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

Boagrius

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
ADMk2 said:
The latest variant of Patriot has a brand spanking new 360 degree radar, so there isn’t much benefit there.

SAMP-T seems to be a lower level AD designed system from all I have read. I’d be concerned if the mission it was chosen for, included Ballistic Missile Defence...

Personally I am encouraged by the integration of PAC-3 MSE missiles into the THAAD system…

www.defensenews.com

Missile Defense Agency fires Patriot missile from THAAD system

MDA has hit a milestone for integrating the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system with the Patriot air and missile defense system, firing an advanced Patriot missile from THAAD.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

The $25B funding bracket and aspirational BMD / anti-hypersonic missile capability seems more within it’s purview to be honest. With the ability to fire PAC-3 MSE from the same launch system, it seems we’d gain an overlapping AD / BMD capability from the one system…
Click to expand...
Agree - the Patriot/THAAD combo is shaping up to be a very worthy contender for our IAMD needs. The US seems to be integrating the two systems very rigorously, to the point that I am a little surprised the US hasn't expressed an intent to procure more THAAD batteries.

The possible x-factor (to my mind) is that future HGVs (mated to a DF-26, for example) may be difficult to stop for the current pair of effectors. On publically available info, such a weapon would fly too low for THAAD and (possibly) too fast for PAC3-MSE. The obvious MOTS solution here is the SM-6, but it's not clear that the US Army intends to use that missile as anything more than an ASM. Patriot/THAAD units would probably need a new TEL to fire it anyway... tricky.

The other challenge is that PAC3-MSE seems like a rather uneconomical missile to shoot at conventional LACMs, but you get what you pay for I suppose. The Patriot-compatible Stunner/PAAC-4 might mitigate this problem to some extent. Definitely following this space with interest whatever the case.
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Boagrius said:
Agree - the Patriot/THAAD combo is shaping up to be a very worthy contender for our IAMD needs. The US seems to be integrating the two systems very rigorously, to the point that I am a little surprised the US hasn't expressed an intent to procure more THAAD batteries.

The possible x-factor (to my mind) is that future HGVs (mated to a DF-26, for example) may be difficult to stop for the current pair of effectors. On publically available info, such a weapon would fly too low for THAAD and (possibly) too fast for PAC3-MSE. The obvious MOTS solution here is the SM-6, but it's not clear that the US Army intends to use that missile as anything more than an ASM. Patriot/THAAD units would probably need a new TEL to fire it anyway... tricky.

The other challenge is that PAC3-MSE seems like a rather uneconomical missile to shoot at conventional LACMs, but you get what you pay for I suppose. The Patriot-compatible Stunner/PAAC-4 might mitigate this problem to some extent. Definitely following this space with interest whatever the case.
Click to expand...
There is a latent THAAD-ER program that L-M has developed privately too which may change to equation some, if the USG pick it up…
 
Boagrius

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
ADMk2 said:
There is a latent THAAD-ER program that L-M has developed privately too which may change to equation some, if the USG pick it up…
Click to expand...
Yep, I spotted that one (looks like it's going into testing next year). I'm interested to see if they can get it to function low enough to catch an HGV, or if it will remain strictly targeted at ballistic missiles. Arguably not a show stopper if it does, since there is no shortage of those in our threat environment...
 
Last edited:
M

Mikeymike

Active Member
Finland has down selected two Israeli systems for their Air Defence program. The two down selected ones are BARAK - MX and David's Sling.

This is for a higher altitude than their NASAMs systems and interestingly they eliminated Patriot from the program quite early and NASAMs extended range version was also not selected as discussed here.

Their requirements sound similar as to what Australia is after in the AIR6502 Phase 1 Medium range GBAD system and be interesting if what they end up going for would suit Australia. Seems there might be more competitors in this area than I initially thought.

I'm personally not a fan of the American solutions like Patriot.
 
Boagrius

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
Yes I imagine the Israeli systems (also including Arrow) could make a good competitor to the Patriot/THAAD combo. Bear in mind, though, that the Patriot we would likely be looking at is a fundamentally different beast to the one popularised in the 90's. Different sensor(s) (LTAMDS GaN AESA coupled with AN/TPY-2), effectors (PAC-3MSE, Skyceptor from David's Sling, possibly even SM-6, LTFI down the track) and data sharing (IFCN).
 
