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

S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Is the default of this that we do not need our northern bases?
I do get the scenarios are many and varied. Land can be conceded for the greater good and the big picture stuff.
Maybe its not about moving teams of regulars across the services to the north and west; but rather having the infrastructure in place for when duty calls.
if the bare bone and main air force bases are fit for purpose well and good, but I feel some capital work are still needed in these areas to make them truly operational for real world sustained on going operations?
Thoughts
Regards S
 
B

Bob53

Well-Known Member
Gents No offence taken by any previous comments.

Have we ever operated a squadron of hornets out of the WA bare bases for a month at any stage? Have Curtain or Learmonth been used for any length of time with any significant aircraft numbers during exercises?
 
ASSAIL

ASSAIL

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Stampede said:
Is the default of this that we do not need our northern bases?
I do get the scenarios are many and varied. Land can be conceded for the greater good and the big picture stuff.
Maybe its not about moving teams of regulars across the services to the north and west; but rather having the infrastructure in place for when duty calls.
if the bare bone and main air force bases are fit for purpose well and good, but I feel some capital work are still needed in these areas to make them truly operational for real world sustained on going operations?
Thoughts
Regards S
Click to expand...
Yes we need northern bases.
We still need to protect sovereignty over the northern half of our continent which now more than ever can be accessed by anyone from subsistence fishermen, illegal arrivals of every description or in the extreme, armed reconnaissance patrols.
We have valuable offshore resource projects that need protection achieved by enduring presence.
We must have the capability to support operations to our north, surely East Timor showed the worth of that.

There are difficulties in placing bases in remote areas but these mainly relate to personnel. Isolation from family and lack of lifestyle in places such as Katherine/Tindal all contribute to retention problems, why even Subforce has a problem by being at FBW.
I would consider these superficial. Those that embrace the lifestyle often stay and places like Darwin are heavily populated by veterans who chose to stay. I’m one of them, I hated my first 6 months in Darwin, I grew to like it but was glad to leave for my next posting and then after a year living in Sydney I and my family missed Darwin so much we returned. That was 40 years ago!

Australia had a policy of abandonment of the north, it was the official policy should Japan invade during WW2. There were no other choices during early 1942. There was little or no infrastructure or transport, no capability to support deployed forces and really no alternative considering the bulk of Australia’s armed forces were overseas supporting Britain in the Med, the ME, Britain herself and belatedly Singapore. Luckily support came from the US and the policy was never enacted.

Any possible threat of instability to our security will originate to our north.
I every case except invasion by a superpower, northern bases are vital to our national interest and that’s why context is paramount in any discussion such as has occurred here over the last few posts.
 
Takao

Takao

The Bunker Group
ASSAIL said:
Yes we need northern bases.
We still need to protect sovereignty over the northern half of our continent which now more than ever can be accessed by anyone from subsistence fishermen, illegal arrivals of every description or in the extreme, armed reconnaissance patrols.
We have valuable offshore resource projects that need protection achieved by enduring presence.
We must have the capability to support operations to our north, surely East Timor showed the worth of that.

There are difficulties in placing bases in remote areas but these mainly relate to personnel. Isolation from family and lack of lifestyle in places such as Katherine/Tindal all contribute to retention problems, why even Subforce has a problem by being at FBW.
I would consider these superficial. Those that embrace the lifestyle often stay and places like Darwin are heavily populated by veterans who chose to stay. I’m one of them, I hated my first 6 months in Darwin, I grew to like it but was glad to leave for my next posting and then after a year living in Sydney I and my family missed Darwin so much we returned. That was 40 years ago!

Australia had a policy of abandonment of the north, it was the official policy should Japan invade during WW2. There were no other choices during early 1942. There was little or no infrastructure or transport, no capability to support deployed forces and really no alternative considering the bulk of Australia’s armed forces were overseas supporting Britain in the Med, the ME, Britain herself and belatedly Singapore. Luckily support came from the US and the policy was never enacted.

