ADF General discussion thread

[gf0012-aust]

It certantly get the attention of the white house considering the dramas over the last few days!

the ability for us to work within current US tech developments is a minor part of the headache - but also one of the biggest

the loss of access by default to a whole pile of critical US systems due to justified USG/State nervousness alone makes it a none starter

it would cause multiple hurt points to errupt

 

[t68]

the ability for us to work within current US tech developments is a minor part of the headache - but also one of the biggest

the loss of access by default to a whole pile of critical US systems due to justified USG/State nervousness alone makes it a none starter

it would cause multiple hurt points to errupt

My comment wasn't ment to be taken seriously, tongue in cheek never contemplated it would be astarter

 

[gf0012-aust]

My comment wasn't ment to be taken seriously, tongue in cheek never contemplated it would be astarter

ack, mine was basically to ensure that everyone else unfamiliar would appreciate why its a DNS

 

[STURM]

With the mellowing of relations between the US and Russia, is there any chance that Australia could consider buying some Russian equipment? Their S300 and S400 anti missile/aircraft missiles seem to be very good,

The main problem with buying stuff like S300 and S400 is the need integrate it to the current AD network as well as other assets. Recently, the Turks were told that if they went ahead with buying a Russian made long range AD system, that system will have to be a stand alone system as Turkey's NATO members will not allow it to be integrated with the present NATO compatible network; for security reasons.

 

[Volkodav]

The main problem with buying stuff like S300 and S400 is the need integrate it to the current AD network as well as other assets. recently, the Turks were told that if they went ahead with buying a Russian made long range AD system, that system will have to be a stand alone systems as Turkey's NATO members will not allow it to be integrated with the present NATO compatible network; for security reasons.

Exactly, its hard enough reconciling the security requirements when integrating French with US systems :crazy. Just ask anyone involved in combat systems.

 

[STURM]

India's experience with their SU-30MKI should tell us all we need to know about whether it is a good idea to get on-board with Russian kit...

The Russian after sales/support system has improved a lot but still leaves a lot to be desired. Part of the problem is that under the existing set up customers have to go via Rosboronexport [before that Rosvooruzhenie]; in most cases they're not allowed to deal directly with the OEM when it comes to delivery schedules, ordering spares, etc. I know of instances in the 1990's when a particular customer was force to seek the help of the Russian Military Attache at the embassy because of delays in getting a simple reply from the Rosvooruzhenie representative who in turn had failed to get a reply from the OEM.

Then again I also know of major Western companies - with excellent track records - who have failed to deliver on spec and on time. With regards to the IAF's MKIs part of the problem was the need to integrate/certify various non Russian systems to the aircraft which resulted in the need for the Russians to work with non Russian companies

 

[SouthernSky]

A new fella with suspicious hair moves into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and all of a sudden we're talking about Russian systems in the ADF? Has someone dropped some LSD into the forum? :tasty

 

[Volkodav]

A new fella with suspicious hair moves into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave and all of a sudden we're talking about Russian systems in the ADF? Has someone dropped some LSD into the forum? :tasty

I suspect a third of the word has had a psychotic break, another third a stress breakdown while the rest are just scared sh!tless. LSD and other psychotropic substances me be universally required soon enough, just to be able to function at all.

 

[hairyman]

We had a mix of Mirage fighters and Canberra bombers (both made or assembled here) then we went american with F111 and F18's, now we are going to have F35's, what are we going to have to replace the F111 and Canberras? The F35 does not have much of a payload or range, so what is available that can be used in that role?

 

[Todjaeger]

We had a mix of Mirage fighters and Canberra bombers (both made or assembled here) then we went american with F111 and F18's, now we are going to have F35's, what are we going to have to replace the F111 and Canberras? The F35 does not have much of a payload or range, so what is available that can be used in that role?

The F-35's, likely armed with standoff munitions. In the last decade or so of thr F-111's service, the range was not particularly significant, because they would have required a fighter escort. Keep in mind that the effectiveness of platform is how well it can meet all the needed outputs. Great range and ordnance capacity are meaningless if the platform still cannot deliver the munitions to the target when needed.