M

Mikeymike

Active Member
Wouldn't Australia be looking to integrate CEA radars into the Medium range system similiar to how they are for the Army NASAMs?

If so, would it make sense to use similiar layouts and FDCs as the NASAMs setup? But then you end up with essentially NASAMs but with different Effectors.
 
Boagrius

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
Possibly. AFAIK, LTAMDS and AN/TPY-2 are larger, more powerful systems than CEA-TAC and CEA-OPS. They've also undergone a lot of work to make them talk to each other and the various new effectors, so it would be odd (and possibly wasteful) for us to reinvent the wheel there.

The other possible advantage of the American solutions going forward is that they will almost certainly be developing against the very same pacing threat systems we face.
 
cdxbow

cdxbow

Well-Known Member
Redlands18 said:
adbr.com.au

Loyal Wingman given MQ-28A Ghost Bat designation | ADBR

The Boeing Airpower Teaming System (ATS) uncrewed combat aircraft being developed for the Royal Australian Air Force’s Project DEF 6114 Loyal Wingman program has officially been given the designation and…
adbr.com.au adbr.com.au
Loyal Wingman no more, from here on to be known as the MQ-28A Ghost Bat.
Click to expand...
Australia's only carnivorous bat, it's a good name. Ghost Bat - The Australian Museum
Will the development program keep the Loyal Wingman moniker?
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Mikeymike said:
Finland has down selected two Israeli systems for their Air Defence program. The two down selected ones are BARAK - MX and David's Sling.

This is for a higher altitude than their NASAMs systems and interestingly they eliminated Patriot from the program quite early and NASAMs extended range version was also not selected as discussed here.

Their requirements sound similar as to what Australia is after in the AIR6502 Phase 1 Medium range GBAD system and be interesting if what they end up going for would suit Australia. Seems there might be more competitors in this area than I initially thought.

I'm personally not a fan of the American solutions like Patriot.
Click to expand...
The American solutions have the benefits of guaranteed and sustained economic investment, full NATO compliance and interoperability with the short-listed systems under AIR-6500, plus much greater security of supply of missiles and American production capacity.

It would be quite the eye-opening decision were a non-US system (or US supported like NASAMS) chosen…

Personally I suspect the MRAD and future BMD / anti-hypersonic programs will be rolled effectively into one with the THAAD / PAC-3 MSE combo selected…

But time will tell.
 
H

hauritz

Well-Known Member
cdxbow said:
Australia's only carnivorous bat, it's a good name. Ghost Bat - The Australian Museum
Will the development program keep the Loyal Wingman moniker?
Click to expand...
Is Loyal Wingman necessarily an accurate description of the program?
The airframe itself is probably adaptable to a number of other roles. In fact it is being offered as part of the USAF Skyborg program which could hint at its future role in the RAAF.
nationalinterest.org

The Air Force's Skyborg Drone Could Conduct Kamikaze Missions

Would it really be effective in that role?
nationalinterest.org nationalinterest.org
 
M

Mikeymike

Active Member
ADMk2 said:
The American solutions have the benefits of guaranteed and sustained economic investment, full NATO compliance and interoperability with the short-listed systems under AIR-6500, plus much greater security of supply of missiles and American production capacity.

It would be quite the eye-opening decision were a non-US system (or US supported like NASAMS) chosen…
Click to expand...
Agree it would be unlikely to be a non-US supported system. But what counts as a US supported system?

Does Israel's David's Sling which is partially funded and developed by the US/Raytheon count as US supported?

If Australia was to go Patriot what would an Australian Patriot battery look like? Does Australia do similar to Poland and try and integrate the SkyCeptor effector? does the Radar change to one from CEA? do you use the same FDCs as NASAMS?

If you end up with similar changes as Australia made to NASAMs how different to the Australian version of NASAMs does that actually look like and would it be easier to just integrate new effectors into NASAMs?

