The MQ-28A Ghost Bat, Unmanned Systems and the Future of Australian Air Power

[@calebswanson3132]

Happy to see some frontline technology coming the other way! We all make each other stronger! 🇺🇸🇦🇺

[@markhowells13]

Except it isnt ... the Ghost bat has been barred from the major US MUM-T programs in the USAF (Skyborg etc) . The US is only an ally as long as it doesn't offend their weapons contractors

[@GSteel-rh9iu]

The E-7A Wedgetail if a fantastic platform developed for the RAAF; the US has ordered 26!

[@mikemorr100]

Your upload schedule is wild, man. A 2 hour video once a month is so much work, when you're clearly working a full time job as well. I appreciate your efforts. I recommend your channel quite often

[@McMeevin]

I really appreciate the amount of time and care that is put into all your videos, you deserve way more subs.

[@raymongarza4290]

Always like knowing about all of past present and future aviation keep it up thanks.

[@bradz9413]

100%

[@patrickboone7509]

@@raymongarza4290 I’m llllllI’m just saying I’m going out llllllllllllll I’ll llllllllllllll😊llll

[@patrickboone7509]

Llllllllllll

[@lamwen03]

You make a hell of a good argument for the Ghost Bat. Especially considering Australia's position way way out of coverage by allies. It would be excellent for extending your defensive envelope.

[@Snickerszn]

Yeah was thinking same thing. Would also be nice to have these things circling the Australian and USA coasts 24/7 also.

[@Blight-fp3vt]

Fantastic video. Being an Australian design, we don't have the same kind of coverage and analysis to satisfy our nerdy needs. So GREATLY appreciate the work you have done to make this.

[@kden9772]

I’m a grunt in a first world army and I appreciate the level of detail without bullshit buzzwords. If I can grasp your 2 hour video and be entertained throughout, you’ve succeeded.

[@olivierdemers199]

As an ex-grunt, I second this. It's the kind of content that should be shown to our recruits.

[@Heshhion]

As an ex grunt I also agree with the above comments. This vid is clear, easy to digest and I still think pogs are bjtches..

[@attilioc238]

Grunts are too dumb to follow along with this.

[@edo599]

@@attilioc238 lol

[@ireneoconstantino1829]

​@@olivierdemers199 😅❤arytYtYUut To h sa wsar0😂d3😂🎉 B be cb😊jjinjjjj

[@robertmoyse4414]

You are right about the low-quality of the debate on Australian naval aviation. When a KZbinr makes better arguments about naval aviation than most of the papers I saw during my time in Defence you know something is wrong. The RAN could have liberated itself from the tyranny of the radar horizon years ago, using rotary wing AEW&C, like the RN but, despite having many good people, it seems culturally incapable of thinking outside its comfort zone.

[@garry19681]

I often wonder why they don’t see the logic? Surely they understand the advantages?

[@goodshipkaraboudjan]

@@garry19681 The RAN is terrified of mission overlap. A patrol boat will just patrol. An amphibious ship will only do that, a minesweeper will only do that etc.

[@goodshipkaraboudjan]

The powers to be at the RAN have always considered JORN to be their asset for over the horizon work since the government just gave them a single helicopter capability when they bought the Spanish Frigates and called them "Destroyers". Just having an AEW&C helicopter loses more than just their ASW capability. If they had a rotary wing AEW&C asset that benefits the LHDs and Choules, not the other MFUs. Thoughts?

[@GSteel-rh9iu]

To be fair our dude might work for Defence or a Think Tank at some point; he's a PhD KZbinr in exactly this kind of topic.

[@clintonqriggs9704]

Love it how your topic was a modern UAV yet you were able to squeeze in a WWII period doco on Australia's aircraft production, which was more comprehensive than most other youtubers that dedicate entire videos to it. Also I'd love to hear you on The Bilge Pumps Podcast, Jamie from Armoured Carrier KZbin channel is always talking about ships being UAV, UUV and ASV motherships.

