This is a discussion on EA/18G Growler within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; From today's Australian Aviation Express
Issue 157
SUPER HORNETS FOR RAAF? The RAAF looks set to acquire 24 Boeing F/A-18F ...
From today's Australian Aviation Express Issue 157
SUPER HORNETS FOR RAAF? The RAAF looks set to acquire 24 Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornets as a hedging strategy to offset any capability gaps between the retirement of the F-111C and the introduction of the F-35 JSF, and reduce risk associated with an early JSF acquisition. Boeing has been quietly promoting the Super Hornet option to government for several years, with the previously unsolicited proposals believed to have led to two-way discussions earlier this year after Defence Minister Dr Brendan Nelson said he had asked the RAAF and DMO to look at options should the F-35 be delayed. Boeing Integrated Defence Systems (IDS) head Jim Albaugh and Hornet sales head Rick McCrary were in Canberra in early December to meet with senior ADF and government ministers, reportedly including federal cabinet's National Security Committee (which includes the prime minister, treasurer and defence minister), to discuss the Super Hornet option. Reports indicate that Defence has provisionally agreed to take 24 F/A-18Fs as a bridging capability. This would allow the RAAF's F-111s to be retired in 2010, and mean the RAAF won't have to take as many of the early build low rate initial production (LRIP) F-35s, which will be more expensive and less capable than later production aircraft. The Super Hornet, with its AESA radar and limited stealth features, would also provide a neat generational transition aircraft between the fourth generation F/A-18A (HUG) and fifth generation F-35. "The Minister has emphasised that Australia will not accept an air combat capability shortfall," the RAAF's Director General Capability Management, AIRCDRE Mark Binskin, told Australian Aviation in a statement. "Defence continues to develop contingency options to ensure Australia maintains its air combat capability edge during the transition to the New Air Combat Capability (NACC)." "An option being analysed is to obtain 24 Boeing F/A-18F Super Hornet aircraft to supplement our fleet of upgraded F/A-18s during the transition from F-111 to a fully operational F-35 JSF force," AIRCDRE Binskin added. "Selecting the F/A-18F Super Hornet would build on a very successful association with our current F/A-18 fleet. It would provide a highly capable combat aircraft that is currently in service with the US Navy." The Super Hornet is currently being delivered to the US Navy under a multi-year fixed price production plan at a unit cost of US$54.8m (A$70m). Allowing for foreign military sales fees, weapons, electronic warfare equipment and other add-ons, support infrastructure and equipment, and initial spares, this would likely translate to a cost of about A$95-100 million per aircraft. Other benefits of a Super Hornet buy would be the operation of a multiple type and therefore more diverse force structure, allowing greater flexibility in operational planning; the spreading out of the funding required to replace the 100-strong F/A-18A/B and F-111 force and their subsequent successors at the end of their lives; and the almost three decades of operational experience with the F/A-18 the RAAF has already achieved. "Air Force has a deep understanding of F/A-18 systems and technical support, as well as strong relationships with suppliers," AIRCDRE Binskin said. "This makes the Super Hornet a low risk option to ensure Australia's capability edge is maintained at a time of major equipment renewal and change for Air Force. If obtained, the Super Hornet would provide Air Force with the flexibility to assign all Air Combat force aircrew and technical workforce across a relatively common fleet during the transition to the F-35 JSF." The plan reportedly is to be approved in the 2007/08 federal budget, in which case the RAAF should be able to start taking delivery of Super Hornets by late 2009. Deliveries to the US Navy are currently running at more than a dozen aircraft and several months ahead of schedule, so Australia's airframes would likely be taken from USN allotments in an arrangement similar to that of the RAAF's first two C-17s being taken from USAF production slots. Additionally, if a decision to acquire the Super Hornets is taken, the RAAF's five remaining F-111Gs which fly with 6SQN would likely be retired almost immediately, allowing 6SQN's F-111Cs to be transferred to 1SQN so as to free up personnel to train on and introduce the Super Hornet into service. An Initial Operational Capability (IOC) with 12-14 Super Hornets could realistically be within reach by mid 2011, with Full Operational Capability (FOC) following by the end of 2012. Boeing's bid to sell Australia the Super Hornet is part of a wider program internally dubbed 'Project Archangel' under which the aircraft was being pitched to various nations in our wider region including Japan, India and Malaysia, with the plan to offset a purchase with as much local industry involvement as possible. In Japan and India's cases, each of which has a 120+ aircraft requirement and a mature indigenous aircraft manufacturing capability, this could include final assembly and the manufacture of major components including engines, whereas for Malaysia there are more limited opportunities likely to be restricted to smaller high tech components. In Australia's case, there may be opportunities for local Boeing subsidiary Hawker de Havilland to undertake additional honeycomb structure and assorted composite fabrication work for the Super Hornet.
