Technically possible but are we going to send a high value aircraft like an P8 and crew within 1000kms of an adversaries territory?,Depends on the horizon. Lockheed Martin would certainly argue long range strike from a P-8A across differing domains is certainly technically possible.
Lockheed Flexes To Modular AGM-158 JASSM Missile Concept
FLEX aims to give the JASSM missile family modular weapons architecture spanning longer-range, anti-ship, and new launch configurations. FLEX aims to give the JASSM missile family modular weapons architecture spanning longer-range, anti-ship, and new launch configurations.www.twz.com
Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
Depends on the adversary.
So many scenarios.
Just upping the options.
Be it a soldier, sailor or aviator and the platforms that carry’s them, we endeavour to calculate risk to our favour.
Some scenarios will always be a bridge too far.
After all we are just a mid sized power but a P8 does distance and speed of response better than grey things that float.
Anyone with ill intentions will take note of our 3000km reach even if it’s from a relatively slow modified commercial airliner.
Cheers S
I suppose it depends on the target, but JASSM-XR is reputed to be much longer ranged than 1000k…
1000km is still pretty far, and we can probably still have those protected with land based aircraft.
A p8 loaded with munitions and a couple of SH or F-35 Or MQ28 with just A2A in a low drag config.
While a P8 isn't stealthy, it has the uncanny ability to look like a 737, of which there are literally thousands of them flying all over south east Asia all the time. So a slow moving 737 isn't a huge cause for alarm, like a supersonic return would be. So a 737, on a commercial route, that then moves off the route a bit and launches some low return munitions and then get backs on route, looks like a commercial plane just moving around cloud or storms or traffic etc. In many cases it wouldn't even have to change route, it could just fly literally in normal commercial airspace.
Having the enemy blindly launching a2a munitions at 737 over 1000km away would be a very deep state of conflict. Or a very advanced traffic management and AWACS capability. Even with sats and AI, that would still be a hell of a identification and to form a kill chain at that distance would, impressive.
I read with Interest Canadas decision to go with Global eye much of the argument seemed to be it was against purchasing American equipment rather than what was best fit for Canada but ignored that Canada was purchasing Poseidon aircraft at same time ,Global eye flying ten thousand feet higher than both aircrft and having a radar that could detect a submarines periscope could work well for Canadas needs , my convoluted thread would ask if the Global eye could be a useful addition to the R.A.A.F acting forward of the Wedgetail beeing smaller and faster would report back to a Wedgetail of incoming threats like low flying missiles that Wedgetail may not detect aimed at surface units and the Wedgetail itself would be not exposed to so much risk being larger and slower , Work on the Wedgetail from concept started twenty five years ago ,Wedgetail itself has been suggested as being replaced in ten or so , so perhaps such work has started, any thoughts?
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Anti-US feelings and Bombardier content were the driving factors for GlobalEye but Kegbreath’s Initial E7 cancellation also helped. As for being a useful addition, maybe.
Any chance of Australia buying Kuwaits F-18Fs? Maybe making a move on the addition USN F-18F as well adding another 18 F-18F, converting 6-12 of the origional F-18F to Growler configuration, while doing Blk III upgrades and Advance growler upgrades.
MQ28 intergration and forward deployments seem to be taxing our Superhornet fleet. Plus so many weapons are currently SH only. LRASM, Aim260, the us has aim174b and blackbeard..
We are spending $6b to upgrade our 12 growlers... I hope none crash.
MQ28 intergration and forward deployments seem to be taxing our Superhornet fleet. Plus so many weapons are currently SH only. LRASM, Aim260, the us has aim174b and blackbeard..
We are spending $6b to upgrade our 12 growlers... I hope none crash.
Can see the appeal on many levels, but it’s probably something Canada should be looking at given their fast air conundrum.
Cheers S
Given Kuwait’s urgent need for additional air defence capacity I’d suggest there is more chance of us actually buying a medium ranged air defence system (lol) than these Shornets which if I recall, aren’t even delivered yet…
No only are they not delivered they still haven't finish issuing contracts for base upgrades to accommodate them. They are still sitting with Boeing. They have 28 typhoons including two seats in country. So 1m people country supporting 55+ fighter jets of two different tech trees in country seems too much..
We will be down on airframes during growler and sh upgrades which take 365 days per airframe.
With only 12 growlers, it gets pretty thin if you have some doing integration work. 3 or 4 in upgrades for one year at a time and deploying to Japan phillipines butterworth..
The sh fleet was always small stop gap numbers but its arguably more useful now than when we bought them.
An additional 6 would increase growler capacity by 50%.
Doing mq28 sh integration work could be key to getting mq28 selected by allies. Showing it can be mission controlled by back seat operator would flow into f15ex and typhoon operator programs.
