Australian Defence Force

News and discussion threads on defence in other parts of the world.
Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

Topical, as I understand UK is working on this as well.
Image
Image

Remote Pilot Warfare Officers from 822X SQN and an engineering team from the Aircraft Maintenance and Flight Trials Unit have successfully completed a first-of-class flying sortie of the Navy’s Shiebel S100 Camcopter from the flight deck of HMAS Adelaide. The trials are being run to gauge the effectiveness of the platform to be able to operate around manned aircraft systems. The RPWOs will continue flight trials on HMAS Adelaide throughout the Indo-Pacific Endeavour deployment across Southeast Asia and the Northeast Indian Ocean. Adelaide is part of a Task Group made up of five ships, 11 helicopters and nearly 1800 personnel that will conduct activities with 14 countries over the next two months, returning to Australia by mid-December.
http://images.defence.gov.au/S20223434

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Lord Jim »

It appears to be a good piece of kit that has had many customers. I assume the person with the control unit is only involved with launch and recovery operations. I wonder of such a system could operate of a River class utilising a container for hangarage and support needs?

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Tempest414 »

Lord Jim wrote: 27 Oct 2022, 07:54 It appears to be a good piece of kit that has had many customers. I assume the person with the control unit is only involved with launch and recovery operations. I wonder of such a system could operate of a River class utilising a container for hangarage and support needs?
Camcopter already has from the Brazilian B2's some years back great video on youtube

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

Yeah, Shiebel have been operating these off various vessels across many navies for quite a few years now. Not all got beyond a demonstration, but the kit seems to have come a long way (I'm thinking the engine fuel upgrades and the payload upgrades lately). Australia ran trials a few years back and have selected these for our OPVs, and clearly other vessels like the LHDs as well. What interests me is that the system for running these things is obviously maturing in the RAN, illustrated by a new warfare officer category (the Remote Pilot Warfare Officer). Very good.

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

These users liked the author Mercator for the post:
Tempest414

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Tempest414 »

When I see this I think what could be done with a CANZUK battle group of

1 x carrier (UK )
1 x SSN
1 x LHD (A)
1 x LPD (UK)
2 x BAY ( 1 A & 1 UK )
4 x Destroyers (A & UK )
9 x Frigates ( 2 x A , 3 x C , 3 x UK 1 x NZ )
4 x SSK ( 2 each from A & C )
4 x Tankers ( 1 from each country )

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »



Much of this was known for over a year (via Parliamentary Works Committee submissions), but the Australian ABC is just figuring it out and happens to have another China special report coming out tonight. So a bit of a beat up, but at least it's rising up into the public consciousness.

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »


Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

A while back there was chatter about the ADF considering KC130J in the mix as well. I note the announcement below has no numbers or types at this time. Though I have not yet listened to what the Minister has to say on the subject. Possibly more details today.


R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by R686 »

Mercator wrote: 31 Oct 2022, 22:57 A while back there was chatter about the ADF considering KC130J in the mix as well. I note the announcement below has no numbers or types at this time. Though I have not yet listened to what the Minister has to say on the subject. Possibly more details today.


Interesting

They don’t seem to be going to get rid of C27 just yet anyway

Going in for a upgrades

https://news.defence.gov.au/media/media ... cs-upgrade

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

This from a pretty well connected aviation journo:
https://adbr.com.au/defence-to-replace- ... e-c-130js/

“Defence has identified that the new C-130J aircraft represents the only option that meets all of Australia’s capability requirements and assures Defence’s medium air mobility capability without introducing substantial cost, schedule and capability risk,” it added. “As a result, new C-130J aircraft will be the only option that Defence will progress for Government approval under Project AIR 7404 Phase 1 in 2023.”

This first paragraph is perhaps in reference to reported submissions to the Commonwealth from rival bidders proposing alternatives such as the Airbus A400M, Embraer C-390, and the Kawasaki C-2 transports. The Review is scheduled to report in March 2023, but it has been widely reported the AIR 7404 decision had been taken prior to the commencement of the Review process, and was already well-advanced through the US FMS approval process.

The number of new aircraft that will be acquired under AIR 7404 has not been disclosed, but it is believed 24 long-fuselage C-130J-30s have been requested to replace both the current Richmond-based C-130J-30s operated by 37SQN which entered service in 1999, and possibly the RAAF’s 10 C-27Js operated by 35SQN at Amberley which entered service in 2016. It has also been reported that a separate tranche of KC-130J tankers may also be under consideration.

The US Defense Security Acquisition Agency (DSCA) will likely publish its approval notification in the coming weeks, and a final decision is expected to be made at or near the completion of the Review in early 2023.

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

The avionics upgrade on the Spartan may just be route navigation and IFF upgrades that a lot of the older transport aircraft have had to undertake. It might not be a vote of confidence, but rather something you have to have to get anywhere these days, even if you only own the aircraft for a few more years.

They are pretty much only doing fisheries patrols right now. A pretty sad state of affairs for a fancy transport aircraft.
These users liked the author Mercator for the post:
Timmymagic

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

The 'lesson learned' in this article below refers to the C27J:
https://australianaviation.com.au/2022/ ... -hercules/

Another example of where there's not a lot of love for the Spartan. The aircrew for the extra airframes has to come from somewhere. It will probably be the Spartans.

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by R686 »

https://www.dsca.mil/press-media/major- ... 0-aircraft

DSCA notifications of RAAF C130J x24

Can’t see anything about KC-130J

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

Yeah the ADBR article above thought they would be a separate project, if it goes ahead. More than likely they would do it that way if it was separate funding from the special forces budget, or even just a separate project.

