Go Back   Defense Technology & Military Forum > Global Defense & Military > Air Force & Aviation
Forgot Password? Join Us! Its's free!

Defense News
Land, Air & Naval Forces






Military Photos
Latest Military Pictures

F-35_launches_Joint_Strike_Missile.jpg

us-south-korea-drill.jpg

this-year-12700-us-troops-are-participating-alongside-many-more-south-korean-soldiers.jpg

the-us-routinely-dedicates-an-extremely-large-contingent-of-soldiers-and-marines-to-the-drills.jpg
Defense Reports
Aerospace & Defence







Recent Photos - DefenceTalk Military Gallery





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

This is a discussion on Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by StingrayOZ I've heard JORN depends on conditions around us. So in favourable conditions it would be reasonably ...


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 16 votes, 4.25 average.
Old June 8th, 2007   #16
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 14,479
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by StingrayOZ View Post
I've heard JORN depends on conditions around us. So in favourable conditions it would be reasonably accurate. As GF said, it was highly capable before the huge and expensive upgrades.

As JORN is being tied into the missile shield, it will be further enhanced with satellites and other assets to greatly enhance its capabilities.

There was a claim in an article about JORN being being good enough to accurately direct airtraffic around dili, showing position, heading and airspeed with all the information being sent to Canberra and shown on a large screen. Can it do the same with B-2's in Texas? I don't know, possibly? JORN seems to have superhuman reach, and the US interest in it shows its got to be god like in some repects for them to show such an interest. You don't want an unreliable sensor in that network, causing you to launch missiles against nuclear powers in the region.

Judging from my experience with radio telescopes, processing all the data is one of the biggest issues. If you want real time capability not hours,days or weeks later capability, there is a lot you can do with the data to enhance accuracy. It looks like they have that real time capability with the latest hardware and software upgrades.
JORNs strength is as a complimentary system.

The issue of data processing is the sophistication of the algorithms used to sort useful data from fluff and noise.

One of the anomalies of JORN is that its possible to see "targets" outside of advertised range (depending on weather conditions) eg, ballistic rocket launches in the middle east etc.... (unsubstantiated)

welcome to the vagaries of the ionosphere....
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 8th, 2007   #17
Defense Enthusiast
Captain
No Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Big city
Posts: 777
Threads:
The reason we are "interested in it" is because its the most remarkable radar network in the world.

And the Aussies consistently under-talk the system, "oh the JORN? Yeah its pretty good". Good for them. Let it be a surprise.

To understand just how incredible the system is you have to really look at the Geography of the area it is directed against. Its a huge and remote area and JORN covers all the approaches an enemy would have to take to attack Australia. It covers an almost unbelievable amount of coastline as well.

Imagine the $$ the Aussies would have to spend just in coastline protection assets if JORN didn't exist?

I have repeatedly said such potential enemies like the PLAN, PLAF, Indonesia, ect would have a real bad time against the Aussies despite the relatively modest size of their armed forces. Instead of looking at single systems, instead, look at how the individual systems function together as one. JORN is a big part of that equation and I continue to be impressed with the intelligence shown in the system purchases, development, and integration of the Australian armed forces. As a cut of meat they are pretty lean and mean.

In the '70s and '80s the Yank armed forced developed the doctrine of superior technology winning wars. The Aussies were attentive students.

Some reading for all http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/lsp/index.cfm
Rich is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 9th, 2007   #18
Senior Member
Brigadier General
No Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,615
Threads:
I suppose thats the secret of JORN is essentially a development island unto itself. No one really has a comparible network, as few countries suffer a simular problem as Australia. Under optimal conditions it clearly is extremely useful. Of course which conditions it really suffers would be essentially unknown to everyone who the network is designed to detect, hence you could never rely on it not working.

Certainly it was never designed to operate alone. But combined with US and Japanese sensor networks, it becomes an extremely useful tool.
StingrayOZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 16th, 2007   #19
Aussie Digger
Guest
No Avatar
Posts: n/a
Threads:
Well despite all the nonsense from APA and the wider media about it's capability, RAAF meanwhile continues to improve it's capability as outlined here:

Smart bombs on trial


The acquisition of advanced smart ordnance for Australia’s Hornets took a significant step forward with a further series of successful trials of the Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) system.