How large do we want our mq28 fleet and do we want fighters to control them? Are future 2 seat fighters likely?
Or canada.. but it's a small number..
Sounds a bit like HAMAS launching missiles from very close to a school or hospital....just saying
The block 3 MQ-28 are timed to start production in 2027 and would have two internal aim-120 AMRAAM or 4 gbu 39 small diameter bombs and 3 external hard points ,not sure what the hard points are for but wondered about a small drop tank or if possible air to air refueling its range of 2000 kilometres appears problematic for escorting the longer ranged aircraft like Poseidon and Wedgetail ,,ts why I have suggested the possibility of the mq-28 being able to be launched off the L.H.D,s
Not really. Firing missiles off at just random radar contact is very poor form. Not only is it generally ineffective, it is often a war crime.
More like driving a tank along a road. The road can carry cars, and a tank can also use it. Usually if you have tanks firing and things firing at tanks, driving a bus weaving in and out of tank column is pretty silly. But if you are sitting at a radar screen and just shooting at anything that is on a road, you don't know if your hitting civilians, enemy, your own team, decoys etc. China uses 737s.. Electronically a E7 should look very different to a regular 737, as regular 737 don't have MW MESA arrays the size of a bus on their roofs pumping out radar. But with long range munitions and long range aircraft your vectors are more numerous than just shortest possible distance between two points.
E7 and P8s already do FON flights. Same deal. You have to inspect the aircraft. Not just fire off missiles at any plane.
Its not 2000km, its 2000Nm. So nearly 4000km. Maybe further using internal payload space. I think its ideal for E7/P8 escort duties.
Boeing Unveils New Capabilities for MQ-28 Ghost Bat
Boeing unveiled at ILA Berlin 2026 the new capabilities within the MQ-28 Ghost Bat’s roadmap, including internal weapon bays and larger wings. Boeing has
theaviationist.com
Also on carrier MQ28..
Official rendering shows Ghost Bat ‘loyal wingman' landing aboard Queen Elizabeth-class carrier
An official rendering shown for the first time atan event on 21 February depicts a Boeing MQ-28 Ghost Bat ‘loyal wingman' landing aboard a UK Royal Navy (RN) Queen...
www.janes.com
Its highly likely the larger MQ28 with larger wings, fuel and payload, could take off from a carrier or a LHD (at reduced payload). Still have more range than a F-35A.. So much range you could lilly pad them. Take off from a land base, land on a LHD, refuel, take off continue to another land base. Have some on the LHD itself organically. Give you huge situational awareness. Minimal demands on a carrier. No crew, no rescue helo in the air at all times.
MQ28 looks very much like its the ideal CCA for UK, AU, US, Germany and Japan. If all of those acquire it, thats potentially thousand of units. So MQ28 ops and integration will be a very big thing. But part of that is proving it not just with E7 control, but with fighter control from our existing F-18. It would make every existing seater 4th gen fighter very attractive. Euro Typhoon for Germany (30 odd examples all ready an no doubt more if MQ28 integrated and proven). F-15EX (perhaps replacing Japan's older F-15 2 seaters,48 of them). It would give forces a very useful reason to keep 4th gen fighters, F-35 is great, but is a single seat fighter, Also stealth but controlling other planes is a bit of a mission confusing. Its like having a stealth EW platform.
So an extra 6-18 Superhornets for Australia could support a much larger MQ28 fleet and operations, including with allies. For SEAD and naval strike, the F-18 is probably the ideal platform for Australia to control MQ28. MQ28:SH ratios could be 2:1 That would seem reasonable. So even a few airframes would lot of capability to the RAAF in that situation.
Nah....I think if a military strike came from an aircraft disguised as a civilain airliner, using civilian flight paths, it would be catastrophic for air travel and trade. A major escalation.
My mistake on nautical versus kilometres whoops, it would have range to accompany Poseidon the longer range Wedgetail might need other considerationsNot really. Firing missiles off at just random radar contact is very poor form. Not only is it generally ineffective, it is often a war crime.
More like driving a tank along a road. The road can carry cars, and a tank can also use it. Usually if you have tanks firing and things firing at tanks, driving a bus weaving in and out of tank column is pretty silly. But if you are sitting at a radar screen and just shooting at anything that is on a road, you don't know if your hitting civilians, enemy, your own team, decoys etc. China uses 737s.. Electronically a E7 should look very different to a regular 737, as regular 737 don't have MW MESA arrays the size of a bus on their roofs pumping out radar. But with long range munitions and long range aircraft your vectors are more numerous than just shortest possible distance between two points.
E7 and P8s already do FON flights. Same deal. You have to inspect the aircraft. Not just fire off missiles at any plane.
