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

[John Newman]

In regards to P8 once the options expire and if the Government wanted to order more do we still need approval from US congress under FMS and notification

I believe the answer is no, it’s not an FMS procurement.

The Government/RAAF has a ‘Cooperative Program’ with the USN, we have been putting money into P-8A development, other nations are FMS customers, we aren’t.

It works similar to our Partner Nation status on the F-35 program, we are not an FMS customer for the F-35.

Have a read of the Ministers press release:

Two more P-8A Poseidon aircraft boosts maritime patrol capability | Department of Defence Ministers

Air Force’s maritime patrol capability will be boosted with Australia set to acquire two more P-8A Poseidon surveillance and response aircraft, bringing the total fleet size to 14.

www.minister.defence.gov.au

Cheers,

 

[John Newman]

Yes and even I believe even if they deal with Boeing direct. However I think that's really moot because Boeing apparently has called last orders. It would be nice if my own govt ordered another 1, even 2, but dreams are free until the taxman finds a way of taxing them.

You Kiwis just need to put your hands into you pockets, find the wallet buried under your hankie and dust off those decades of dust and cobwebs! Both you lot and the Poms too!!

 

[Redlands18]

You Kiwis just need to put your hands into you pockets, find the wallet buried under your hankie and dust off those decades of dust and cobwebs! Both you lot and the Poms too!!

I think a few of our Canuck members would throw Canada in as well.

 

[John Newman]

I think a few of our Canuck members would throw Canada in as well.

Yes.... Our Canuck cousins, what can you say?

Sadly I think our Canuck cousin politicians have all got together (both the Left and Right) and have agreed on one course of action when it comes to defence and defence procurement, and that is:

“Let’s all make a decision NOT to make a decision”.

It’s the only logical reason that I can think of!!

Cheers,

 

[ngatimozart]

You Kiwis just need to put your hands into you pockets, find the wallet buried under your hankie and dust off those decades of dust and cobwebs! Both you lot and the Poms too!!

Cobber, some of us would if we were in the position to do so. If I was, the first thing I'd do is confine all of Treasury to Tasmania Waiouru with no communications capabilities. All of our pollies I'd banish to Sydney the Auckland Islands.

 

[John Fedup]

Yes.... Our Canuck cousins, what can you say?

Sadly I think our Canuck cousin politicians have all got together (both the Left and Right) and have agreed on one course of action when it comes to defence and defence procurement, and that is:

“Let’s all make a decision NOT to make a decision”.

It’s the only logical reason that I can think of!!

Cheers,

Yes, that is pretty much what our pollies do, about the only issue they can agree on wrt defence, do nothing. This would be impossible but our apathetic electorate makes it possible. Unfortunately the poor response to COVID and the resulting financial mismanagement will very likely see defence suffer even more as a consequence.

 

[Takao]

Yes, that is pretty much what our pollies do, about the only issue they can agree on wrt defence, do nothing. This would be impossible but our apathetic electorate makes it possible. Unfortunately the poor response to COVID and the resulting financial mismanagement will very likely see defence suffer even more as a consequence.

I spent most of this year working with Canadian's. Really good bunch of people - but three things struck me.

1. Their (including PPCLI elements) amazement at the quality of battlefield kit I carried. Specifically the helmet, body armour + storage gear and rifle + sight. When I explained that this was the tier two stuff - the bare minimum that poges got you should have seen their faces fall.

2. The lack of care at what was happening beyond their borders. Little understanding of Russia, almost nothing about China. Obviously more as the ranks went higher - but the look of bewilderment when I mentioned that we didn't carry personal mobiles on us because of espionage and that there was an increasing threat from China was concerning. One of their O6s mentioned that as far as Canada is concerned, especially the RCN, the Pacific doesn't exist. That was, concerning from my POV.

3. The bitterness and infighting between them. Unfailingly they were polite, respectful and correct to the other nations. But internally? I've only seen such toxicity once or twice. And this wasn't hidden - the other nations were aware of it and we just rolled it into our planning. But it included bitter fights and undermining between subordinates and superiors, support and action, and services.

I'm really sorry to say, but (3) plus (2) gives me no faith in the Canadian military as an ally - which knowing their individual and our combined history is a damn shame. I was proud to have in some small way continued the PPCLI + ADF operational relationship.... Furthermore, their flat out general ignorance of China was even more concerning. While I understand the ETO has been the Canadian focus since 1939, they make up 20% of FVEY. I would have expected their MAJ and above to be reasonably aware, if not fluent.

