Australia never officially had an order for additional 28 aircraft. The original order was for 72 f35s which is still being fulfilled. It was planned that an additional 28 would be acquired to replace the super hornets but with the NGAD coming online within the next decade, and if the US is willing to export it to allies it would make sense for Australia to wait for a potential 6th generation capability, which is why there will be an open tender for the super hornet replacement.
@@paythepiper6283 but they’re exporting f35s as we speak, are sharing their nuclear technology with us and are willing to sell us b21s as well…so why wouldn’t they?
The department of defense nor the American public will be keen on giving ngad our best fighter to our Allie’s. we didn’t do it with the f22 so why would we do it with ngad?
Because the Growler will be in operation into the foreseeable future. It makes sense to continue using the 24 F Models and look towards what comes next.
@@texleeger8973 yep, he's just another Russian bot. One of many, who's sole mission is to spread disinformation. The main export of the Russian economy
@@dexlab7539Australia actually going to replace all soon with more advanced 6th generation aircraft and drones. The F35 was a decade too late entering service. The super hornets block III will do fine till 6th generation aircraft comes along. The F35 isn't that great. It has its disadvantages in beast mode that can't compete what the super hornets can deliver. To remain stealth in a F35 you have very limited payload option. Ok if for just scout mission. In major battle it's useless where it has to lose stealth for more payload
No; boeing is an american country. The US is fully aware of the capabilities of the MQ-28 Ghostbat, and isn't impressed. The Us has recently been bringing the drone in for further experimentation (I.e making significant improvements)
The US is still currently using those drones to experiment with and refine their AI systems. They or other drones are expected to be ordered as part of the collaborative combat aircraft program alongside the ngad and paired with the f35 as well.
@@Devil-ev3zm Don’t know if this is based on any facts as the US and Aus are perusing joint development with the USA evaluating it extensively. Not sure where you found them not being impressed with it, but if you have a reputable source I’d be keen to have a look at it👍
That's the thing. Australia is getting ready to replace all aircraft soon for more advanced 6th generation so the UK tempest could be on the cards for the next purchase along with MQ ghost bat drones. The F35A was a decade late entering service. The reason why RAAF don't want more F35A in a decade will be replaced by 6th generation aircraft. The super hornets with Block III upgrade will do fine for the gap period. As it actually outperforms the F35A in beast mode. For F35A to remain stealth it has very limited payload option and when it's in beast mode. It actually has its disadvantages in comparison to Super hornet. It's just cheaper to upgrade the super hornets for the time being than actually purchasing more F35A that will soon to be replaced
@@Devil-ev3zm So mate research harder Boeing Australia yes is a American company but is a Australian subsidiary full of Australian's that bought out the Australian Government aviation company. meaning anything invented by Boeing Australia has to abide by Australian defence laws on secrecy and all other Australian laws. MQ28A Ghost Bat is 70% designed and built in Australia and even the AI wasn't built by Boeing and is being used in a lot of other Australian tech from other companies prove this. Also the detachable nose design is a Australian invention we trialed on i think Mirage iii jets long ago. Boeing Australia is already designing new drones bigger and different as Boeing Australia has a big R&D facilitiy in Australia. Even if research Boeing Australia the smart Australian's not Yankees can only do special resins and other parts on planes proves not all is American lol. .BAA is Australia's only designer and manufacturer of advanced composite aerostructure components for commercial aircraft. Boeing Aerostructures Australia manufactures the 'moveable trailing edge' control surfaces of the 787 using a unique carbon fibre production technology developed in Victoria called resin infusion. This is Australia's largest aerospace contract valued at $5 billion over 20 years, and Fishermans Bend is the only Boeing location in the world to apply the unique resin infusion system that enables the components to be cured without a traditional autoclave. Boeing Aerostructures Australia has invested $70 million in site improvements to support 787 production increases over the next decade.
The F/A-18 Super Hornet is the most multirole and reliable Fighter ever built. They made a great decision keeping them around to compliment their current F-35s.
Unfortunately, Super Hornets are wearing out a lot faster then the older legacy Hornets. Not being used on carriers will help prolong Australia's Super Hornets in comparison to America's.
And you do not need the functionality of the F-35 if something cheaper will work. Not every mission is going to be one that needs stealth. Heck, you could have a few F-35s, and a few SH that are receiving information from the F-35.
Australia first bought one lot of Super Hornets, then a few years later decided to buy more of them, with some of them being the Growler variant. This tells you that the RAAF had tried out the Super Hornets and were impressed. We're getting the impression that the only advantage the F-35 has over the Super Hornet is that it's stealthy. I believe Australia would have a more capable air force with a mix of F-35s and multi-role Super Hornets.
F-35A, B, and C are far more reliable than Super Hornets, with a fraction of the MMHPFH, better availability, far longer combat radii for A and C models, and are cheaper to acquire and operate.
great video but there where a few inaccuracies that i picked up the RAAF operates three combat f-35 sqns being no.3sqn no.75 sqn and no.77 sqn(which is probably were you got the 3 squadrons amount from) but they also have one conversion squadron being 2 OCU the RAAF only has ever had one super hornet squadron you might be getting confused with the classic hornets which where replaced by the f-35s in the aforementioned 3 squadrons another reason for keeping the super hornets is there parts commonality with the Growlers operated by the RAAF Other then that it was a great video thanks for doing one on australia
This is not a big surprise here in Australian. The RAAF had indicated very early on in the acquisition process of the F35 that a mix of F35 and super Hornets 🐝 were the likely and preferred balance for the needs of the RAAF . Also they were ordering each block of F35 one block at a time.
@@Will_CH1 war has moved on, now its the age of the "drone swarm", FAR cheaper than a F-35 lawn dart, and using those "smrt" drones like the ones they use instead of real fireworks these days, only takes one cheap drone sucked into an intake to wreck the jet pilots day. You should check out what they are doing with them on military summary channel (R18+ version). (It's a REAL eye opener for the "preppers" too). nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.
it's capabilities to enter indonesian air space hit targets in the capital or elsewhere and get out of there unharmed scared indonesian leaders big time. that is why it was a strike bomber, super fast and capable.
Australia’s leadership on the E-7 Wedgetail program is impressive. They basically owned it from the beginning. Far superior to the E-3. Thanks for working out all for the rest of us.
As a Mission Crew Commander Air Battle Manager on AWACS who have flown missions with Wedgetail crewmembers on our jet, there are still many things the E-3 can do the Wedge cant. The Wedge doesn't have an ECO or his systems, it doesn't have an escape tube through the fuselage floor, it doesn't have a few of the radar bands the very flexible E-3 radar has. As for the airframe the 737 is far superior. The E-3 is built on America's first jet ever, the 707. The engines smoke a little, and the range and speed isnt all that great, but by keeping fighter CAPs between us and the bad guys you really dont need to be fast and we can stay airborne for a long time hitting the tanker aircraft.
Yeah different roles and if your a top level commander, you can make things do stuff that the lay pilot is still wondering/confused about, ranging from pawn swapping, kamikaze, to empirical attack/defense, to safety strikes with back up(standard stuff) AI has a lot to learn about our history... that and fear.. lol
@@zedwpd I don't think people realize the amount of upgrades and modernization the E-3 fleet has undergone. Nor should anyone think America would not totally dominate the AEW space. Just because something is newer, doesn't make it better. I'm sure the Aussie bird is great, but its not like America just 'gives up' an advantage. Most of the serious companies involved in its development were bloody American companies anyway.
Australia, the worlds biggest aircraft carrier. If something does kick off in the indo-pacific im sure there will be many nations using Australia as a base of operations.
australia is too far away from anything important to actually be much use. its more than 4000km from the south china seas, no fighter aircraft can travel that far and come back.
@@hughmungus2760 with air to air refueling the RAAF has this in mind. Also in Australia there are B52 from USAF and also soon to be B1. So not that far away from south China sea when you really think about it. But can be a forward base of operations just like WWII
@@Datalore74 Even with midair refueling you're looking at 12 hour long missions where response times will be so slow that you'll likely miss any targets of opportunity. strategic bombers can be placed anywhere really.
The issue of cost has come into play. F-35 are costly to by and very costly to operate and maintain. Most of the F-35 delivered to Australia arrived with 26+ unresolved issues during manufacture most still not resolved fully. Now there are additional upgrades that further increase the operational costs. It’s getting to the point pilots will spend more time in training simulators than actual airtime.
That's a fear for Canada, since Canada has finally committed to purchase 88 new F-35's from the U.S. Many in Canada preferred the Swedish SABB/Gripen, which would have been built in Canada and would have provided 140 Gripens to meet the domestic and NATO commitments,for the same cost, followed by lower maintenance costs.
@@yakidin63 I think you need to talk to a RAAF pilot on how much actual air time they are getting because of operating and maintenance costs on the F-35 is all I’m going to say. (I know two of them)
This is not entirely Correct, Japan will have the second largest F35 fleet, but the won’t happen until 2025. Australia currently has the second largest F35 fleet with 72 F35a’s. Japan will get 135 planned F35a and F35b . Australia has 24 super hornets and 12 E18 growlers. Australia is committing to the 6th generation fighter. The F18/E18 will be replaced by a 6 generation fighter.
The order wasn't cancelled because it was never actually an order, it was an option but they never ordered them, like you said, the super hornet still has 15+ years of service life so no reason to replace them
Australia has very unique needs. Given its geographic location, likely enemies are quite far away. The B-21 Raider could not only take over a strike role from the old long range F-111s, (since the F-18 never had the same range), but it could do so without relying so heavily on tankers. I hope Australia surprises everyone and gets B-21. The old restrictions on stealth technology from the F-22 days should end. Our allies need stealth. And it isn't like China hasn't made every effort to steal our stealth technology by hitting our own contractors directly with spies and hackers. Many of these efforts were quite successful.
F-15EX is a more feasible replacement for the retired F-111 and current Super Hornets and Growlers. Australia can get effective deterrence value of US strategic bombers for free simply by allowing the USAF to use Australia’s bases.
F-15EX has much further range than the F-18s and aerial refueling only increases that advantage. With tanks they can also travel much farther than F-35A that have to avoid external stores. The range is not quite as good as F-111 but much closer than any other fighter currently in production. F-15EX is a new variant with vast improvements under the hood and is just starting production now. It is a perfect fit for Australia’s needs. To reach even further out requires strategic bombers or maritime patrol aircraft. Australia already has some MPA. Strategic bombers are unaffordable for Australia to buy but fortunately are available for free simply by allowing the USAF to base their bombers in Australia.
Australia has uniquely few defense needs. It "needs" to be able to provide token forces to places like Niger as part of a US owned coalition. And that's about it. There are no enemies. Every penny Australia spends on its military is wasted.
The RAAF has 36 Super Hornet airframes in service with 24 F/A-18F's and 12 E/A-18G's, keeping the F/A-18F's in service makes sense given the commonality between these two aircraft, the F/A-18F will also more than likely be used as a control platform for the MQ-28 Ghost Bats, having a two man crew with a WSO onboard would certainly be a better idea than piling that workload onto the single pilot of an F-35A.
Selling them all and replacing them with 36 F-15EX would provide a more capable and more flexible platform at only slightly more cost, still cheaper to operate than F-35. All of them can be dual seaters for use as drone controllers, electronic warfare platforms, or strike platforms as needed.
@@stupidburp The simple fact is we have trained aircrews and ground crews with a decent supply of parts, switching to the F-15EX is not as simple as you think and would require several years of getting things organised before they would even reach IOC, better to upgrade the Super Hornets to Block 3 and replace them down the track with the new generation of aircraft when they come online, there will be a few options available when it comes to that time including the FCAS, Tempest, as well as the NGAD.
@@stupidburp If we did get the F-15EX we would only replace the super hornets, the EX has a completely different mission set to the growler so they will stay
The creator failed to mention the Super Hornet is being fitted out to deliver the JASSM & LASSM cruise missiles and are a new addition to the RAAF arsenal. These are 500 - 1000km range missiles. You don't need a stealth plane to deliver a long range cruise missile. The Super Hornet is very suited to this role and linked with the Growlers Oz also deploys it is a very capable set of platforms and munitions for long range land and sea strike. The F-35 on the other hand fires the shorter range Kongsberg Naval Strike anti ship missile.
The super’s are one of the best purchases ever made buy Australia….it has just taken time to equip them with long range weapons and still no longer range weapons for the growlers
The Super Hornets/Growlers are maybe 12 years old- they are not old aircraft. Wise to upgrade them and use in conjunction with the F-35. In addition, Japan has some F-35A's, but the numbers quoted are the entire order which will not be fulfilled for many years.