[@andrewmetcalfe9898]

1:32 - in that particular scenario the HMAS Canberra taskforce is still very vulnerable, due to the limited number of AMRAAMs that the Ghost Bats can be equipped with. Also, when conducting these sort of ASW - Sea Denial - type operations the lower vehicle deck would be completely un-used on a Canberra class LHD. A autonomous drone with the Ghost Bat’s size can have either folding or even detectable wings; thus it could fit on the internal vehicle lift and stored in the lowest vehicle deck, which could be then transformed into a UAV Hanger. This in turn would free up the light vehicle deck to be used not just for helicopter storage and servicing, but for a small number of F35Bs: the point being that even 4 to 8 embarked F35Bs - held in reserve for an occurrence such as an attack by a bomber formation - can bring the sort of kinematic heft to the fight that the Ghost bat cannot; moreover flying in a team with the ghost bats, the formation can rely upon the F35Bs radar, meaning more ghost bats in the air with missiles to augment the F-35bs strike power; by 2032 the F35B should be able to carry 6 long range missiles internally (up from 4 at present); thus a four plane flight of F35Bs, plus four Ghost-bats could bring a total of 32 missiles to that engagement and therefore not have to rely upon the rest of the bomber formation being scarred off by one of their number being damaged (noting the heroism of bomber crews in WW2 it seems equally likely to me that the formation of bombers may persevere with the mission even after the first missile strikes, especially if their intelligence tells them that at such long ranges the Canberras are likely to only be protected by lightly armed UAVs). I fully accept that the Canberra establishment is opposed to the F35B; but when teamed with a UAV system like the Ghost-Bat only a small number of F35Bs would be needed and hence the cost of acquiring and operating them would be lessened significantly and the degree of modifications back toward the Jan Carlos configuration would also be minimised. A total of something like 18-24 F35Bs would be sufficient to see both our LHDs embarked with a small squadron of STOVL jets, alongside ASW helicopters and autonomous UAVs for sea denial operations. Worth it. Much more so than some of the big ticket purchases being contemplated by the ADF, IMO.

[@BaconGold790]

Just wanted to say mate, all in all I 100% agree. The more this kind of discussion occurs the more I believe people will understand that it is in our best interest to have a navy that can protect itself in such ways.

[@JoeOvercoat]

Yeppers: a high/low mix is a force multiplier, across domains, to boot.

[@marktucker8896]

The MQ-28 is a member of a generation of programs many call "loyal wingman". It will be interesting to see how these programs develop, but with the UK already cancelling its own loyal wingman program, it is by no means certain that any will reach front line squadrons. Anybody who has been watching military aviation for a few decades will notice the clear similarities between the objectives of current loyal wingman programs and the old concept of having a high low combat mix of combat aircraft. The idea being that a small air force like Australia could offset the high cost of high end combat aircraft by buying cheaper less capable aircraft to make up the numbers. The problem has always been that to make these cheaper aircraft genuinely combat capable, they end up being 80-90% of the cost of aircraft you want to avoid buying. The F-5 was the last fighter to make a commercial success of this concept, the F-20 is a famous example of one that tried and failed in the eighties because its cost was too close to the high end capability like the F-16. Making a drone cheap enough while being good enough to do the jobs the RAAF will require is a challenge most greatly underestimate. The APG-85 is a good example, it is an example of the kind of senor performance many would want such a drone to have, but costs as much as you want to spend on the fly away cost of the aircraft you want to buy. Other boxes with the same issue include DAS, EOTS, Stealth of any kind, limited supersonic speed. Unmanned only saves you so much. Combine the fact that the RAAF will never buy anything in massive numbers, and you may well find it cheaper to simply buy more F-35A's if you want to tick all the boxes we associate with a modern fighter aircraft. This is not to say that the RAAF buying an armed drone is a dumb idea, but I would argue that expecting the first generation of such an asset to be capable of air to air combat is. That capability looks a lot like an unmanned F-35, and would cost just as much, if not more, if it is build a small numbers. A future generation might, but without a first generation you don't get a fifth gen. If you look at the MQ-28 design, one thing stands out, it is clearly a remote sensor capability first , with a limited secondary combat role. It will more likely to cost US$60-70m per unit, than US$10-20M many are hoping for. More an unmanned E-2 than an unmanned F/A-18. Dominating the electronic spectrum, may not be sexy, like air to air combat is, but it is arguable far more important. This does not require a massively advanced AI that has not yet been invented yet. A drone which can fly long distances, be refueled in the air so could support and be controlled by a RAN task force operating at distance, for a faction of the cost of an F-35B, and be expendable in the way a E-7 could never be. This makes much more sense to me. Now we just need a navy destroyer with sufficient VLS cells to support such a concept. Sorry Hunter but that is so not you.

[@nedkelly9688]

Yea you have good points but Australia has done well with AI and you say Britain stopped these programmes. well Taranis also used the same company BAE Australia to build it's AI and why first flights were in Australia. Australia has over 500 fully AI mining trucks. one mine is fully AI. We also have Ghost Shark AI submersible also. Britain and USA all have similar projects. Think you are in the 80's still. DefendTex D40 drone is being used in Ukraine war now is a Australian AI drone capable of swarm drone and anti enemy drone. During Aukus USA and UK were very surprised at some tech Australia had that they previously knew nothing about.