________________
Lead, follow, or get out of the way!
The article also mentions that LRIP F-35s will cost more. Something which I had not factored in. What it doesn't say is whether lower JSF purchase numbers would further increase JSF unit cost?
Not just cost more but be less capable Block 2 jets. Because we're a program partner, I don't think we have to 'negotiate' the prices fo the aircraft - we just pretty much pay what everyone else is paying for the aircraft at that point of the production line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by weasel
Its a brave choice. If there are no other E/F users, maintenance @ 24 units could be costly 20 years down the road.
The USN will still have hundreds of Supers in service in 20 years, and because of the relationship built up with them and Boeing over the past 25 years with the 'classic' Hornets, support will not be an issue.
Magoo
________________
Lead, follow, or get out of the way!
Its a brave choice. If there are no other E/F users, maintenance @ 24 units could be costly 20 years down the road.
Deja Vu, we travelled this same road with the F-111 as it was an orphan. There's yet to be any clear indication that Rhino is/will be an orphan. Even if it is, then the baseline numbers would indicate no shortage of spare parts/frames over the next 20 years. (Failing open conflict etc....)
________________ A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:
"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
Everyone seems to be sitting on the fence with the JSF program. The price originally was based on 3000+ aircraft being built, the price will sky rocket when they cant even get 2000 firm orders.
When Australia firsts see's the price of the JSF if its price is 50% greater than a Super Hornet which is higgly likely, then it is also highly likely that we may just buy more Super Hornets.
We have already taken a step in the Super Hornet direction.
In my opinion i dont think Australia will even buy JSF aircraft. In 2015 the US Navy will have a UAV aircraft in the pipeline which could most likely be controlled by the two seat Super Hornet. This will seal the deal and Australia will buy more Super Hornets with the likely purchase of a UCAV soon after.
Don't thinks so. I don't see the type of UCAV you are talking about being ready in the time frame. It is still developmental and that project has more bugs to iron out than JSF being not so far down the path.
I am quite happy about a mixed fleet of JSF and Rhinos. Maybe we may even buy some F-35B's donw the track (as I ahve said before it is nice to daydream). dodging the need to buy the LRIP aircraft is a bonus in overall costs.
What's the expected lifetime on the Super Hornet airframes? That airframe must get an absolute flogging given the sort of Gs it can pull (not that they'd do it all that often).
Current RAAF pilots were surely a little excited at the news.
Don't thinks so. I don't see the type of UCAV you are talking about being ready in the time frame. It is still developmental and that project has more bugs to iron out than JSF being not so far down the path.
Thats why i said we would need another Super Hornet purchase to replace the rest of our hornets. Unmanned aircraft can become operational very quickly. After the initial first flight, Australia could have an operational squadron a few years later.
Quote:
Originally Posted by alexsa
I am quite happy about a mixed fleet of JSF and Rhinos. Maybe we may even buy some F-35B's donw the track (as I ahve said before it is nice to daydream). dodging the need to buy the LRIP aircraft is a bonus in overall costs.