I did come up with an idea to get a MMM (for the Canadian side) and a CSC (for me). The RCAF doesn't have attack helicopters. The Canadian Government loves second hand kit. Australia is disposing of Tiger. It already is bilingual..... this is win's all round!

Edit: To bring it back on topic - it took me 4 - 6 weeks to realise the three thick lines were LTCOL, not WGCDR and the corresponding equation for FLTLT, SQNLDR and GPCAPT. Made for much entertainment seeing the Canadian's talking to RAF and RAAF personnel.

"Yes Colonel, can do"
""

 

[John Newman]

I did come up with an idea to get a MMM (for the Canadian side) and a CSC (for me). The RCAF doesn't have attack helicopters. The Canadian Government loves second hand kit. Australia is disposing of Tiger. It already is bilingual..... this is win's all round!

The term ‘Attack’ or Tiger ‘Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter’ might be a tad too aggressive and a bit too war like for the Canadian Government.

I have a solution...

Paint them yellow and red, strap a couple of stretchers either side (just like M*A*S*H) and say that ARH stands for Ambulance Rescue Helicopter, the new breed of super fast SAR helicopter!

Problem solved!

Cheers,

 

[John Fedup]

@John Newman, wrt infighting, sort of how the country is run so finding the same BS within the CAF is not a surprise. Just look at interprovincial relations, hard to believe they are in the same country. As for your ARH plan, try it, it is probably the only way the RCAF would ever acquire them.

 

[ADMk2]

@John Newman, wrt infighting, sort of how the country is run so finding the same BS within the CAF is not a surprise. Just look at interprovincial relations, hard to believe they are in the same country. As for your ARH plan, try it, it is probably the only way the RCAF would ever acquire them.

OMG, please don’t mention giving Tiger’s to an Air Force again...

 

[John Fedup]

OMG, please don’t mention giving Tiger’s to an Air Force again...

The RCAF is in charge of military aviation assets in Canada. They also fly CG aviation assets as well.

 

[pkcasimir]

Yes and even I believe even if they deal with Boeing direct. However I think that's really moot because Boeing apparently has called last orders. It would be nice if my own govt ordered another 1, even 2, but dreams are free until the taxman finds a way of taxing them.

Boeing has made no "last call" for production of P-8s. It has enough orders to keep the line open through 2025 and would certainly keep it open after that year if it received more orders.

 

[Todjaeger]

Boeing has made no "last call" for production of P-8s. It has enough orders to keep the line open through 2025 and would certainly keep it open after that year if it received more orders.

Part of the calculation on when a line will close has to do with long-lead items. Boeing might have sufficient orders currently booked to run through until 2025, but there are likely some subsystems and/or components which will be out of production by the time Boeing starts working on the last of the current orders, unless new examples are ordered between now and when the subcomponent production ends. Based off what I recall happening with other pieces of complex kit, the final examples of long-lead items are likely to start production ~2022 absent new/additional orders. In the lead up to that point, Boeing would likely put out some feelers as well as notices advising that the order book will be closing soon.

 

[John Newman]

Part of the calculation on when a line will close has to do with long-lead items. Boeing might have sufficient orders currently booked to run through until 2025, but there are likely some subsystems and/or components which will be out of production by the time Boeing starts working on the last of the current orders, unless new examples are ordered between now and when the subcomponent production ends. Based off what I recall happening with other pieces of complex kit, the final examples of long-lead items are likely to start production ~2022 absent new/additional orders. In the lead up to that point, Boeing would likely put out some feelers as well as notices advising that the order book will be closing soon.

I agree.

Whilst a production line might deliver the final product on X date, the production of sub assemblies and components can end production on -1X date or -2X date, and the manufacturer will notify customers and suppliers earlier to allow an orderly shutdown of the production line.

From what I remember, that is exactly what happened with C-17A production.

And talking of the C-17A, I wouldn’t be surprised if history repeats itself with P-8A production.

Separate to international customers, if I remember correctly, USAF production was to end at 180 aircraft, this was increased to 190, then 205, and eventually 222.

Why? Political interference, it’s not unusual for US politicians to push for an increase in production to maintain that production for political reasons (keep the voters in your electorate employed), just have a look at continued Super Hornet production as an example.

So back to Poseidon, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least in the coming years that we will probably see additional aircraft added to the USN buy, 10 here, 10 there, before we hear ‘last call’.

Anyone whose been involved in auctions, especially real estate auctions, will have heard ‘last call’ called numerous times before the hammer fall.

Cheers,

 

[pkcasimir]

I agree.