[@marktucker8896]

@@nedkelly9688 Driving a truck around a predetermined route, conducting predetermined activities, is much easier than any combat environment, not a valid comparison. The Drones used by Ukraine are a much lower end capability than we are targeting with this project, some would argue we do something similar first, then look to increase capability over time as we grow the Australian expertise. Taranis did its testing in Australia, but it was a UK project, all we did was let them use our testing facilities, BAE Australia's involvement was minimal. As i said above, it will in interesting to see how this project moves forward, I suspect the next stage is actually to bring in a couple of joint venture partners. This project needs volume, to be successful, it is the best way forward to deliver that volume.

[@nedkelly9688]

@@marktucker8896 Lol mate Australia had a lot to do with the AI in Taranis. you have no clue on the matter actually. Australia DefendTex D40 is very good and has been in videos of swarm drone manouvres in USA.

[@jimgraham6722]

These days, the F15EX and F16 are the low end of the high low mix. In my view the issue is now not so much high end vs low mix, as small numbers vs large numbers. Large numbers and lots of firepower, have a significant quality of their own.

[@marktucker8896]

@@jimgraham6722 You will always have a mix, is not a choice between low end drones or high-end capabilities like the F-35. The decision to be made is what is the right combination of the two? I see a future where the manned element looks more like an AWACS than a traditional fighter controlling your drone fleet. That said if we end up spending A$100 million per drone, the RAAF will not get enough armed drones to make the concept work. That is the risk when we start wanting too many high-end capabilities in our drones.

[@AnimarchyHistory]

Hypo, you are speaking to my soul here. Why Australia does not have a STOVL Carrier capability? Is my number one point of contention and fury with our political leaders. We need carriers. We are an island nation... we should have them.

[@samposyreeni]

A *fine* job at a difficult format. It's more like an audio treatise with emphasis on background research than anything I've seen on KZbin thus far. I'm not easily surprised, yet you manage it every time, with your level-headed and practical take on things. You've in fact managed to change my mind e.g. on the F-35 - no mean online feat, as we all know. Kudos, and looking forward for more!

[@samposyreeni]

BTW, one way to make the argument that unmanned aircraft aren't the be all and end all of fighter jets, is that actually they've already been here for a long time. It's just that they're called missiles, not fighters. They certainly have far greater manoeuverability when that's important, and will increase in lethality once their control is relegated to AI. But for command and control, which is what humans do, it'll be a long time before even part of that decision making power can be relegated over. Skynet notwithstanding. Finally, we actually have an example - a ghastly one but still well established - of how to bridge the gap between fighter jets and missiles the other way around: the kamikaze mission. I mean, what is it except a single use military aircraft, a missile, only now powered by a human brain. Thought about that way, especially in the context of modern stealth, actually landing in a dogfight *is* kind of turning into your mission half-way into a kamikaze one. Maybe not with such sheer intent and certainty of demise, but still a very high ris, with the pilot serving as the brains of what is a very high performance and costly now-expendable missile.

[@Kenny-yl9pc]

Man, it is always a pleasure to see a new video of yours! I'm always looking for new content, since you are one if not THE best content creator on KZbin, providing detailed in depth review and analysis regarding defense topics in and around Australia. Please don't stop your great work! I really appreciate it! Keep it up, bud!

[@The_ZeroLine]

A major accomplishment. I am glad Australia is somewhat coming to its sense and recognizing the need to be more than a shriveled husk of a military depending on the U.S. to protect like most European countries. Great video. Cheers from California.

[@jimgraham6722]

The Australian designed and made Jindivik was a very capable unmanned aircraft for its time. It had a substantial payload, an extraordinary rate of climb and could operate in level flight to well over 70,000 feet. Its performance was enhanced by its light weight as a result of not having to cater for a pilot. It was remote controlled but there were plans in the early 1980s to upgrade it for autonomous operation and equip for roles other than target towing. Unfortunately these were never realised and ultimately in Australia it target towing role was replaced by the Learjet. The Jindivik saw service with the UK and US as well as Australia.

[@sixstringedthing]

There's a Jindivik on display at the Fleet Air Arm Museum, HMAS Albatross, in Nowra NSW. Remarkably compact considering the capabilities! A common misconception is that these were used as target drones in live-fire exercises; they were too valuable for that, so instead were used as tow vehicles for the actual target vehicle at the end of a fairly long cable. The bright orange paint scheme was of assistance when fishing them out of the ocean after exercises. @Jim Graham, the Learjets now being used as tow vehicles are awesome little jets too, seen a few displays at airshows around the place, I don't recall the name of the contractor who operates them for the ADF off the top of my head (edit: yeah I do, Air Affairs Australia) but those are some very capable crews.