Phase one of the operational test and evaluation (OT&E) of the system was conducted at the Delamere Range Facility from April 23 to May 4 using three variants of JDAM: the GBU-31 2000lb JDAM, GBU-32 1000lb JDAM and GBU-38 500lb JDAM, as well as the Mk 83 1000lb General Purpose Low Drag bomb.

The Tactical Fighter System Program Office (TFSPO) coordinated the trial on behalf of the Advanced Aircraft Bomb Project Office (Project Air 5409), while 77SQN Hornets flew the trial missions.

Project Air 5409 Integration team leader FLTLT Simon Chan from TFSPO said the trials were conducted as the first low rate of effort operational test of the JDAM weapon system.

“This trial was the first of two JDAM OT&E programs,” FLTLT Chan said. “The purpose of the program was to test the current procedures and systems for the build-up, loading, mission planning and employment of JDAM off the F/A-18.”

Nine JDAM of all variants and seven Mk 83 low drag bombs were employed during the trials. The target for the firings was the high explosive impact area at Delamere. Four discrete targets were nominated and plotted to provide GPS target coordinates for the JDAM.

The trials followed on from the successful Developmental Test and Evaluation (DT&E) trials, which were conducted at Woomera in August last year.

“The DT&E ensured that JDAM could be safely carried and employed from the F/A-18 and validated the flight carriage and employment parameters for JDAM,” FLTLT Chan said.

“These recent OT&E trials were designed to test both the aircrew and ground crew procedures in the preparation of and loading to the F/A-18 of JDAM (ground crew) and the mission planning and actual employment of JDAM off the F/A-18 (aircrew).

“From this testing, the suitability of the procedures and systems used by the operational squadrons is evaluated and [the testing] ensures that procedures and systems being introduced with JDAM are suitable for use by the Hornet squadrons when JDAM becomes an authorised weapon in the ADF inventory.”

“It was a very successful exercise.Events such as these OT&E trials are pivotal in delivering effective capability to the ADF,” he said.

A second series of trials is planned for July-August, again using Delamere and 77SQN.

After which, FLTLT Chan says, Defence is well on track to achieve initial operational capability of the system in January next year.

and here:

77SQN fires into history


A world-first was accomplished by the Air Force after the first ‘in-service’ firings of ASRAAM cued by a Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) took place.

The milestone was achieved by 77SQN in February and was the culmination of a massive team effort that began with the inception of Project Air 5400 (ASRAAM) and HUG Phase 2.2 (JHMCS), which gives the Air Force a proven high off-boresight air-to-air capability.

The JHMCS enables the F/A-18 to cue missiles at high off-boresight angles and the ASRAAM gives them the ability to use that cueing in close-in combat. The JHMCS/ASRAAM combination greatly increases the effectiveness and the lethalness of the F/A-18 in the visual combat arena.

CDRACG AIRCDRE Geoff Brown acknowledged the significance of the event.

“It’s an impressive development for the Air Force, and adds a considerable capability to our Hornet aircraft,” he said.

“A lot of effort has been put into making this capability a reality and I pass on my congratulations to all those involved. It’s a tremendous reflection of all the hard work.”

The ASRAAM shots were representative ‘in-service’ firings that were prepared by the squadron’s armament section and flown by 77SQN pilots.

One of the pilots, FLGOFF Beau Pitcher, said the experience was “fantastic”.

“It was great to be given the opportunity to fire a live ASRAAM against a manoeuvring target in a realistic fighting profile. The JHMCS/ASRAAM combination is an impressive capability to have,” he said.

The ASRAAMs were fired using combat-representative profiles at Kalkara drones from the Navy’s Target Unit at Jervis Bay in NSW.

Project Air 5400 procured the ASRAAM, with the missile being released for service in 2004.

The missile manufacturer, MBDA, in conjunction with the Commonwealth, has set-up a deep maintenance and software development facility at Edinburgh in South Australia to allow continued improvements to be made to missile software.