Thats a perfect example of the international customers sitting on the fence. No one wants to buy the LRIP aircraft so it seems the USAF will be forced to buy them. The USAF will be pretty pissed off as the first JSF's will cost the same as additional F-22's. This will be another nail in the JSF coffin.
I vaguely remember reading an article somewhere (a year or so ago) which proposed flogging off the HUG'ged bugs to Canada and replacing them with Shornets. The writer of the article made it sound feasible.
If the RAAF were to now get some Shornets, what is the likelihood that the RAAF could sell some of the HUG bugs and get a few more Shornets?
Or would there be too little return for the cost and the effort, assuming the Canadians, or Swiss or Spanish or whoever, wanted some?
Honorary Moderator / Defense Professional / Analyst
Major
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 903
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rossfrb_1
I vaguely remember reading an article somewhere (a year or so ago) which proposed flogging off the HUG'ged bugs to Canada and replacing them with Shornets. The writer of the article made it sound feasible.
If the RAAF were to now get some Shornets, what is the likelihood that the RAAF could sell some of the HUG bugs and get a few more Shornets?
Or would there be too little return for the cost and the effort, assuming the Canadians, or Swiss or Spanish or whoever, wanted some?
rb
Lets remember that the Shornets are replacements for the F-111s, the legacy Hornets will be replaced by the F-35 (without going into the debate, THIS is the the current plan) in the 2012-2014 time frame.
I would like to see some G model kits bought as well, my understanding is that all new build F's can be easily upgraded to G?
Lets remember that the Shornets are replacements for the F-111s, the legacy Hornets will be replaced by the F-35 (without going into the debate, THIS is the the current plan) in the 2012-2014 time frame.
I would like to see some G model kits bought as well, my understanding is that all new build F's can be easily upgraded to G?
The latest block F models have all the wiring to be converted to G models down the track. So if we go JSF later, then some of our hornets can be converted to G models.
Also we have not signed ANY orders for the JSF. We have shown interest in the development with possibilities of buying up to 100 but realistically 80 aircraft. Now that we are going with super Hornets we MAY only buy 50-60 JSF aircraft.
Nothing is down on paper, it is highly likely that we may just buy more Super Hornets as they will be significantly cheaper. This current order is a clear step in that direction.
Everyone kept saying that we should go with a single aircraft as its cheaper etc so the JSF was a good option. Now watch those people be hyprocits and say we should go with two aircraft types...
We should just go with Super Hornets, with our budget we can afford well over 100 aircraft, with enough for attrition to allow us to fly them for the next 40 years.
The Super Hornet has most of the capabilities of the JSF, yet the JSF will never have some of the capabilities of the Super Hornet with two seats and electronic warfare versions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rossfrb_1
If the RAAF were to now get some Shornets, what is the likelihood that the RAAF could sell some of the HUG bugs and get a few more Shornets?
Or would there be too little return for the cost and the effort, assuming the Canadians, or Swiss or Spanish or whoever, wanted some?
Our hornets dont have enough flight hours left in the air frames. The classic hornets will be retired in 10 years time even though the avionics and weapons it can carry are still very decent.
Flying all our classic hornets across multiple squadrons will use up the remaing flight hours very quick. If we ordered a second or even third squadron of Super Hornets now then the Classic Hornets could be combined into a single squadron so that the air frames will last 2-3 times as long as each aircraft wont get flown as often. This would ensure we dont throw away a perfectly usefull aircraft just be its flight hours have been maxed out. The classic hornets are more than good enough for flying CAP's and escorting wedgetail and inflight refueling tankers, while the Super Hornets engage the enemy.
I suppose based on this we could sell the hornets to the Canadians, Swiss or Spanish users. They would then use our aircraft for attrition so that their current fleet can be flown longer.
The latest block F models have all the wiring to be converted to G models down the track. So if we go JSF later, then some of our hornets can be converted to G models.
Also we have not signed ANY orders for the JSF. We have shown interest in the development with possibilities of buying up to 100 but realistically 80 aircraft. Now that we are going with super Hornets we MAY only buy 50-60 JSF aircraft.
