Australian lawmakers confident in F-35's future

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post04 May 2018, 17:37

:applause: 8) :mrgreen: That's why they pay 'BP' :salute: :notworthy: the big bucks. :crazypilot: BUCKAROO BANZAI! :roll: :twisted: :doh:

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_mpBGa4P5jUo/T ... anzai1.jpg

Image
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1128
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post05 May 2018, 01:05

steve2267 wrote:BP, do accelerate-stop / accelerate-go distances get tossed out (or paid lip service) for those types of takeoffs? That is, you're taking off whether you like it or not... it's just that if you lose a blower during roll... you're going for a swim (Diego)?


We are the only crew I am aware of that took off under what was called "EWO" emergency war orders conditions, in a time that was not at least a crisis. That meant there was definitely over a 1000 feet where we could not takeoff nor could we abort. Did I mention that your heartbeat speeds up? :D And did I mention that those guys who did the charts for takeoff weight vs runway and temp are frickin genius's. They had it down to the foot.

FWIW
BP

PS I think I still have the message from ChJCS that authorized the max load EWO takeoff. I also remember thinking that guy is out of his mind. The U-2 guy said that we did not understand the gravity of the mission. I remember mumbling under my breath that I think he didn't understand "the gravity" of the situation. As I said he was very quiet, business only for the rest of the mission after takeoff. No comments on "gravity" at all.
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1681
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post05 May 2018, 01:21

Q model?
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, add dollop of F-117 & gob of F-22, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well, then bake. Whaddya get? An F-35.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post05 May 2018, 01:39

One version of my most extreme takeoff on NAS Nowra 6,200 foot runway with the last couple of thousand uphill getting more extreme in the last few hundred feet before an abrupt deep drop off into the gully at the end of runway 08:

viewtopic.php?f=58&t=23050&p=246276&hilit=gully#p246276

download/file.php?id=17192

The most extreme NAS Nowra takeoff was with a TA4G with 3x 2,000 pound full fuel tanks (centre being buddy tank) doing the ‘ski jump’ on 6,200 foot Runway 08 on a hot windless summer day, contemplating where the aircraft should be pointed, IF, during the ‘interminable’ takeoff roll things did not go as advertised according to the TA4G NATOPS Take Off Performance Charts (thankfully just making all the benchmarks perfectly) as it trundled down towards that magic drop off into the gully off the end of RW 08; but NOT BEFORE bouncing up & down on that long nose oleo – going nowhere performance-wise – on that last few hundred feet uphill (the jump-de-ski effect).

Yep, veer/turn right – eject. But then the wheels left the tarmac & aircraft dropped into the gully, slowly accelerating ‘downhill’. No performance in TA4G with that 6,000lb extra load/drag with full internal fuel of 4,800lbs on that ‘hot’ day. [A long field arrest was perhaps possible – but not certain.] NATOPS is PITCH PERFECT - solo in a Trainer SKYHAWK no one can hear you SCREAM! :D CLICK on MAP GRAPHIC to then ZOOM in - red line follows the gully off RunWay 08 somewhat.

Image
Attachments
NASnowraRunways3D.jpg
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

blindpilot

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1128
  • Joined: 01 Mar 2013, 18:21
  • Location: Colorado

Unread post05 May 2018, 03:11

steve2267 wrote:Q model?

Yes, but mission relay only for U-2s. Trying to refuel would do bad things to those long glider wings, and they had mega range anyway. We just needed time on station, was the reason for the heavy load.

BP

PS for accuracy - The U-2F technically was air refuelable, but it was never (rarely?) used. The R's not, had longer wings, and longer range making the need even less likely.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post07 May 2018, 17:46

RAAF F-35A training systems delivered to Williamtown
07 May 2018 aviation.com.au

"The RAAF has taken delivery of two key training systems for its forthcoming F-35A Lightning II fighters. A weapons load trainer and an ejection systems maintenance trainer were delivered to RAAF Base Williamtown by an Antonov An-124 on May 2, and will be installed at the new Integrated Training Centre which is nearing completion at a greenfield site on the northern side of the base.

When assembled, the weapon load trainer represents the underside of an F-35 hybrid of all three models, split down the aircraft centreline. One side will be a weapons bay of the F-35A and C models which share a common weapons bay and forward fuselage, while the other side will be the smaller F-35B weapons bay and wider forward fuselage which houses that model’s lift-fan.

The trainer also features wing station hardpoints, with one side having the common wing and main undercarriage of the F-35A and B models, while the other side is an F-35C undercarriage and wing which is of greater span and has a wing-fold mechanism...."