All our F18 are sold to a American defence company to train American pilots, but are now wanting to send them to Ukraine. we don't own any except a few we will keep in museum on display.
@@dexlab7539 the super hornet has the smallest RCS among all 4 gen jets and the Block 111 will be the smallest and be considered a 4.5 gen jet. American will 700 some, so wtf are you talking about?
@@airprok8328When you combat-configure any Super Bug, including Block 3, it has a huge RCS that allows the aircraft to be detected like any other 4th Gen fighter. Its toed-out pylons make the frontal RCS even worse. It does have NCTR denial features in the intakes and blockers in front of the IGVs, but it will still be detected and acquired at pretty extreme long ranges.
Internal only sacrifices firepower. Using stealth aircraft with external weapons sacrifices stealth that you still have to spend time and money to maintain.Some weapons don’t fit inside such as large stand off strike missiles that don’t need a stealth platform to launch hundreds of kilometers away from adversaries. Non stealth still has utility, especially for large volume firepower and loud broadcast electronic warfare that negates stealth. Buying F-15EX would complement the stealth fighters well.
Maybe they will get involved in Tempest through their work on loyal wingman. That would directly align with AUKUS and would tie them into a closer relationship with Japan.
@@carisi2k11 Really? So who did you come to when you needed nuclear subs to get you out of the French money trap? The British. Same as you came to the British for your T26 frigates. Apart from which the Japanese were so impressed with the British Tempest they dropped their programme and signed up for the British based programme. Hardly 'euro'. Btw some of us would remind you the British are no longer in the EU.
@@jamesharris9816 What? Its rather the Japanese and Italians asked to join the British Tempest project. It started in the UK and is based in the UK with 3 partner nations. Maybe get some facts before writing? Oh and there is no way the British will ever again join with Germany let alone France in any joint project. Been there and got burned by carriers, Tornado and Typhoon.
Things get more complex than that as Australia will also be acquiring SSNs which themselves possess an impressive long range strike capability. Add to that its plans to acquire long range strike missiles such as the Tomahawk, its work with the US on Hypersonic missiles, land based anti-ship missiles, optionally manned surface ships, large autonomous underwater vessels and what I believe will eventually be armed versions of the Ghost Bat. All of these capabilities were announced after the F-35 was ordered. Australia's defence plans are now way more diverse than originally planned.
Australia is working on the loyal wingman which will make up the canceled option on the F-35's for now. A future long range version called the bogan wingman, will go extended distances running on beer and will pick a fight with anyone.
F35A was purchased to replace the clasic hornets FA/ 18 A and B hornets. Not the super hornets. The super hornets purchase was only ment to be a gap to replace aging F111s Australia had. In a decade Australia will replace both super hornets and F35A with a 6th generation fighter option and MQ 28 ghost bat drone. It's just probably cheaper to upgrade the existing super hornets to block III than it is to purchase more F35A that will soon be replaced anyway. The only thing I didn't like was Australia had significantly downgraded its fleet size over the last 2 decades. Before we had 100 clasic hornets and 100 F111s. Today we have 54 F35A and a total of 34 super hornets.12 of them are growlers so it's a big drop in combat aircraft
NGAD costs 3x as much as F-35 which means that Australia likely would have to sacrifice fighter numbers just to get a few of them. Not practical even if they were available.
@@stupidburpwhat you talking about Australia already has sacrifice fighter jets. We had 100 clasic hornets and 100 f111. Look at it today. Just meets half that. I doubt RAAF will sacrifice more. The government will just have to pay for what's needed and that's it. Just like they have done for submarines. Get your box of tissues out mate your tax will go up
Look, it's really simple. Though we might have to support the US or other allies in the indo-pacific, what the RAAF really must do is defend northern Australia and maybe PNG against Indonesia if it should come to an unpleasantness again. They've got SU-35C and E with twice the range of the F-35A, which means that they can hit us, but we can't hit them. This has to change. We have to have a long-range strike aircraft with a decent weapon load, and the F-35 isn't it. So we limit the purchase of F-35s and we buy something we actually need.
Not to mention neither the f35 or f18E/F have the legs for what Australia needs. Even with refueling, it is difficult to to cover Australia, much less strike targets in SE Asia. What Australia really wants is an f111 replacement, which I think will be obtained through a combination of missiles, nuke subs and possibly even the b21 or another platform. Long range strike, particularly the naval kind, is the order of the day.
No current fighter does without a lot of refueling. The next gen fighters are probably long range missile/drone platforms, which are more what Australia wants. No need to acquire more F-35’s when the F/A-18E/F/G are great aircraft, do the job just fine, and are cheaper to upgrade.
@@DirtyMardi indeed. And if you develop a big munition or air launched drone you can just mount it to the hard point. That’s basically the reasoning behind the f-15EX (and being able to pack 12 missiles compared to 4-6). Yes, you can mount weapons externally to the f-35 but if you’re going to do that, you probably do just as well with a 4.5 bird.
What we really need is just enough as a deterrent rather than wasting money worrying about developing the kind of capability that would require bankrupting the country to achieve.
@@shraka yep. I think the sticky point is what is how much investment is required for an effective deterrent? The SSN issue is a case in point. Australia is not a Baltic country like Denmark or a nation like Taiwan or South Korea with a potential adversary on their doorstep. There is a long way for Australian subs to cover just to get into theatre. The distance from Sydney to Perth, for example, is longer than that from Suez to Gibraltar. I suspect the main reason behind nuke subs and AUKUS has nothing to do with the French sub being “sub”-par but changing strategic circumstances changing the calculus of what provides an effective deterrence. I wouldn’t worry about the program bankrupting the country but it could cannibalise other parts of the Defence Force. Short of something drastic like a war in Asia promoting an increase in taxes, I don’t see the Australian government being able to realistically increase defence spending, at least as a proportion of GDP.
@@CaptainBanjo-fw4fq The deterrent calculus has become more paranoid maybe. I'm not sure where you get the idea that defense spending can't go up - it went up this year. I'm positive the sub purchase is extra spending. The entire defense budget is only $50 billion a year. These things will add about 11 billion a year to that. We could buy a bunch of missile destroyers ($2-5 billion each) and the French sub fleet ($90 billion) giving us more flexible capability (especially in peace time) and have enough left over to build high speed rail between Melbourne and Sydney, and we wouldn't have pissed a major member of the European Union off. The nuclear submarine purchase is a terrible terrible idea.
I suspect that one of the reasons the RAAF choose not to exercise the 28 F-35's acquisition was to let other nations get the build slots, Germany and Canada come to mind.
@@XxBloggs Guess it is ultimately self-serving, however, when Australia was told the US needed its existing slipways for its own new nuclear submarines; Australia said it will build and pay for a new slipway in the States, costing billions.
Australia didn't purchase F35 to replace F18 super hornets at all. They was purchase to replace the old clasic hornets F18 A and B varent. Super hornet was purchased as ment to only be a gap for the F111 replacement till RAAF found another salotion. It really bothers me to listen to foregeners talk about Australia defence as so much is based wrong information. Or dated information. Australia government has decided to stop the continued purchase of F35A and upgrade the existing super hornets to block III reason as its getting closer for 6th generation aircraft option along with drones. The F35 was a decade too late entering service. Australia not going to continue purchase the 5th generation aircraft when it's almost time to replace them
@@robman2095They shouldn't bother with them. They should just go for block III super hornets till 6th generation comes available in the next decade. Australia found the F35A is only good for limited interceptor or special missions due to its small payload within its internal bay. It remains stealth but not really effective if it comes up against multiple aircraft. You virtually have to send every F35 up to match the payload of 4th generation aircraft to maintain stealth. In beast mode it can carry lot of weapons but it isn't stealth and has less capability then the super hornets. Block III super hornets new cockpit and digital display virtually is the same as F35 in terms of Avionics and sensors but in a better preforming aircraft, although it has external targeting pods and electronic jamming as where the F35 is built in. Making the super hornets costing more. But since Australia already has the Super hornets. It works out cheaper to just do the upgrades since we already have the planes. Australia will decommission the super hornets as soon 6th generation fighter comes available. It will most likely end up being US. FA XX NGRAD. Or UK tempest and Australian built MQ28 ghost bat drone developed by Boeing Australia
@@budisuwandhi6818 The maintenance of the F-35 is expensive, but it does not break as often as something like the F-15 or F-16. However, when something breaks, it is expensive.
The Quad is NOT an alliance. It is merely an agreement to share intelligence. No military commitment to mutual support in case of conflict. India likes it that way.
@@bradclawsie The AUKUS alliance means we are legally and morally committed to supporting each other in case of war. Our commitment is real and profound.
@@dexlab7539it's cheaper than expected. The trillion dollar number is a life time cost of a fleet till 2050. Buying a new f35 is cheaper than most 4th gen planes
Those extra 28 F35's will probably still be gotten if only because the newer builds of the F35 will provide some extra abilities over our earlier builds.
Those rough sums have already been done and B21 will be much cheaper than B2 and although costly, it has been estimated Australia could probably afford a squadron if the need were established.
@@lisaroberts8556 1) It's not the B-21 Raider, and yes they will that as it's already been offered to Australia. They'll never make the same mistake they made with Raptor ever again. 2) Australia has actually contributed to the development of the NGAD 6th Gen platform, so yes, it is already offered to us.
Comes down to cost and needs. Sure everyone wants the best but the best costs a lot of money. If you can upgrade what you currently have and still keep it competitive then less learning curve and changes. It also depends on what countries pose a threat to you and what they have.
An interesting decision by Australia. If I were in their position, particularly when the first 6th generation planes are scheduled to come online in 2034, maybe they are waiting for the NGAD or Tempest. From what I know, Japan, Italy and UK are producing their 6th Gen Tempest while Australia is developing their loyal wingman to work with it as a 6th Gen package. The partners who were involved in the Lightening were angry at the US blocking them out of the NGAD project. Economies of scale would have made it cheaper for everyone. Instead we have the US with NGAD, Japan, UK and Italy with Tempest and finally, Germany, France and Spain with FCAS. it’s absolutely stupid for those three projects to be trying to produce 6th fighters that neither will be able to freely sell for security reasons. The customers who would have purchased that fighter are all competing with each other.
I don't think you want to put all your eggs in one basket. Having three different projects is good competition for all. Improvements/breakthroughs are made in such ways.
@@LeonAust Why do people like you tell others to 'look up' something like we don't already know? I would also remind you of my words which said prototypes in 2025 and production in 2035. Totally realistic given the advanced system sued to prove systems even before an aircraft takes flight. So from EAP to Typhoon production was 16 years? Not sure quite what the point is because the actual Typhoon first flew in 1994 some 8 years before production. I can return your comment that by saying 'look up' who was involved at that time with the UK (which by the way totally funded and built the EAP and could have gone on on its own had it not been for European politics), the French, Germans, Italians and Spanish. It was a committee of self interests all of which conspired to delay decisions and increase costs. We do not have that issue with Tempest. It is a firmly British led project with two partners (two of whom learned from the Typhoon experience) who are on the same page regarding designs and objectives.
The RAAF's F/A-18Fs are operated by the 1 SQN, notionally a strike squadron. Since the retirement of the F-111, the RAAF has lacked a true strategic strike capability. There may be some interest in eventually replacing the F/A-18 with the B-21 to fill this gap.
B-21 is too expensive for Australia even if cleared for export. But Australia can get functional access to B-21 for free simply by allowing the USAF to use bases in Australia. A more practical and affordable option for the role of the retired F-111 is F-15EX. 36 F-15EX could replace all Super Hornets and Growlers at lower operating costs than F-35.
@@stupidburp Defence has already ruled out purchasing the B-21. I think the F-15EX is a non-starter. The F-15 would require retraining ground crew and aircrew on a type they're not familiar with. Additionally, Defence has previously refused to purchase any F-15 variants. The reason why the RAAF operates the Hornet, a carrier-based fighter, is because they did not want the F-15 because it was too capable for the RAAF to manage.
OK let me throw this in the chat: The UK / Japan / Italy Tempest will fly in prototype / proof of concept tests in 2025 and is scheduled to go into service in the early 2030s when Typhoon (and RAAF F-18s) will be retired. Given the RAN will be building and using the British designed and powered 'next - Astute' nuclear sub under the AUKUS programme, is building and will be using the UK designed and powered Type 26 frigate and it has its developing drone programme I suspect the Aussies could do a very good deal with the UK to buy Tempest given that that aircraft is being designed for 'wingman' capability. It would open a very useful market given the countries building it. I am also not convinced the USA will export its new fighter just as they didn't with the F-22. Just food for thought.