[@jimgraham6722]

@@sixstringedthing Yes a fan of the Learjet. These have been successfully used during weapon trials in Australia to drop 'test' weapons.

[@ikabody]

One of my old flight instructors flew the manned version of the jindivik, the pika.

[@qwertykeyboard1207]

@@sixstringedthing its designed by boeing not austrailia.

[@GSteel-rh9iu]

Excellent presentation! However, I think you could boost viewership by splitting this up into 33min chunks. Your content is very good; professional and I look forward to it. Looking forward to your next videos!~

[@sophrapsune]

You’ve made a very good argument here for Australia to field one or more dedicated fixed wing aircraft carriers. Given your revision, or clarification, of your previous videos it’s clear that you’re seeing the complexity of the total national force structure. Thanks for your work.

[@stevebell7288]

If we’re to acquire an aircraft carrier let’s do it properly. Plenty of people think we can just throw a handful on the Canberra class and we’re set. It’s the worst of all worlds. It has to be built for purpose and the Canberras are not

[@stevebell7288]

*handfull of F 35s

[@handal0]

@@stevebell7288 If you click the 3 buttons to right of posts you can edit them ;]

[@corvanphoenix]

I like the idea of dumping the high price, high capability Gucci aircraft options favoured by the USN & going with a cheap platform with range & payload. Something which we can afford to equip, then fly the wings off. It would carry AMRAAM, HARM, Hellfire, JASSM, LRASM, JDAM, NSM, SDB, Sidewinder - & all of those tiny new missiles with amazing capabilities, a range of >600nm. It would just be a versatile, affordable, multi-role system we can get huge bang for our Aussie buck with. We'd be able to use our own engineering ingenuity to come up with all sorts of jobs for it, without needing anyone else to do it.

[@tofubutcher7456]

RAN doesn't have anywhere near the personnel to run an aircraft carrier, not to mention the mind-boggling cost of running one. However it dies seem like some sort of Canberra class type ship as a drone launcher might he an idea, but currently the solution is firmly Canberras are effectively to get the Army into the Pacific with helicopter support, and the Air Force will launch ultra long range support from Darwin via tanker support. This does seem like the best use of resources

[@themineosaur4675]

The hero we don't deserve, thank you for another fantastic video!

[@thomasromanelli2561]

The MQ-28 program is an important investment for the RAAF, as a force multiplier that can serve a variety of roles within the umbrella of the Loyal Wingman concept: ordinance carrier, ECM/ECCM, etc. If the program is developed to produce a platform that supports a fundamental shift in combat doctrine, each pilot could execute a portfolio of missions that would have required committing a traditional fighter squadron with supporting assets. Challenges remain: procurement (including the need for advances in materials science), cost and overcoming the politics inherent in the administration of multi-billion dollar defense projects. And all of this must be done within a time-sensitive manner to keep pace with the evolving threat environment.

[@kcharles8857]

This just arrived in my notifications. I've got a beer fridge full of tinnies, pizza will be here soon, and its a Sunday afternoon. Looking forward to the next 2 hours and 4 mins. I already know it will be brilliant!

[@bradz9413]

Oh sweet I cannot wait to listen to this tonight!! Love your work mate

[@topiasr628]

Just starting but already know this is going to be excellent. You've never failed to disappoint

[@MikeM-qb9qh]

Repeating what your parents say?

[@sixstringedthing]

Lol, might want to check the wording there :)

[@topiasr628]

Welp I'm an hour in and have no regrets 🤷‍♂️ 🙃

[@sixstringedthing]

@@topiasr628 "You've never failed to disappoint" is what's known as a "double negative", which is a phrase that's intended to sound like a compliment or positive statement but actually means the opposite. What you've said there is "you've always disappointed me in the past". The phrase you were reaching for is "you've never failed to impress (me)". Cheers ;)

[@topiasr628]

@@sixstringedthing Oh. Oops... You're right - good call out. Well I'm sure he knows what I meant. This video was superb - as always

[@Zei33]

This is absolutely awesome. Trust the Aussie military to really take it to the next level. This does so much to cover our weaknesses.

[@austin357]

I really hope our planners are listening to what you are saying about naval air capability, we do seem to be making some good decisions though (like ghost bat development) which gives me hope.

[@tdb7992]

You're not alone mate. I pray that each night, the bureaucrats in Canberra dedicate some time to learning a thing or two from channels like this one and Perun's.