 

[ASSAIL]

We had a mix of Mirage fighters and Canberra bombers (both made or assembled here) then we went american with F111 and F18's, now we are going to have F35's, what are we going to have to replace the F111 and Canberras? The F35 does not have much of a payload or range, so what is available that can be used in that role?

Defence capability is not fixed in time as you seem to suggest.
Your supposition is that all previous platforms need a like for like replacement which is patently ridiculous, a bit like suggesting modern cavalry regiments should be replacing their horses

Using your example you should learn the capabilities of the platforms you want replaced and compare them with the known/released capabilities of the F35 and you may be surprised.

 

[rossfrb_1]

The F-35's, likely armed with standoff munitions. In the last decade or so of thr F-111's service, the range was not particularly significant, because they would have required a fighter escort. Keep in mind that the effectiveness of platform is how well it can meet all the needed outputs. Great range and ordnance capacity are meaningless if the platform still cannot deliver the munitions to the target when needed.

Tod nailed it. No use sending aircraft into an environment when they can't defend themselves (or be defended by shorter ranged fighers). Carrying one or two AIM-9Ls doesn't really count in today's environment.
Add in 7 KC-30A tankers to the mix too and the F111's much vaunted long legs becomes less significant.

 

[t68]

Add in 7 KC-30A tankers to the mix too and the F111's much vaunted long legs becomes less significant.

Yes the F111 was getting long in the tooth, originally it's combat radius and weapons capability is what made it the RAAF the premier strike capabilty of its time, unfortunately time moved on and became obsolete.

We still have the need for long range precision strike otherwise we would not need the AAR capabilty. If the RAAF had an option for for a regional bomber I imagine they would have fought tooth and nail for the replacement. As it was the the US were working on an interim regional bomber untill 2037 bomber program matured but was cancelled under the 2006 QDR.

 

[hairyman]

I am just trying to point out that in the past we always had a fighter and a light bomber, now it appears that we are going to have the F35 for both jobs. And only 72 of them!
When I was at school, we had Vam[ires and Lincoln bombers, then Avon Sabres and Canberra bombers, then the Mirage and Canberra, then the F111 and Hornets. Now Super Hornets and shortly the F35. Once we get all 72 F35's what is the plan for the Super Hornets? If we are left with 72 F35 and 12 Growlers we will have the smallest fighting air force since WW2.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I am just trying to point out that in the past we always had a fighter and a light bomber, now it appears that we are going to have the F35 for both jobs. And only 72 of them!
When I was at school, we had Vam[ires and Lincoln bombers, then Avon Sabres and Canberra bombers, then the Mirage and Canberra, then the F111 and Hornets. Now Super Hornets and shortly the F35. Once we get all 72 F35's what is the plan for the Super Hornets? If we are left with 72 F35 and 12 Growlers we will have the smallest fighting air force since WW2.

the danger is heading down the platform for platform count - and the platform centric debate - esp when bombers in the majority of most airforces are now replaced by long range precision weapons

RAAF especially under Plan Jericho is exponentially far more capable than it ever was

 

[hairyman]

The danger if we end up with the F35 as our sole fighting aircraft would be if the fleet was grounded through a software problem or whatever. we would need to keep the Super Hornets as an insurance against such an event, and probably have a few more than 24..

 

[t68]

I am just trying to point out that in the past we always had a fighter and a light bomber, now it appears that we are going to have the F35 for both jobs. And only 72 of them!
When I was at school, we had Vam[ires and Lincoln bombers, then Avon Sabres and Canberra bombers, then the Mirage and Canberra, then the F111 and Hornets. Now Super Hornets and shortly the F35. Once we get all 72 F35's what is the plan for the Super Hornets? If we are left with 72 F35 and 12 Growlers we will have the smallest fighting air force since WW2.

Your forgetting a possabile buy of F35B or more A's or even perhaps son of Taranis!

For the time being once all F35A we still will have SH and growler that brings us past the hundred.

 

[Boagrius]

Once we get all 72 F35's what is the plan for the Super Hornets? If we are left with 72 F35 and 12 Growlers we will have the smallest fighting air force since WW2.

