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

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Unfortunately it seems that a number of the acquisition contracts are not being pursued with haste, with there being an apparent mismatch between rhetoric about what the security situation is and likely will be vs. steps being taken to actually attempt to meet said threats.

The new and significant acquisition that I most recall is for the RGM-109E Tomahawks with some 220 to be acquired. However it now looks as though the Hobart-class DDG's might be the only launch platform in ADF service until ~2034 or later. In that regards, it leaves me with the impression that a number of the changes proposed or in the process of being implemented for Defence is more to make it look like improvements are being made, rather than actually having steps taken to improve Defence.
Many have noted that. It’s an interesting situation when one of the current ‘attacks’ on previous handling of defence was”all” announcement and no substance.

Yet we are seeing the same thing now, with things like the Tomahawk announcement which was made from memory on no less than 4 occasions and which we still won’t see for several years and even then only from a single platform… Not to mention other capabilities which were deliberately slowed, such as HIMARS and the new Blackhawks…
 

Volkodav

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
If it seems that way that might be because it is that way

One of the most substantive sore points between Mr Marles and the department has been officials persisting with funding demands for new manned platforms such as tanks, defying the recommendations of the defence strategic review, which called for a more nimble, maritime-focused army.

Defence officials, meanwhile, feel hamstrung by the need to make deep funding cuts to pay for new priorities such as AUKUS nuclear-powered submarines because the government is not increasing the Defence budget substantially until 2027.


The Government's Expenditure Review Committee, has put the squeeze on everyone and everything to get the budget in order. Which to be fair to the Government they seem on track to do
Ironically the new large and medium landing craft would provide the ADF with the ability to deploy more heavy armour than they have ever had before.

They could easily lift fully equipped armoured combat teams to completely overmatch any opfor in our region
 

OldTex

Well-Known Member
If it seems that way that might be because it is that way

One of the most substantive sore points between Mr Marles and the department has been officials persisting with funding demands for new manned platforms such as tanks, defying the recommendations of the defence strategic review, which called for a more nimble, maritime-focused army.
Despite the name "Combined Arms Combat" isn't just about things that go bang!!!! It is also about how they move, how they are supplied and supported. There has to be something behind the sharp point and that is where Combat Support (CS) and Combat Service Support (CSS) add the weight to the sharp point Arms Corps (AC).
Having a nimble maritime focused army sounds like the 'emperor's new clothes'. It is the latest fad or trend. If the way of achieving that fad is by going lightweight then there are two consequences. The first is that situations for the use of the maritime focused army are reduced. The second is that experienced valuable soldiers are needlessly wasted. When you need a 14 pound sledgehammer a 1 pound hammer just doesn't cut it.
 

Maranoa

Active Member
...Having a nimble maritime focused army sounds like the 'emperor's new clothes'. It is the latest fad or trend. If the way of achieving that fad is by going lightweight then there are two consequences. The first is that situations for the use of the maritime focused army are reduced. The second is that experienced valuable soldiers are needlessly wasted. When you need a 14 pound sledgehammer a 1 pound hammer just doesn't cut it.
Not to mention the reality that maritime based movements are particularly vulnerable in these day's of unblinking space based weather independent sensors. That combination, even when simply leveraging commercial satellite imagery like in Ukraine already has resulted in catastrophic losses for Russian surface combatants and amphibious hulls.
 

MickB

Well-Known Member
Ironically the new large and medium landing craft would provide the ADF with the ability to deploy more heavy armour than they have ever had before.

They could easily lift fully equipped armoured combat teams to completely overmatch any opfor in our region
The deterrent value of such overmatch should not be underestimated.

But if hostilitees do break out such an overmatch will allow for a quick decisive victory and result in reduced casualties on both sides.
 

hauritz

Well-Known Member

A new 9000 square-metre facility is being built to manufacture the MQ-28 Ghost Bat. Production is expected to commence in 3 years.

The ability to locally produce these aircraft is probably just as important as the aircraft itself. I believe 75% of the components will be locally sourced. The program seems to be progressing smoothly enough although we are yet to see details as to how many will be acquired and exactly what capabilities they will possess.

The speed at which this aircraft has moved from concept, development and now on the verge of production makes me wonder what is wrong with our ship building industry.
 

AndyinOz

Member
Flight testing apparently of one of the acquired BBJ 737-8 (BBJ MAX 8) a rejected takeoff, then a successful takeoff in the first half of the video. I am not adverse to the slightly different paint job. :)
 

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro

A new 9000 square-metre facility is being built to manufacture the MQ-28 Ghost Bat. Production is expected to commence in 3 years.

The ability to locally produce these aircraft is probably just as important as the aircraft itself. I believe 75% of the components will be locally sourced. The program seems to be progressing smoothly enough although we are yet to see details as to how many will be acquired and exactly what capabilities they will possess.

The speed at which this aircraft has moved from concept, development and now on the verge of production makes me wonder what is wrong with our ship building industry.
“We” didn’t build the MQ-28A. Boeing did...

If we employed the same methodology and contracted say, Bath Iron Works to build our ships for us, I wonder if our shipbuilding would be as ‘bad’?
 
Top