ADF General discussion thread

kiwi in exile said:
probably air launched and later ship launched AGM 158C LRASM. Australia allready operates JASSM. Media are reporting 200 missiles for $800m or $990m depending on where you look.

US approves multimillion-dollar Australian LRASM acquisition request

The US Defense Security Cooperation Agency has approved the US$990 million ($1.47 billion) acquisition of the Long Range Anti-Ship Missiles for the Royal Australian Air Force.
www.defenceconnect.com.au www.defenceconnect.com.au
Click to expand...

I love the way this came as a surprise to the press, given it was obvious four months ago. Now if they had defence journalists worth the title...

oldsig.
 
Arclighy said:
A strong speech from Scott Morrison l thought. There is a lot to take in from the two documents. This point on p 36 of the 2020 Force Structure Plan caught my eye -
"Acquire a range of advanced maritime guided weapons, including
long-range anti-ship and land strike weapons, and extended range
surface-to-air missiles ...". I can only assume the Long range land strike is something like Tomahawk? But l could be wrong. That is a very big step up in capability for Navy.
Click to expand...

I think there are two fairly clear candidates for long/extended range.

For extended range surface to air missile I'd suggest that it would be SM-6:

en.wikipedia.org

RIM-174 Standard ERAM - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

It won't replace the current SM-2/ESSM combination for the Hobart and Hunter classes, but certainly can be added as an additional load out in their respective Mk41 VLS magazines.

For long range anti ship and land strike, I'd suggest that might end up being LRASM:

en.wikipedia.org

AGM-158C LRASM - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

It's already been announced that LRASM will be procured for the F/A-18F fleet, ultimately it will probably end up on the P-8A fleet, and has the potential to be carried externally on F-35A too.

LRASM has also been test launched from Mk41 VLS and has also been test launched from a box/canister launcher too, and has the potential to be sub surface launched, LRASM is also reported to be able to be used for land targets too.

Long range? LRASM and SM-6.

Cheers,
 
oldsig127 said:
Hardly a surprise, other than the paper having the gall to publish a piece by an ex politician who was given the boot for being on China's payroll.

oldsig
Click to expand...

If that former ALP Senator was in the gutter on fire I wouldn't even bother to piss on him!

And talking of the ALP, has anybody come across any comments from Albo or their current defence spokesman regarding yesterdays announcement?

I would assume that Albo will quietly go along with what has been said and announced by Morrison.
 
oldsig127 said:
Hardly a surprise, other than the paper having the gall to publish a piece by an ex politician who was given the boot for being on China's payroll.

oldsig
Click to expand...
It would appear the public were not permitted to comment on the article. Not a surprize really as I think there would have been a robust response. The paper will push its particular position and they are allowed to, however, I found the tone rude and the content sarcastic base journalism. That really does undermine their position. I do not the the opposition leader appears to support the move so hopefully there will bipartisan support
 
John Newman said:
And talking of the ALP, has anybody come across any comments from Albo or their current defence spokesman regarding yesterdays announcement?

I would assume that Albo will quietly go along with what has been said and announced by Morrison.
Click to expand...

Both Albanese and Marles (deputy, and shadow defence) were interviewed repeatedly and supported the announcement in full. The ABC interview of Marles was instructive. Despite being repeatedly led to make a criticism, Marles stuck to the bipartisan support, only saying that the opposition would work to ensure the government kept its promises.

oldsig
 
John Newman said:
I think there are two fairly clear candidates for long/extended range.

For extended range surface to air missile I'd suggest that it would be SM-6:

en.wikipedia.org

RIM-174 Standard ERAM - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

It won't replace the current SM-2/ESSM combination for the Hobart and Hunter classes, but certainly can be added as an additional load out in their respective Mk41 VLS magazines.

For long range anti ship and land strike, I'd suggest that might end up being LRASM:

en.wikipedia.org

AGM-158C LRASM - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

It's already been announced that LRASM will be procured for the F/A-18F fleet, ultimately it will probably end up on the P-8A fleet, and has the potential to be carried externally on F-35A too.

LRASM has also been test launched from Mk41 VLS and has also been test launched from a box/canister launcher too, and has the potential to be sub surface launched, LRASM is also reported to be able to be used for land targets too.

Long range? LRASM and SM-6.

Cheers,
Click to expand...

Yep fair enough call for all of that, but the NSM/JSM combination can do all that too, and the NSM can be internally carried by the F-35A, no indication and any talk of LRASM being able to be carried internally, and being that Lockheed make both you would bet they would be singing that from the rooftops if that was the case ?

Also the USN has selected the NSM to replace Harpoon, so would not think it is all set in concrete when you take into account our involvement in the JSM, just my thoughts :)

Some good options available with each with differences and pro's and con's, not a bad problem to have though :)

Cheers
 
aussienscale said:
Yep fair enough call for all of that, but the NSM/JSM combination can do all that too, and the NSM can be internally carried by the F-35A, no indication and any talk of LRASM being able to be carried internally, and being that Lockheed make both you would bet they would be singing that from the rooftops if that was the case ?