Whilst a production line might deliver the final product on X date, the production of sub assemblies and components can end production on -1X date or -2X date, and the manufacturer will notify customers and suppliers earlier to allow an orderly shutdown of the production line.

From what I remember, that is exactly what happened with C-17A production.

And talking of the C-17A, I wouldn’t be surprised if history repeats itself with P-8A production.

Separate to international customers, if I remember correctly, USAF production was to end at 180 aircraft, this was increased to 190, then 205, and eventually 222.

Why? Political interference, it’s not unusual for US politicians to push for an increase in production to maintain that production for political reasons (keep the voters in your electorate employed), just have a look at continued Super Hornet production as an example.

So back to Poseidon, it wouldn’t surprise me in the least in the coming years that we will probably see additional aircraft added to the USN buy, 10 here, 10 there, before we hear ‘last call’.

Anyone whose been involved in auctions, especially real estate auctions, will have heard ‘last call’ called numerous times before the hammer fall.

Cheers,

The fact of the matter is that Boeing has not issued a last call for the P-8 and any statement that it is closing down that line is simply erroneous. You can speculate all you want, but it's speculation, not fact, not reality.

@pkcasimir

Just to reflect, yes there has been no formal call to close the line by Boeing. However, the other posters have given the context of their discussion. These are valid comments and you need to be a little polite in how you come back to people. It makes the site a better place where we don't leap to a conclusion then slap someone down.

Just a friendly suggestion.

Alexsa

 

[John Newman]

The fact of the matter is that Boeing has not issued a last call for the P-8 and any statement that it is closing down that line is simply erroneous. You can speculate all you want, but it's speculation, not fact, not reality.

Sorry? What?

Where exactly did I speculate a date or say the P-8A line was shutting down?

Where?

 

[Todjaeger]

The fact of the matter is that Boeing has not issued a last call for the P-8 and any statement that it is closing down that line is simply erroneous. You can speculate all you want, but it's speculation, not fact, not reality.

IIRC the only firm sort of date mentioned so far, is how far out the Boeing order book currently extends to. What is not really speculation is the observation that long-lead items which would be required for continued production, would be getting closer to the end of their order books ahead of the Boeing order book, because the items have long lead times. While the information on what sort of long-lead items the P-8 would contain/require, or how much lead time a part needs, is not AFAIK available in the public domain, acknowledging that any "last call" for P-8 Poseidon orders would be made ahead of shutdowns in production for long-lead items, and not the actual P-8 Poseidon line itself shutting down.

Where there has been some speculation is whether or not the US defence budget will have additional funding inserted (by Congress, possibly without a request/desire for more by the USN) to order a few extra P-8's to keep some of the lines still running. I agree that could possibly happen, OTOH due to the impact upon the US economy, Federal budget, and US deficit, there might be little appetite to add 'pork' to a defence bill, especially if there is a split in control of the House and Senate.

 

[ngatimozart]

The fact of the matter is that Boeing has not issued a last call for the P-8 and any statement that it is closing down that line is simply erroneous. You can speculate all you want, but it's speculation, not fact, not reality. The reason why I said that the last call was made, is because the RNZAF were not going to acquire them until 2025, but Boeing told them that they had to order them by mid 2019 because the long lead items haveto be ordered 2 - 3 years before the aircraft begins assembly. Now this is fact and you can claim all you want, but if you want to verify it, you can always ask the Ministry of Defence in Wellington.

 

[Rob c]

The reason why I said that the last call was made, is because the RNZAF were not going to acquire them until 2025, but Boeing told them that they had to order them by mid 2019 because the long lead items haveto be ordered 2 - 3 years before the aircraft begins assembly. Now this is fact and you can claim all you want, but if you want to verify it, you can always ask the Ministry of Defence in Wellington.

-My understanding was that the 2019 order date for the RNZAF was set due to pricing and that a delay would incur a significantly higher price for the P8's if ordered at a later date and every thing would have to be renegotiated. We also had a Defence minister at the time who wanted to get things done, very unusual in NZ politics.

 

[ngatimozart]

-My understanding was that the 2019 order date for the RNZAF was set due to pricing and that a delay would incur a significantly higher price for the P8's if ordered at a later date and every thing would have to be renegotiated. We also had a Defence minister at the time who wanted to get things done, very unusual in NZ politics.

He got the deal across the line and he was the best DEFMIN we've had for decades, but they had to rejig the DCPs, funding and everything. It cut across the Herc replacement project which was programmed to occur first. They didn't want to have to major acquisitions occurring at the same time.