Nothing is down on paper, it is highly likely that we may just buy more Super Hornets as they will be significantly cheaper. This current order is a clear step in that direction.
Everyone kept saying that we should go with a single aircraft as its cheaper etc so the JSF was a good option. Now watch those people be hyprocits and say we should go with two aircraft types...
We should just go with Super Hornets, with our budget we can afford well over 100 aircraft, with enough for attrition to allow us to fly them for the next 40 years.
Watch the hypocrites?
I am!!!
Wasn't it only a matter of weeks ago you were pushing the A-10 bandwagon?
The it was the F-22/F-16 band wagon. Now it's the HUG BUG/Super Hornet deal followed apparently somewhat down the track by the Super Hornet/UCAV deal.
Your opinions sound a bit like a child in a candy store at times. "I want that one!" Ooh no I want that one...
How about attempting to look at the situation realistically?
No Super Hornets have been ordered yet. RAAF and ADF are still focussed on the F-35 to provide the basis for their follow on air combat capability.
The SH purchase does nothing to change that. It may indeed reduce the funding available for an F-35 purchase, but I doubt whether we'll see more than 75-80 JSF's in-service anyway. That number is sufficient to equip 3x operational Sqn's and RAAF has ALWAYS said it requires 4x Sqn's to fulfillthe tasks required of it.
Phase 1 and 2 of AIR-6000 will acquire JSF. Phase 3 of AIR 6000 was ALWAYS "assessing" other "options" and will continue to do so. Whether they are SH controlled UCAV's or some other form of UCAV remains to be seen.
This current deal is nothing more than a strong push by the incumbent Defence Minister who seems to be getting his way with a lot of decisions. (As did Senator HILL too).
There is no guarantee that Defmin NELSON or even the Liberal Party will be in their current position come 2007. Looking too far down the track because of this one supposed purchase (which STILL hasn't been announced officially, when I see the FMS notice or an update at defence.gov.au, THEN I'll believe it)...
Wasn't it only a matter of weeks ago you were pushing the A-10 bandwagon?
The it was the F-22/F-16 band wagon. Now it's the HUG BUG/Super Hornet deal followed apparently somewhat down the track by the Super Hornet/UCAV deal.
Your opinions sound a bit like a child in a candy store at times. "I want that one!" Ooh no I want that one...
How about attempting to look at the situation realistically?
I am looking at the situation realistically. This is why i have been suggesting various combinations to get opinion on the these various choices.
The A-10 suggestion was originally because if Australia went with the JSF it would lack a low end aircraft for peace time missions and CAS. I also suggested F-16's with the JSF to provide a high-low mix.
The F-22/ F-16 combo was suggested because Labour dreams of seeing the F-22 in Australian colours. If the F-22 was ordered then we would have definitely needed a cheaper aircraft to make up numbers and to perform the low-risk missions. This is why i suggested the F-16, it would perform well with the F-22 in a ultra high-low mix. Both of these options no longer exist if the Super Hornet order goes ahead.
The Super Hornet option however is cheap enough to buy 100 aircraft so it doesn't need a cheaper aircraft to make up the numbers. The Super Hornet is also capable enough that it doesn't need an expensive high end aircraft to get the difficult jobs done.
So for Phase 1 and 2 of Air 6000
The advantages of buying F-35's to go with the Super Hornets
Harder to detect, so less risk.
Slighly longer range on internal fuel
Slighly better A2A capability
The advantages of buying a 2nd, 3rd or 4th Super Hornet Squadron
Cheaper than JSF per aircraft
Australia would operate a single aircraft fleet cheaper again
We will already operate Hornets and 1 squadron of Super Hornets, setup costs would be much less. CHEAPER AGAIN
Our inflight refueling tankers dont require a boom, so we could keep using our current tankers to save a bit of money. CHEAPER AGAIN!!!
Twin Engine, less crashes.
Two seat cockpit will provide quicker and more accurate Close Air Support as it reduces pilot workload.