Also the USN has selected the NSM to replace Harpoon, so would not think it is all set in concrete when you take into account our involvement in the JSM, just my thoughts :)

Some good options available with each with differences and pro's and con's, not a bad problem to have though :)

Cheers
Click to expand...

Hi mate, I wasn't specifically ignoring NSM and JSM, rather more referring to long or extended range weapons.

I can see the DDGs and FFGs being armed with SM-2 and ESSM as their standard fit, and I would imagine that for that long/extended range you would add SM-6 to the mix.

I agree that NSM is a good upgrade from Harpoon, but it would appear that the range is still well short of LRASM, and if I'm correct JSM is still short on range compared to LRASM.

Yes JSM has an advantage of being carried internally on the F-35A (and externally too) for stealth purposes, but equally with an external LRASM under the wing it allows for a heavier hitting weapon, and because of that extra range it probably means that being detected is less of an issue.

In the past Harpoon was the one size fits all across the ADF, but moving forward I can well imagine that there may be more than one type in the mix, horses for courses so to speak!

Cheers,
 
LRASM is also able to be fired from Super hornets, F-35, P-8's (integration has started), and ships. So for a country like Australia a common missile across all platforms with the most modern features its ideal. US has already approved sale of up to 200 missiles to Australia, in February, so this is no surprise. Haven't heard much about a sub launched variant in quite a while, last I heard they were making something for the Virginia payload system, so may not be able to go through the tubes.

SM-6 is also likely. Its a very capable missile, capable of engaging air and surface threats at extreme ranges and extreme speeds (~mach 3.5). Although its warhead is on the lighter side for anti-surface work (being about half the NSM warhead), its a secondary feature of the missile.

I still think NSM/JSM is still a possible buy. Box launcher, internal on F-35, sub launching. NSM/JSM and LRASM are in pretty different weight classes. Warhead on NSM/JSM is ~120kg, LRASM is 450kg. Total weight is less than half a LRASM. Also as a coastal battery.
 
John Newman said:
Hi mate, I wasn't specifically ignoring NSM and JSM, rather more referring to long or extended range weapons.

I can see the DDGs and FFGs being armed with SM-2 and ESSM as their standard fit, and I would imagine that for that long/extended range you would add SM-6 to the mix.

I agree that NSM is a good upgrade from Harpoon, but it would appear that the range is still well short of LRASM, and if I'm correct JSM is still short on range compared to LRASM.

Yes JSM has an advantage of being carried internally on the F-35A (and externally too) for stealth purposes, but equally with an external LRASM under the wing it allows for a heavier hitting weapon, and because of that extra range it probably means that being detected is less of an issue.

In the past Harpoon was the one size fits all across the ADF, but moving forward I can well imagine that there may be more than one type in the mix, horses for courses so to speak!

Cheers,
Click to expand...
For sure mate, yep agree that the one size fits all approach is well in the past, range and that bigger warhead is a hard one to look past for sure but still think the requirement will still be there for internal carry, does not mean it may or may not be JSM or a modified version of the LRASM, or the LRASM may fit for internal carry and we just don't know yet, in the public domain at least anyway :)

I also like the possibility/potential of the NSM/JSM in future conjunciton with NASAMS 2, a lot of the same equipment, components and systems used by Kongsberg for their NSM CDS system.

www.kongsberg.com

NSM™ CDS – Integrated Air and Missile Defence

The NSM™ CDS is a high performance ground based Coastal Defence System. It has unique features with a net centric architecture that enables multiple simuntaneous engagements and over the horizon (OTH) targeting.
www.kongsberg.com www.kongsberg.com


Cheers
 
The LRASM has a 1,000 lb (454 kg) warhead compared to the NSM / JSM 276 lb (125 kg) warhead. So there's a huge difference in the warhead size, meaning that you are able to use the LRASM on targets that the NSM / JSM may have trouble knocking out.
 
StingrayOZ said:
SM-6 is also likely. Its a very capable missile, capable of engaging air and surface threats at extreme ranges and extreme speeds (~mach 3.5). Although its warhead is on the lighter side for anti-surface work (being about half the NSM warhead), its a secondary feature of the missile.
Click to expand...
I suspect it depends what version you are talking about. There has been some suggestion that SM6 Blk IB, leveraging SM3 tech developments, will be a hypersonic weapon in its own right. Even if it "only" hits the target at the low end of the hypersonic regime, it ought to pack one hell of a punch. The baseline (~M3.5) SM6 was apparently sufficient to sink the former USS Reuben James (OHP class Frigate).
 
