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

[hauritz]

Japan has awarded a contract to Boeing to test drones for their manned-unmanned teaming research and development program. The obvious contender for these tests in the MQ-28. This could be a shot in the arm for Australia after this aircraft lost out on selection for the US collaborative combat aircraft program.

Of course there are other implications down the track as this project may well form part of the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP).

Boeing to Test Drones for Japanese ‘Loyal Wingman’ Experiment

Japan has awarded Boeing a contract to test aerial drones for the manned-unmanned teaming research and development.

thedefensepost.com

 

[Vivendi]

Has there been any discussions in Australia about joining GCAP? The longer legs of the Tempest compared to the F-35 could perhaps be of interest to Australia, together with the CCA?

 

[Mark_Evans]

Has there been any discussions in Australia about joining GCAP? The longer legs of the Tempest compared to the F-35 could perhaps be of interest to Australia, together with the CCA?

We are unlikely to get NGAD so it is definitely a conversation worth having. Better relationship with Japan and expansion of ties with UK.

 

[hauritz]

Has there been any discussions in Australia about joining GCAP? The longer legs of the Tempest compared to the F-35 could perhaps be of interest to Australia, together with the CCA?

Australia has been approached. Whether as a partner or a customer isn't certain but from what little I have read about GCAP it does seem to address a lot of Australia's needs. It would contribibute to our long range strike capability and cheaper than alternatives such as the B-21. Then as a sweetener there is the possibility of the MQ-28 being selected as a CCA.

Australia urged to seriously consider next-gen British, Italian, Japanese Global Combat Air Programme

As adversarial airpower continues to evolve at breakneck speed, keeping ahead of the competitor is of paramount importance. But our options are, in many ways, limited, with a growing chorus calling for Australia to partner early with the UK, Japan, and Italy on the next-gen Global Combat Air...

www.defenceconnect.com.au

 

[Bob53]

This article goes into the threat posed by a lack of hardened shelters for the U.S.A.F raised my curiosity about such hardened shelters for the RAAF ,is there such a program for all of the aircraft at major bases can such shelters be dispersed to hide such ?

Exactly my point above. We can have all the most advanced tech we like but how good is it if sitting unprotected on a tarmac less than 2km from public roads These days.

 

[Bob53]

This site suggest a GCAP combat range of 863 miles or close the 1400 km…assuming that’s combat radius is impressive. Realistically this probably won’t enter service till the 2040s and what’s the chances of costs being anything close to $100m in todays dollars? F15ex without tanks is about 1200km. I think we would better of taking a here and now option with known costs and capabilities With range and load probably being more important to Australia than outright stealth.

6 Aviation Innovations In The BAE Systems 6th-Generation Tempest Program

The Tempest or GCAP fighter is going to tax the capabilities of the combined industries of the UK, Japan, and Italy to their limits.

simpleflying.com

 

[seaspear]

Is there any strength to a belief that in considerations of military equipment that political considerations receive a very high influence on those decisions about what we purchase ?

 

[hauritz]

Is there any strength to a belief that in considerations of military equipment that political considerations receive a very high influence on those decisions about what we purchase ?

Absolutely. I expect political considerations to strongly influence the outcome of any major military purchase. In Australia's case we have traditionally been looking towards the United States but let's be honest, as a superpower they are on the wane. We need to start looking around for regional partners. If buying a few ships or aircraft or partnering a few projects from Japan helps create stronger regional ties then so be it.

As it happens I also think Japan and Korea have some pretty good kit that probably holds up on its own merits anyway. Although just vaporware at the moment something like the GCAP seems to tick a lot of boxes for Australia. The Mogami is no slouch either.

Political decisions that may promote Australia's own defence industry doesn't hurt either. If it promotes the sale of something like the Ghost Bat or gives us an opportunity to partner with Japan in designing and building UCAVs then that will also benefit us.

 

[seaspear]

But is there an argument that this has stopped us acquiring the best equipment because of political pressure?

 

[hauritz]

But is there an argument that this has stopped us acquiring the best equipment because of political pressure?

Hard to say. The RAAF is predominately made up American sourced equipment. In some cases there wasn't really even a selection process. Had there been a proper selection process and no political pressure we probably still would have made the same choices.

The other services have been more open to buying equipment from other sources but even then we tend to give preference to the Americans. If the Americans had a GPF candidate there would be a good chance we would have selected it.

 

[Todjaeger]

Hard to say. The RAAF is predominately made up American sourced equipment. In some cases there wasn't really even a selection process. Had there been a proper selection process and no political pressure we probably still would have made the same choices.

The other services have been more open to buying equipment from other sources but even then we tend to give preference to the Americans. If the Americans had a GPF candidate there would be a good chance we would have selected it.

With respect to Australia aircraft procurement, one needs to keep in mind what Australia was/is looking for in specific aircraft projects, when this projects are running, what is available or on offer at these times and/or when Australia needs to have a capability in service by.

In a number of instances, US-sourced kit was the only real contender available.

At the same time, I do believe that a couple of Australian aviation selections were made based upon political (rather than Defence) considerations, and the two which stand out most IMO were non-US helicopters...

 

[old faithful]

But is there an argument that this has stopped us acquiring the best equipment because of political pressure?

I think in the past, Army wanted to purchase some Toyota Landcruiser troop carriers, but the RSL intervened because they were Japanese, and we ended up with Landrovers again. I certainly don,t want something like that to happen again, but this time, its between Germany and Japan, so Navy will get one of them!

 

[hauritz]

With respect to Australia aircraft procurement, one needs to keep in mind what Australia was/is looking for in specific aircraft projects, when this projects are running, what is available or on offer at these times and/or when Australia needs to have a capability in service by.

In a number of instances, US-sourced kit was the only real contender available.

At the same time, I do believe that a couple of Australian aviation selections were made based upon political (rather than Defence) considerations, and the two which stand out most IMO were non-US helicopters...

You are right of course. Usually US designed equipment is the best option. In the case of 5th gen fighters you really only have the F-35. There wasn't anything else worth considering. Still the case in fact. However things might change.

The USAF is currently working on NGAD. This is an F-22 replacement and although there are elements of the program we might be interested in, it really doesn't address our needs. For long range strike role the USAF will be acquiring the B-21. It has already been rejected by Australia. This isn't to say that we won't change our minds but for the time being at least it is off the table. The USN F/A-XX program, like the NGAD, is having funding issues and there isn't a lot of info about it. The navy wants to start replacing its rapidly aging F-18 fleet and to be honest time seems to be running out. I wouldn't be surprised if it simply ended up buying more F-35s.

On the subject of F-35s they will remain in production until the mid 2040s and as things stand it may be the only US aircraft the RAAF will consider when replacing its Rhinos and Growlers.

Enter GCAP. Still in its early stages but on paper this aircraft would seem to be closer to what the RAAF is looking for than the F-35, NGAD, F/A-xx or the B-21. We are still looking at a proper replacement for the F-111. The Rhinos were only supposed to be interim replacements for these aircraft. Going into the 2030s the choice may come down to the F-35 vs a better suited GCAP solution. What may decide it in the end is whether it is in our best interest to cultivate regional alliances, as opposed to relying almost solely on the US.

Anyway all speculation. The F-35 may yet be the only show in town when it comes to replacing our 4th gen fighters.

 

[John Fedup]

The F-35 program may not continue into the 2040s depending on new developments (NGAD, UCAV, CCA, etc.). Also, on going issues like block 4, TR3, and F135 engine improvements for the F-35 aren't exactly winning friends in Congress. Trump and his new fighter expert Elon could shake things up as well.

 

[seaspear]

With regards to procurement sixth generation aircraft would it not be better to involved in the design and development of such than waiting for an export version ,there was some concerns the recipients of the f-35,s were not provided some of the sensitive information or that the aircracraft was not as good as the American version

 

[hauritz]

With regards to procurement sixth generation aircraft would it not be better to involved in the design and development of such than waiting for an export version ,there was some concerns the recipients of the f-35,s were not provided some of the sensitive information or that the aircracraft was not as good as the American version

I think one question to raise is what is 6th gen anyway? To me it seems to be a system of systems. With NGAD work on the manned element seems to be currently on hold but they are still pushing forward with the CCA element. The MQ-28 missed out on selection with the NGAD program with the nod going to Anduril and General Atomics.

This does have repercussions for Australia. It means we are either going to have to fund the future development of the Ghost Bat ourselves, find ourselves another development partner, or just give up and go with another county's existing design.

This is why the possibility of partnering up with Japan might be a bit of a Godsend. Any CCA that is developed with Japan should be able to operate along side any manned aircraft or even completely independently. It is quite possible that Australia may want to buy additional F-35s and use its own CCAs. Could even opt to go all CCA and scrap the manned element completely.

I don't believe any colaboration with the Japanese on a CCA will neccessarily tie us in with the GCAP. In fact we have been working with the idea of collaborating with Japan on CCAs for a number of years now.

US, Australia eyeing deeper drone technology cooperation with Japan

Senior officials from the U.S. and Australia are poised to explore new opportunities for trilateral cooperation with Japan explicitly focused on making and deploying drones for military operations.

defensescoop.com

 

[seaspear]

I was also thinking of involvement in the G.C.A.P

UK, Italy, Japan to Develop Next-Generation Fighter Jet

The UK, Italy, and Japan launched a joint venture to develop a supersonic next-gen fighter jet by 2035, replacing the Eurofighter Typhoon.

thedefensepost.com

.
This article suggests an emphasis on range and payload with low radar feedback that may complement existing RAAF aircraft and likely cheaper than the B-21

3 Countries Designed a Fighter Jet That Looks Like a 'Bomber Raptor'—and the Future of Warfare

The sixth-gen GCAP gives priority to long range, heavy payloads, and stealth and speed over maneuverability.

www.popularmechanics.com

 

[StingrayOZ]

This article suggests an emphasis on range and payload with low radar feedback that may complement existing RAAF aircraft and likely cheaper than the B-21

I think the GCAP might be a better fit than the B21. It might be more like the tool we are looking for.
Operating costs and weapons integration and procurement all look more realistic/useful. It would be a better member of a systems in that sense.

Worthy enough to attach an attache to and see what's going on. Maybe get in on some of the build/work share early on in the piece if an acquisition ever did develop. Maybe even just on the weapons/done side.

 

[John Fedup]

I think the GCAP might be a better fit than the B21. It might be more like the tool we are looking for.
Operating costs and weapons integration and procurement all look more realistic/useful. It would be a better member of a systems in that sense.

Worthy enough to attach an attache to and see what's going on. Maybe get in on some of the build/work share early on in the piece if an acquisition ever did develop. Maybe even just on the weapons/done side.

More importantly the GCAP will be available whereas likely export restrictions on the B-21 will make it unavailable.

 

[Sandson41]

More importantly the GCAP will be available whereas likely export restrictions on the B-21 will make it unavailable.

Our presence at the unveiling was interesting. Still wondering if that was an invite to buy or just a look at what the USAF might want to fly out of our airbases.
If an invite, the choice is between a true stealth bomber and a large and long range multiple LO fighter. Interesting times ahead.
Wonder which will be better at maritime strike...