Also, DTR had an article out today on the C27J project. Apparently it's only $70 million and it's only upgrading the cryptography on some radios. Not a major deal. Doesn't look like it's anything more than maintaining the capability, it seems.
These users liked the author Mercator for the post:
R686

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Lord Jim »

Whilst the selection of new C-130J-30 aircraft to replace the existing fleet, is a logical decision, was any consideration given to the A400 at all. IT would obviously involve additional costs to set up a a new support infrastructure, wouldn't the increased payload and range been of benefit to the RAAF?

R686
Senior Member
Posts: 2322
Joined: 28 May 2015, 02:43
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by R686 »

Lord Jim wrote: 03 Nov 2022, 11:27 Whilst the selection of new C-130J-30 aircraft to replace the existing fleet, is a logical decision, was any consideration given to the A400 at all. IT would obviously involve additional costs to set up a a new support infrastructure, wouldn't the increased payload and range been of benefit to the RAAF?
I was not shocked at the decision but a little surprised that A400 was not selected even though our kit is getting larger


It was supposedly also looked at but I think the after sales support from the US was the deciding factor and that it is in service be retraining to be done

Little J
Member
Posts: 973
Joined: 02 May 2015, 14:35
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Little J »

Given their experience with Airbus Helicopters, I suspect they decided to stay safe
These users liked the author Little J for the post:
swoop

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Little J wrote: 03 Nov 2022, 18:39 Given their experience with Airbus Helicopters, I suspect they decided to stay safe
I am pretty sure in the press release that although they did nt mention Airbus, that they were stressing as a positive the RAAF's history and experience of using the Herculus.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Timmymagic »

Mercator wrote: 28 Oct 2022, 01:35 Yeah, Shiebel have been operating these off various vessels across many navies for quite a few years now. Not all got beyond a demonstration, but the kit seems to have come a long way (I'm thinking the engine fuel upgrades and the payload upgrades lately). Australia ran trials a few years back and have selected these for our OPVs, and clearly other vessels like the LHDs as well. What interests me is that the system for running these things is obviously maturing in the RAN, illustrated by a new warfare officer category (the Remote Pilot Warfare Officer). Very good.
Worth noting that Schiebel are working on a larger, more capable version, the S-300. Looks like they've scaled up the solution with not many changes, which is perfectly sensible. 24 hours mission duration has been mentioned, with larger payloads. Given the S-100 managed to carry (and fire) 2 Martlet missiles it sounds like a very tempting capability...It could carry an EO/IR sensor and radar simultaneously with a weapon loadout for a significant patrol duration. A small dipping sonar could also be a potential payload.

Image

https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/eu ... euronaval/
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post (total 2):
MercatorTempest414

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2900
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by abc123 »

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... eculation/

So, what do you think about speculations about ordering 4-6 intermediate/transitional submarines until SSNs arrive in 2040s?

The article mentions KSS-III Batch 2 or Barracudas.
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Timmymagic »

abc123 wrote: 04 Nov 2022, 15:17 So, what do you think about speculations about ordering 4-6 intermediate/transitional submarines until SSNs arrive in 2040s?

The article mentions KSS-III Batch 2 or Barracudas.
Zero possibility. Australia will go for the Collins upgrade. The RAN knows that if they show the slightest interest in anything else its goodbye SSN's...
These users liked the author Timmymagic for the post:
Mercator

Mercator
Member
Posts: 669
Joined: 06 May 2015, 02:10
Contact:
Australia

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Mercator »

yes, definitely a Collins upgrade. I think it's already partially approved, actually. Previously, under the older acquisition timetable, it was just a question of whether they would upgrade all of the Collins before the French SSK started to come online online. (I think the plan at one stage was to do only four). Now they obviously need to do all of them. It's years into the future though. We will have to wait for the entire SSN plan to be made public before any of those details get firmed up.

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5550
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Tempest414 »

Timmymagic wrote: 04 Nov 2022, 12:03
Mercator wrote: 28 Oct 2022, 01:35 Yeah, Shiebel have been operating these off various vessels across many navies for quite a few years now. Not all got beyond a demonstration, but the kit seems to have come a long way (I'm thinking the engine fuel upgrades and the payload upgrades lately). Australia ran trials a few years back and have selected these for our OPVs, and clearly other vessels like the LHDs as well. What interests me is that the system for running these things is obviously maturing in the RAN, illustrated by a new warfare officer category (the Remote Pilot Warfare Officer). Very good.
Worth noting that Schiebel are working on a larger, more capable version, the S-300. Looks like they've scaled up the solution with not many changes, which is perfectly sensible. 24 hours mission duration has been mentioned, with larger payloads. Given the S-100 managed to carry (and fire) 2 Martlet missiles it sounds like a very tempting capability...It could carry an EO/IR sensor and radar simultaneously with a weapon loadout for a significant patrol duration. A small dipping sonar could also be a potential payload.

Image

https://www.navalnews.com/event-news/eu ... euronaval/
This new S-300 may even be able to carry a Sea Venom or 4 Hero 120 loiter weapon

I have to say I like this a lot this would transform the RB2's with the ability to have organic over watch even the S-100 would be a game changer for the RB2's

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 3224
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
United Kingdom

Re: Australian Defence Force

Post by Timmymagic »

Tempest414 wrote: 05 Nov 2022, 08:17 This new S-300 may even be able to carry a Sea Venom or 4 Hero 120 loiter weapon
I don't think it would have the sensors and weapon system needed to really get the full capability of Sea Venom, it could be useful as a data link in an engagement perhaps. Brimstone could be a possibility though. But in truth the capability for Martlet would be quite enough. Always thought the S-100 with 2 Martlet was perhaps marginal, with limited range and loitering capability. S-300 could easily manage 2 Martlet and carry sensors to get the best of it combined with loitering capability/range.

Post Reply