Recently there has been speculation about alternative methods of air defense. Following is a concept outlined by Owen Eather, originally published on the Fourays website in 2001.
Editor.
‘Control of the Air’ assets needed for Australian Continental Defence are becoming increasingly costly and erosive of the Defence budget over lengthy periods. Current estimates for any potential Australian acquisition of the, as yet, unflown United States (US) ‘Joint Strike Fighter’ are around AUD 8 Billion. As well, continuing costs of the current FA 18 fleet would be additional to this until the assets are acquired. They may well be more as new technology inevitably over runs its budget; witness the initial delays and increasing costs associated with the F 111 and ‘Collins’ class submarine.
In this article, we propose the notion that it is prudent to examine lower cost alternatives of acceptable utility for Continental Air Defence. Specifically, we examine the ‘Air Defence Cruiser’ concept (ADCC). This would complement, at least, classic “Control of the Air’ solutions that revolve around increasingly costly and manned ‘Air Superiority’ fighters.
The ADCC has some inspiration in long range anti submarine operations of ‘Sunderland’ flying boats in World War 2 and, recently, concepts developed by the US Navy for its proposed ‘Arsenal’ class of high speed monitor ships. Conjunction of a number of factors rounded out the feasibility, namely;
Large numbers of Large Passenger Transport (LPT) jet aircraft in US desert storage resulting from uneconomic overcapacity in world airlines. There are many with low hours. These types have a long loiter time potential, at least around four to six hours without refueling. Combined with this are significant payload and operational radius characteristics.
Availability of well tried systems for air launching of cruise missiles, from simple pylon mountings or more complex and higher capacity inboard rotary equipment. These would be developed, relatively cheaply, to carry air to air anti aircraft missiles
The increasing range of new generation air to air missiles of the ‘Phoenix’ type. Ranges of up to and over 200 nautical miles are now possible. This imparts a marked stand off capability to the launch aircraft.
Imminent acquisition of Airborne Warning and Control (AWAC) capacity by the Royal Australian Air Force.
Completion of large, hard surface fixed bases for the RAAF across the northern coast of Australia. Initially for flexible deployment of Air Superiority fighters, they would provide close proximity bases for the ADCC.
Increasing reliability of data from Jindalee Over the Horizon Radar. This gives extreme early warning to command elements for fine and concentrated deployment of Air Defence assets, particularly those with relatively low speed.
A suitable number of LPTs would be acquired and modified to provide ADCC platforms. If these were the B747 it may be possible to restore military transport features, originally designed for this type, that facilitate carriage and launch of missiles. Whatever launch system is decided upon, each aircraft would carry a minimum of twelve to sixteen anti aircraft missiles depending on size/range. This may be a larger number if inboard systems were chosen. Aircraft would carry and accommodate two crews, to enhance utilization time if air to air refueling were envisaged.
Each forward base would support three aircraft, giving an ADCC Wing size of twelve to fifteen. For each patrol station this would give one aircraft active, one on route and one reserve. Air to air refueling may alter these requirements, if it could be reliably provided. AWAC aircraft would command and control ADCC assets, using onboard sensing and analyzing Jindalee intelligence to concentrate around a detected air threat to the Continent.
Positioned in a timely manner and in effective range, two ADCC platforms could be expected to deal with a wing of enemy strike aircraft, that is, about twenty to thirty aircraft. More ADCC or Air Superiority assets could then be deployed to deal with any remaining threat, by then significantly reduced.
It is possible that ADCC assets may be useful for supplementary roles. The first could be in Coastal interdiction, with suitable stores packs applicable to this task. Anti submarine and Surface target operations may also be within these aircrafts’ capability.
Such a concept would bring currently unavailable benefits, specifically;
Delayed and more precise deployment of Air Superiority assets after reduction of an initial threat by ADCC platforms. Sparing use of these costly platforms has always been a core principle of RAAF operations and the ADCC enhances this.
Wear and tear on Air Superiority assets, whether current or future, would be significantly reduced, further decreasing Defence budget loads from this area.
Cheap development of systems from existing, low cost platform elements not only gives additional Air Defence capability but could allow deployment much sooner than any potential FA 18 replacement. There could also be economic benefit in this project from Defence industry enhancement or exports
It is possible that recruitment of retrenched airline pilots may reduce pilot training costs and increase retention of those skills.
It would reduce dependence on the current exclusive solution, namely ‘Air Superiority” fighters, for Continental Air Defence. It could also expand capacity across a range of other threats pertaining to the approaches to continental Australia.
This concept is a rough outline only. While I'm sure it will have traditionalist detractors I feel it's worthy of further and detailed examination by appropriate Defence professionals. In the increasing uncertainty challenging the protection of Australia’s security it deserves no less, regardless of its radical and unconvential aspects.