These successful firings were a result of the effective partnership that has evolved between the RAAF, DMO, MBDA and DSTO.
  Reply With Quote
Old July 16th, 2007   #20
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 126
Threads:
Hi AD. Also of interest as mentioned elsewhere, RAAF will be currently the only user of JDAM-ER. Which is the wing kit tested with the weapon a long long time ago in early JDAM history but never funded for field use in the U.S. A very nice extra stand-off option for the RAAF frag planners to use when needed.
ELP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 16th, 2007   #21
Grumpy Old Man
General
gf0012-aust's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 14,479
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ELP View Post
Hi AD. Also of interest as mentioned elsewhere, RAAF will be currently the only user of JDAM-ER. Which is the wing kit tested with the weapon a long long time ago in early JDAM history but never funded for field use in the U.S. A very nice extra stand-off option for the RAAF frag planners to use when needed.
I'm wondering whether it will be a stop gap. the Kerkanya is back under development again, and they were trialling the long range wing kit.

considering that kerkanya was the original vehicle of concept for JDAM, then there is some irony in restarting a 20 year old weapons project.

I was under the impression that JDAM had been trialled with the long range kerkanya wings.
________________
A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

"Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity"
http://au.linkedin.com/pub/gary-fairlie/1/28a/2a2
http://cofda.wordpress.com/
gf0012-aust is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2007   #22
Defense Professional / Analyst
Lieutenant
Magoo's Avatar
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 557
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by ELP View Post
Hi AD. Also of interest as mentioned elsewhere, RAAF will be currently the only user of JDAM-ER. Which is the wing kit tested with the weapon a long long time ago in early JDAM history but never funded for field use in the U.S. A very nice extra stand-off option for the RAAF frag planners to use when needed.
Just to clarify this, JDAM-ER is a privately funded development by Boeing's Hawker de Havilland, and is not part of any current RAAF requirement.

The ADF teamed up with HdH last year to provide one of ARDU's Hornets to conduct test drops of JDAM-ER At Woomera, but there has been no active movement on bringing this capability into RAAF service since.

That said, there is considerable interest in the capability with the ADF, so future funding a requirements are not out of the question.

Cheers

Magoo
________________
Lead, follow, or get out of the way!
Magoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 17th, 2007   #23
Defense Enthusiast
Corporal
No Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 126
Threads:
Thanks for the clarification Magoo.
ELP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2007   #24
Defense Enthusiast
Sergeant
No Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 212
Threads:
P8a

Just got this from Nelsons site looks like the MMA is the only realistic alternative out there for Australia. What do you think will The RAAF purchase a mots version or will it be modified for Australian use.




FIRST PASS APPROVAL FOR ORION REPLACEMENT



I am pleased to announce that the Government has given first pass approval for AIR 7000 Phase 2 – a $4 billion project for Defence to acquire a manned Maritime Patrol and Response Aircraft (MPRA).



The manned MPRA, in conjunction with the Multi-mission Unmanned Aerial System being acquired by Defence under AIR 7000 Phase 1, will replace the capability currently provided by the AP-3C Orion.



The AP-3C Orion is planned to be retired in 2018 after over 30 years of service.



First pass approval has been granted to allow Defence to commence formal negotiations with the United States Navy (USN) to participate in the cooperative development of the P‑8A Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA).



Following an exhaustive examination of available options, the USN chose the Boeing Company to develop the P‑8A MMA based on its 737 commercial aircraft. The P‑8A MMA offers a modern, highly reliable commercially-proven airframe with the latest maritime surveillance and attack capabilities.



The P-8A will be equipped with modern Anti-Submarine Warfare, Anti-Surface Warfare and Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance sensors that have evolved from proven systems. The P‑8A will be capable of broad-area, maritime, littoral and limited overland operations.



Through its participation in the proposed cooperative development of the MMA, Defence will assist in providing opportunities for Australian industry as well as gain an ability to positively influence development of the MMA Program.