Any possible threat of instability to our security will originate to our north.
I every case except invasion by a superpower, northern bases are vital to our national interest and that’s why context is paramount in any discussion such as has occurred here over the last few posts.
Click to expand...
Spot on (although I'll quibble with one point).

In addition to all this, northern bases also provide a significant demonstration to the populations of WA / NT / QLD that Canberra remembers they are there and takes them seriously. It's very easy for Canberra to forget anything above a Brisbane-Adelaide line - putting fighters, ships and Brigades in the north is a clear and unambiguous sign that Canberra is aware of them. It is one of the reasons for Army getting frowned upon about pulling 1 Bde out of Darwin. So, politically speaking, they are hugely valuable. If Party A was to pull forces south (for economic and recruitment reasons), how long until Party B highlights the abandonment point of view ASSAIL mentioned above?

ASSAIL said:
There are difficulties in placing bases in remote areas but these mainly relate to personnel. Isolation from family and lack of lifestyle in places such as Katherine/Tindal all contribute to retention problems, why even Subforce has a problem by being at FBW.
I would consider these superficial.
Click to expand...
They aren't. They are actually significant - and getting worse. RAN retention, Tiger aircrew / maintainer retention, for a long time RAAC retention - all suffer disproportionately. The reality is, there isn't the support up there for families and the like - and most defence towns in the north are male heavy, meaning even single people tend to suffer after a while. Yes, the north can be magnificent - I would go there in a heart beat. Yes, there is a heavy veteran/ SNCO presence up there - in fact this was an enormous help in corporate knowledge to some of the units up there. But getting young blood up there, especially soldiers, is hard. Getting people north of Brisbane or west of Adelaide remains a significant challenge for CMA's of all three services - especially at the JNCO/O3 level.

I'd suggest the next big personnel hit the ADF experiences won't relate to pay and conditions - it'll relate to families and their opportunities.
 
7

76mmGuns

Active Member
Speaking of improvements, I saw the F-35 could have a new missile bracket which might increase the missiles carried from 4 to 6.

I was wondering if it were feasible to consider an internally carried "extrenal" fuel tank to occupy one of the missile brackets, on each side. While it wouldnt be big, and would need an extra connection internally, by being internally carried, it avoids the drag issues which affect the external fuel tanks carried. This is just my thought. Haven't seen it online.

Any ideas ?
 
Boagrius

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
I'd say it's doubtful. Even a small fuel bag would be a lot bulkier than an AMRAAM or AIM260 and leave scarce little space to fit anything else.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
Boagrius said:
I'd say it's doubtful. Even a small fuel bag would be a lot bulkier than an AMRAAM or AIM260 and leave scarce little space to fit anything else.
Click to expand...
I do like the OPTION of external fuel tanks for the F 35 A,B and C.
I appreciate the 5 Gen stealth stuff, but I'm sure there would be many scenarios where that extra range would be appreciated.

Lockheed Eyes Giving F-35s More Gas With Drop Tanks And That's A Very Good Thing

Something raised in this article was just the ability to transit from A to B in a non operational sense.
Re fuel bag ,maybe not realistic given the lack of space to explore using the internal weapons bay for a " Fuel Pod " but I would certainly be please if an external fuel tank was developed and certified for the F35 series.
Then again Boagrius,open to all ideas.

Regards S
 
Boagrius

Boagrius

Well-Known Member
No argument there re: external bags. I believe the F22 already does it and I've heard mutterings about the ability to jettison them rail and all to return the aircraft to a VLO state.

Would definitely be handy on the Lightning. Couple that with new variable bypass engines in a decade or so and you'd get some serious range out of the jet.
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
ngatimozart said:
The RAAF is looking at to incorporate the General Dynamics Advanced Capabilities Mission Computer (ACMC) in the RAAF’s Super Hornets and Growlers, plus ordering 12 improved Lockheed Martin IRST21 sensor systems for the Super Hornets.