Photo: "The An-124 unloading the weapons load trainer and ejection seat maintenance trainer at Williamtown. (Defence)" http://australianaviation.com.au/wp-con ... 0_0041.jpg


Source: http://australianaviation.com.au/2018/0 ... lliamtown/
Attachments
AN-124wiliamtown02may2018deliveryF-35trainers.jpg
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post14 May 2018, 12:10

RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2392
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post14 May 2018, 14:08

spazsinbad wrote:


Beautiful bird.

C-5 knockoff though, IMO. Now the AN-225, THAT's innovative!
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post26 May 2018, 18:38

6 Page PDF of this entire OzAv article attached - only a small amount of excerpts below - lots of details in PDF lah.
Starting from SCRATCH
June 2018 ANDREW MCLAUGHLIN

The RAAF’s Growler airborne electronic attack force is nearing initial operational capability...

“..New Growler crew go into the US Navy training system at VAQ-129, the US Navy’s West Coast EA-18G Fleet Replenishment Squadron (FRS) based at Whidbey Island, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

For those humans, they are taught to fly US Navy style,” GPCAPT Churchill said. “There is an Australian ‘course mum’ over there to mentor and look after them, but fundamentally they pass a US Navy course. Then what we’ve built here is an operational transition for when they get back, to ‘Australianise’ them so to speak.

“So, they’ll learn to speak Australian on the radios again, and to understand Australian air-to-air tactics, which are the big difference,” he added. “The way we operate is more like the US Air Force – we don’t have large aircraft carriers which is what US Navy tactics are broadly built around.”...

...Unsettling
A RAAF Growler suffered a catastrophic engine failure during takeoff from Nellis AFB in Nevada on January 28 during the type’s first deployment to a Red Flag exercise. The Growler’s crew reportedly did a remarkable job to stay with the aircraft and to keep it away from large numbers of parked aircraft nearby, as it was only seconds away from rotating. Unofficial pictures of the aircraft showed it at rest off the righthand side of Nellis’s eastern runway with large amounts of damage to the rear fuselage, right vertical stabiliser, undercarriage and right wing.

While the likely loss of an airframe will obviously hurt the RAAF, the loss of a number of ALQ-99 jammer pods which the aircraft was carrying is a blow to the wider Growler community, as production of these pods ended over a decade ago.

But while the damage assessment of the aircraft has been completed, a formal decision on the aircraft’s future is yet to be made.

“We know that the accident was a right engine failure on takeoff. It was uncontained, and there was a component failure which we think very likely caused the engine failure, but the report will determine exactly why,” GPCAPT Churchill said.

“To see one of our jets like that was upsetting. I guess I feel quite paternal about that. But what I can say is that the aircraft was extensively damaged, and the people who inspected it have done their reports for Defence to make a decision.”

Always evolving
The RAAF intends to stay in lockstep with the US Navy as it upgrades its Growler fleet. Apart from the Next Generation Jammer, the US Navy’s larger Growler Block II spiral upgrade program will add numerous other enhancements that mirror those of the Super Hornet Block III.

“Every couple of years there will be a new capability upgrade. Similar to the F-35 where they talk about their block upgrades, Growler will also have block upgrades,” GPCAPT Churchill said.

“There is definitely a requirement to keep evolving these platforms, because the electromagnetic spectrum is increasingly congested, contested, and dynamic,” he said.

“By dynamic I mean it is largely software-defined, so it can look one way and then the next second it can look completely different. Our people in the program are getting some visibility on those things now, and this is helping us to understand them so we can bring forward proposals to government.”

Although it’s still early days, the RAAF has also started educating the Growler’s wider ‘customer base’ about what the aircraft can bring to the fight....”

Source: Australian Aviation Magazine June 2018 No.360
Attachments
Growler RAAF Australian Aviation June 2018 pp6.pdf
(608.46 KiB) Downloaded 222 times
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

brucealrighty

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 32
  • Joined: 22 Mar 2015, 07:06

Unread post01 Jun 2018, 16:54

This seems an appropriate place to plonk this youtube vid discussing '5th generation' air bases. Its a long vid but I thought it interesting how he compared the integrated information systems of the RAN aegis equipped air warfare destroyers with the 'phone, pen and paper' operation rooms of land bases (the soft underbelly of the airforce) at around the 19 min mark. It quickly gets too complicated for me from there!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tC4cheCpEcE&t=16s
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post01 Jun 2018, 17:18