[@mickmelbourneaustralia1305]

I totally agree with your assessment of McArthur and also demonstrating why politicians should never be involved in dissensions on the battlefield. Well done!

[@Plythios]

Perfect. Was wondering about this thing. An in depth analyses is good.

[@Girvo747]

Ghost Bat letting our small air force/military punch above it's weight despite our small population is huge. Exciting times: we should take advantage of our highly technical and rich population, in collaboration with our allies. I'm also aware of similar projects the Navy is doing with drone boat swarms :) The interesting thing will be the use of Terahertz comms, which the THz Gap has now recently seen a huge leap forward. Will allow for *incredibly* high bandwidth and incredibly low latency for LOS data links, and in a way that near-peer adversaries simply don't have the EWAR capabilities to disrupt right now.

[@advancingaustralia2913]

My son is an Army Cadet and I have made all of your videos part of his summer study program.

[@michaelpowell6023]

Great work as usual, much looked forward to. Now that the DSR has been released to the public, I would love to hear your take on it, and any thoughts /predictions on Australia's ADF going forward.

[@mightymoe22]

Look forward to all of your updates! Thank you for the superb documentaries!

[@PosthumousAddress]

Bloody brilliant video, I really appreciate the attention to detail, the great sense of historical context.. Aussies are really killing it recently with military/geopolitical video essays, between you and Perun.

[@advancingaustralia2913]

Your analysis is second to none. I really enjoy, and am genuinely thankful for, your content. God bless.

[@thelaughingprophet2275]

Once again, love your work. Lot of research put in. You have convinced me, I will take six final production Ghostbats please.

[@AugmentedGravity]

Your videos are absolute top notch sensory pleasure man.

[@madthough2298]

Australia needs to keep their military strong because we here in New Zealand just planned on hiding behind you guys if shit hits the fan.

[@WillArtie]

lol - yes like the first commenter said, Australia plans on hiding behind the USA, so then I guess NZ hides behind us. Like two school boys standing behind their big buddy in the playground and throwing dirt and stones around him at the older bully.

[@megafauna8374]

Lots of Kiwis serving in the ADF, RN etc.

[@petrichor3947]

Just send a company of Māori and we should all will be sweet.

[@robman2095]

Yes that is no doubt the strategy of the leftist government and has been for a while. Much better to buy votes spending on social programs and leave Australia to worry about defending NZ. Pretty cynical really. It is not that Aus is spending more money than it was going to anyway because of NZ policy but we could use an extra 20% spent on our joint coordinated defence efforts as we are not exactly a major player ourselves.

[@nerd1000ify]

Who would NZ need to fight? They don't have occasionally belligerent northern frenemies like Indonesia to deal with, and they're not a worthwhile target for the likes of China. Makes sense for them to just tag on to Australian defence umbrella like Aus does with the US.

[@MoltenLens]

Marvelous presentation, as usual. I hope the ASPI wonks take note.

[@derekshaw8050]

The same ASPI that thinks armour is obsolete and that we should buy B-21 instead of an interim submarine? The same ASPI that thinks climate change is the number one issue the DSR should address? That one?

[@mingming9604]

thank you for another great presentation! ;)

[@corvanphoenix]

I love your work mate, so let me say first, hope you had a good silly season & thanks for not dumbing down your presentations. Given how little information Boeing released about MQ-28's specifications, I was shocked at the low price of the MQ-28! It's fantastic! All that built in Brisbane, for only a few million! As you say, it gives us the opportunity to learn so much about how to do UCAV operations, their real world performance, improving the AI models etc that is invaluable IP to have at this point in the century. For that reason alone, I would like to see greater investment in their production facilities. Ideally we need every branch, particularly the RAAF & RAN, learning what these systems can do for them. My dream aircraft for Australia would be a long range, medium bomber sized UCAV. Something we can send 2,000 NM with a belly full of LRASM or JASSM-ER. It wouldn't be supersonic or as stealth as B-21, but it would be able to perform long range ISR, strike & ASu missions. We've bumped heads over F-35B for the RAN before, as I'm against it on cost grounds. I definitely think naval aviation would be outstanding for us, for all the reasons you mentioned & more. However I'm of the uncommon opinion that a cheaper manned aircraft would be ideal for the RAN. Something like a capable of long endurance light/medium strike aircraft. Ideally a COTS navalised advanced trainer or light strike aircraft. It would have an AESA, visual & IR sensors, 2 crew, & the capability to fulfil many roles for the naval task force. e.g. I'd happily see such an aircraft with Mk-46's & a pod to drop sonar buoys. I love the MQ-28 for the Canberra. However I am not as optimistic as you about the cost & complexity of outfitting the class for fixed wing aviation. I wish the RAN weren't so stubborn about it when we were getting them built. Due to the extra weight the strengthened gear, airframe & hook entails, I'm not as optimistic about the ease of making a carrier capable MQ-28. I would sure love to hear that Boeing were seriously investigating it though as it's a capability we could always find customers for.