RAAF Super Hornets eye computing upgrade, IRST
Click to expand...
I'm getting the"vibe" the Super Hornets and Growlers will be around for some time to come.
Maybe that last tranche of F35's will be pushed out over the horizon and the RAAF will be a F35 / S Hornet fleet out to the early 2030's.
It may save some coin in the mid 20's but not sure if this is the correct way forward.
One to watch and await some clarity for "Fast Air".

Regards S
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Not to worry, I know a buyer for your upgraded SHs will be available in 10-15 years, make sure his cheque doesn't bounce.
 
B

Bob53

Well-Known Member
ngatimozart said:
The RAAF is looking at to incorporate the General Dynamics Advanced Capabilities Mission Computer (ACMC) in the RAAF’s Super Hornets and Growlers, plus ordering 12 improved Lockheed Martin IRST21 sensor systems for the Super Hornets.

RAAF Super Hornets eye computing upgrade, IRST
Click to expand...
Interesting. What’s the status is the lost growler? I haven’t heard anything for a while now. Attrition or is it likely to be a warranty claim and he replaced? And is it likely that any of the wired for but not with Super Hornets may be upgraded to growler? It seems that EW is a significant force enabler when it comes to high threat environments so it’s seems potentially as good bang for the buck...but I am not clear on if the once structure would warrant an increase in growler numbers?
 
S

Severely

New Member
Bob53 said:
Interesting. What’s the status is the lost growler? I haven’t heard anything for a while now. Attrition or is it likely to be a warranty claim and he replaced? And is it likely that any of the wired for but not with Super Hornets may be upgraded to growler? It seems that EW is a significant force enabler when it comes to high threat environments so it’s seems potentially as good bang for the buck...but I am not clear on if the once structure would warrant an increase in growler numbers?
Click to expand...
Unfortunately as is understood it seems that most of the vital equipment has been stripped, ? where it is stored e.g spares etc. The airframe seems to be stored at AMARC as of February 2019. See the link ADF-Serials Image Gallery :: EA-18G A46-311 :: Growler_A46_311_at_AMARG_February_2019_Photo_via_Bob_Maddern
 
John Newman

John Newman

The Bunker Group
Interesting little bit of info buried at the bottom of this Flight Global report, see the last two paragraphs:

Lockheed declares F-35 stealth coating ‘rock solid’

Meanwhile, Over notes that the F-35 programme continues to see falling airframe costs, as discussions continue on low-rate initial production blocks 12, 13 and 14, covering a combined 478 of the stealth aircraft.

“We have not finalised the exact dollar amount for each of the airplanes in [production lots] 12, 13 and 14, but we and the US government have agreed that [the cost of a] Lot 13 airplane will start with a seven, and lot 14 will be even cheaper. We continue down the price curve, and we haven’t reached bottom yet. We'll be below $80 million for an F-35A in Lot 13.”

The cost so far for the RAAFs aircraft have been:
* 2 x LRIP 6 - US$103m- excluding engine - total approx. US$120m each
* 8 x LRIP 10 - US$94.6m - inc engine
* 8 x LRIP 11 - US$89.2m - inc engine

The RAAF has orders for 15 x Lot 12, 15 x Lot 13, 15 x Lot 14 and 9 x Lot 15. You could reasonably assume that Lot 12 is probably going to be around the mid US$80m mark (say US$85m), and Lot 13 should be around US$79m or less.

The last 'estimate' I saw (back in 2016) regarding the average per airframe cost for the RAAFs fleet was to be approx. US$90m, it would appear that the average cost across the fleet will be even lower than that estimate.

When the decision time comes in the mid 2020s for that possible 4th squadron, cost per airframe shouldn't be an issue.

Cheers,

(PS, with cost falling quickly, I wonder what the next excuse the Government of our Canuck cousins will come up with for not procuring F-35A? I'm sure they will find a way! Ha Ha!).
 