Last edited:
ngatimozart said:
The LRASM has a 1,000 lb (454 kg) warhead compared to the NSM / JSM 276 lb (125 kg) warhead. So there's a huge difference in the warhead size, meaning that you are able to use the LRASM on targets that the NSM / JSM may have trouble knocking out.
Click to expand...
Yep for sure, different class for different purposes, on the harder targets the LRASM will have more cut through, at a minimum NSM/JSM might hit hard enough for a mission kill.

Time will tell :) would love to see the requirements !!

Cheers
 
I'm interested as to how the Defence Strategic update will be received in the neighbourhood.

Australia has very much signalled out its intent to challenge and call out the PRC.
Bold language backed up with defence dollars sends a message that would of not have being envisaged a year ago.
Has diplomacy and tact gone out the door?
Well maybe sometimes not a bad thing. At the end of the day we have drawn a line in the sand and have cast a path.
That line is at the extended perimeter facilitated by the purchase of long range deterrence. mainly in the form of Long range missiles deploy by our various ADF assets.

So

How will China react and how will others respond.

In particular.

New Zealand, New Guinea, Indonesia, Singapore and India.
Also and just as important, our many pacific island Neighbours.

it appears may nations maybe forced to take a side.

Either your with China or against it.

Not a comfortable position for any nation.

Challenging times for all.


Regards S
 
oldsig127 said:
Both Albanese and Marles (deputy, and shadow defence) were interviewed repeatedly and supported the announcement in full. The ABC interview of Marles was instructive. Despite being repeatedly led to make a criticism, Marles stuck to the bipartisan support, only saying that the opposition would work to ensure the government kept its promises.

oldsig
Click to expand...
I half suspect they were cursing in private as I believe increased local defence manufacturing was one of their big policy plans before the next election. Local defence work equals lots of apprenticeships, traineeships and cadetships, of the sort of scale not seen since privatization of Government defence industries began in earnest in the 80s (under Labor ironically). Quite a few older blokes I work with had their way paid through their trade Diploma or Degree by the tax payer while working for various government owned enterprises of even WRE/DSTO, everyone since has had to sell a kidney to get to same quals.

Overall this is good news, but I noticed no one has mentioned the bleeding obvious, an Aluminum trimaran JSS to replace Choules and keep Austal running.
 
StingrayOZ said:
LRASM is also able to be fired from Super hornets, F-35, P-8's (integration has started), and ships. So for a country like Australia a common missile across all platforms with the most modern features its ideal. US has already approved sale of up to 200 missiles to Australia, in February, so this is no surprise. Haven't heard much about a sub launched variant in quite a while, last I heard they were making something for the Virginia payload system, so may not be able to go through the tubes.

SM-6 is also likely. Its a very capable missile, capable of engaging air and surface threats at extreme ranges and extreme speeds (~mach 3.5). Although its warhead is on the lighter side for anti-surface work (being about half the NSM warhead), its a secondary feature of the missile.

I still think NSM/JSM is still a possible buy. Box launcher, internal on F-35, sub launching. NSM/JSM and LRASM are in pretty different weight classes. Warhead on NSM/JSM is ~120kg, LRASM is 450kg. Total weight is less than half a LRASM. Also as a coastal battery.
Click to expand...
Anything hit by a mach 2 plus missile is not going to be in very good shape afterwards, SM-6 will doo plenty of damage. Sea Sparrow is capable of killing (mission kill at least) a reasonable sized combatant, just ask the Turks what happened to one of their FRAM destroyers when someone forgot to tell a US sailor on a carrier a missile launch was a drill and not a live fire.
 
Volkodav said:
Overall this is good news, but I noticed no one has mentioned the bleeding obvious, an Aluminum trimaran JSS to replace Choules and keep Austal running.
Click to expand...
Oh please FFS give me strength :) Please god I really hope not !! I am not a religious person but I will be praying this will never happen and go into bat for the Navantia proposal !!

Would normally sign off with a Cheers, but not sure if I will this time Volk :p
 
aussienscale said:
Oh please FFS give me strength :) Please god I really hope not !! I am not a religious person but I will be praying this will never happen and go into bat for the Navantia proposal !!

Would normally sign off with a Cheers, but not sure if I will this time Volk :p
Click to expand...
If you had a shovel you still wouldn't be able to go deep enough to find my opinion of Austal.

Not a fan of Navantia either and I will take the chance to point out that their JSS appears to have been evolved from Galicia, which is basically an Enforcer, i.e. Rotterdam, from which the Bays (Choules) were in turn evolved. Why don't we cut out the Spanish and Brits and deal direct with the Dutch on something nice shiny and new, maybe even look at a collaborative deal with Indonesia as they seem to have a very beneficial relationship with Damen.

Our norther neighbors do not seem all that happy with Chinas behavior and may feel even more threatened than we do. I suspect their may actually be some sighs of relief in SEA that Aust seem to have finally woken up to the fact that China is Chinas best friend, not ours, we are just the supermarket they have been shopping at, they don't actually like us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top