Its not 2000km, its 2000Nm. So nearly 4000km. Maybe further using internal payload space. I think its ideal for E7/P8 escort duties.
Boeing Unveils New Capabilities for MQ-28 Ghost Bat
Boeing unveiled at ILA Berlin 2026 the new capabilities within the MQ-28 Ghost Bat’s roadmap, including internal weapon bays and larger wings. Boeing has
Also on carrier MQ28..
Official rendering shows Ghost Bat ‘loyal wingman' landing aboard Queen Elizabeth-class carrier
An official rendering shown for the first time atan event on 21 February depicts a Boeing MQ-28 Ghost Bat ‘loyal wingman' landing aboard a UK Royal Navy (RN) Queen...
Its highly likely the larger MQ28 with larger wings, fuel and payload, could take off from a carrier or a LHD (at reduced payload). Still have more range than a F-35A.. So much range you could lilly pad them. Take off from a land base, land on a LHD, refuel, take off continue to another land base. Have some on the LHD itself organically. Give you huge situational awareness. Minimal demands on a carrier. No crew, no rescue helo in the air at all times.
MQ28 looks very much like its the ideal CCA for UK, AU, US, Germany and Japan. If all of those acquire it, thats potentially thousand of units. So MQ28 ops and integration will be a very big thing. But part of that is proving it not just with E7 control, but with fighter control from our existing F-18. It would make every existing seater 4th gen fighter very attractive. Euro Typhoon for Germany (30 odd examples all ready an no doubt more if MQ28 integrated and proven). F-15EX (perhaps replacing Japan's older F-15 2 seaters,48 of them). It would give forces a very useful reason to keep 4th gen fighters, F-35 is great, but is a single seat fighter, Also stealth but controlling other planes is a bit of a mission confusing. Its like having a stealth EW platform.
So an extra 6-18 Superhornets for Australia could support a much larger MQ28 fleet and operations, including with allies. For SEAD and naval strike, the F-18 is probably the ideal platform for Australia to control MQ28. MQ28:SH ratios could be 2:1 That would seem reasonable. So even a few airframes would lot of capability to the RAAF in that situation.
There's been quiet a bit of chat as to where the order is up to seeing as construction of super hornets is ending. Here is the latest information.
indefencemag.com
Boeing extends Kuwait Super Hornet ferry support - IN Defence
Boeing will extend support for Kuwait's Super Hornets awaiting transfer. The six-month modification covers maintenance, engines, logistics, storage, transportation, and ferry preparation before delivery to Kuwait.
indefencemag.com
Takao
The Bunker Group
Not sure where you'd find the money quite frankly. Complicated by the L-M debacle with Block IV F-35, which will see us paying for things that should have already been paid for.There's been quiet a bit of chat as to where the order is up to seeing as construction of super hornets is ending. Here is the latest information.
Boeing extends Kuwait Super Hornet ferry support - IN Defence
Boeing will extend support for Kuwait's Super Hornets awaiting transfer. The six-month modification covers maintenance, engines, logistics, storage, transportation, and ferry preparation before delivery to Kuwait.
There is a really awkward point coming, where the only aircraft that can carry our genuine strike weapons and hold a threat at distance will need heaps of $$ because it's getting obsolete; but we are still paying heaps of $$ to buy the latest and greatest - that can't do the amount of strike....
And I realise MQ-28 is the next answer - but that progressively comes with a massive bill.
Add in the skyrocketing cost of air combat enablers (tankers and AEW&C) and there may have to be a drastic rethink in air combat - because non-superpowers cannot have everything. What does the super network look like if we cannot afford an E-7 replacement?
Canada ordered the P-8 three years ago, after some time negotiating. US policy has changed since then. P-8 is in service with the USA in large numbers & so far there's been no sign of the USA not being committed to supporting it. E-7 is not in service with the USA & the current US government decided to cancel the programme in 2025, leading to NATO cancelling its acqusition. It has no other known new international customers. That put the E-7's future in doubt, while Globaleye has not only secure support by its home country, but international customers. It's been selected by NATO. Thus, RCAF Globaleyes should be fully interoperable with Canada's European allies.
This isn’t strictly true - while the US did cut its order the war in Iran has demonstrated the issues with the USAF E-3 fleet and highlighted that a replacement is required. Funding has since been secured for seven E-7 airframes, the two earlier test aeroplanes and an additional five.
As such, it wouldn’t be a great surprise to see this order grow further in future financial years; I’d argue it’s entirely reasonable that eventually the E-7 will fully replace the E-3.
There’s only so much you can do with a global-eye sized platform. Physics - radar size, power generation, and space available onboard all play a part in constraining what a global eye can do.
Last edited:
John Fedup
The Bunker Group
Yep