[@nerd1000ify]

I think they could probably navalise the ghost bat (would it be a sea bat?) in a similar way to the F-35C, I.e. bigger wings to handle the extra mass at the cost of some speed and max G load. Also depending on how far the engine is from the tail there might be room to add an afterburner, which would help out a lot with any thrust to weight ratio issues. In fact if they're supposed to be so cheap I wonder about building a 'CAM ship' capability for taking down maritime recon aircraft that are shadowing convoys. Like the WW2 CAM ships you would have a single aircraft on a rocket boosted catapult, bolted to the deck of any suitable ship. The drones would have to be expendable, but spending $20 Mil of drone plus $5 mil of missiles to kill a Tu-95 or similar is probably worthwhile.

[@Wuodan1]

The statements made above are consistently excellent discussions. I am a retired Professor of Electro-Optics/Plasma physics and Quantum Electrodynamics, as well as a pilot and more that I cannot discuss. How I wish that I could bring extremely advanced technology to be used today. Schade.

[@keyzersoze5958]

Love your content brother - awesome info, clearly an almighty amount of diligence goes into these; a true hero for ADF enthusiasts.

[@msytdc1577]

So, what you're saying is that due to low population, Australia is the first to rely upon AI for survival, thus ensuring that the Southern Hemisphere is where Skynet first becomes self-aware at 30,000 feet...

[@Doberman300]

Dude. Your videos are absolutely killer. Loved the one about the F-35, but I found your channel from the Iraq war video. This quality and simplicity (of the information delivered) are unmatched, especially compared to cable TV or online forums. Keep up the fantastic work!

[@f1b0nacc1sequence7]

As I have come to expect from your work, this was excellent. I do have one observation, however. While your description of what the Ghost Bat (and other UAVs) will be able to do is pretty much spot-on, I cannot help but wonder about what the putative enemy forces (i.e. the Chinese) might do using similar tactics. After all, the Chinese steal EVERYTHING, so it has to be assumed that they will at least have something similar to the MQ-28A in the not too distant future, and likely have them in significantly larger numbers. Since we must assume that they will be aware of the problem posed by the Ghost Bat (if nothing else, they will likely have watched your video!), it might be interesting to see what they would choose to do with those large UAV fleets... Imagine a squadron of F-35Bs (with associated MQ-28As) confronted with 2-3 squadrons of J-20s (and associated MQ-28A knockoffs)... At the very least, it will be interesting to imagine what tacticians on both sides will come up with.

[@andrewsmall6834]

In the words of the immortal big Kev, "I'm excited!"

[@rtrThanos]

I remember when bean counters thought that guns were a thing of the past, so the original F-4 Phantom only had unreliable missiles and no way to defend themselves in a dogfight. Even after strapping gunpods on them, the pilots weren’t trained to use them. This is what inspired the Topgun program. And now the bean counters proclaim drones are the future.

[@ryandeee4628]

Excellent video, can definitely tell a lot of work has gone into it, can't wait for more!

[@h4wk5t4r]

Thanks. That's a fascinating and well researched video with not just info about the MQ-28A but about the ADF capabilities in general.

[@theadvocatesails]

I really appreciate and am enjoying your analysis work. I have often wondered what a small fleet of 35's with accompanying ghost bats on the Canberra would look like/work out.

[@michaelsoland3293]

It’s nice to see the USN is starting testing with 2 units, it’d likely fit well for the low aspect of NGAD, which means it’d be cheaper for both the US and Australia

[@corvanphoenix]

I think there's no way the Yanks will pair this with NGAD due to its affordable performance, however they'll use it to get a much better idea of what they want with their NGAD unmanned wingman.

[@mikedrop4421]

These docos are always top tier. Thanks from the US of A.

[@sarcasmo57]

You've done it again my dude.

[@ianrobinson8974]

20/01/2023 THANK YOU HHH. As ever you have given a really good overview of Australia's needs as well as its' capacity to get an idea off the ground and working. As a further example of our capacity you could have mentioned Jindivik, Ikara and similar systems of years gone by.