@@aregeebee201why is that non sense? It's a newer aircraft, is designed to support 5th gen fighters and has a longer transit and combat range than the FA18F/G
This! This is what I was talking about in your video on Canada getting the F-35. It's way too expensive, the capability do not fit our needs. We don't need a fancy battle coordinator, we need self defence, we need attack support, and we need a sustainable cost to operate. The Grippen would have fulfilled all the requirements at a quarter of the cost to purchase and operate.
Dude you have no clue what you are talking about. You do not have a clue about what we need, reality. Gripens are flown around in circles by F35s. We use to do it at Frisian flag in our old CF18A's. I've also got to see what the F35 was capable of before I got out. I fear the F35 more then the F22 for a matter of fact.
The Gripen is technically more expensive to purchase though. It's just much cheaper to operate and maintain. A lot of factors (combat integration, parts compability and most importantly, politics) lead to the purchase of the F 35
It was Great seeing our f 18 super hornets flying over near and around Williamtown it was a sight I will never forget, especially stopping at their raaf base to see the majestic aircraft land, consisting of trainer hawks, pc-21 planes and F35’s. I will always miss and remember the F18 forces we have there. If you want to see the Worimi Hornet in person, they have a museum there overlooking the runway where you can see all sorts of aircraft including the f-111. Stay safe Spartans.
@@pkmishra6763 Considering India is neighbour’s with china who have the ability to detect the Rafael fighters and the fact that china has had multiple conflicts with india and may invade india in the future, stealth aircraft would be able to penetrate china’s airspace, take out their radar systems and hopefully allow for less stealthy fighters to go in and destroy the Chinese invasion force, if china decides to invade india if that is. I would say about one or two squadrons could do the job..
Nice, I got to see F35s flying from above recently when I was camping on a mountain top and they were flying around the valleys below - was quite a sight!
Why is the F35 such a special aircraft? It is because it is massively over budget and over time; even then it is barely functional. Because it is so overdue much of the technology, (including the stealth) is obsolete. But it has succeeded in its primary mission, to transfer as much money as possible from the US government to the shareholders of Lockheed Martin, thereby giving the executives of that company the biggest possible bonuses.
You have to wonder if Australia has the same American 'friend' status as Germany and Ukraine. Germany lost Nordstream (America said it was 5 guys in a boat from somewhere... ?), and Australia is no longer allowed to maintain our previous income by selling commodities to China. Ukraine is bashing it's head against Russian fixed defences with American supplied war material and who knows how that will turn out... !
If the F-22 is any indication, maybe not. So the Tempest program will probably be a good idea to get involved in with it being a multi-nation collaboration and all.
No we didn’t export the f22 so why would we do that with ngad I highly doubt the dod or the American public would be happy if people in government started suggesting this we nvr export our best tech.
@@mill2712 the f22 was developed in a time where the US had a stealth monopoly and had no real near pier threats so they had little to gain and a lot to loose by sharing tech. neither is the case anymore. right now isn't the time to be stingy towards allies especially when any special new tech could just be stolen again anyway
@@grandadmiralthrawn8116ur logic doesnt make sense now that we dont have a monopoly on stealth you expect us to tive away the one thing that gibes us that edge
The gig is up on stealth. Modern sensors and computing has cracked this problem. It's a huge part of why the US are also building more F15's. When stealth is no longer the key function you're better off going with superior performance.
The F35 program has been ploughing through deep troubles for extended times. The RAAF is not alone in reworking orders and planning. The US gov stats on avail rates for F35 for 2023 is as horrible and bad as previous years, in some ways worse. How as a program you manage to be both screwing up your new tranches - and having findings against the aging of in service units is brutally grim. When you are unable to get above the aging Harrier fleet in avail rate, and have a worsening state than that fleet - it really says something. The farce over the new engine also highlights a further staggering failure in the program. Its got unending software issues, and very very poor operational outcomes (Things like the plane is so flawed that high altitude supersonic flight is basically being excluded) - when customers are advised that the actual compute hardware, which given a time window of beyond 20 years, has got so 'hot' (the mind boggles that they have runaway thermal design issues in modern hardware which should be magnitudes cooler over decades time frames) - means that another outcome like the B models being unable to take a new engine - and thus won't be able to move forward technically - are just part of the unending farce of the program. It is highly likely that the UK will cut order numbers sharply, and the Belgians are currently refusing to take the plane on order as they contracted TR4 and have been handed TR3s. The F35 has been, and remains YEARS behind where its meant to actually be, and the in service units are an absolute mess. The plane to reach the correct TR4 levels now look like fleetwide level rework and re-enginning is required. There comes a point where people have to decide on a cut of point for their interactions with the failing program, and that's the inflection point now. Focus is changing towards NGAD and Tempest and other programs, and in the UK - it should actually look sideways and place a new order for Typhoon (which bluntly is carrying the war-work and work load, burning through its air frame hours covering for the failing F35 state.)
@@LeonAust Yes, the F35 has done very well in show trials and in games where it can hide its shit avail rates, lack of comparable weapon load, and the fact it doesn't fly over enemy airspace. The real world workload of RAF work is done by Typhoon. This includes the Tornado workload the F35 was supposed to be doing. Tell me friend. If the F35 is such a success, why does it require a new engine. Why is the US airforce now looking for a new F16 replacement (again, this was the F35's job). The B model we have, can't fit a new engine. And that's now thus a complete dead end. The unending farce of the F35 program will roll on a few more years, but you can put a fork in it.
Wish you purchased A models hey? as available rates have improved dramatically for F-35A and even the F-35B. .....F-16 replacement is the F-35A! NGAD will replace F-22 and naval version replace the super hornets the F-35 will stay. New engines are a block improvement as the F-35 will have continuous block improvements to stay number 1 for up to 30 years unlike eurofighter. When you make comparisons do it against Sea Harrier, the F-35B is far superior, Britain should have converted to CATOBAR thus the better F-35C. Still F-35B is the best STOVL fighter that can beat all if not most fighters.@@AdmV0rl0n
It’s getting scary with the capabilities of gen 5 jets, and the possibilities of the gen 6 jets. In the 80’s and 90’s the fear with future jets was creating something that a human pilot could not control or even survive because of the potential G’s. These gen 5’s are game changers, and before they really get comfortable with the planes, these countries are already planning for the gen 6’s. I flew the F-16 in the 80’s and 90’s and that craft has been “proven” for 40 years. With upgrades, it’s still formidable. Can’t wait to see what the 6’s can do.
I worked at the Super hornet SPO as well as both of the F111 SQN's, we were the poor brother to the USA when it came to spares so looking at the issues with the F35 software etc I don't think the RAAF wants anymore pain hence the downsizing.
As a prior Commander for the largest USAF ground radar unit in Japan, and a Mission Crew Commander Air Battle Manager on AWACS, Australia is too far away to help much with Taiwan or mainland China. Australia have no aircraft carriers so the enemy is going to have to be pretty close for them to us the fighter aircraft. Okinawa is bristling with US military 400 miles east of Taiwan and, while it's nice to have help from the Aussies, it won't be needed for any rapid response counter strikes. It's also nice to have our allies as strong as possible to give different options for long term conflicts. So kudos for their new subs and maybe they will purchase more F-35's in the future.
The video is clickbait. There never was an order for an additional 28 F-35As for Australia, and there is no corresponding literature in any of the reputable or even disreputable publications to support this video.
Australia’s role would be to interdict PLA vessels during war and to perform some strikes against the PLA island outposts. Locking down access to the Indian Ocean can also mess with their logistics and economy in that situation. They would hold their end of the line.
If Australia got some longer range strike assets such as F-15EX carrying LRASM and JASSM-ER then they could reach PLA targets further North, perhaps as far as Hainan and the Southern coast of China with some aerial refueling.
australia can provide great surveillance and gather intel through our special forces on the ground getting in to spots gathering intell then bugging out undetected. Or via our sub capabilities which are first rate but limited.
If only you Americans stopped dragging us into your shit just so you can maintain your grip as a world power at your "allies" cost. It's quite obvious you know this to be true with comments like "also nice to have our allies as strong as possible to give different options for long term conflicts". I suppose those "options" would be to help the US stay at the top at the cost of everyone else. Instead, maybe you could take all those bases, like Pine Gap and ever the increasing numbers of USMC in Darwin for starters and stick them somewhere else instead of making us a target for your country's benefit?
From the ASPI article about the Super Hornet flying on: "RAAF chief Air Marshal Robert Chipman has said: ‘We will look at the F-35 and we’re very, very comfortable and very happy with the capability of the F-35. But it would be remiss of me not to look at what else is available for us to replace our Super Hornets in the future.’" This sums up the situation best I reckon so no, Australia isn't moving on from the F-35. Our previous and current governments have a lot of projects ongoing and this will continue in successive governments.
new news (a few days after this vid was posted): Australia will develop a domestic facility to apply stealth coatings to the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter. The new Aircraft Coating Facility will be built at Newcastle Airport, New South Wales, and will support the Royal Australian Air Force’s (RAAF’s) fleet of F-35As, says Australia’s Department of Defence.
If I recall correctly Australia was also going to be the asia-pacific centre for certain higher order maintenance activities on F-35 so this might fit in with that too.
I highly doubt the U.S. would export the NGAD given how cutting edge it's supposed to be. Given it's price tag of "several hundreds of millions dollars" per aircraft, I doubt Australia could afford it anyway. The primary reason Australia decided not to pursue B-21 procurement was cost. The more likely scenario is that Australia buys the GCAP fighter.
If the US doesn’t export them it runs the risk of having congress cut the order due to the cost. Honestly I’d say export them. Cost comes down with more customers
@@aidan11162 while exporting them would make the most sense I really don’t see the American public being OK with that but even if they do export it, I’m sure the plane will be significantly NERFED compared to the American version and the amount of countries I can even buy it in the first place are slim
If the US trusts Austrailia with Nuclear Submarine tech, they might trust them with NGAD. Also, Austrailia tried to buy the F-22, which was pretty comparably expensive in its day, so them holding out for 6th gen isn’t impossible.
@@drksideofthewal The Ngad and Fa-XX programs are being developed specifically for the US military. We would have to sell australia computational infrastructure and teach them how to utilize the aircraft. As they're going to be used in conjuction with Ai wingman.
An additional consideration is that like the USAF decided that they still need missile trucks like the F-15X platform that helps to overcome the lack of weapons capacity in the F-35.
The problem with both the NGAD and B21 for us Aussies is cost. Having to shill out what we will for these nuclear subs, I don't know if we will really have the budget for the new cool guys in town. I guess it depends on how China plays its game until then. They are the only real driving force in our region for us to acquire such advanced capabilities.
I think the SSN purchase is a very clear signal we aren't in the market for B-21 or NGAD. As the plan currently states, we will have Collins, Virginia & SSN AUKUS all operational at the same time. That'll suck the life out of the Defence budget for the next couple of decades.
Australia government has shit for brains. It don't matter what fight jet Australia gets it will have no range to project. Australia needs aircraft carriers. Today warships can sit 5000 km out and rain cruise missiles on us. Australia not only out gunned but outraged. 3 AWDs and 8 submarines ain't going to do shit. During ww2 it was the aircraft that sunk the ships and won the war in the pacific. The longest range Australia has purchased is tomahawk missiles with 2500km range. China has cruise missile that succeed more than 5000km range
In FY2021, F-35As (including the older aircraft not in combat-coded F-35 units) achieved 11.2 mean flight hours between critical failures - the target was 20 hours. This makes the F35A unsuitable for Oz. Here in Oz, we do not have the ships and support to quickly pick up a pilot (aka shark bait) from the water a long way from support. Pilots are reluctant to fly the F35A over water in remote area for that reason.
Okay, I don't know if this is specific to Australia, but at least the US doesn't have issues maintaining the F-35, considering that it is currently the most reliable aircraft in service in the US Air Force and Navy.
Most likely this cancellation is to wait for the upcoming 6th gen option as part of AUKUS. But some B21 Raiders would also be a good fit, bringing back that kind of advantage in strike technology that Australia found so useful out of the F-111. Also, an updated FA18 Super Hornet will not be a bad piece of kit, and not every mission requires full stealth capabilities, so choosing to run multiple platforms will allow greater flexibility even if it leads to slightly worse logistics. It is very interesting that India chose the Rafale. It's quite a capable aircraft in its own way, and built for an almost entirely different doctrine. With some upgrades the French are making to their missiles it will be very interesting to see how that would match up against an upgraded Super Hornet (not that we are anything but allies).
Australia has 4 units flying F35a , not at full strength as RAAF is still receiving new aircraft for a total of 72 ( 28 more were options ) . Two units fly the F18 super hornets with a total of 36. ( 12 Growlers with 12 more pre engineered to be Growlers of the 24 ).
An airplane will last as long as you want to spend money on repairs. I was stationed at cannon afb. We had f111d fighter bombers. I liked the airplanes.
the 35 programmes have been woeful including failing to meet written essential requirements and massive cost over runs. australia massively gains increases through great aircraft modified updated and exceptional performance by plane, servicing, avionics, weapons and pilots. ground attack capability nothing like it required to have.
Excellent video. Makes sense to operate the Super Hornets longer and upgrade them as they have more range than the F-35. It will be cool to see Block III hornets. Hope more Super Hornets operators then chose this upgrade.
What everybody oversees in my opinion is that upgraded super hornets are still very deadly, especially since the F35 can share its information with them and enhance their capabilities. If properly working together these aircrafts will be victorious over any enemy even China.
@@Aaron-wq3jz And significantly less than F-111. Also less than an F/A-18F with external tanks. Point being that with F/A-18F and -18G we already acknowledge the stealth aspect shortcomings and have prioritized range and payload over super sneaky stuff.
I really hope we get the B-21. It's massive range will help protect our massive country. Having them tucked away safe in the southern parts of the nation but still able to reach the South China Sea would be HUGE! Almost as huge as it's price tag ;)
I'm not quite certain, but maybe the AUKUS submarine (SSN) deal has put somewhat of a dent in earlier procurement plans as well. SSNs are extremely costly and require more dedicated infrastructure than diesel-electric/AIP submarines. While Australia certainly isn't a poor nation, it doesn't have the kind of fiscal and monetary leverage the US have, so also acquiring NGAD and B-21s alongside F-35As (which will have to be up to the block 4 standard with considerable added cost) and SSNs? Sorry, can't see that happening even with tensions rising. Australia has got a lot on its plate as is. The Royal Australian Army is modernizing with among others : the replacement of the ARH-2 Tiger and MRH-90 (both not up to specs) by UH-60 and AH-64E (?), the investment related with the SSNs and its specialized training and maintenance/repair infrastructure and industrial support base, the replacement of the ANZAC-class frigates scheduled, and possibly the purchase of Patriot batteries (haven't seen a final decision on that yet). That's a lot for any nation to carry in a relative short timeframe. If one added NGAD and B-21 Raiders, I wonder if Australian taxpayers can or want to carry that financial burden. Maybe if some mining company strikes gold in the outback again...
You do realise that the Australian economy is the world's 12th largest economy, right? This idea that Australia is a tiny, inconsequential country that wouldn't be able to "afford" a squadron or two of whatever the hell aircraft it chooses is ridiculous.
They’ve already reduced the amount of ifv’s they’ll acquire from the land 400 program. The navy and Air Force take priority over the army which makes sense.
There isn’t any debate that J20 isn’t a 5th gen aircraft. It is not a low observable aircraft, it can’t super cruise, and it is not super maneuverable.
We currently have a Labor (Democrat)federal government. Every time they get into power, Labor rips funding from defence. The F35 cut is not the only programme they've done this too. They have cut by 2/3 the amount of new AFV's and SPA's that the Army was going to get for eg. Standard Labor.
@@BettyBettyBoBetty Like everyone has forgotten how many billion the Liberals flushed down the toilet buying submarines that were never built. What an idiot, ay?
@@BettyBettyBoBetty At least they try. All Labor does is gut the budget for defense. Every time they get in they rip the cash straight out to buy votes on fuzzy policies. The LNP then have to spend a few years getting it back on track. Go look at history. It's rinse and repeat every time the Socialists get in power.
Liberal does the exact same thing. they were in power for almost a decade and DIDN'T replace M113, they bought MRH-90 and ARH Taipan (which are now getting replaced by new helicopters), Labor has CONTINUED AUKUS (like they said they would in 2021), they did a DSR, and INCREASED spending.
@@De_cool_dude Didn't replace the M113? Like the Collins replacement that should have been done years before by, what for it, Labor. Under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd. They ignored a sub replacement for the 6 years whilst in office. The LNP started the M113 replacement programme, which has recently decided that it would be the Redback from South Korea. So what did Labor do, they cut by 2/3 the amount of IFV's we'd buy. Then they cut the amount of K-9 SPA's we'd buy. Sure at this point they are supporting AUKUS, but the extreme lefty's of the Labor party are starting to get louder about cancelling that too. Same old Labor. So are you ignorant of Labor and their history in defence, or are you their paid bot?
The USAF has just banned it's F-35A's from flying within 25 miles of storms, especially thunderstorms (ie, bad weather), because apparently they fall out the sky. Several reasons are possible but the likeliest is the fact the metal mesh added to the carbon fibre provides inadequate lightening protection (probably caused by the famous weight issues the F-35 has suffered). If this is the case then it's not an issue that can be resolved with repair or retrofit, which effectively makes these planes useless other than on sunny days. No word on whether this effects the F-35B/C variants but as all three effectively share the same architecture, and as the B/C variants had even more weight issues than the A, then this plane looks to be the biggest eff-up in Western military procurement history.
Think your video is a little bit misleading. Australian hasn't moved on, it's purchase of F35 was always only 72, which is expected/hoped to be delivered in full end this year. There was the POTENTIAL for a further order of 28 to take the number to 100 under the partner program, but that was more Lockheed's sales hopes, rather than anything factual or at all contractual. So there was no cancellation, simply a defence review decided that 72 aircraft can suffice until any access to 6th gen is clearer (as you did indicate). Depending on the US's stand on that, the order for 28 more may in fact still come... its all up in the air (pun intended) at this time.
72 F-35 is enough but they could use 36 F-15EX to support them for long range strikes and EW. Eagle II are a notch above Super Hornet and Growler that they could replace.
As a neighbouring country, (New Zealand) Australia is our main line of defence. We would rely on them in time of war as the first responders until the U.S and U.K arrived. The big jump in military spending was good for the west.
In Canada we have a similar problem in that we exist between two of the largest war nations of all time. Well, Russia is pretty depleted now, but still
Tempest is coming, and for a change America is facing a wee bit of home grown western competition. This should be seen as a good thing, competition keeps all the players focused.
Clickbait. We never officially planned to order 28 more. At 72 F-35s, we are already one of the largest fleet operators outside the US and will likely go the route of block 3 super hornets then NGAD or whatever other 6th gen options exist.
Australia never officially had an order for additional 28 aircraft. The original order was for 72 f35s which is still being fulfilled. It was planned that an additional 28 would be acquired to replace the super hornets but with the NGAD coming online within the next decade, and if the US is willing to export it to allies it would make sense for Australia to wait for a potential 6th generation capability, which is why there will be an open tender for the super hornet replacement.
They didn't export the F22 so why would they export the next, even more capable aircraft?
@@paythepiper6283 but they’re exporting f35s as we speak, are sharing their nuclear technology with us and are willing to sell us b21s as well…so why wouldn’t they?
The department of defense nor the American public will be keen on giving ngad our best fighter to our Allie’s. we didn’t do it with the f22 so why would we do it with ngad?
Don't forget ghost bat, developed here in Australia, working with F-35s
@@mrprodigy7143 Because of AUKUS
Because the Growler will be in operation into the foreseeable future. It makes sense to continue using the 24 F Models and look towards what comes next.
Hehe, the Growler. LMAO
@@princesskenny7222 Betting you are a MiG - 47 "Супер капуста" pilot?
@@texleeger8973 yep, he's just another Russian bot. One of many, who's sole mission is to spread disinformation. The main export of the Russian economy
Growler is dead meat nowadays
@@dexlab7539Australia actually going to replace all soon with more advanced 6th generation aircraft and drones. The F35 was a decade too late entering service. The super hornets block III will do fine till 6th generation aircraft comes along. The F35 isn't that great. It has its disadvantages in beast mode that can't compete what the super hornets can deliver. To remain stealth in a F35 you have very limited payload option. Ok if for just scout mission. In major battle it's useless where it has to lose stealth for more payload
interesting note, the RAAF is moving somewhat faster than USAF in terms of adopting some new tech items, namely MQ-28 Ghost Bat and E-7.
No; boeing is an american country. The US is fully aware of the capabilities of the MQ-28 Ghostbat, and isn't impressed. The Us has recently been bringing the drone in for further experimentation (I.e making significant improvements)
The US is still currently using those drones to experiment with and refine their AI systems. They or other drones are expected to be ordered as part of the collaborative combat aircraft program alongside the ngad and paired with the f35 as well.
@@Devil-ev3zm Don’t know if this is based on any facts as the US and Aus are perusing joint development with the USA evaluating it extensively. Not sure where you found them not being impressed with it, but if you have a reputable source I’d be keen to have a look at it👍
That's the thing. Australia is getting ready to replace all aircraft soon for more advanced 6th generation so the UK tempest could be on the cards for the next purchase along with MQ ghost bat drones. The F35A was a decade late entering service. The reason why RAAF don't want more F35A in a decade will be replaced by 6th generation aircraft. The super hornets with Block III upgrade will do fine for the gap period. As it actually outperforms the F35A in beast mode. For F35A to remain stealth it has very limited payload option and when it's in beast mode. It actually has its disadvantages in comparison to Super hornet. It's just cheaper to upgrade the super hornets for the time being than actually purchasing more F35A that will soon to be replaced
@@Devil-ev3zm So mate research harder Boeing Australia yes is a American company but is a Australian subsidiary full of Australian's that bought out the Australian Government aviation company. meaning anything invented by Boeing Australia has to abide by Australian defence laws on secrecy and all other Australian laws.
MQ28A Ghost Bat is 70% designed and built in Australia and even the AI wasn't built by Boeing and is being used in a lot of other Australian tech from other companies prove this.
Also the detachable nose design is a Australian invention we trialed on i think Mirage iii jets long ago.
Boeing Australia is already designing new drones bigger and different as Boeing Australia has a big R&D facilitiy in Australia.
Even if research Boeing Australia the smart Australian's not Yankees can only do special resins and other parts on planes proves not all is American lol.
.BAA is Australia's only designer and manufacturer of advanced composite aerostructure components for commercial aircraft. Boeing Aerostructures Australia manufactures the 'moveable trailing edge' control surfaces of the 787 using a unique carbon fibre production technology developed in Victoria called resin infusion. This is Australia's largest aerospace contract valued at $5 billion over 20 years, and Fishermans Bend is the only Boeing location in the world to apply the unique resin infusion system that enables the components to be cured without a traditional autoclave. Boeing Aerostructures Australia has invested $70 million in site improvements to support 787 production increases over the next decade.
The F/A-18 Super Hornet is the most multirole and reliable Fighter ever built. They made a great decision keeping them around to compliment their current F-35s.
Unfortunately, Super Hornets are wearing out a lot faster then the older legacy Hornets. Not being used on carriers will help prolong Australia's Super Hornets in comparison to America's.
And you do not need the functionality of the F-35 if something cheaper will work. Not every mission is going to be one that needs stealth. Heck, you could have a few F-35s, and a few SH that are receiving information from the F-35.
Australia first bought one lot of Super Hornets, then a few years later decided to buy more of them, with some of them being the Growler variant. This tells you that the RAAF had tried out the Super Hornets and were impressed. We're getting the impression that the only advantage the F-35 has over the Super Hornet is that it's stealthy. I believe Australia would have a more capable air force with a mix of F-35s and multi-role Super Hornets.
F-35A, B, and C are far more reliable than Super Hornets, with a fraction of the MMHPFH, better availability, far longer combat radii for A and C models, and are cheaper to acquire and operate.
@@LRRPFco52 more reliable? What are you smoking ??
great video but there where a few inaccuracies that i picked up
the RAAF operates three combat f-35 sqns being no.3sqn no.75 sqn and no.77 sqn(which is probably were you got the 3 squadrons amount from) but they also have one conversion squadron being 2 OCU
the RAAF only has ever had one super hornet squadron you might be getting confused with the classic hornets which where replaced by the f-35s in the aforementioned 3 squadrons
another reason for keeping the super hornets is there parts commonality with the Growlers operated by the RAAF
Other then that it was a great video thanks for doing one on australia
Thanks for pointing this out and glad you enjoyed the video!
there were, not where
there where? 😂
@@davekirkpatrick5724I also get annoyed when people write this
@@soulsphere9242 thank you for pointing that out I will remember that for next time my bad
This is not a big surprise here in Australian. The RAAF had indicated very early on in the acquisition process of the F35 that a mix of F35 and super Hornets 🐝 were the likely and preferred balance for the needs of the RAAF . Also they were ordering each block of F35 one block at a time.
Probably got drunk and blew the budget on fake titties and crotchless panties for Kangaroos.
Does australia plan to get nuclear weapons ? I think australia needs a nuclear triad for long term security.
Yeah... and it's not really the RAAF Cancelling an Order.... they just didn't take up an option
@@Иванпонимаете-г4ш no
@@Иванпонимаете-г4шThey plan to get nuclear submarines. Not nuclear weapons.
The F-111 was a brilliant aircraft, it was so sad to see that beauty retired.
she was absolutely gorgeous
"who needs smart bombs when you have a smart plane" quote from one of its pilots.
We have nothing to replace its capability.
@@Will_CH1 war has moved on, now its the age of the "drone swarm", FAR cheaper than a F-35 lawn dart, and using those "smrt" drones like the ones they use instead of real fireworks these days, only takes one cheap drone sucked into an intake to wreck the jet pilots day.
You should check out what they are doing with them on military summary channel (R18+ version). (It's a REAL eye opener for the "preppers" too). nowhere to run, nowhere to hide.
it's capabilities to enter indonesian air space hit targets in the capital or elsewhere and get out of there unharmed scared indonesian leaders big time. that is why it was a strike bomber, super fast and capable.
Australia’s leadership on the E-7 Wedgetail program is impressive. They basically owned it from the beginning. Far superior to the E-3. Thanks for working out all for the rest of us.
As a Mission Crew Commander Air Battle Manager on AWACS who have flown missions with Wedgetail crewmembers on our jet, there are still many things the E-3 can do the Wedge cant. The Wedge doesn't have an ECO or his systems, it doesn't have an escape tube through the fuselage floor, it doesn't have a few of the radar bands the very flexible E-3 radar has. As for the airframe the 737 is far superior. The E-3 is built on America's first jet ever, the 707. The engines smoke a little, and the range and speed isnt all that great, but by keeping fighter CAPs between us and the bad guys you really dont need to be fast and we can stay airborne for a long time hitting the tanker aircraft.
Uh it's way newer than the E3. If it wasn't better there'd be something very wrong
Yeah different roles and if your a top level commander, you can make things do stuff that the lay pilot is still wondering/confused about, ranging from pawn swapping, kamikaze, to empirical attack/defense, to safety strikes with back up(standard stuff) AI has a lot to learn about our history... that and fear.. lol
@@zedwpd I don't think people realize the amount of upgrades and modernization the E-3 fleet has undergone. Nor should anyone think America would not totally dominate the AEW space.
Just because something is newer, doesn't make it better. I'm sure the Aussie bird is great, but its not like America just 'gives up' an advantage. Most of the serious companies involved in its development were bloody American companies anyway.
America is set to order E7 wedgie to replace the E-3 later this decade
Not a bad choice by the Aussies, great to see the Hornet will be around for a few years yet 💪
not a good choice either, buy extra F35s and upgrade supers
Australia, the worlds biggest aircraft carrier. If something does kick off in the indo-pacific im sure there will be many nations using Australia as a base of operations.
Yup, and it will be the biggest target for quick destruction too.
@@dexlab7539 Fucking lot of deserts, arid and semi-arid land to overlook. So many places you can hide things in Australia given some heads up.
australia is too far away from anything important to actually be much use. its more than 4000km from the south china seas, no fighter aircraft can travel that far and come back.
@@hughmungus2760 with air to air refueling the RAAF has this in mind. Also in Australia there are B52 from USAF and also soon to be B1. So not that far away from south China sea when you really think about it. But can be a forward base of operations just like WWII
@@Datalore74 Even with midair refueling you're looking at 12 hour long missions where response times will be so slow that you'll likely miss any targets of opportunity.
strategic bombers can be placed anywhere really.
The issue of cost has come into play. F-35 are costly to by and very costly to operate and maintain. Most of the F-35 delivered to Australia arrived with 26+ unresolved issues during manufacture most still not resolved fully. Now there are additional upgrades that further increase the operational costs. It’s getting to the point pilots will spend more time in training simulators than actual airtime.
Rubbish. The F35 is not costly for Australia at all.
That's a fear for Canada, since Canada has finally committed to purchase 88 new F-35's from the U.S. Many in Canada preferred the Swedish SABB/Gripen, which would have been built in Canada and would have provided 140 Gripens to meet the domestic and NATO commitments,for the same cost, followed by lower maintenance costs.
@@yakidin63 I think you need to talk to a RAAF pilot on how much actual air time they are getting because of operating and maintenance costs on the F-35 is all I’m going to say. (I know two of them)
The F35's were designed to be a cash cow for the USA. Expensive to maintain and buy. Great for the USA and a dud for those who buy it.
An F-35 costs $42,000 per flight hour. Ouch that's insane!
This is not entirely Correct, Japan will have the second largest F35 fleet, but the won’t happen until 2025. Australia currently has the second largest F35 fleet with 72 F35a’s. Japan will get 135 planned F35a and F35b . Australia has 24 super hornets and 12 E18 growlers. Australia is committing to the 6th generation fighter. The F18/E18 will be replaced by a 6 generation fighter.
I have heard Japan is starting a plan to reduce its order of F-35s and joining in on the Tempest program
Japan isn’t reducing their F-35 orders, they are increasing them because they have many fighters to replace now and Tempest is still a long ways off.
The order wasn't cancelled because it was never actually an order, it was an option but they never ordered them, like you said, the super hornet still has 15+ years of service life so no reason to replace them
Australia has very unique needs. Given its geographic location, likely enemies are quite far away. The B-21 Raider could not only take over a strike role from the old long range F-111s, (since the F-18 never had the same range), but it could do so without relying so heavily on tankers. I hope Australia surprises everyone and gets B-21. The old restrictions on stealth technology from the F-22 days should end. Our allies need stealth. And it isn't like China hasn't made every effort to steal our stealth technology by hitting our own contractors directly with spies and hackers. Many of these efforts were quite successful.
B-21 is not needed. a larger MQ-28 is fine.
F-15EX is a more feasible replacement for the retired F-111 and current Super Hornets and Growlers.
Australia can get effective deterrence value of US strategic bombers for free simply by allowing the USAF to use Australia’s bases.
F-15EX has much further range than the F-18s and aerial refueling only increases that advantage. With tanks they can also travel much farther than F-35A that have to avoid external stores. The range is not quite as good as F-111 but much closer than any other fighter currently in production. F-15EX is a new variant with vast improvements under the hood and is just starting production now. It is a perfect fit for Australia’s needs.
To reach even further out requires strategic bombers or maritime patrol aircraft. Australia already has some MPA. Strategic bombers are unaffordable for Australia to buy but fortunately are available for free simply by allowing the USAF to base their bombers in Australia.
Australia has uniquely few defense needs. It "needs" to be able to provide token forces to places like Niger as part of a US owned coalition. And that's about it. There are no enemies. Every penny Australia spends on its military is wasted.
The cost alone would be prohibitive to Australia, the country has a population of only 20 million. Just how many do you think they will buy?
The RAAF has 36 Super Hornet airframes in service with 24 F/A-18F's and 12 E/A-18G's, keeping the F/A-18F's in service makes sense given the commonality between these two aircraft, the F/A-18F will also more than likely be used as a control platform for the MQ-28 Ghost Bats, having a two man crew with a WSO onboard would certainly be a better idea than piling that workload onto the single pilot of an F-35A.
Selling them all and replacing them with 36 F-15EX would provide a more capable and more flexible platform at only slightly more cost, still cheaper to operate than F-35. All of them can be dual seaters for use as drone controllers, electronic warfare platforms, or strike platforms as needed.
@@stupidburp The simple fact is we have trained aircrews and ground crews with a decent supply of parts, switching to the F-15EX is not as simple as you think and would require several years of getting things organised before they would even reach IOC, better to upgrade the Super Hornets to Block 3 and replace them down the track with the new generation of aircraft when they come online, there will be a few options available when it comes to that time including the FCAS, Tempest, as well as the NGAD.
@@stupidburp If we did get the F-15EX we would only replace the super hornets, the EX has a completely different mission set to the growler so they will stay
The creator failed to mention the Super Hornet is being fitted out to deliver the JASSM & LASSM cruise missiles and are a new addition to the RAAF arsenal. These are 500 - 1000km range missiles. You don't need a stealth plane to deliver a long range cruise missile. The Super Hornet is very suited to this role and linked with the Growlers Oz also deploys it is a very capable set of platforms and munitions for long range land and sea strike. The F-35 on the other hand fires the shorter range Kongsberg Naval Strike anti ship missile.
Great point and thanks for pointing that out!
they should have refurbed F-111 for australias unique defence needs,namely our enemys will be coming from some distance away
The super’s are one of the best purchases ever made buy Australia….it has just taken time to equip them with long range weapons and still no longer range weapons for the growlers
@@bigman23DOTS fuel range to short,bomb load to smalll
Compared to F-35A similar range, I think a strategic range is required for a the F-111 replacement and the Super aint it.@@andrewsmart2949
The Super Hornets/Growlers are maybe 12 years old- they are not old aircraft. Wise to upgrade them and use in conjunction with the F-35. In addition, Japan has some F-35A's, but the numbers quoted are the entire order which will not be fulfilled for many years.
F18s have a huge RCS signature - makes them VERY vulnerable to air defense systems
All our F18 are sold to a American defence company to train American pilots, but are now wanting to send them to Ukraine. we don't own any except a few we will keep in museum on display.
@@dexlab7539 the super hornet has the smallest RCS among all 4 gen jets and the Block 111 will be the smallest and be considered a 4.5 gen jet. American will 700 some, so wtf are you talking about?
@@airprok8328When you combat-configure any Super Bug, including Block 3, it has a huge RCS that allows the aircraft to be detected like any other 4th Gen fighter. Its toed-out pylons make the frontal RCS even worse.
It does have NCTR denial features in the intakes and blockers in front of the IGVs, but it will still be detected and acquired at pretty extreme long ranges.
Internal only sacrifices firepower. Using stealth aircraft with external weapons sacrifices stealth that you still have to spend time and money to maintain.Some weapons don’t fit inside such as large stand off strike missiles that don’t need a stealth platform to launch hundreds of kilometers away from adversaries. Non stealth still has utility, especially for large volume firepower and loud broadcast electronic warfare that negates stealth. Buying F-15EX would complement the stealth fighters well.
Maybe the RAAF is also waiting for the Tempest 6th gen fighter?
Maybe they will get involved in Tempest through their work on loyal wingman. That would directly align with AUKUS and would tie them into a closer relationship with Japan.
Tempest is a late 2030s production aircraft. That is a long wait when the PLA is aggressive now.
@@glynnwright1699They might be already doing that.
The UK, Japan and Italy are already developing a next generation fighter called Tempest. Due to be available in the mid 2030's.
We aren't going there. When we go euro it always bites us big time in the rear.
I'd be willing to see what the Japanese can do, UK not so much. @@carisi2k11
I see the UK has joined the axis nations. When is Germany joining?
@@carisi2k11 Really? So who did you come to when you needed nuclear subs to get you out of the French money trap? The British. Same as you came to the British for your T26 frigates. Apart from which the Japanese were so impressed with the British Tempest they dropped their programme and signed up for the British based programme. Hardly 'euro'.
Btw some of us would remind you the British are no longer in the EU.
@@jamesharris9816 What?
Its rather the Japanese and Italians asked to join the British Tempest project. It started in the UK and is based in the UK with 3 partner nations.
Maybe get some facts before writing?
Oh and there is no way the British will ever again join with Germany let alone France in any joint project. Been there and got burned by carriers, Tornado and Typhoon.
Things get more complex than that as Australia will also be acquiring SSNs which themselves possess an impressive long range strike capability. Add to that its plans to acquire long range strike missiles such as the Tomahawk, its work with the US on Hypersonic missiles, land based anti-ship missiles, optionally manned surface ships, large autonomous underwater vessels and what I believe will eventually be armed versions of the Ghost Bat. All of these capabilities were announced after the F-35 was ordered. Australia's defence plans are now way more diverse than originally planned.
Australia is working on the loyal wingman which will make up the canceled option on the F-35's for now. A future long range version called the bogan wingman, will go extended distances running on beer and will pick a fight with anyone.
I agree about the F-111. It was ahead of its time!.
The running costs of the f35 are too inhibitive - The new F 15 EX's would make an excellent new choice or even the EX 6 gen fighter from JAPAN
I agree wholeheartedly !!!! Australia has woeful defense and needs drastically to increase its weaponry !!!
One word Tempest will be available to our Brothers and Sisters in Australia.
And it comes risk free of a US MAGA government taking power and turning against traditional US allies to please Putin.
Aus has few options for a 6th gen. US NGAD & Tempest. Future variants of the F35 could also replace their Super Hornets & Growlers
They might be waiting for the F-35 version with more efficient engine, that is slated for the NGAD.
F35A was purchased to replace the clasic hornets FA/ 18 A and B hornets. Not the super hornets.
The super hornets purchase was only ment to be a gap to replace aging F111s Australia had.
In a decade Australia will replace both super hornets and F35A with a 6th generation fighter option and MQ 28 ghost bat drone. It's just probably cheaper to upgrade the existing super hornets to block III than it is to purchase more F35A that will soon be replaced anyway.
The only thing I didn't like was Australia had significantly downgraded its fleet size over the last 2 decades. Before we had 100 clasic hornets and 100 F111s. Today we have 54 F35A and a total of 34 super hornets.12 of them are growlers so it's a big drop in combat aircraft
NGAD costs 3x as much as F-35 which means that Australia likely would have to sacrifice fighter numbers just to get a few of them. Not practical even if they were available.
F-35s will not replace growlers, an electronic warfare variant of one of the upcoming 6th gen aircraft will most likely replace it
@@stupidburpwhat you talking about Australia already has sacrifice fighter jets. We had 100 clasic hornets and 100 f111. Look at it today. Just meets half that. I doubt RAAF will sacrifice more. The government will just have to pay for what's needed and that's it. Just like they have done for submarines. Get your box of tissues out mate your tax will go up
Look, it's really simple. Though we might have to support the US or other allies in the indo-pacific, what the RAAF really must do is defend northern Australia and maybe PNG against Indonesia if it should come to an unpleasantness again. They've got SU-35C and E with twice the range of the F-35A, which means that they can hit us, but we can't hit them. This has to change. We have to have a long-range strike aircraft with a decent weapon load, and the F-35 isn't it. So we limit the purchase of F-35s and we buy something we actually need.
The range of the aircraft isnt what does the damage. Its the range of the weapons.
Not to mention neither the f35 or f18E/F have the legs for what Australia needs. Even with refueling, it is difficult to to cover Australia, much less strike targets in SE Asia. What Australia really wants is an f111 replacement, which I think will be obtained through a combination of missiles, nuke subs and possibly even the b21 or another platform. Long range strike, particularly the naval kind, is the order of the day.
No current fighter does without a lot of refueling. The next gen fighters are probably long range missile/drone platforms, which are more what Australia wants. No need to acquire more F-35’s when the F/A-18E/F/G are great aircraft, do the job just fine, and are cheaper to upgrade.
@@DirtyMardi indeed. And if you develop a big munition or air launched drone you can just mount it to the hard point. That’s basically the reasoning behind the f-15EX (and being able to pack 12 missiles compared to 4-6). Yes, you can mount weapons externally to the f-35 but if you’re going to do that, you probably do just as well with a 4.5 bird.
What we really need is just enough as a deterrent rather than wasting money worrying about developing the kind of capability that would require bankrupting the country to achieve.
@@shraka yep. I think the sticky point is what is how much investment is required for an effective deterrent? The SSN issue is a case in point. Australia is not a Baltic country like Denmark or a nation like Taiwan or South Korea with a potential adversary on their doorstep. There is a long way for Australian subs to cover just to get into theatre. The distance from Sydney to Perth, for example, is longer than that from Suez to Gibraltar. I suspect the main reason behind nuke subs and AUKUS has nothing to do with the French sub being “sub”-par but changing strategic circumstances changing the calculus of what provides an effective deterrence. I wouldn’t worry about the program bankrupting the country but it could cannibalise other parts of the Defence Force. Short of something drastic like a war in Asia promoting an increase in taxes, I don’t see the Australian government being able to realistically increase defence spending, at least as a proportion of GDP.
@@CaptainBanjo-fw4fq The deterrent calculus has become more paranoid maybe. I'm not sure where you get the idea that defense spending can't go up - it went up this year. I'm positive the sub purchase is extra spending. The entire defense budget is only $50 billion a year. These things will add about 11 billion a year to that. We could buy a bunch of missile destroyers ($2-5 billion each) and the French sub fleet ($90 billion) giving us more flexible capability (especially in peace time) and have enough left over to build high speed rail between Melbourne and Sydney, and we wouldn't have pissed a major member of the European Union off.
The nuclear submarine purchase is a terrible terrible idea.
Wise decision on Australia’s part.
I suspect that one of the reasons the RAAF choose not to exercise the 28 F-35's acquisition was to let other nations get the build slots, Germany and Canada come to mind.
Yeah. Absolutely no. Countries don’t make military purchase taking into their friends requirements.
@@XxBloggs Guess it is ultimately self-serving, however, when Australia was told the US needed its existing slipways for its own new nuclear submarines; Australia said it will build and pay for a new slipway in the States, costing billions.
I never thought of that?🤔
@@petersinclair3997thats diffrent
Australia didn't purchase F35 to replace F18 super hornets at all. They was purchase to replace the old clasic hornets F18 A and B varent. Super hornet was purchased as ment to only be a gap for the F111 replacement till RAAF found another salotion.
It really bothers me to listen to foregeners talk about Australia defence as so much is based wrong information. Or dated information.
Australia government has decided to stop the continued purchase of F35A and upgrade the existing super hornets to block III reason as its getting closer for 6th generation aircraft option along with drones. The F35 was a decade too late entering service. Australia not going to continue purchase the 5th generation aircraft when it's almost time to replace them
Meanwhile countries like canada, germany, finland etc etc still waiting for theirs
@@robman2095They shouldn't bother with them. They should just go for block III super hornets till 6th generation comes available in the next decade.
Australia found the F35A is only good for limited interceptor or special missions due to its small payload within its internal bay. It remains stealth but not really effective if it comes up against multiple aircraft. You virtually have to send every F35 up to match the payload of 4th generation aircraft to maintain stealth. In beast mode it can carry lot of weapons but it isn't stealth and has less capability then the super hornets. Block III super hornets new cockpit and digital display virtually is the same as F35 in terms of Avionics and sensors but in a better preforming aircraft, although it has external targeting pods and electronic jamming as where the F35 is built in. Making the super hornets costing more. But since Australia already has the Super hornets. It works out cheaper to just do the upgrades since we already have the planes.
Australia will decommission the super hornets as soon 6th generation fighter comes available. It will most likely end up being US. FA XX NGRAD. Or UK tempest and Australian built MQ28 ghost bat drone developed by Boeing Australia
F35 only premium in price , but very delicate, easy to break down , pricely maintenance .
@@budisuwandhi6818 The maintenance of the F-35 is expensive, but it does not break as often as something like the F-15 or F-16. However, when something breaks, it is expensive.
The Quad is NOT an alliance. It is merely an agreement to share intelligence.
No military commitment to mutual support in case of conflict.
India likes it that way.
@@bradclawsie Seals what?
Excellent point and thanks for commenting as well as being a subscriber!
@@craigkdillon Meaning, mutual support is implied.
@@bradclawsie The AUKUS alliance means we are legally and morally committed to supporting each other in case of war.
Our commitment is real and profound.
@@craigkdillon
That's absolutely not true.
But the ANZUS alliance does.
Strike Eagles would make more sense. A relatively small force of F-35s can clear the way and scout, and then the Eagles can do the pounding.
The crews call the F35 the "Panther" because 60% of the time, it works every time. 😅
Haha, and 100% of the time it cost 3X more than expected 😂
CLASS! 😆
@@dexlab7539it's cheaper than expected. The trillion dollar number is a life time cost of a fleet till 2050. Buying a new f35 is cheaper than most 4th gen planes
@@angellara7040 AT the moment the price of the F-35 has gone up while the F-15 has become cheaper than the F-35
@@allenjones4160Nope, the F35 is cheaper than almost everything on the market
The F15 QA Eagle would be an awesome choice
Those extra 28 F35's will probably still be gotten if only because the newer builds of the F35 will provide some extra abilities over our earlier builds.
Being back the F-111 and upgrade its engines to GE F110-132 engines! Imagine the increase in performance!💪💪
I heard they're waiting for the next F-35 block which is supposed to improve compatibility with domestic Australian ordnance like drop bears...
The drop bear capability of the F-111 has never been replaced.
Ah yes, the new round of software and engine upgrades.
@@CausticLemons7 All old F-35 will be upgraded to the new Block
We haven't check out of the F-35. My prediction is that we will replace that 4th proposed F-35 squadron with the NGAD. We will also acquire the B-21.
Am not sure the Pentagon and Northrop Grumman will be selling the Raider outside of the USA.
the DSR already said there are no plans to acquire the B-21 due to the cost and F-35s/NGAD being just as effective
@@gibbo_303 I didn’t say under this government.
Those rough sums have already been done and B21 will be much cheaper than B2 and although costly, it has been estimated Australia could probably afford a squadron if the need were established.
@@lisaroberts8556 1) It's not the B-21 Raider, and yes they will that as it's already been offered to Australia. They'll never make the same mistake they made with Raptor ever again. 2) Australia has actually contributed to the development of the NGAD 6th Gen platform, so yes, it is already offered to us.
Comes down to cost and needs. Sure everyone wants the best but the best costs a lot of money. If you can upgrade what you currently have and still keep it competitive then less learning curve and changes. It also depends on what countries pose a threat to you and what they have.
Australia had never ordered the 28 extra F 35's. They didn't cancel them.
An interesting decision by Australia. If I were in their position, particularly when the first 6th generation planes are scheduled to come online in 2034, maybe they are waiting for the NGAD or Tempest. From what I know, Japan, Italy and UK are producing their 6th Gen Tempest while Australia is developing their loyal wingman to work with it as a 6th Gen package. The partners who were involved in the Lightening were angry at the US blocking them out of the NGAD project. Economies of scale would have made it cheaper for everyone. Instead we have the US with NGAD, Japan, UK and Italy with Tempest and finally, Germany, France and Spain with FCAS. it’s absolutely stupid for those three projects to be trying to produce 6th fighters that neither will be able to freely sell for security reasons. The customers who would have purchased that fighter are all competing with each other.
I don't think you want to put all your eggs in one basket. Having three different projects is good competition for all. Improvements/breakthroughs are made in such ways.
nah they’re gonna build em locally.
No Tempest thats 20years away.
@@LeonAust So where do you get that idea? Its scheduled for prototype flights in 2025 and into service by 2035 to replace Typhoon.
@@LeonAust Why do people like you tell others to 'look up' something like we don't already know? I would also remind you of my words which said prototypes in 2025 and production in 2035. Totally realistic given the advanced system sued to prove systems even before an aircraft takes flight.
So from EAP to Typhoon production was 16 years? Not sure quite what the point is because the actual Typhoon first flew in 1994 some 8 years before production.
I can return your comment that by saying 'look up' who was involved at that time with the UK (which by the way totally funded and built the EAP and could have gone on on its own had it not been for European politics), the French, Germans, Italians and Spanish. It was a committee of self interests all of which conspired to delay decisions and increase costs. We do not have that issue with Tempest. It is a firmly British led project with two partners (two of whom learned from the Typhoon experience) who are on the same page regarding designs and objectives.
Tempest partnership? Makes sense for Australia to join that.
The RAAF's F/A-18Fs are operated by the 1 SQN, notionally a strike squadron. Since the retirement of the F-111, the RAAF has lacked a true strategic strike capability. There may be some interest in eventually replacing the F/A-18 with the B-21 to fill this gap.
an enlarged MQ-28 would do the B-21's job fine.
B-21 is too expensive for Australia even if cleared for export. But Australia can get functional access to B-21 for free simply by allowing the USAF to use bases in Australia.
A more practical and affordable option for the role of the retired F-111 is F-15EX. 36 F-15EX could replace all Super Hornets and Growlers at lower operating costs than F-35.
@@stupidburp Defence has already ruled out purchasing the B-21. I think the F-15EX is a non-starter. The F-15 would require retraining ground crew and aircrew on a type they're not familiar with. Additionally, Defence has previously refused to purchase any F-15 variants. The reason why the RAAF operates the Hornet, a carrier-based fighter, is because they did not want the F-15 because it was too capable for the RAAF to manage.
OK let me throw this in the chat:
The UK / Japan / Italy Tempest will fly in prototype / proof of concept tests in 2025 and is scheduled to go into service in the early 2030s when Typhoon (and RAAF F-18s) will be retired.
Given the RAN will be building and using the British designed and powered 'next - Astute' nuclear sub under the AUKUS programme, is building and will be using the UK designed and powered Type 26 frigate and it has its developing drone programme I suspect the Aussies could do a very good deal with the UK to buy Tempest given that that aircraft is being designed for 'wingman' capability. It would open a very useful market given the countries building it.
I am also not convinced the USA will export its new fighter just as they didn't with the F-22.
Just food for thought.
Would be good to see Australia get some F15EX platforms to replace the F18 platforms especially if the USAF get the NGJP for the EX
@@aregeebee201why is that non sense? It's a newer aircraft, is designed to support 5th gen fighters and has a longer transit and combat range than the FA18F/G
Australia had options for 28 more F-35s, it did not place an order. 🤦♂🤦♂
This! This is what I was talking about in your video on Canada getting the F-35. It's way too expensive, the capability do not fit our needs.
We don't need a fancy battle coordinator, we need self defence, we need attack support, and we need a sustainable cost to operate. The Grippen would have fulfilled all the requirements at a quarter of the cost to purchase and operate.
Dude you have no clue what you are talking about. You do not have a clue about what we need, reality. Gripens are flown around in circles by F35s. We use to do it at Frisian flag in our old CF18A's. I've also got to see what the F35 was capable of before I got out. I fear the F35 more then the F22 for a matter of fact.
The Gripen is technically more expensive to purchase though. It's just much cheaper to operate and maintain. A lot of factors (combat integration, parts compability and most importantly, politics) lead to the purchase of the F 35
You know Australia already owns like 73 or so f35s.
the Gripen is more expensive than the F-35 tho
This is misleading. Australia ordered 72 with an option to buy more, but decided to look at UAV's to fit out a 4th squadron.
Misleading
It was Great seeing our f 18 super hornets flying over near and around Williamtown it was a sight I will never forget, especially stopping at their raaf base to see the majestic aircraft land, consisting of trainer hawks, pc-21 planes and F35’s. I will always miss and remember the F18 forces we have there. If you want to see the Worimi Hornet in person, they have a museum there overlooking the runway where you can see all sorts of aircraft including the f-111. Stay safe Spartans.
Should India buy f-35 ?
@@pkmishra6763 Considering India is neighbour’s with china who have the ability to detect the Rafael fighters and the fact that china has had multiple conflicts with india and may invade india in the future, stealth aircraft would be able to penetrate china’s airspace, take out their radar systems and hopefully allow for less stealthy fighters to go in and destroy the Chinese invasion force, if china decides to invade india if that is. I would say about one or two squadrons could do the job..
@The-Master-Chief I believe you're talking about Fighterworld. I've been there a couple of times. It's a great aircraft museum.
@@jimdigitalvideo Yes it is, thank you I was not thinking of the name at the time of making that comment.
Nice, I got to see F35s flying from above recently when I was camping on a mountain top and they were flying around the valleys below - was quite a sight!
The F-35's nickname in Australia is "The Little Turd". Pretty much sums it up, really.
but it does sound awesome... watching the demo at Bathurst was worth every cent of my taxpayer dollars spent on it.
Why is the F35 such a special aircraft? It is because it is massively over budget and over time; even then it is barely functional. Because it is so overdue much of the technology, (including the stealth) is obsolete. But it has succeeded in its primary mission, to transfer as much money as possible from the US government to the shareholders of Lockheed Martin, thereby giving the executives of that company the biggest possible bonuses.
Pretty much.
You have to wonder if Australia has the same American 'friend' status as Germany and Ukraine. Germany lost Nordstream (America said it was 5 guys in a boat from somewhere... ?), and Australia is no longer allowed to maintain our previous income by selling commodities to China. Ukraine is bashing it's head against Russian fixed defences with American supplied war material and who knows how that will turn out... !
😂 I had to laugh after the most recent f35 debacle.
Ok mate
Wtf are you talking about the f-35 is not obsolete, it is a very capable aircraft.
Good move . The F-18 is a premier fighter. Still a star in this new era.
Is NGAD going to be exported? I suppose it would likely either be that or Tempest.
If the F-22 is any indication, maybe not. So the Tempest program will probably be a good idea to get involved in with it being a multi-nation collaboration and all.
No we didn’t export the f22 so why would we do that with ngad I highly doubt the dod or the American public would be happy if people in government started suggesting this we nvr export our best tech.
@@mill2712 the f22 was developed in a time where the US had a stealth monopoly and had no real near pier threats so they had little to gain and a lot to loose by sharing tech. neither is the case anymore. right now isn't the time to be stingy towards allies especially when any special new tech could just be stolen again anyway
I say yes but only to a select lot of countries
@@grandadmiralthrawn8116ur logic doesnt make sense now that we dont have a monopoly on stealth you expect us to tive away the one thing that gibes us that edge
The fact of the matter is Exactly the same as Canada ,Australia needs an air superiority aircraft and the F 35 won't cut the mustard
Dont ask France for Rafales ,they wont find this funny.
The gig is up on stealth. Modern sensors and computing has cracked this problem. It's a huge part of why the US are also building more F15's. When stealth is no longer the key function you're better off going with superior performance.
The F35 program has been ploughing through deep troubles for extended times. The RAAF is not alone in reworking orders and planning.
The US gov stats on avail rates for F35 for 2023 is as horrible and bad as previous years, in some ways worse. How as a program you manage to be both screwing up your new tranches - and having findings against the aging of in service units is brutally grim. When you are unable to get above the aging Harrier fleet in avail rate, and have a worsening state than that fleet - it really says something.
The farce over the new engine also highlights a further staggering failure in the program. Its got unending software issues, and very very poor operational outcomes (Things like the plane is so flawed that high altitude supersonic flight is basically being excluded) - when customers are advised that the actual compute hardware, which given a time window of beyond 20 years, has got so 'hot' (the mind boggles that they have runaway thermal design issues in modern hardware which should be magnitudes cooler over decades time frames) - means that another outcome like the B models being unable to take a new engine - and thus won't be able to move forward technically - are just part of the unending farce of the program.
It is highly likely that the UK will cut order numbers sharply, and the Belgians are currently refusing to take the plane on order as they contracted TR4 and have been handed TR3s.
The F35 has been, and remains YEARS behind where its meant to actually be, and the in service units are an absolute mess. The plane to reach the correct TR4 levels now look like fleetwide level rework and re-enginning is required.
There comes a point where people have to decide on a cut of point for their interactions with the failing program, and that's the inflection point now. Focus is changing towards NGAD and Tempest and other programs, and in the UK - it should actually look sideways and place a new order for Typhoon (which bluntly is carrying the war-work and work load, burning through its air frame hours covering for the failing F35 state.)
F35 is a lemon, and ploughing more money into it is the sunk cost fallacy
In major war games it kills the opposition 7 to 1 that includes your RAF Typhoons
@@LeonAust Yes, the F35 has done very well in show trials and in games where it can hide its shit avail rates, lack of comparable weapon load, and the fact it doesn't fly over enemy airspace.
The real world workload of RAF work is done by Typhoon. This includes the Tornado workload the F35 was supposed to be doing.
Tell me friend. If the F35 is such a success, why does it require a new engine. Why is the US airforce now looking for a new F16 replacement (again, this was the F35's job).
The B model we have, can't fit a new engine. And that's now thus a complete dead end.
The unending farce of the F35 program will roll on a few more years, but you can put a fork in it.
Wish you purchased A models hey? as available rates have improved dramatically for F-35A and even the F-35B. .....F-16 replacement is the F-35A!
NGAD will replace F-22 and naval version replace the super hornets the F-35 will stay.
New engines are a block improvement as the F-35 will have continuous block improvements to stay number 1 for up to 30 years unlike eurofighter.
When you make comparisons do it against Sea Harrier, the F-35B is far superior, Britain should have converted to CATOBAR thus the better F-35C.
Still F-35B is the best STOVL fighter that can beat all if not most fighters.@@AdmV0rl0n
Understood and explained adequately
That's a B pass PilotPhotog.
The trouble with the F35 is the amount of downtime, and cost, for every hour of flight time.
Same with the F-14 Tomcat and the F-22 Raptor. Both were very expensive to maintain
It’s getting scary with the capabilities of gen 5 jets, and the possibilities of the gen 6 jets. In the 80’s and 90’s the fear with future jets was creating something that a human pilot could not control or even survive because of the potential G’s. These gen 5’s are game changers, and before they really get comfortable with the planes, these countries are already planning for the gen 6’s. I flew the F-16 in the 80’s and 90’s and that craft has been “proven” for 40 years. With upgrades, it’s still formidable. Can’t wait to see what the 6’s can do.
I worked at the Super hornet SPO as well as both of the F111 SQN's, we were the poor brother to the USA when it came to spares so looking at the issues with the F35 software etc I don't think the RAAF wants anymore pain hence the downsizing.
Howard made the decision on the F35 on the way to a meeting the US in the limo. Thankfully it's finally been put down.
As a prior Commander for the largest USAF ground radar unit in Japan, and a Mission Crew Commander Air Battle Manager on AWACS, Australia is too far away to help much with Taiwan or mainland China. Australia have no aircraft carriers so the enemy is going to have to be pretty close for them to us the fighter aircraft. Okinawa is bristling with US military 400 miles east of Taiwan and, while it's nice to have help from the Aussies, it won't be needed for any rapid response counter strikes. It's also nice to have our allies as strong as possible to give different options for long term conflicts. So kudos for their new subs and maybe they will purchase more F-35's in the future.
The video is clickbait. There never was an order for an additional 28 F-35As for Australia, and there is no corresponding literature in any of the reputable or even disreputable publications to support this video.
Australia’s role would be to interdict PLA vessels during war and to perform some strikes against the PLA island outposts. Locking down access to the Indian Ocean can also mess with their logistics and economy in that situation. They would hold their end of the line.
If Australia got some longer range strike assets such as F-15EX carrying LRASM and JASSM-ER then they could reach PLA targets further North, perhaps as far as Hainan and the Southern coast of China with some aerial refueling.
australia can provide great surveillance and gather intel through our special forces on the ground getting in to spots gathering intell then bugging out undetected. Or via our sub capabilities which are first rate but limited.
If only you Americans stopped dragging us into your shit just so you can maintain your grip as a world power at your "allies" cost. It's quite obvious you know this to be true with comments like "also nice to have our allies as strong as possible to give different options for long term conflicts". I suppose those "options" would be to help the US stay at the top at the cost of everyone else. Instead, maybe you could take all those bases, like Pine Gap and ever the increasing numbers of USMC in Darwin for starters and stick them somewhere else instead of making us a target for your country's benefit?
Australia has not cancelled anything
From the ASPI article about the Super Hornet flying on:
"RAAF chief Air Marshal Robert Chipman has said: ‘We will look at the F-35 and we’re very, very comfortable and very happy with the capability of the F-35. But it would be remiss of me not to look at what else is available for us to replace our Super Hornets in the future.’"
This sums up the situation best I reckon so no, Australia isn't moving on from the F-35. Our previous and current governments have a lot of projects ongoing and this will continue in successive governments.
new news (a few days after this vid was posted): Australia will develop a domestic facility to apply stealth coatings to the Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter. The new Aircraft Coating Facility will be built at Newcastle Airport, New South Wales, and will support the Royal Australian Air Force’s (RAAF’s) fleet of F-35As, says Australia’s Department of Defence.
If I recall correctly Australia was also going to be the asia-pacific centre for certain higher order maintenance activities on F-35 so this might fit in with that too.
@@robman2095 cool, yeah it wouldnt surprise me if some local allies used the facility
There is still a chance that Australia will put in another order down the road once the F-35 has implemented future upgrades
Haha, unlikely. Australian government is going broke fast
Excellent vid. Thank you.
Glad you liked it!
I highly doubt the U.S. would export the NGAD given how cutting edge it's supposed to be. Given it's price tag of "several hundreds of millions dollars" per aircraft, I doubt Australia could afford it anyway. The primary reason Australia decided not to pursue B-21 procurement was cost. The more likely scenario is that Australia buys the GCAP fighter.
If the US doesn’t export them it runs the risk of having congress cut the order due to the cost. Honestly I’d say export them. Cost comes down with more customers
@@aidan11162 while exporting them would make the most sense I really don’t see the American public being OK with that but even if they do export it, I’m sure the plane will be significantly NERFED compared to the American version and the amount of countries I can even buy it in the first place are slim
If the US trusts Austrailia with Nuclear Submarine tech, they might trust them with NGAD. Also, Austrailia tried to buy the F-22, which was pretty comparably expensive in its day, so them holding out for 6th gen isn’t impossible.
@@drksideofthewal The Ngad and Fa-XX programs are being developed specifically for the US military. We would have to sell australia computational infrastructure and teach them how to utilize the aircraft. As they're going to be used in conjuction with Ai wingman.
well they didn't export the f22 just for that same reason, which lead to the F35 having special mesures just so it could be exported.
An additional consideration is that like the USAF decided that they still need missile trucks like the F-15X platform that helps to overcome the lack of weapons capacity in the F-35.
You mean the F-15EX
The problem with both the NGAD and B21 for us Aussies is cost. Having to shill out what we will for these nuclear subs, I don't know if we will really have the budget for the new cool guys in town. I guess it depends on how China plays its game until then. They are the only real driving force in our region for us to acquire such advanced capabilities.
I think the SSN purchase is a very clear signal we aren't in the market for B-21 or NGAD. As the plan currently states, we will have Collins, Virginia & SSN AUKUS all operational at the same time. That'll suck the life out of the Defence budget for the next couple of decades.
Australia government has shit for brains. It don't matter what fight jet Australia gets it will have no range to project. Australia needs aircraft carriers. Today warships can sit 5000 km out and rain cruise missiles on us. Australia not only out gunned but outraged. 3 AWDs and 8 submarines ain't going to do shit. During ww2 it was the aircraft that sunk the ships and won the war in the pacific. The longest range Australia has purchased is tomahawk missiles with 2500km range. China has cruise missile that succeed more than 5000km range
@@corvanphoenix suck the life out of the tax payer.. we better fkn use these kids toys
No amount of budget matters if our country is at steak.
@@neth77 american propaganda bro china is our largest trading partner we have more to lose picking sides than being a passive Switzerland/new Zealand
In FY2021, F-35As (including the older aircraft not in combat-coded F-35 units) achieved 11.2 mean flight hours between critical failures - the target was 20 hours.
This makes the F35A unsuitable for Oz. Here in Oz, we do not have the ships and support to quickly pick up a pilot (aka shark bait) from the water a long way from support.
Pilots are reluctant to fly the F35A over water in remote area for that reason.
Okay, I don't know if this is specific to Australia, but at least the US doesn't have issues maintaining the F-35, considering that it is currently the most reliable aircraft in service in the US Air Force and Navy.
The F-35 is a great example for America’s privat industry over designing and ending in a mess.
Most likely this cancellation is to wait for the upcoming 6th gen option as part of AUKUS. But some B21 Raiders would also be a good fit, bringing back that kind of advantage in strike technology that Australia found so useful out of the F-111.
Also, an updated FA18 Super Hornet will not be a bad piece of kit, and not every mission requires full stealth capabilities, so choosing to run multiple platforms will allow greater flexibility even if it leads to slightly worse logistics.
It is very interesting that India chose the Rafale. It's quite a capable aircraft in its own way, and built for an almost entirely different doctrine. With some upgrades the French are making to their missiles it will be very interesting to see how that would match up against an upgraded Super Hornet (not that we are anything but allies).
If Australia intends to buy fighters strictly for homeland defense/patrol, then the F-15EX would have been the better choice of airframe
nope
Australia's shifting away from continental defence to contributing naval/air/amphib to Allied ops in SE and East Asia.
Considering it's the closest Western thing to a Su family when it comes to weapon capacity and range, I am also equally surprised
Australia has 4 units flying F35a , not at full strength as RAAF is still receiving new aircraft for a total of 72 ( 28 more were options ) . Two units fly the F18 super hornets with a total of 36. ( 12 Growlers with 12 more pre engineered to be Growlers of the 24 ).
Wagner is training the abbos in Northern territory to take their country back.
Wrong forum mate. You've clicked off the Sky News tab in your browser.
An airplane will last as long as you want to spend money on repairs. I was stationed at cannon afb. We had f111d fighter bombers. I liked the airplanes.
the 35 programmes have been woeful including failing to meet written essential requirements and massive cost over runs. australia massively gains increases through great aircraft modified updated and exceptional performance by plane, servicing, avionics, weapons and pilots. ground attack capability nothing like it required to have.
@@keithprinn720 The F-35 meets the capability standards but is way over budget.
They could be looking closer at b-21 or getting on ngad. They got offered the b-21
Indeed, and both would make sense - either getting B-21s or NGAD fighters. Thanks for commenting and for being a long time subscriber!
The B-21 got looked over in the latest australian review. NGAD is a possibility.
Nobody is getting the NGAD for 20 years….US not even shipping out old F22s still
an enlarged MQ-28 could do the B-21's job.
@@De_cool_dude how would australia power this enlarged mq-28. It would be so expensive.
Someone in Australia was reading the old 2014 Air Power Australia report signed by Carlo Kopp and with that made a decision in 2023
Excellent video. Makes sense to operate the Super Hornets longer and upgrade them as they have more range than the F-35.
It will be cool to see Block III hornets. Hope more Super Hornets operators then chose this upgrade.
What everybody oversees in my opinion is that upgraded super hornets are still very deadly, especially since the F35 can share its information with them and enhance their capabilities. If properly working together these aircrafts will be victorious over any enemy even China.
F-35 have significantly more range than the hornets
@@Aaron-wq3jz And significantly less than F-111. Also less than an F/A-18F with external tanks. Point being that with F/A-18F and -18G we already acknowledge the stealth aspect shortcomings and have prioritized range and payload over super sneaky stuff.
Well there are only threee operstors
@@lantinian using chat gpt as a source was your first mistake
Australia should get the F15SEX to replace the Hornets
Forgot to comment yesterday haha...😎
Australia is looking at the Gripen for the near future.
Thank God. This plane is an overrated money pit
I really hope we get the B-21. It's massive range will help protect our massive country. Having them tucked away safe in the southern parts of the nation but still able to reach the South China Sea would be HUGE! Almost as huge as it's price tag ;)
Australia government rejected it for a option
No they didn't as it is a future potential acquisition@@Nathan-ry3yu
I'm not quite certain, but maybe the AUKUS submarine (SSN) deal has put somewhat of a dent in earlier procurement plans as well. SSNs are extremely costly and require more dedicated infrastructure than diesel-electric/AIP submarines. While Australia certainly isn't a poor nation, it doesn't have the kind of fiscal and monetary leverage the US have, so also acquiring NGAD and B-21s alongside F-35As (which will have to be up to the block 4 standard with considerable added cost) and SSNs?
Sorry, can't see that happening even with tensions rising. Australia has got a lot on its plate as is. The Royal Australian Army is modernizing with among others : the replacement of the ARH-2 Tiger and MRH-90 (both not up to specs) by UH-60 and AH-64E (?), the investment related with the SSNs and its specialized training and maintenance/repair infrastructure and industrial support base, the replacement of the ANZAC-class frigates scheduled, and possibly the purchase of Patriot batteries (haven't seen a final decision on that yet). That's a lot for any nation to carry in a relative short timeframe. If one added NGAD and B-21 Raiders, I wonder if Australian taxpayers can or want to carry that financial burden. Maybe if some mining company strikes gold in the outback again...
I for one would be OK with a Defence spending increase but that's me.
You do realise that the Australian economy is the world's 12th largest economy, right?
This idea that Australia is a tiny, inconsequential country that wouldn't be able to "afford" a squadron or two of whatever the hell aircraft it chooses is ridiculous.
They’ve already reduced the amount of ifv’s they’ll acquire from the land 400 program. The navy and Air Force take priority over the army which makes sense.
@@tigerpjm This
an enlarged MQ-28 could do the B-21's job.
There isn’t any debate that J20 isn’t a 5th gen aircraft. It is not a low observable aircraft, it can’t super cruise, and it is not super maneuverable.
The J-20 is probably capable; we just don't know much about it. What you said applies to the Su-57 because we know what it can do, and it isn't much.
We currently have a Labor (Democrat)federal government. Every time they get into power, Labor rips funding from defence. The F35 cut is not the only programme they've done this too. They have cut by 2/3 the amount of new AFV's and SPA's that the Army was going to get for eg. Standard Labor.
Have you looked at the Liberal Parties history of defence management and procurement - you must be kidding
@@BettyBettyBoBetty
Like everyone has forgotten how many billion the Liberals flushed down the toilet buying submarines that were never built.
What an idiot, ay?
@@BettyBettyBoBetty At least they try. All Labor does is gut the budget for defense. Every time they get in they rip the cash straight out to buy votes on fuzzy policies. The LNP then have to spend a few years getting it back on track. Go look at history. It's rinse and repeat every time the Socialists get in power.
Liberal does the exact same thing. they were in power for almost a decade and DIDN'T replace M113, they bought MRH-90 and ARH Taipan (which are now getting replaced by new helicopters), Labor has CONTINUED AUKUS (like they said they would in 2021), they did a DSR, and INCREASED spending.
@@De_cool_dude Didn't replace the M113? Like the Collins replacement that should have been done years before by, what for it, Labor. Under Rudd/Gillard/Rudd. They ignored a sub replacement for the 6 years whilst in office. The LNP started the M113 replacement programme, which has recently decided that it would be the Redback from South Korea. So what did Labor do, they cut by 2/3 the amount of IFV's we'd buy. Then they cut the amount of K-9 SPA's we'd buy. Sure at this point they are supporting AUKUS, but the extreme lefty's of the Labor party are starting to get louder about cancelling that too. Same old Labor. So are you ignorant of Labor and their history in defence, or are you their paid bot?
The USAF has just banned it's F-35A's from flying within 25 miles of storms, especially thunderstorms (ie, bad weather), because apparently they fall out the sky. Several reasons are possible but the likeliest is the fact the metal mesh added to the carbon fibre provides inadequate lightening protection (probably caused by the famous weight issues the F-35 has suffered). If this is the case then it's not an issue that can be resolved with repair or retrofit, which effectively makes these planes useless other than on sunny days. No word on whether this effects the F-35B/C variants but as all three effectively share the same architecture, and as the B/C variants had even more weight issues than the A, then this plane looks to be the biggest eff-up in Western military procurement history.
Think your video is a little bit misleading. Australian hasn't moved on, it's purchase of F35 was always only 72, which is expected/hoped to be delivered in full end this year. There was the POTENTIAL for a further order of 28 to take the number to 100 under the partner program, but that was more Lockheed's sales hopes, rather than anything factual or at all contractual.
So there was no cancellation, simply a defence review decided that 72 aircraft can suffice until any access to 6th gen is clearer (as you did indicate). Depending on the US's stand on that, the order for 28 more may in fact still come... its all up in the air (pun intended) at this time.
72 F-35 is enough but they could use 36 F-15EX to support them for long range strikes and EW. Eagle II are a notch above Super Hornet and Growler that they could replace.
As a neighbouring country, (New Zealand) Australia is our main line of defence. We would rely on them in time of war as the first responders until the U.S and U.K arrived. The big jump in military spending was good for the west.
In Canada we have a similar problem in that we exist between two of the largest war nations of all time. Well, Russia is pretty depleted now, but still
Astralia could join the UK/Italy/Japan Tempest 6th generation fighter program.
Australia actually doesn’t need that many F35, the Super Hornets is very capable and can do most of what is needed
Tempest is coming, and for a change America is facing a wee bit of home grown western competition. This should be seen as a good thing, competition keeps all the players focused.
Tempest is just a power point picture though. No Tempest have actually been built, let alone flown.
Clickbait. We never officially planned to order 28 more. At 72 F-35s, we are already one of the largest fleet operators outside the US and will likely go the route of block 3 super hornets then NGAD or whatever other 6th gen options exist.
It's the vertical landing ones Australia needs so they can land on our 2 aircraft carriers
hard to believe the jsf from 1993 is still having issues