John Newman

John Newman

The Bunker Group
Stampede said:
I'm getting the"vibe" the Super Hornets and Growlers will be around for some time to come.
Maybe that last tranche of F35's will be pushed out over the horizon and the RAAF will be a F35 / S Hornet fleet out to the early 2030's.
It may save some coin in the mid 20's but not sure if this is the correct way forward.
One to watch and await some clarity for "Fast Air".

Regards S
Click to expand...
I wouldn't be getting too excited yet.

The decision on the 4th F-35A squadron is not due until about 2025, and considering the Super Hornets will be operational until at least 2030 regardless, then it's not surprising that they will continue to be upgraded, the RAAF did say from day one they would be kept in 'lock step' with the USN fleet, specifically for sustainment reasons. The Growlers are here for longer, regardless of what happens to the Super Hornets or not.

I would imagine that the 'sign' they may continue in service is when and if the Government/RAAF announce the upgrade of the Super fleet from Blk II to Blk III.

My understanding is that the USN will start the upgrade of their existing Blk II fleet to Blk III standard starting in 2022, here's a good article from the Warzone website:

Here's Where Boeing Aims To Take The Super Hornet In The Decades To Come

The Block III upgrade will take many years, so there is no real rush for a decision from Government, my guess is we will know, one way or the other, when the announcement of that 4th F-35A squadron is made, if the 4th squadron is a go, then I'd reasonably assume that the Super fleet won't be upgraded to Blk III, what would be the point?

Cheers,
 
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
John Newman said:
(PS, with cost falling quickly, I wonder what the next excuse the Government of our Canuck cousins will come up with for not procuring F-35A? I'm sure they will find a way! Ha Ha!).
Click to expand...
Jeez John don't encourage them :D Probably because it hasn't got 120% Canadian content.
 
John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
There are already complaints from a Quebec union complaining they won't get support contracts for RCAF F-35s. These are the same people who want to license build Euro jets (only Saab left now for this to happen). It would be politically difficult for junior to reject the F-35 now IMO in favour of Saab and the price difference between SH and Lightning is narrowing with each passing day. I suspect a reduction in the order number, a PO delay or combination of both is an n the cards.

Canadian fighter jets – big questions
 
S

Stampede

Well-Known Member
John Newman said:
I wouldn't be getting too excited yet.

The decision on the 4th F-35A squadron is not due until about 2025, and considering the Super Hornets will be operational until at least 2030 regardless, then it's not surprising that they will continue to be upgraded, the RAAF did say from day one they would be kept in 'lock step' with the USN fleet, specifically for sustainment reasons. The Growlers are here for longer, regardless of what happens to the Super Hornets or not.

I would imagine that the 'sign' they may continue in service is when and if the Government/RAAF announce the upgrade of the Super fleet from Blk II to Blk III.

My understanding is that the USN will start the upgrade of their existing Blk II fleet to Blk III standard starting in 2022, here's a good article from the Warzone website:

Here's Where Boeing Aims To Take The Super Hornet In The Decades To Come

The Block III upgrade will take many years, so there is no real rush for a decision from Government, my guess is we will know, one way or the other, when the announcement of that 4th F-35A squadron is made, if the 4th squadron is a go, then I'd reasonably assume that the Super fleet won't be upgraded to Blk III, what would be the point?

Cheers,
Click to expand...
A lot can happen in five years
The decision will be a combination of cost / timing / need / threats? / and which party is in government.
From Oct 2019 it's difficult to call a result.
If the price comes down, both the F35 B and C models may have some interest, for their respective attributes.
The former for it's ability to land vertically and the latter to carry more fuel for increased range.
What ever the outcome, I would be confident the Growlers will fly into the next decade, with of without the Super Hornets.
Could we afford to have our cake and eat it to with an additional Sqn?
Keep all and buy as well?

Regards S

PS - the PLAN should have 3 Carriers and 3 Large LHD's active in 2025 with enough experienced crew to have them "show the flag" in the Pacific region.
Friendly visits and all!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top