Australian lawmakers confident in F-35's future

Similar story also at: http://adbr.com.au/next-eight-raaf-f-35 ... -delivery/

Australia’s third F-35A on track for delivery
20 Jul 2017 Staff Writer

"The Royal Australian Air Force’s third F-35A Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) A35-003 is making progress along the production line at the Lockheed Martin headquarters in the US.

Head Joint Strike Fighter Air Vice-Marshal Leigh Gordon said the A35-003 was the first of the next batch of eight Australian F-35s currently in production in Fort Worth to begin the “mate” process, where major components of the aircraft were joined together to form the aircraft structure.

"The aircraft will then make its way down the assembly line and through its check flights in preparation for delivery in early 2018," AVM Gordon said.... "Like its two RAAF F-35A stablemates, A35-003 will be delivered to Luke Air Force Base Arizona in early 2018, where it will be used for F-35 pilot and maintainer training until permanently re-locating to Australia in 2020," said AVM Gordon...."

Source: https://www.defenceconnect.com.au/strik ... r-delivery

[F-35A] Acquisition timeline and potential alternatives
18 Nov 2016 Senate Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee

"...Australia's F-35A delivery profile of a total of 72 aircraft is as follows:
• 2 aircraft in 2014;
• 8 aircraft in 2018;
• 8 aircraft in 2019;
• 15 aircraft in 2020;
• 15 aircraft in 2021;
• 15 aircraft in 2022; and
• 9 aircraft in 2023...."

Source: http://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Bus ... er/c04.pdf (100Kb)

On my days-off, I watch a very large pot of water come to the boil ... over a candle ...

It's too bad the F-22 was banned for foreign sales. I always thought that the F-22 would have been a outstanding fit for the Australians. I have no doubt that the Aussies would have guarded its secrets. However, I think the F-35 fits their vision going forward. They will not be disappointed.



Jim

Why, its range is lower than the F-35, it's A2G sensors are limited, it has no FLIR, and it's weapons list is absurdly small.

Why, its range is lower than the F-35 and it's weapons list is absurdly small.

Precisely! And the F-22 is also quite limited in Air-to-Ground missions/roles. For example it doesn't have the ability to engage a ground moving target.

Besides the 'yearning for something the RAAF never wanted' what else is there? The F-35A-but I yearn for some Bs!

Five pages of 'why the RAAF does not want the F-22' attached with OF COURSE the F-22 is not even available to USAF now.

Earlier quotes this thread this material: viewtopic.php?f=58&t=23043&p=319219&hilit=Harvey#p319219
&
viewtopic.php?f=58&t=23043&p=307623&hilit=Harvey#p307623 [hands knees & boomsadaisy]

Nothing 'stealthy' about the F-22 This article is quoted at least once earlier in this thread probably.....
21 Feb 2007 Air Vice-Marshal John Harvey, Program Manager NAAC

"...Defence analysis shows that the F-22 is not the right aircraft for Australia's air combat needs. The F-22 is without doubt a highly capable fighter aircraft, but we need a truly multi-role aircraft able to conduct the full range of air-to-ground as well as air-to-air combat missions.

Defence never has made a formal request to acquire the F-22. Nor have we ever asked US officials to start a process to lift the Congressional ban on selling the F-22. It is hardly unusual that the US should decide that some of its military technology is not for export, and hence the F-22 remains prohibited from export by US Congressional legislation...."

Source: http://www.defence.gov.au/dmo/ceo/record/21FEB.pdf (prolly not available now but in PDF below)

I presume this table gives some idea of how 'naysayers were comatose' when the RAAF Hornets were 'delivered', a few are missing because early crashes. http://www.aph.gov.au/~/media/Committee ... report.pdf (1.1Mb)

It's too bad the F-22 was banned for foreign sales. I always thought that the F-22 would have been a outstanding fit for the Australians. I have no doubt that the Aussies would have guarded its secrets. However, I think the F-35 fits their vision going forward. They will not be disappointed.
Jim

As you have just recently finished flying F-22As did you at one point see potential for the RAAF to change the avionics and weapons load in an effective manner?

No Basher, I just think that they knew that the 22 was off the table. They have requirements that they laid down and the 35 meets those requirements.

Jim

No Basher, I just think that they knew that the 22 was off the table. They have requirements that they laid down and the 35 meets those requirements.

Jim

I wrote some detailed blog entries addressing this topic in 2007, mostly because the domestic political choices of the time were becoming toxic and warped due to extensive partisan dis-info, on air combat proposals.

Basically, what RAAF wanted was clearly the correct choice, for it and the ADF. And if the F-35A had been available sooner the F/A-18F also would not have been acquired.

The interesting fact (of the time) was that the critics of the F-35A, and F/G Super Hornets were arguing for an updated 'F/A-22B' plus F-111 combo. But the network and avionics updates proposed (by them) were very much in line with what the F/A-18F could already do (which they greatly criticised and rejected), plus F-35A would innately be designed to do precisely as they proposed, only better. But which neither the F-111 or F/A-22B type combo would be unable to provide any time soon, or for twice the cost and time, with massive technical risk.

The requirements RAAF (and joint ADF) were describing, was that of an F/A-18F type capability (or perhaps F-15E), which the F-22A did not provide, and could not be made to do so any time soon.

As for hitching an old F-111 to an F/A-22B conception ... well ... the F-35A is more survivable, faster, has similar un-refuelled range, flies efficient hi-hi-hi profile, and has potentially more weapon payload (post 2025) than an F-15E ... or F-111 ... bomber!

The F-22A was a clear non-starter, and if it came to air dominance ROLES, then the F-35A would be effectively as deadly in a regional context as having the F-22A, as it could provide a clear air dominance capability relevant to RAAF's needs.