For a free subscription to Defence Direct, the Minister for Defence's monthly e-newsletter, please follow this link:

http://www.minister.defence.gov.au/d...subscribe.html

Mod edit: Moved from RAN discussion thread, MPA operated by RAAF
-Preceptor

Last edited by Preceptor; July 20th, 2007 at 10:40 AM. Reason: Moved to appropriate category & thread
knightrider4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 20th, 2007   #25
Super Moderator
General
swerve's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Reading, Berkshire
Posts: 5,472
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by knightrider4 View Post
Just got this from Nelsons site looks like the MMA is the only realistic alternative out there for Australia. ...
Not the only option, but probably the one with least risk, since the USN virtually guarantees development will be fully funded & it'll be built. Alternative tactical systems are available (e.g. the EADS FITS system), but they'd either have to be fitted into a less capable airframe, or Australia would have to take a punt on the A320 MPA, which so far nobody else has ordered. Unfortunately, the Japanese are unlikely to agree to export the P-X, which otherwise looks like a good option.

Mod edit: Moved from RAN discussion thread, MPA operated by RAAF
-Preceptor

Last edited by Preceptor; July 20th, 2007 at 10:41 AM. Reason: Moved to appropriate category & thread
swerve is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 21st, 2007   #26
Ship Watcher
Brigadier General
Tasman's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 1,940
Threads:
AIR 7000 Statement by Brendan Nelson

Whilst First Pass Approval does not guarantee final selection of the P-8A by the RAAF the fact that the minister has not mentioned updating the AP-3Cs (beyond what is already planned) in his statement and has moved to enter a co-operative effort with the USN in the development of the P-8A MMA certainly demonstrates how the RAAF and Defence are thinking in relation to Phase 2 of AIR 7000.

To me the steps announced by the minister are a logical approach for Australia to take.

Cheers
________________
Learn from the past. Prepare for the future
Tasman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2007   #27
The Wanderer
Major
robsta83's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Norway
Posts: 907
Threads:
Expeditionary Wings

Reading a recent DID article Canada's Air Expeditionary Wing and the success in which the USAF has operated them is their any plans or already operating practises in which RAAF operate in the same way is it necessary or are current deployment guidelines working well.
________________
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
robsta83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2007   #28
The Wanderer
Major
robsta83's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Norway
Posts: 907
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tasman View Post
Whilst First Pass Approval does not guarantee final selection of the P-8A by the RAAF the fact that the minister has not mentioned updating the AP-3Cs (beyond what is already planned) in his statement and has moved to enter a co-operative effort with the USN in the development of the P-8A MMA certainly demonstrates how the RAAF and Defence are thinking in relation to Phase 2 of AIR 7000.

To me the steps announced by the minister are a logical approach for Australia to take.

Cheers
Any very early speculation on numbers available?
Purely from my opinion would be 12 MMA with 6-8 Global Hawk or similar.
________________
Si Vis Pacem, Para Bellum
robsta83 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2007   #29
Ship Watcher
Brigadier General
Tasman's Avatar
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Posts: 1,940
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by robsta83 View Post
Any very early speculation on numbers available?
Purely from my opinion would be 12 MMA with 6-8 Global Hawk or similar.
The budget would allow a larger purchase. AGRA gave some figures on another forum that suggest a one for one replacement of the AP-3C is possible with the $A4bn mentioned by the Defence Minister, if costs for the RAAF are the same as for the USN. As Australia would be a development partner I see no reason why this should not be so. Therefore I think that a buy of approx 18 P-8A MMA plus 6-8 Global Hawk or similar is a possibility.

If AGRA is lurking he may be able to clarify this.

Cheers
________________
Learn from the past. Prepare for the future
Tasman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 22nd, 2007   #30
Defense Professional / Analyst
Master Sergeant
AGRA's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 338
Threads:
Lurking sounds so ominous...

The U.S. Navy awarded the Boeing-led industry team a USD 3.89 billion contract on May 14, 2004 to build the Multi-mission Maritime Aircraft (MMA). The total program acquisition value is estimated at about USD 20 billion for 108 aircraft.

As a partner Australia would expect to pay an equal slice of total program acquisition cost for the number of units, including the 20% extra for development on top of unit procurement costs. This would equate with current AUD-USD exchange rates to 18.8 P-8As. This includes all costs, except through life support that is already budgeted for in operating the Orions. Workforce costs will be the same, P-8As will burn more fuel but maintenance costs will be much lower thanks to using commercial 737 maintenance. This would mean however that the BAMS UAV operating costs would have to be supplemented. Though operating costs for 6-8 BAMS UAVs is going to be much, much lower than 18 AP-3C/P-8As.
AGRA is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:24 AM.