Will be interesting to see where the RAAF goes in this space. Particularly if there are any lessons from the war in Ukraine that could affect the decision. (Thinking particularly around effect of SRBM like Iskander)

No matter what will be better than where we are now, with nothing in this space.
 
cdxbow

cdxbow

Well-Known Member
hauritz said:
Is Loyal Wingman necessarily an accurate description of the program?
The airframe itself is probably adaptable to a number of other roles. In fact it is being offered as part of the USAF Skyborg program which could hint at its future role in the RAAF.
nationalinterest.org

The Air Force's Skyborg Drone Could Conduct Kamikaze Missions

Would it really be effective in that role?
nationalinterest.org nationalinterest.org
Click to expand...
The program to develop the AI versus the development of the MQ28A platform.
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Mikeymike said:
Agree it would be unlikely to be a non-US supported system. But what counts as a US supported system?

Does Israel's David's Sling which is partially funded and developed by the US/Raytheon count as US supported?

If Australia was to go Patriot what would an Australian Patriot battery look like? Does Australia do similar to Poland and try and integrate the SkyCeptor effector? does the Radar change to one from CEA? do you use the same FDCs as NASAMS?

If you end up with similar changes as Australia made to NASAMs how different to the Australian version of NASAMs does that actually look like and would it be easier to just integrate new effectors into NASAMs?

Will be interesting to see where the RAAF goes in this space. Particularly if there are any lessons from the war in Ukraine that could affect the decision. (Thinking particularly around effect of SRBM like Iskander)

No matter what will be better than where we are now, with nothing in this space.
Click to expand...
Israeli designed C2 systems, Israeli / US designed and manufactured interceptors purchased with US FMF Israel funding program. Should the US ever decide to stop that funding, or even substantially lower it, that entire program is at risk…

Which is not to say it can’t happen, as we have Elbit BMS, Iron Fist, Iron Vision, Spike LR2, Israeli EW systems and various flavours of Rafael Typhoon RWS systems in-service or ordered off the top of my head as examples where we have chosen Israeli products instead of competing US / European systems…

But those are small fry, compared to a program that is going to dwarf even JSF in cost, scale and arguably even importance from a national survival POV…
 
Boagrius

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
Did some digging around and saw that this one occurred rather quietly a little while back:

www.army-technology.com

Raytheon wins $2.3bn to produce GaN-based AN/TPY-2 radars

Raytheon Missiles & Defense has received a $2.3bn contract for the production of seven gallium nitride (GaN)-based AN/TPY-2 radars.
www.army-technology.com www.army-technology.com

So not only would the new Patriot LTAMDS radars be using GaN TRMs, but any new AN/TPY-2's for THAAD would be as well. AFAIK this represents the state of the art in AESA radar technology. Interesting stuff.
 
A

ADMk2

Just a bloke
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
W

Wombat000

Active Member
Interesting the mentioning of base Hardening.
im guessing there would be some valuable insights in Ukrainian air ops resilience in such a hotly contested environment.

being an outsider, I’m guessing they are operating something?
how are they doing it?
how have they persisted and what’s involved?
does this have lesson markers for RAAF operational contexts.
very interesting.
 
M

Mikeymike

Active Member
I am guessing the Ukrainian Air force has managed to survive mainly through dispersing to highway strips and their more secure western airports.

Though this article seems to indicate they are also still operating out of some of the bases that have been harder hit.

Not sure if the RAAF practice dispersing to other places apart from the main bases, though that is purpose of the bare bases in the first place.

Does the RAAF practice road highway dispersal?

The selection of the F35 by the Finnish seems to indicate they don't see it as an issue and maybe there is better way to spend money than hardening a base that the enemy knows you will be using?
 
H

hauritz

Well-Known Member
cdxbow said:
The program to develop the AI versus the development of the MQ28A platform.
Click to expand...
I agree that the AI is the important part. Ultimately I suspect it will be a transferable technology that will be incorporated into many different platforms in many different domains. I imagine that it will find itself not only in drones but also in missiles. Imagine an AI cruise missile with full situational awareness. It could serve as a co-pilot in manned aircraft and in fact would not even need to be aboard the aircraft it is controlling. No reason why it couldn't eventually replace human operators for Tritons and reapers.

AI could be a completely disruptive technology.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top