The plan has always been for the ~24 Super Bugs to be replaced in due course - either with another F35 buy or something else. AFAIK you're still looking at a front line fleet of 100+ aircraft.

 

[vonnoobie]

Something else to consider, Our location in the world.

We have no airborne threats to the east, south or west... Everything we have to worry about is north of us. Of all those the most capable air force is allied with us along with a less capable one also an ally. Every other one is too small, under supplied or fielding very old equipment.

We have no need to field more then 100 modern combat aircraft, anything more would be over kill and taking away valuable resources from other area's that all vitally need those resources.

When you break it down those in range to attack us (only really ASEAN members) ..

Brunei - No combat aircraft
Cambodia - No combat aircraft
Indonesia - Only capable combat aircraft are 25 older model F-16's and 16 Su 27/30's, Simply outnumbered by us
Laos - No combat aircraft
Malaysia - Arguably more capable then Indonesia with 18 Su-30's and plan's under way to replace 30 Mig 29's and F-5's with either Typhoons and Rafales, Also a member of FPDA with Australia so more likely an ally then an enemy.
Myanmar - Has a number of modern aircraft including 31 Mig 29's and 16 JF-17's on order however capability is in question due to it's lack of any use in a number of skirmishes (ie: Flashy equipment, no support and experience to use it).
Philippines - While nothing official is more of an ally, or at least friendly to Australia. That said there most capable aircraft are 12 FA-50 trainers from South Korea so of no threat what so ever.
Thailand - Decent force but has tended to be more COIN orientated, 51 F-16's, 30 F-5's and 7 JAS 39's.. F-5's and F-16's are outdated, JAS 39 are there most modern aircraft but too few in number.
Vietnam - 11 Su-27's and 35 Su-30's make up there biggest capability, but between the range, limited budget support and the fact they hate China more then Australia likelihood of them becoming an active enemy is low.

All in those with the capability aren't on bad term's with us being either neutral or close allies, every nation that could become a threat is either too far away, has no airforce to speak of or too little of one to matter.

 

[Boagrius]

Something else to consider, Our location in the world.

We have no airborne threats to the east, south or west... Everything we have to worry about is north of us. Of all those the most capable air force is allied with us along with a less capable one also an ally. Every other one is too small, under supplied or fielding very old equipment.

We have no need to field more then 100 modern combat aircraft, anything more would be over kill and taking away valuable resources from other area's that all vitally need those resources.

When you break it down those in range to attack us (only really ASEAN members) ..

Brunei - No combat aircraft
Cambodia - No combat aircraft
Indonesia - Only capable combat aircraft are 25 older model F-16's and 16 Su 27/30's, Simply outnumbered by us
Laos - No combat aircraft
Malaysia - Arguably more capable then Indonesia with 18 Su-30's and plan's under way to replace 30 Mig 29's and F-5's with either Typhoons and Rafales, Also a member of FPDA with Australia so more likely an ally then an enemy.
Myanmar - Has a number of modern aircraft including 31 Mig 29's and 16 JF-17's on order however capability is in question due to it's lack of any use in a number of skirmishes (ie: Flashy equipment, no support and experience to use it).
Philippines - While nothing official is more of an ally, or at least friendly to Australia. That said there most capable aircraft are 12 FA-50 trainers from South Korea so of no threat what so ever.
Thailand - Decent force but has tended to be more COIN orientated, 51 F-16's, 30 F-5's and 7 JAS 39's.. F-5's and F-16's are outdated, JAS 39 are there most modern aircraft but too few in number.
Vietnam - 11 Su-27's and 35 Su-30's make up there biggest capability, but between the range, limited budget support and the fact they hate China more then Australia likelihood of them becoming an active enemy is low.

All in those with the capability aren't on bad term's with us being either neutral or close allies, every nation that could become a threat is either too far away, has no airforce to speak of or too little of one to matter.

All very true. That said I do wonder what our response would be to significant enhancements to PLAAF strategic bomber assets. While the H6 isn't an issue for us in its various iterations right now, if they do succeed in replacing it with the H20 or similar down the track, would that begin to affect our force planning?