[@john-paulfarrell2562]

Great content as usual, one interesting prospect would be the integration of an EMP device in the nose cone of the Ghost Bat such as the Counter-electronics High Power Microwave Advanced Missile Project (CHAMP) or the High-Powered Joint Electromagnetic Non-Kinetic Strike Weapon (HiJENKS). This capability actually destroys electronics rather than jams them and has a multi shot capability.

[@corvanphoenix]

Yeah I'd love to see our next domestic aircraft to have a huge surplus in electrical power supply & cooling, in order to see what we can do with electronic attack on these small systems.

[@jonathanpfeffer3716]

That kind of clashes with the intent of the Ghost Bat to begin with, since it’s meant to be cheap and attritable. Implementing DEWs into a fighter esque platform is expensive and has a long list of prerequisites that the Ghost Bat may or may not fill, more likely not. Things like payload capacity, power generation etc.

[@john-paulfarrell2562]

@@jonathanpfeffer3716 The EMP weapons I described were mounted on the nose of cruise missiles, so it is likely that the loyal wingman will have no issue with weight or power generation. I would argue that the kind of mission that would use EMP weapons would be highly dangerous, such as SEAD, and it would be much better to send expensive drones and loose a few, than to send human pilots in aircraft that are far more expensive.

[@jonathanpfeffer3716]

@@john-paulfarrell2562 Oh, you literally meant EMP weapons, not just DEWs. Yeah, those wouldn’t really work for something like the GhostBat. Those EMP projects you describe are mounted on cruise missiles for a reason. They are warheads, not weapons. The only reason they really exist is to be detonated above a structure immediately before a SF team moves to secure the structure, and that’s about it. Basically every other situation a normal explosive warhead would be better at. Obviously putting a weapon that requires the platform to literally be right next to the target doesn’t make sense if you expect that platform to fly back to base and continue operating. The only realistic use of microwave weaponry in general is for self defense DEWs, which you can think of functioning like little lasers (they aren’t lasers, they just behave like them) that fry the seeker heads of incoming AAMs.

[@john-paulfarrell2562]

@@jonathanpfeffer3716 you seem to be pretty knowledgeable in this field, I would be interested to know what nose cone modules you think would best suit the Ghost bat?

[@CharliMorganMusic]

Great timing! I just finished watching your video on the Australian army.

[@mediocredad6525]

Another excellent video and a good example of the wider thinking we need in our Defence Community.

[@tlevans62]

Another extremely well considered and thought out presentation. I especially like the idea of a Ghost Bat, larger Super Ghost Bat and Sea Bat, with stronger landing gear and arrestor hook. The only issue would be air to air refueling issues since the F-35As & Wedge Tails would likely be refueling on missions so the UCAVs need to be able to stay airborne with them, unless the plan is to have rotations so that when one escort package goes bingo on fuel, another escort package of Ghost Bats would have joined them on station before the 1st group start their RTB. Alternatively, they could have disposable drop tanks that would allow them to fly a considerable distance on the mission and then be jettisoned prior to entering the conflict zone. Giving them extended radius of action. Perhaps conformal tanks could be fitted to extend combat radius, based on mission requirements.

[@sniper.93c14]

MQ25A could give the stealthy Air to Air refueling drone needed. It also could potentially be developed as a bomb truck to sling LRASMs and JASSMs at surface targets.

[@Tang0Down]

Time to get the popcorn!

[@jeffbenson223]

Fantastic video and technical analysis! I love the self sovereignty aspect the current and perhaps future Ghost Bat derivatives lend to Australia. The cost savings and production potential also make it an excellent choice for security and or collaboration of lesser allied govs. in the Indo -Pacific arena's ever expanding efforts to counter influence from PRC (both military and economic). Thank you very much for the hard work! Again excellent video!

[@harrikeinonen7576]

An eloquent presentation outlining Australia’s biggest strategic weaknesses: a small, versatile and high capability force lacking sufficient weight of effort. In simplistic terms we have lots of width but very little depth. Also an extremely vulnerable logistic train for sustainment purposes. I remember been lectured on the just-in-time logistics principle and thinking what a false ideology that is for a military force as it requires all the moving pieces to work perfectly all the time for effective sustainment. This was amply demonstrated in the early weeks of Australia’s deployment to Timor Leste. Thank you for creating these thought provoking briefings.

[@fehzorz]

New Lazerpig, new HHH, if Perun sticks to schedule this is a great weekend

[@sixstringedthing]

Considering he hasn't missed a single week I'd say it's a safe bet. ;)

[@williambrasky3891]

Every video you publish is a treat. Thanks for putting these togther

[@bwcdevices3028]

Fantastic, well informed and thought provoking as usual - Thanks.

[@indeedbridge8954]

BABE WAKE UP NEW hhh VIDEO! I know this is gonna be quality, love your vidoes mate.

