F-35 Joint Strike Fighter - Abbott agrees to buy more, more, more.

[madmug]

The plan is to get 100 odd stealth multi role strike fighters, and to pair them along with no less than a dozen Growler EW aircraft (alongside our 6 Wedgetail AWACS). Thats 6 x F35's per Growler, and one AWAC per 12 x F35's.

More than enough air power to ensure air superiority against an attack from anyone other than a concerted and sustained attack from a super power (like China or the US).

Who would want to fly over & attack us anyway?

I still say our sub fleet (what ever we get) will be our prime defence asset. The rest of it is just toys for boys.

I mean WTF do we need 70 ton Abrams tanks for?

Good air defence missiles & some decent subs & we're ok. Except if China or the US come knocking. If they do then just lower the draw bridge, we're cooked anyway

 

[rodney hoo]

Who would want to fly over & attack us anyway?

I still say our sub fleet (what ever we get) will be our prime defence asset. The rest of it is just toys for boys.

I mean WTF do we need 70 ton Abrams tanks for?

Good air defence missiles & some decent subs & we're ok. Except if China or the US come knocking. If they do then just lower the draw bridge, we're cooked anyway

IMO if any large military power really wants to roll in we are gone anyway, population not large enough to make a stand but we are the USA deputy sheriff in this region so think they would be up for the help as would Britain and Europe, so as you say good air defence missiles, a well equipped navy etc should be fine. In today's war machines it does not take long to wipe out cities. Deplomacy is the best weapon, be good to our neighbours.

 

[Dagger5]

China has zero capability of invading us. Their merchant fleet does not have the capability of supporting such an expedition plus their navy would be incapable of projecting force that far from their bases, they are not a blue water navy on the level of the US, Japan, UK and at a stretch Russia. The only thing we would have to worried about would be them lobbing missiles at us and cyber warfare. Advanced subs are a huge nightmare for any navy to deal with and the Chinese would be sitting ducks for even the Collins class.

 

[madmug]

So the question remains, why do we spend so much on shyte toys?

WTF do we want the F-35 for. They are an expensive disaster which have hardly flown yet.

 

[Max zero]

So the question remains, why do we spend so much on shyte toys?

WTF do we want the F-35 for. They are an expensive disaster which have hardly flown yet.

Why is the US building more Abrams tanks even though the US army does not want anymore?

Why did we build the Collins class in Adelaide when we could get something better and cheaper off the shelf?

Its more about toys and pork barreling (those sexy maintenance contracts) then safety.

 

[Power Raid]

6 Subs, 8 Frigates and 4 (ancient) 4500 ton Adelaide class Destroyers form the core of the navy at the moment (with 3 Aegis equipped shiny new 6500 ton destroyers on the way to replace the old Adelaide class). There are a dozen blue water patrol boats (commercial shipping patrols and pirates only) and the rest are troop transports and support ships. All based (largely) at Perth and Sydney (each base also maintains a special forces quality clearance diving unit), with main training conducted on Melbourne (down at Crib Point) and production in Adelaide, with many of the fleet staggering deployments around the world on operations or exersizes.

How are 2 blokes going to destroy our Navy?



The fighter squadrons alone are spread out around Australia. And the aircraft themselves are individually stored in separate bunkers and grouped for maintenance in the odd hangar.

Again, I cant see it happening.

Dont underestimate our intelligence services (Defence signals directorate, ASIO, ASIS etc) to detect any threat well in advance of it occurring. We're spying on everyone (and vice versa) and would know months if not years in advance if a concerted attack from a foreign State was coming our way. Also; allies.

A planned concerted attack and invasion of Australia by anyone short of the USA would only occur during a third world war (or it would start one).

I know its not the 90s anymore but there were no underwater patrols at fleet base east or west. Around Christmas there were days the entire fleet is tied up with probably less than 10 guys on duty and awake. Effectively having just a quarter master on the waste.

So its would have been pretty easy for 1 diver with a re-breather to do the job.


Can any serving members confirm if anything has changed, specifically over Christmas?

I can't comment about the Air force as I was only interested in the navy's security risk.

 

[Power Raid]

Why is the US building more Abrams tanks even though the US army does not want anymore?

Why did we build the Collins class in Adelaide when we could get something better and cheaper off the shelf?

Its more about toys and pork barreling (those sexy maintenance contracts) then safety.

If any government contract is handed to adelaide, you can guarantee it is not for commercial reasons. It is a pork barreling con. That said, there was nothing off the shelf available as no one wants what we want..........that is a bit of a warning sign.

We decided to get something off the shelf and then change it for our needs. We ended up with a piece of s**t and have decided to replace it with another piece of s**t. Unfortunately to get what we need, that works, we need to go nuclear. That is a political hot potato, so common sense will not prevail.

 

[Power Raid]

So the question remains, why do we spend so much on shyte toys?

WTF do we want the F-35 for. They are an expensive disaster which have hardly flown yet.

I'm not defending the f-35 but we shouldn't build what we need until China has locked in their aircraft. then we should ensure we air superiority.

until then, we should focus on electronic warfare and other R&D systems.

 

[telsor]

Who would want to fly over & attack us anyway?

I still say our sub fleet (what ever we get) will be our prime defence asset. The rest of it is just toys for boys.

I mean WTF do we need 70 ton Abrams tanks for?

Good air defence missiles & some decent subs & we're ok. Except if China or the US come knocking. If they do then just lower the draw bridge, we're cooked anyway

Who said it has to be to defend against people attacking us?

The point of a military is to be capable of fulfilling a flexible array of (reasonable) national goals.

20 years back, do you think they were planning to deploy to East Timor to stare down the Indonesians? I think most would agree that that was a 'good' use of force, and that required a broad array of military capability, both to implement and to intimidate the Indonesians against escalating further. It also required the cooperation of allies like the USA, and gaining that requires us helping them on occasion (again requiring a broad array of capability, that is interoperable with those Allies).

The point is, you don't know what you'll need the military for ahead of time, so you maintain as broad an array of capability as possible.

 

[Max zero]

I'm not defending the f-35 but we shouldn't build what we need until China has locked in their aircraft. then we should ensure we air superiority.

until then, we should focus on electronic warfare and other R&D systems.

What about Drones?

Could buy a hell of a lot more (ie patrol the coast a lot better) plus could remotely pilot them (which helps a lot due to Australia's size)?

 

[telsor]

I know its not the 90s anymore but there were no underwater patrols at fleet base east or west. Around Christmas there were days the entire fleet is tied up with probably less than 10 guys on duty and awake. Effectively having just a quarter master on the waste.

So its would have been pretty easy for 1 diver with a re-breather to do the job.


Can any serving members confirm if anything has changed, specifically over Christmas?

I can't comment about the Air force as I was only interested in the navy's security risk.

Just how much explosives do you think a diver could carry? Enough to disable significant parts of the fleet briefly if well placed? Maybe, but even that would be a huge effort.

Also, if a defense review picked this up, then presumably they took measures to counter it. Isn't that why they have such reviews?

 

[Power Raid]

Just how much explosives do you think a diver could carry? Enough to disable significant parts of the fleet briefly if well placed? Maybe, but even that would be a huge effort.

Also, if a defense review picked this up, then presumably they took measures to counter it. Isn't that why they have such reviews?

I would hope so, as it is almost 20 years. but knowing the "puss", very little would have changed but hopefully serving personnel can shed some light.

 

[telsor]

What about Drones?

Could buy a hell of a lot more (ie patrol the coast a lot better) plus could remotely pilot them (which helps a lot due to Australia's size)?

But they also have a point of vulnerability....They'd be run from a central point (or a few of them)...Take that(them) out, and the drone fleet is gone...

 

[telsor]

I would hope so, as it is almost 20 years. but knowing the "puss", very little would have changed but hopefully serving personnel can shed some light.

Oh, I'm sure *something* changed...How effective that change is is another question.

 

[Max zero]

But they also have a point of vulnerability....They'd be run from a central point (or a few of them)...Take that(them) out, and the drone fleet is gone...

Wouldn't have to be centrally located at all. Plenty of places to hide a facilities in Australia.

 

[telsor]

Wouldn't have to be centrally located at all. Plenty of places to hide a facilities in Australia.

Yeah, nobody would be able to tell where they are....We have so many secret military bases with significant comms (thank god nobody can jam EF signals) and an airstrip...

 

[Max zero]

Yeah, nobody would be able to tell where they are....We have so many secret military bases with significant comms (thank god nobody can jam EF signals) and an airstrip...

Doesn't need the airstrip.

The launching facilities need not be near the control facilities.

The US has 64 Drone control stations (as of 2012) with only 12 having the hanger and launch facilities.

 

[telsor]

Doesn't need the airstrip.

The launching facilities need not be near the control facilities.

The US has 64 Drone control stations (as of 2012) with only 12 having the hanger and launch facilities.

OK, The US is what, 15-20 times bigger than us, so if they have 64...How many do you think we would have? 3? 4?
12 hangers Vs....1?

 

[Max zero]

OK, The US is what, 15-20 times bigger than us, so if they have 64...How many do you think we would have? 3? 4?
12 hangers Vs....1?

About 12 times actually.

Add to that any launch facility the Drones required would also be required by any manned aircraft.

Can have plenty of control stations.

When you throw in the running costs being anywhere from 1/7th to 1/50 cheaper means the infrastructure support is a fraction of what is required for manned aircraft.

Its why the F35 is being predicted as the last manned fighter aircraft.

"There are those that see JSF as the last manned fighter. I'm one that's inclined to believe that."
-- Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff

 

[telsor]

About 12 times actually.

Add to that any launch facility the Drones required would also be required by any manned aircraft.

Can have plenty of control stations.

When you throw in the running costs being anywhere from 1/7th to 1/50 cheaper means the infrastructure support is a fraction of what is required for manned aircraft.

Its why the F35 is being predicted as the last manned fighter aircraft.

What about the question of jamming?

You don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As for the F-35 being the last manned fighter, that's looking 20-30 years ahead....Not current capacity.

 

[Malifice]

I know its not the 90s anymore but there were no underwater patrols at fleet base east or west. Around Christmas there were days the entire fleet is tied up with probably less than 10 guys on duty and awake. Effectively having just a quarter master on the waste.

So its would have been pretty easy for 1 diver with a re-breather to do the job.


Can any serving members confirm if anything has changed, specifically over Christmas?

I can't comment about the Air force as I was only interested in the navy's security risk.

I highly doubt you would find the whole fleet moored up over Xmas - plenty on duty overseas and on exercise.

Also - who on earth would bomb the fleet? A concerted effort might sink or heavily damage a few (the sheer amount of explosives you would need to sink 2 dozen 4000 ton warships being a major issue.

All I can say is be confident that ASIS, ASIO and DSD would almost certainly pick them up pretty darn quickly, months before they got here. We have a brilliant intelligence capability in Oz.

If a war was coming you would know about it months in advance. There would be sabre rattling, posturing, a s**t load of diplomacy to ensure other nations stay out of it, and then a False flag or something to give pretext of 'self defence'.

Leaving aside the logistical nightmare of invading then conducting and supporting sustained operations on mainland Australia. In order to maintain the air power required to support an invasion or sustained operations in Australia any future opponent tequires an aircraft carrier (or permission to use air bases in NZ or SE Asia - and even that is severely limiting). Even assuming you can maintain air power over Australia (and with the most sophisticated ground radars, EW, growlers, AWACS, AEGIS, 100 odd F35s that's no easy task even if you had an aircraft carrier or two) sustaining operarions requires fuel, ammo, food, reinforcements and a billion other things. In constant supply. Even before you encounter that problem you have to deal with the Army - a technologically, doctrinally, and professionally top notch military. Of course, during the build up to conflict, the reserves would get called into full time service, and the inactive reserve would be activated vastly bolstering the numbers of trained soldiers at our disposal. Conscription would follow (assuming full scale invasion). Our forces don't have the logistics problems that the invaders face. Of course there is also the issue of allies - mainly the USA, who have a vested intrest in not letting Australia fall into the hands of any other power that might have the capacity to actually attempt to invade. The kiwis would be in also (they're good for a brigade, a few extra frigates, and Special forces) and the Poms would have a serious look at chipping in too (presuming we didn't kick the thing off).

Short of WW3 (and any serious attempt at invading Australia would only happen in the middle of such a conflict) it's not going to happen, and barring a seriously powerful opponent (the USA, China, UK, France are probably the only 4 that have the naval power to pull it off) we would almost certainly win.

TLDR - short of WW3 it isn't going to happen (and we have bigger problems if the superpowers start slogging it out again).

 

[Malifice]

What about the question of jamming?

You don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As for the F-35 being the last manned fighter, that's looking 20-30 years ahead....Not current capacity.

As for jamming (and ECM and EW) look no further than our growlers, AEGIS and AWACS (and the on board suite on the F35s).

As it stands at the moment, drones are fine for taking out goat herders in Iraq and Afghanistan, but are horribly vulnerable to EW and ECM (and the elephant in the room, hacking). EW drones are being developed at present, but they're still some time away. Also hardened drones that you can't just frazzle or jam. ECM and Cyber warfare are just starting off.

Drones are also ridiculously vulnerable to enemy aircraft at present. Fantastic force multiplier once you control the skies (and the airwaves) though.

 

[Max zero]

What about the question of jamming?

You don't put all your eggs in one basket.

As for the F-35 being the last manned fighter, that's looking 20-30 years ahead....Not current capacity.

What about not finding enough trained pilots to fly aircraft? Or enough pilots to maintain high levels of operations? The US has already run into both these issues.

20-30 years on current estimates. The US started the second Iraq war with zero robotic devices. In 4 years that had over 10,000 with a demand for double that.

Things change quickly.

 

[telsor]

I highly doubt you would find the whole fleet moored up over Xmas - plenty on duty overseas and on exercise.

Also - who on earth would bomb the fleet? A concerted effort might sink or heavily damage a few (the sheer amount of explosives you would need to sink 2 dozen 4000 ton warships being a major issue.

All I can say is be confident that ASIS, ASIO and DSD would almost certainly pick them up pretty darn quickly, months before they got here. We have a brilliant intelligence capability in Oz.

If a war was coming you would know about it months in advance. There would be sabre rattling, posturing, a s**t load of diplomacy to ensure other nations stay out of it, and then a False flag or something to give pretext of 'self defence'.

Leaving aside the logistical nightmare of invading then conducting and supporting sustained operations on mainland Australia. In order to maintain the air power required to support an invasion or sustained operations in Australia any future opponent tequires an aircraft carrier (or permission to use air bases in NZ or SE Asia - and even that is severely limiting). Even assuming you can maintain air power over Australia (and with the most sophisticated ground radars, EW, growlers, AWACS, AEGIS, 100 odd F35s that's no easy task even if you had an aircraft carrier or two) sustaining operarions requires fuel, ammo, food, reinforcements and a billion other things. In constant supply. Even before you encounter that problem you have to deal with the Army - a technologically, doctrinally, and professionally top notch military. Of course, during the build up to conflict, the reserves would get called into full time service, and the inactive reserve would be activated vastly bolstering the numbers of trained soldiers at our disposal. Conscription would follow (assuming full scale invasion). Our forces don't have the logistics problems that the invaders face. Of course there is also the issue of allies - mainly the USA, who have a vested intrest in not letting Australia fall into the hands of any other power that might have the capacity to actually attempt to invade. The kiwis would be in also (they're good for a brigade, a few extra frigates, and Special forces) and the Poms would have a serious look at chipping in too (presuming we didn't kick the thing off).

Short of WW3 (and any serious attempt at invading Australia would only happen in the middle of such a conflict) it's not going to happen, and barring a seriously powerful opponent (the USA, China, UK, France are probably the only 4 that have the naval power to pull it off) we would almost certainly win.

TLDR - short of WW3 it isn't going to happen (and we have bigger problems if the superpowers start slogging it out again).

I'd add India and Russia to the list of those with the potential to, at the very least cause us a lot of trouble, the latter needing access to bases.

The logistics of moving and maintaining modern forces around it all is what most people don't seem to get their heads around.

Australia has, for decades, deployed a large part of it's military up north, and when Timor came around, in order to move about a few thousand men there in reasonably short time and keep them there we were stretched to the limit (actually beyond...The US helped us out).

There is a reason that one of the first big 'new' decisions since then was buying the LHDs, the 2 biggest ships we've ever had.


Anyone wanting to go the other way would face the same problems, after having to fight through the Airforce and Navy before they had to deal with the army ... Someone complained about us having tanks before...Sure, they're a 'luxury', but if anyone wanted to invade us, they'd need to deploy (and maintain) a lot of their own tanks (and/or other AFV counter measures) to counter them, making the prospect even tougher.

 

[Max zero]

As for jamming (and ECM and EW) look no further than our growlers, AEGIS and AWACS (and the on board suite on the F35s).

As it stands at the moment, drones are fine for taking out goat herders in Iraq and Afghanistan, but are horribly vulnerable to EW and ECM (and the elephant in the room, hacking). EW drones are being developed at present, but they're still some time away. Also hardened drones that you can't just frazzle or jam. ECM and Cyber warfare are just starting off.

Drones are also ridiculously vulnerable to enemy aircraft at present. Fantastic force multiplier once you control the skies (and the airwaves) though.

They are quite vulnerable at the moment but do we really need improved air superiority at the moment? I would argue keeping tracking of what happens along our coasts would be of far greater concerns.