6 RAAF Supers to Growlers (Fewer F-35s?)

[gtx]

It is obvious that Es are not likely

[Conan]

Growlers have a bright future here though and getting brighter from all reports...

[gtx]

Agreed. They will be in service to something like 2035 IMHO

[Conan]

Agreed. They will be in service to something like 2035 IMHO

I'd suggest possibly even longer. Govt and RAAF are getting nervous about our contingency buffer being increasingly eroded by the delays and extended development.

It's getting to the point where 3 Sqn's of Shornets and Growlers and 24x JSF's is becoming an increasingly likely force structure.

L-M left Canberra recently VERY unhappy.

Boeing OTOH...

[gtx]

It's getting to the point where 3 Sqn's of Shornets and Growlers and 24x JSF's is becoming an increasingly likely force structure.

I doubt that. I suspect you will see that the only SHs are the current ones.

[Conan]

I doubt that. I suspect you will see that the only SHs are the current ones.

I wish that were the case, but that's not what I'm hearing. The push for it isn't coming from RAAF but it's becoming increasingly accepted within ADF circles, that the larger SH/Growler fleet is going to become a reality.

I don't presume that we will abandon F-35 entirely, but the case against primarily investing in it is getting weaker as the years go by, as our Hornets increasingly run out of airframe life and no useable F-35 product is within sight.

A change of Govt may not necessarily change that perception either. Senator Johnson is an unabashed fan of FMS acquisitions that have little to no risk attached to them...

[gtx]

I have been hearing otherwise: that both Govt and Opposition are more comfortable with the F-35 status and that more SHs are seen as less of a need. However that said it is an election year...

[Conan]

I have been hearing otherwise: that both Govt and Opposition are more comfortable with the F-35 status and that more SHs are seen as less of a need. However that said it is an election year...

If that were the case I doubt we'd have seen the LOR or the following DSCA announcement...

[gtx]

That is all part of the process...

[spazsinbad]

FnA18E/G Sustained G Flight Envelopes Graphic: http://defense-update.com/wp-content/up ... velope.jpg FROM:

Australian Growler Crews Have A Heavy Workload Ahead 07 Sep 2012 Richard_Dudley

http://defense-update.com/20120907_ausi_growlers.html

Graphic Caption: "Comparison of the Super Hornet and Growler flight envelopes with and without the ALQ-99 pod. Chart: NAVAIR"

[count_to_10]

Does that mean that Growlers are non supersonic capable?

[linkomart]

on military.

[XanderCrews]

Does that mean that Growlers are non supersonic capable?

purely anecdotal on my part, but when loaded, no they are not supersonic capable according to the Growler pilot I talked to. They are also a much heavier aircraft than the SH in general.

[spazsinbad]

The propellor electricity generators at the front of the underwing pods do not allow supersonico (when they are turning I'll guess - when feathered [according to NATOPS? high Mach is possible?). New jamming pods in the works may have these propellors in a tunnel which will allow more stealth? and more speed AFAIK.

http://www.navy.mil/management/photodb/ ... 0X-003.jpg

Graphic and following text from Preliminary Growler NATOPS here:

http://info.publicintelligence.net/E18-G-000.pdf (22Mb)

Stores on Stations 3 and 9 have the props in front.
______________

Interesting RELEVANT to CURRENT LIMITATION on F-35s (until cleared later on):

4.1.9 Prohibited Maneuvers [GROWLER NATOPS
Environmental -
1. Flight in lightning or thunderstorms....
&
3. Flight above 650 KCAS and below 18,000 feet MSL (as shown in figure 4-2).

4.2 EXTERNAL STORES LIMITATIONS
The NTRP 3-22.4-EA-18G (EA-18G Unclassified NATIP) defines the stores limitations for all EA-18G authorized suspension equipment and external stores, including external fuel tanks.

[count_to_10]

From the image, it looks like the outer hard points are blocking the jammers. How does that work?