which aircraft types used them and how. We now know that Australian air bases were used to support the Yemen strikes, although officials are tight-lipped about which aircraft...

www.twz.com

Either way, a positive for commercial shipping!

 

[Bob53]

it’s been mentioned on this thread several times that F15 EX would be a more suitable aircraft to replace the Shornets iwhen they are due to retire in the 30s. The answers seems to be they are not survivable, or than an unmanned option with replace them or silence. Israel doesn’t seem to think so.

Israel Executes Long Awaited Buy Of F-15IA Advanced Eagle Fighters

After a break of almost three decades, Israel has ordered more F-15s, which will spearhead its air force alongside F-35 stealth fighters. After a break of almost three decades, Israel has ordered more F-15s, which will spearhead its air force alongside F-35 stealth fighters.

www.twz.com

 

[hauritz]

it’s been mentioned on this thread several times that F15 EX would be a more suitable aircraft to replace the Shornets iwhen they are due to retire in the 30s. The answers seems to be they are not survivable, or than an unmanned option with replace them or silence. Israel doesn’t seem to think so.

Israel Executes Long Awaited Buy Of F-15IA Advanced Eagle Fighters

After a break of almost three decades, Israel has ordered more F-15s, which will spearhead its air force alongside F-35 stealth fighters. After a break of almost three decades, Israel has ordered more F-15s, which will spearhead its air force alongside F-35 stealth fighters.

www.twz.com

I don't see that happening now. It looks like Australia will be flying the Rhinos well into the 30s.

With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight something like the Strike Eagle might have been a better option for Australia than the F/A-18F. When we originally bought those aircraft they were only intended as interim replacement for the F-111 until the arrival of the F-35s. Those plans now seem to have been shelved with very little interest seeming to exist for another tranche of F-35s.

Had we purchased the F-15 back then we would now have a more capable strike aircraft.

 

[OldTex]

I don't see that happening now. It looks like Australia will be flying the Rhinos well into the 30s.

With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight something like the Strike Eagle might have been a better option for Australia than the F/A-18F. When we originally bought those aircraft they were only intended as interim replacement for the F-111 until the arrival of the F-35s. Those plans now seem to have been shelved with very little interest seeming to exist for another tranche of F-35s.

Had we purchased the F-15 back then we would now have a more capable strike aircraft.

From memory when the F/A-18F was ordered, even as an interim replacement, the only version of the F-15 that was a strike aircraft was the F-15E. That represented another aircraft type that would add to the burden of logistics and training. It also was reported as not providing the strike generation capacity that the RAAF desired.
The F-15EX is a completely different beast, and some metrics suggest it is the better aircraft. But it has missed the window of opportunity. That is not to say that there won't be another window open up in the early 2030's. But it would then be competing against a range of other options against new criteria (which we don't know at this time)

 

[Armchair]

From memory when the F/A-18F was ordered, even as an interim replacement, the only version of the F-15 that was a strike aircraft was the F-15E. That represented another aircraft type that would add to the burden of logistics and training. It also was reported as not providing the strike generation capacity that the RAAF desired.
The F-15EX is a completely different beast, and some metrics suggest it is the better aircraft. But it has missed the window of opportunity. That is not to say that there won't be another window open up in the early 2030's. But it would then be competing against a range of other options against new criteria (which we don't know at this time)

Also the USN gave up slots to allow rapid RAAF acquisition of F-18F. If RAAF had acquired F15-E it would be better placed now for long range strike on land targets than it is now but (as a system of systems and considering compatibility with USN) less well prepared for maritime strike (noting the limitations of F-35 until Block 4 at the end of this decade).

I would rate F-18F and F-18G as two of the best ADF acquisition decisions of the last 50 years.

 

[Todjaeger]

Also the USN gave up slots to allow rapid RAAF acquisition of F-18F. If RAAF had acquired F15-E it would be better placed now for long range strike on land targets than it is now but (as a system of systems and considering compatibility with USN) less well prepared for maritime strike (noting the limitations of F-35 until Block 4 at the end of this decade).

I would rate F-18F and F-18G as two of the best ADF acquisition decisions of the last 50 years.

IIRC one of the major reasons why the F/A-18F was selected was because of how quickly (for several reasons) that SHornets could be brought into RAAF service, to replace the F-111's. Had a version of the F-15 been ordered back in May 2007 instead, it likely would not have been ready to replace the F-111C by the end of 2010. It is also unclear to me whether Boeing would have had built slots available given the contract and options with Singapore from 2005.

 

[Bob53]

I don't see that happening now. It looks like Australia will be flying the Rhinos well into the 30s.

With the benefit of 20/20 hindsight something like the Strike Eagle might have been a better option for Australia than the F/A-18F. When we originally bought those aircraft they were only intended as interim replacement for the F-111 until the arrival of the F-35s. Those plans now seem to have been shelved with very little interest seeming to exist for another tranche of F-35s.

Had we purchased the F-15 back then we would now have a more capable strike aircraft.

Yes but my point is the 18s will retire in the. 30s and given a 10 year lead time on a project something needs to be planned about now as replacement.

 

[hauritz]

Yes but my point is the 18s will retire in the. 30s and given a 10 year lead time on a project something needs to be planned about now as replacement.

We do need to start looking now. Replacing these aircraft could be one of the most complex projects ever undertaken by the Air Force. The first issue isn't so much what we will replace these aircraft with but an even more fundamental question of how we will replace these aircraft. The era of manned combat aircraft could be coming to an end.

The Rhino's entered service in 2010 so in theory could probably operate through to 2040, They will be functionally obsolete long before that date but given defence's proclivity to procrastinate they will likely stay operational until their wings are ready to fall off. Looking at alternatives for replacing the Rhinos and Growlers could involve pulling out a crystal ball given the range of programs currently in progress.

My point is that this is incredibly complex. There are many things that need to be evaluated before we move onto the next step. Take the Ghost Bat for example. We don't know how effective it will be as a force multiplier. It is quite possible that 4th gen combat aircraft teamed with something like the Ghost Bat could be just as effective as a 5th of 6th Gen fighter. Alternatively it could be a dud.

That we seem to be seeing an increased frequency of white papers and reviews suggests that the development of technology is faster than our ability to fully assess and implement it. The DSR itself emphasises the importance of accelerating technology research and bringing these capabilities into service ASAP. To put it another way any capability we order today might be near obsolete before it enters service.