Current F/A-18F's can be converted to G models easily
Likelyhood of the Super Hornet being able to control a UCAV is high, perfect for Phase 3 of Air 6000 which can allow us to buy UCAV.
The chances of us ditching the JSF is extremely high.
Well, I don't think the F-35 buy will be scrapped but a huge reduction in numbers bought, down to say 30-40 airframes.
What I see happening is:
The F/A-18F's will be bought to replace the F-111C/G's.
Those same F/A-18F's with be replaced by the F-35A.
The F/A-18 HUG's would be replaced by a further buy of F's and the HUG's will merge into one Sqn and then replaced.
The F-22 is a wet dream for Australia, why?
1. It's cost?
2. The US will not sell them to us.
3. We don't need that kind of A/C
Labour won't scrap the F-35's
1. They are not that stupid we need a F-111 replacement
2. The know the F-22 is a wet dream idea.
The RAAF doesn't and will never need the F-22 or large numbers of F-35's. What they need is a F-111 replacement now (F/A-18Fs) and a F/A-18 HUG replacement soon.
UCAV's will be a long way off for the RAAF. Why?
How long has the world been using UAV's? And how long has it taken for us?
Whenever these UCAV go operational and take to the sky, add 10-15 years before we get them.
The Army is just going operational with UAV's...the US them in GW1 (91) right?
The RAAF have been toying around for a long time with the global hawk etc and still no sign of getting them. The RAN is just developing the doctrine for patrol boat and UAV deployment. So by the time all of this comes into play it will be years much later than the big players of the world.
That’s how slow it works in Oz
To make it easier:
Fighter = F/A-18F's
Strike = F-35A's
Maritime Strike/Patrol = P-8 MMR?? the 737 version
Maritime Patrol = a small number of Global Hawks
Awac's = 737 Wedge tail
Tankers = Airbus A330 things
Transports = C-17, C130J and maybe C27J's
I am looking at the situation realistically. This is why i have been suggesting various combinations to get opinion on the these various choices.
The A-10 suggestion was originally because if Australia went with the JSF it would lack a low end aircraft for peace time missions and CAS. I also suggested F-16's with the JSF to provide a high-low mix.
CAS capability is NOT a priority for RAAF. That is why Magoo finds the idea of A-10's in RAAF service hilarious and why RAAF is not equipped or armed adequately to conduct the role.
Quote:
The F-22/ F-16 combo was suggested because Labour dreams of seeing the F-22 in Australian colours. If the F-22 was ordered then we would have definitely needed a cheaper aircraft to make up numbers and to perform the low-risk missions. This is why i suggested the F-16, it would perform well with the F-22 in a ultra high-low mix. Both of these options no longer exist if the Super Hornet order goes ahead.
Bomber Beazley dreamed of seeing F-22 in RAAF colours. That's hardly relevant now is it? I'm not so certain the rest of Labour is so keen on the F-22.
Quote:
The Super Hornet option however is cheap enough to buy 100 aircraft so it doesn't need a cheaper aircraft to make up the numbers. The Super Hornet is also capable enough that it doesn't need an expensive high end aircraft to get the difficult jobs done.
In the next 5-10 years you're probably right. I VERY much doubt RAAF would agree with this threat assesment beyond 2015 however.
Quote:
So for Phase 1 and 2 of Air 6000
The advantages of buying F-35's to go with the Super Hornets
Harder to detect, so less risk.
Slighly longer range on internal fuel
Slighly better A2A capability
The advantages of buying a 2nd, 3rd or 4th Super Hornet Squadron
Cheaper than JSF per aircraft
Australia would operate a single aircraft fleet cheaper again
We will already operate Hornets and 1 squadron of Super Hornets, setup costs would be much less. CHEAPER AGAIN
Our inflight refueling tankers dont require a boom, so we could keep using our current tankers to save a bit of money. CHEAPER AGAIN!!!
Twin Engine, less crashes.
Two seat cockpit will provide quicker and more accurate Close Air Support as it reduces pilot workload.
