They will be link 16 compatible, so no problems pairing with Wedgetails or P8s.
Royal Australian Air Force [RAAF] News, Discussions and Updates
OldTex
Well-Known Member
So long as the MQ-28 has the range, speed and endurance of the escorted aircraft it would make sense. If it doesn't then you rapidly get into a situation where either the primary asset (E-7 or P-8) has its operational area restricted to cater for MQ-28 operation or you have a large number of MQ-28 required IOT ensure adequate protective coverage ( range vs time-on-target)
MARKMILES77
Well-Known Member
Confirmation the the first order for production versions of the Ghost Bat has been placed by the Australian Government.
Made in a speech to the Australian Press Club by Pat Conroy, Minister for Defence Industry.
No mention of numbers.
Also a clue as to how large the Ghost Shark programme is, with the statement that 1000 jobs will be supported by Ghost Shark production.
Made in a speech to the Australian Press Club by Pat Conroy, Minister for Defence Industry.
No mention of numbers.
Also a clue as to how large the Ghost Shark programme is, with the statement that 1000 jobs will be supported by Ghost Shark production.
In other Ghostbat news the MQ-28 is participating in Valiant Shield 26 and is operating alongside the F-15EX.
www.twz.com
F-15EX And Ghost Bat Team Up Over Pacific During Valiant Shield
Their appearance together during Valiant Shield offers the strongest signal yet that the Eagle II will evolve into a controller for collaborative combat drones. Their appearance together during Valiant Shield offers the strongest public sign yet that the Eagle II is evolving into a controller...
www.twz.com
We have seen the my-28 fly with the F/A18F, E-7, P-8A and now the F-15EX. Yet to hear of it operating alongside a single seat aircraft such as the F-35. I am not sure if that is a workload issue or that they aren’t yet willing to allow it to operate with that degree of autonomy.
Does mean the RAAF will need to keep flying the F/A-18F well into the future and may eventually have to replace it with another 2 seater.
MARKMILES77
Well-Known Member
I have thought exactly the same. Quite likely Loyal Wingmen will not be operating with single seat aircraft for a long time.
Good question
I like the concept of the MQ-28 and acknowledge that it is early days with regards to bringing a concept to reality.
Pilot workload is certainly a consideration at the best of times, even without with a teaming asset like the Ghostbat.
So agree integration with the single seat F35 will interesting.
If problematic, it will certainly have an impact on the viability of teaming assets going forward.
Hopefully there’s a path forward
Cheers S
I doubt the pilot is ever alone these days. There may be one seat but a whole supporting cast in the Wedgetail and on the ground. It may be teamed and in support of the F35 but I suspect most of the support role thinking, calculations and option development will be done by AI and off board crew.
Agree the pilot is not “Biggles” going solo!
That said a pilot with a teaming vehicle or two does have more complexity than the past.
I agree everything is a team effort and you are one of the cogs on the wheel.
The unmanned AI thing is an interesting and somewhat scary realm.
Not sure if the zombie apocalypse is around the corner or not but anyway let’s see how ghost bat evolves.
I’m confident it has a future providing they keep the cost down
Cheers
What would be interssting is rigging all with IFR. The P8, the E-7 and the Ghostbat. Then fit the P-8 and E-7 with IFR drogue pods. They tank their own escorts and top up from KC30s themselves.
OldTex
Well-Known Member
That might be something for Block 4+ of the MQ-28. Getting the IFR pods added to the P-8 and E-7 might be a costly niche capability. The USN might stump up development and certification money if they can be convinced that it is a great idea of theirs. The E-7 might have to be funded by ADF as the USAF mainly uses booms (although the MC-130s support IFR for CSAR helicopters using hose & drogue).
ADF testing a “candidate” medium ranged AD solution at Woomera, comprising CEA radars, virtualised AEGIS fire control, RAN SM-2 missiles and the “Derringer” Expeditionary Launch System…
Exercise Taipan Strike 2026…
IF that “Derringer” is Mk.41 compatible, than SM-6 and “potentially” SM-3 could theoretically be employed from such a system too…
I think the term “candidate” is a bit of an under-statement here…
Exercise Taipan Strike 2026…
IF that “Derringer” is Mk.41 compatible, than SM-6 and “potentially” SM-3 could theoretically be employed from such a system too…
I think the term “candidate” is a bit of an under-statement here…
Last edited:
The Ghostbat is pretty long ranged. I believe the newer models will have a range similar to the E7/p8 around 6000-7000 km. They are really a ~4000km now.
I think that is one of their future missions is long range escorts which are hard on airframes, pilots and logistics with manned fighters.
Thats awesome. SM-6 fore sure, SM-3 maybe, typically you need more assets to cue a sm-3 launch. Sm-6 is pretty capable. Very interesting aegis ashore type system, thats mobile.
Derringer I guess for the two shots, pretty big for a derringer. Chunky.
MARKMILES77
Well-Known Member
Sounds very clever.
With the Patriot missile being integrated with the AEGIS system for use aboard naval vessels, potentially would allow a common pool of
Patriot and SM series missiles to be used by both Navy and Army for Air defence.
Would also allow Army to get a medium/long range air defence system into service utilising already purchased SM-2 missiles while they wait in
line for Patriot missiles to be available.
Cant help but wonder (if selected) how many units we would aquire? Given China's Pacific launch recently, we have a huge gap in air defence, and with 7 NASSAMs , and no more on order, I would really hooe that a system like this is a priority. The ability use the standard type missiles as well as a future patriot purchace would be awesome....if more than a handful are aquired, otherwise , its just a token buy, and pretty muchnuseless.
OldTex
Well-Known Member
The questions in my mind are:
1. Why should the Army operate a medium/long range ADS rather than the RAAF? Surely it is more in the operational domain of the RAAF, especially if the IADS is also being managed by The RAAF. A medium/long range ADS could be provided as part of the RAAF elements attached to an Australian Task Force.
2. Has PATRIOT been selected as the medium/long range ADS for the ADF? If it hasn't then there aren't any future orders being placed by the ADF for PAC3 missiles. So why would SM-2s be taken away from the RAN to fill possible ADS launchers, which have not been ordered, to be back filled with a different type of missile which also hasn't been ordered.
PHOTOGRAPHER
New Member
Can we trust AI? If so this sounds like a great concept.
AI Overview
Yes, the Derringer expeditionary launch system uses the same canisters that are compatible with the Mk 41 Vertical Launch System (VLS). It fires missiles from a transportable, trailer-mounted setup.
ABC News & Headlines – Australian Broadcasting Corporation +2Here are a few quick details about how the system operates:
- What it is: The Derringer is a land-based, containerized, and highly mobile missile launcher.
- The Cells: Rather than traditional fixed, below-deck cells, the system functions in deployable ground containers.
- The Missiles: It is designed to deploy standard missiles like the Standard Missile-2 (SM-2), which is a core weapon in the Mk 41 VLS.
ABC News & Headlines – Australian Broadcasting Corporation +3
Murse
Member
1. They'd probably be deployed to an area that doesn't have a hotel.
2. No idea, but the answer to 1 is funny IMO