Thanks for that (I've yet to watch video becuz 0218 my time but I'm wondering if the LHD ops rooms are mentioned?). :drool:
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post09 Jun 2018, 16:22

:doh: Damn I still have not watched that Utubby Movie above and it is 0115 here <sigh> perhaps this article is about same?
Carriers Aren’t The Only Big Targets: The Challenges of Mobile Basing
08 Jun 2018 Robbin Laird

"...the United States Air Force, along with the Australian Air Force, has been working on a concept called Agile Combat Employment, which seeks to disperse the force, and make it difficult for the enemy to know where are you at, when are you going to be there, and how long are you are going to be there. [BRING ON THE BUBBLE MACHINES - F-35Bs!]

“We’re at the very preliminary stages of being able to do this but the organization is part of the problem for us, because we are very used to, over the last several decades, of being in very large bases, very large organizations, and we stovepipe the various career fields, and one commander is not in charge of the force that you need to disperse. We’re taking a look at this, of how we might reorganize, to be able to employ this concept in the Pacific, and other places.”

Also, at the Williams seminar was the Chief of Staff of the Finnish Air Force. He was there, in part, to highlight the importance of living in a contested region and of being prepared for force mobility. In February, I talked with his predecessor, Lt. Gen. Kim Jäämeri, who is now deputy Chief of Staff for strategy for the Finnish Defence Forces. He highlighted the distributed operations aspect of the Finnish approach.

“It is becoming clear to our partners that you cannot run air operations in a legacy manner under the threat of missile barrages of long range weapons. The legacy approach to operating from air bases just won’t work in these conditions. For many of our partners, this is a revelation; for us it has been a fact of life for a long time, and we have operated with this threat in the forefront of operations for a long time,” Jäämeri said.

RAAF Air Commodore Ken Robinson
During a visit to Amberley Airbase just before the Williams Foundation seminar in March 2018, I met with the Commander of the RAAF’s Combat Support Group. “We are having to reacquaint ourselves with some tasks and challenges which we parked to the side a bit while we were in the Middle East for so long. We did not have to worry so much about mobile basing to counter the principal threats in that theatre,” Robinson said. “The mindset is in transition now.”

He underscored that this clearly is an army and air force challenge. “We are good at supporting maneuver with our tactical transport aircraft and Australia’s Army aviation capability, including the Tiger Reconnaissance Helicopter, but what we need to do is move to the next level of support to maneuver the most lethal part of our air power capability across a range of airfield options.”

Core capabilities such as providing fuel for air systems when operationalized for a mobile airbasing force on Australian territory are clearly different from supporting a fixed airbase. For example, “expeditionary fuel capabilities is something that’s very much on the forefront of my mind. Lean and agile support packages to operate expeditionary airfields are also key, so that we can offer the best possible maneuver options to the aviators without tying down strategic airlift.”

Whether to pursue mobile basing or build greater depth in Australian territorial defense is one of the core choices facing Australia as it continues its force modernization. Either they can emphasize going deeper into the air-maritime domain in the Pacific or significantly augment their mobile defense capabilities leveraging the vast Australian territory. The role of active defenses working with airpower mobility would be a priority in this second case.......

The UK is working closely with the US Marines who have mobile basing in their DNA. The recent Marine training exercise, which they call WTI, emphasized the concept of mobility and strike from mobile bases. The F-35B was at the heart of this, but mobility also requires a focus on support, which is integrated to the point of operation, rather than focused on having a series of Walmarts and maintainers with accounts at a Walmart store. It is about reshaping logistics to enhance operations to the point of attack, and this will be a major challenge to how the US focuses on its support structure for F-35...."

Source: https://breakingdefense.com/2018/06/car ... le-basing/
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

madrat

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1942
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post09 Jun 2018, 19:11

Nothing like transporting super secret sauce on less than super secure transports...
Offline

beepa

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 237
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2007, 22:36
  • Location: Aust.

Unread post09 Jun 2018, 22:17

Good to see the guys using the new toys....

http://www.contactairlandandsea.com/201 ... th-sortie/
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 21405
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post11 Jun 2018, 01:55

Have we seen a similar photo of the three thingos before? See attached JPG from the above post:

http://www.contactairlandandsea.com/wp- ... 00x444.jpg

Attachments
RAAFlukeF-35A1000sortieJun2018.jpg
RAAFlukeF-35A1000sortieJun2018zoom3lens.jpg
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: hornetfinn, weasel1962 and 15 guests