So who needs an F-22?

I watched it taking off locally, several times, a few months back. Short field takeoffs, vertical by 2 k ft, then below 350 kt to 10 k ft, then you hear engines spool back up to accelerate to transonic, fast vertical climb. Engine sound directly above suddenly stops about a minute later, presumably level at ~60 k ft.

yeah ... that was compelling

http://www.geocities.ws/e/l/element1loop/index.html/

Our JSF one step closer
12 Sep 2017 DeptDefPR

"The team charged with bringing home Australia’s F-35A Lightning II in December 2018 has reached a few important milestones. In May, 27 of the first cadre of Australia’s F-35A maintenance crew completed their technical training....

...The other Australian F-35A pilot currently under training, Wing Commander (WGCDR) Darren Clare, is still part-way through his operational conversion but recently completed his first flight in the F-35A after comprehensive simulation training. “The sims set you up very well for the flights,” WGCDR Clare said. “The jet feels very similar to a Hornet in most flight regimes, and it was exciting to take off in an airplane for the first time solo....

...WGCDR Clare will become the Commanding Officer of 3SQN when the unit transitions from F/A18A Classic Hornet operations to the F-35A. The RAAF personnel are fully embedded with the 61st Fighter Squadron “Top Dogs” and Maintenance Unit at Luke Air Force Base...."

Source: http://www.defence.gov.au/casg/NewsMedi ... JSF_update

Contract awarded for local F-35 EW support
19 Sep 2017 ADM

"The local subsidiary of R&D company SRC Aus has expanded operations after winning a $17 million contract to produce data sets for operational missions for the RAAF F-35A Joint Strike Fighter. In opening SRC Aus’ new Canberra office on Monday, Defence Minister Christopher Pyne announced the company would deliver the 'Ghosthawk' mission support system to be used to produce trusted mission data sets, providing jobs for 15 engineers in Adelaide and 8 in Canberra.

“SRC Aus will play a vital role in developing our fifth-generation air combat force. Ghosthawk replaces our existing mission information systems with an integrated, next generation intelligence support system capable of collecting, manipulating and disseminating data to our pilots and their aircraft.

“The data from Ghosthawk underpins the key information advantage the JSF will bring to the Air Force – data on weapons, radars, other aircraft and EW systems, all integrated with the fighter’s on-board suite of advanced mission sensors to create unsurpassed situational awareness.” Minister Pyne added the work will grow expertise in the field of complex electronic warfare information and analysis, and develop a uniquely Australian information product for the JSF.

In addition to the contract, SRC Aus’ parent company SRC Inc. is under contract for developing the Ghosthawk mission support system valued at $92.7 million. In a statement issued by SRC Aus, the company declared the total contracts will support software development and engineering analysis critical to the successful operation of the JSF in Australia.

“Under this effort, SRC Aus, supported by expertise from its parent company, SRC in the United States, will provide intelligence mission data (IMD). The Adelaide team will be located on government premises at the Defence Science Technology Group's Edinburgh precinct within the Joint Electronic Warfare Operational Support Unit (JEWOSU).”

Darren Robertson, vice president of SRC Aus, said the program represents the first step in developing these key EW technologies in Australia and establishing SRC Aus as aleader in IMD and mission data.”"

Source: http://www.australiandefence.com.au/new ... ew-support

Will each partner nation have a similar set-up, or is this unique to Australia?

This ghosthawk is that - not easily seen by others. Other countries will have to reveal their ghosts. However F-35 Mission Info will be developed along with UK (and Canada ffsake which last I saw was tardy in paying their share for the) ACURL (search this F-35 forum for more info and here is a tidbit) "...The Partner Reprogramming Laboratory for the Commonwealth partner nations (namely the UK, Canada and Australia) is to be known as the Australia–Canada–United Kingdom Reprogramming Laboratory (ACURL). A recent Non Advocate Review by the JSF Program Office has reaffirmed the requirement for reprogramming laboratories...." 2013

The USofA has own labs whilst other partner countries will/have partnered for the own area labs. US NavAir provides FMS customers with support in this regard: http://www.navair.navy.mil/nawcwd/comma ... kFacts.pdf

A handy rinkydink link: http://news.usni.org/2014/11/04/foreign ... r-software

http://pensacolatoday.com/2015/04/eglin ... f-35-labs/ [no longer works so search forum....]....

FOUND IT: viewtopic.php?f=62&t=27067&p=288958&hilit=pensacolatoday#p288958

http://gcacnews.blogspot.com.au/2015/04 ... 1506m.html [CanadUH not mentioned]

BillyBobBoySweetiePie has a moan - an ACURL moment: http://aviationweek.com/defense/f-35-cu ... pdate-labs

Canaduhduhduh back in mebbe: http://www.jsf.mil/news/docs/20160512_Complex.pdf

2016 Ohboy: https://www.flightglobal.com/news/artic ... em-426884/

Wouldn't mind a JDAM-ER plug-in if they can whip one up.

3 x 500 lb JDAM-ER per outer pylon.
3 x 1000 lb JDAM-ER per inner pylon.
12 x SDB2 Internal.

i.e. 24 PGM weapons per jet, per sortie.

16 x F-35 x 24 weapons = 384 weapons per sqn attack (plus 4-ship top-cover).

If you deploy half a sqn thus equipped somewhere, you get 2 x F-35A launched every four hours, for six flights a day, around the clock. Each 2 ship carries 48 weapons.

4 hours = 240 mins

240 mins / 48 weapons = 5 mins

One PGM weapon is available, every 5 mins, 24 hours a day.

As opposed to 24 PGMs in 24 hours for 1/2 a sqn of hornets - 1 per hour.

Game changer.

I hope they can program and test kit like that, outside of block upgrade.