[@rogerbeck3018]

I have no military knowledge, this high quality essay gives me sufficient confidence that Australia's defence is well addressed. Thanks

[@kirkc9643]

@*UncleJoe* I want to like Perun's channel but I find the delivery difficult to listen to for very long.

[@sd989989]

Great stuff. You should look how the V-280, V-247 and hopefully Bell Eagle will change tempo & fires. Autonomous Bell Eagle within a TEU embedded organic CAS with the combination of quadcopters drone in a box as ISR is going to be a thing.... edge IOT warfare is coming.

[@nerd1000ify]

As a WW2 aviation nerd I need to correct a few details: All versions of the R-1830 were supercharged, however the models intended for bombers (as used in the beaufort) had superchargers intended for either low altitude service or augmentation with a turbocharger. High altitude superchargers absorb more power from the engine, so fitting one results in reduced performance at low altitudes. The P-51's under belly scoop houses the radiators and oil cooler, as does the similar scoop on the CA-15. The engines in both are Rolls Royce designs (Merlin and Griffon respectively) with their mechanically driven superchargers attached to the rear of the engine. If you were confused by the CA-14's scoop and thought it was a supercharger, you're not too far off- it's actually the air intake for an intercooler, needed to cool the hot compressed air coming from the turbo before it enters the engine. Being powered by an air cooled engine, there was no existing radiator housing to put the intercooler in so they added that scoop to the side.

[@guylankin]

Love your work. Just sitting down to watch this one!

[@guylankin]

One of your best so far. Loved it! The Ghost Bat is certainly an exciting capability that we can be proud of.

[@terminusest5902]

Fox Bat could provide some protection for Wedgetail and tankers. They could configured for SEAD missions or carry suitable missiles. Australia needs a production line for smaller UAVs, including optional kamikaze drones. Like the US Switchblade. Possibly with the ability to be launched by other aircraft.

[@cjplanes]

showing my dad your channel - he’s a SQNLDR in the RAAF. i’m sure he’d love this, great content

[@sammat1267]

This was excellent. I was sceptical based on your channel name, but you delivered. Well done!

[@deepbuzz]

These videos often take me multiple days to watch- with everything else I have to do.That's just fine with me. I'm always stoked to see a new one arrive.

[@geoffhendrick5339]

Excellent analysis! I would really like to see an analysis of whether/how a Super Ghost Bat (a larger extended range version of the MQ-28A ghost bat UAV with a larger internal weapons bay) could improve the RAAF's ability for impactful power projection at long range? Certainly super ghost bats could be used to ride shotgun for our long range air assets such as P-8A's. It would be interesting to see how "brave" a PLA fighter pilot in the South China Sea would be intercepting a P-8A escorted by 2x super ghost bat UAVs bristling with a range of kinetic and/or grey zone countermeasures! A strike package of super ghost bats configured as missile/bomb carriers could penetrate contested areas at long range and attack ships, incoming bombers and military bases with speed, stealth and mass. But they would need a manned stealthy 5th or 6th gen long range aircraft to provide oversight command and control. A B-21 teaming with super ghost bats seems to tick all boxes to me. But alas not to be as per the DSR. A P-8A/RB-8 teaming with super ghost bats would lack stealth and survivability in contested regions. But in a desperate situation the crew might risk it? But what about an "extended range" F-35? What if super ghost bats could be configured as personal refuelling tankers for a F-35? Then you could have a strike package consisting of a single F-35 "quarterback" teaming with any number of super ghost bats configured for roles such as F-35 tanker, ISR, arsenal plane etc. Some of the tankers would fly with the F-35 and some would lag behind (in case the F-35 needs to bug out and race home). Normally I suppose an F-35 pilot in a traditional F-35 only strike package would be hesitant to rely on shared KC-30 tankers beyond 1500km return home range especially in a contested region (as the loss of a tanker could result in the loss of many F-35s and pilots). But a single F-35 flying with its own personal dedicated redundant stealthy(ish) UAV tankers might be willing to range much further? I would be most interested to see some expert analysis in this area!

[@Aaronwilliam]

Amazing, stunning work

[@JohnSmith-nz4bn]

Love the videos! I think the maritime air issue is more one of personnel than anything. HMS QEII has approx 700 or 1600 with the air wing. HMAS Adelaide has ~460 crew. We have a little over 16k pers in the RAN including reservists and can barely keep the ships doing ship things at it is. And then we want 12 nuclear subs (lol) when we can't keep six conventional boats going. Don't get me wrong, I see the benefits of fixed wing maritime assets. