Australia operates 71x F/A-18A/B aircraft. The "57" number I referred to earlier is the number of "operational" airframes within the "operational" Squadrons, (3 Sqn, 75 Sqn and 77 Sqn) additional Hornets equip 2 OCU, ARDU and an "attrition" pool...
ALL RAAF Hornets are undergoing the Hornet upgrade project, and will have the same APG-73 radar and other capabilities of the HUG project. Not all are going through the centre barrel replacement program however.
Thanks for the information.
I have been doing a little digging.
In total 75 aircraft were purchased 57 F/A-18A (Single seat aircraft) and 18 F/A-18B (Two seat aircraft) of which 2 of each type have been lost, leaving 55 F/A-18A and 16 F/A-18B, 71 aircraft in total.
At present the ARDU appears to have two F/A-18 aircraft a single-seater and a two-seater; I suspect this may increase during the HUG programme.
The OCU has around 10-12 aircraft mainly two seaters, but probably 2-3 single seaters.
Each of the operational squadrons will have at least 1 and possibly 3 two seaters.
With 57 aircraft deployed to the operational squadrons, gives each of the operational squadron 19 aircraft.
When you do the sums the attrition pool is empty.
I have read somewhere that operational squadrons are allocated 15 pilots (and I think the CO is in addition). This is the same in the UK RAF. Squadrons have 15 aircraft plus a flying spare, 16 aircraft in total. Operating many more squadrons, aircraft that are involved in modification programmes are placed in long-term storage as true attrition spares. They are cycled through the operational squadrons filling in as aircraft are withdrawn for deep maintenance and modification.
It looks like the attrition spares have been deployed locally at about 3 aircraft per squadron.
Early in the life of the aircraft this strategy works because it ensures that the flying hours are spread across the fleet. There are dangers, lurking problems. The maintainers get accustomed to providing 8 aircraft from 20 easy, folk do not notice that some of the early deliveries and clocking up a lot of flight time.
Around-about mid-life update time (NOW) things change, the maintainers need to prepare 8 –10 aircraft from 14-16 wreaks that were left from yesterday’s missions.
It becomes much more difficult, the aircraft that went away for update do not return.
I found a source that provide the delivery date for each aircraft:
http://www.adf-serials.com/
Working with the data and an assumed flying rate of 200hrs/year, some of the early deliveries have clocked-up a lot of hours.
If the 73% of anticipated life is correct, then some of the RAAF aircraft are less than one year from time-ex: mainly early two-seaters. On this basis no in service aircraft could be flying in six years. Most of the RAAF aircraft will time out in two or three years.
The first aircraft has gone to Canada for the trial installation of the CBR (HUG 3) modification (A21-16 was sent in April 2006), so far it is not back and there is no forecast of its return to service.
Initial estimates suggested that only 15 CBR’s were required, today 40 – 50 seems nearer the mark. To carry out this work in a reasonable timescale would require a huge number of aircraft to be withdrawn from service.
To enable 48 aircraft to be updated and take 12 months for each aircraft would require, 12 aircraft to be withdrawn from the squadrons and take 5 years to complete, 16 aircraft withdrawn for 4 years, 24 aircraft withdrawn for 3 years. After the update program the Super Hornets could be used to allow the F-111s to retire early.
Now I understand the problem.
The Australian government has no choice (not little, but none). The gap is not caused by a long time need to replace the F-111, but by a medium term short fall in the anticipated lifetime of the F1/A –18 Hornets. After three years the F/A-18E/F/G aircraft can be used to allow the F-111s to retire gracefully.
I think that the RAAF got here because insufficient aircraft were procured initially and that the anticipate life was much lower than anticipated. Spare aircraft were flowed down to the operational squadrons, who had a happy time.
In my assessment Australia needs to order not 24 F/A- 18 E/F/G aircraft, but 36 aircraft, the 24 single-seat and 12 two-seat aircraft (it could be argued that a 50/50 split may be better).
The more I dig the worse it gets. (There are some aircraft out there that have probably exceeded the original planned hours of 6,000hrs, but because hours were not correctly recorded when bits were transferred from one aircraft to another, limits may have been exceeded). A lot of platforms with more than 4,000hrs are at risk.
Running the aircraft that will be permitted to continue flying through the CBR HUG3 program will enable extensive inspection to be carried out and allow SQA to check that all the bits have been identified and that flight hours/fatigue index has been correctly recorded.
Initial results from the first aircraft suggest that CBR will take longer that originally planned and that even if all the RAAF aircraft were put through the program much fewer than 48 aircraft would emerge as flight fit.
It appears that HUG 3 has thrown up bigger problems that will require bigger fixes for the F/A-18A/B(C/D ish) than was envisaged.
The key is the number of aircraft and the time required to go thought the CBR programme; 48 aircraft and 16 months means at least another 24 aircraft are required, A/B/C/Ds are not available so what do you buy? E/F/Gs.
I had no idea that it had become so tight for Australia. Knowing that the F-111 were aging I thought this would be the weak point. I had not realised that the F-18 were running out of hours so quickly.
Chris