Current F/A-18F's can be converted to G models easily
Likelyhood of the Super Hornet being able to control a UCAV is high, perfect for Phase 3 of Air 6000 which can allow us to buy UCAV.
The chances of us ditching the JSF is extremely high.
Government just last week signed the JSF - MoU (the 4th nation in the WORLD to do so) and committed ANOTHER US$100m for the Production, Sustainment and Follow-on development phase of the JSF program. First pass approval was signed for RAAF to acquire the F-35 last only last MONTH.
Boeing provided an un-solicited offer of SH's earlier this year to Government (I found out about it in April) and this latest push for the acquisition is based on tender data obtained during the Formal AIR-6000 phase in 1999/2000. The push to acquire SH's to provide an early replacement for F-111's has been around for years. It's got NOTHING to do with the F-35 acquisition.
What out of this shows ANY indication that Government AND RAAF no longer have the intention of purchasing the F-35A, let alone the high possibility of "ditching" the F-35 that you think exists?
The F-35 is going to prove significantly more capable than the SH in most areas, not "slightly" as you seem to think.
The B-707's CANNOT soldier on much longer. For one thing they are no longer allowed to land at most airports due to their noise, their airframes are absolutely shagged and we only have 3 anyway. Carlo Kopp would throw a fit if he heard you're suggestion that 3 AAR tankers are enough... (Don't you know we need at least 17x "wide-body" tankers to POSSIBLY defend this wide Brown land of ours effectively?)
Besides we've already ordered our boom AND hose and drogue equipped A330's and paid an awful lot already. It's probably a bit late to pull out of that deal, without flushing $1 billion or so down the drain (and it's sounds like we're already about to flush a billion or so down the drain on ANOTHER controversial program )...
F-35's will be able to effectively control UCAV's in due course too. The F-35's inherent EA capability will also be significantly greater than the SH thanks to it's F-22 based AESA radar.
SH's have an effective AESA I agree, but the "back end" is APG-73. A significantly LESS capable radar base than an APG-77 I hope you'll agree???
Rhino "F" models are wired so as to be capable of conversion to a defacto "G" model I agree. Where however in ANY RAAF force structure plans does gaining a dedicated EW aircraft fit in?
We did NOT acquire Raven, we did NOT convert F-111 to a defacto "Wild Weasel" standard despite the opportunity to do so in the mid-90's (again through an un-solicited offer to ADF) we have not even acquired HARM despite DSTO and ARDU integrating it and conducting trials with the weapon on the F-111 in the mid-90's.
Why then do you consider that a plus? Cause we could if we wanted too? That's nice, but RAAF seems to have NO intention of operating any sort of Tactical EW aircraft. Ever.
Most of those points you are arguing in favour of apply equally with a single fleet of F-35 aircraft. Is it going to be more capable than Rhino's?
Yes.
Is a single aircraft fleet cheaper to operate than a dual fleet?
Yes.
As to the others:
Cheaper than F-35?
So what? So is a Cessna. Perhaps we should invest in a fleet of A2A and A2G capability Cessna's? (At least Carlo Kopp COULD speak with some authority then...) If Government is willing to fork over the bucks to get an admittedly more capable system, more power to em I say.
2 seat cockpit provides more accurate CAS and reduces pilot workload?
Again, CAS is not a priority for RAAF so I fail to see why you think this is an issue, but the SINGLE biggest criticism put against the F-35 is it's design is TAILORED towards CAS and battlefield strike at the expense of other more important roles. How you could possibly think (given this alleged design focus), that the SH is more capable than the F-35 will be in this role is beyond me. I agree it has "2 sets of eyes" to perform visual scanning, however the level of automation and data-fusion in the F-35 will largely negate this disadvantage in my opinion. Every RAAF pilot that has "flown" the F-35 simulator has been almost gushing with praise for this aircraft and the capabilities it wil have.
I'm sorry but I trust an operator over a theorist EVERY time. No doubt that will infuriate Kurt, but there you have it...
)...
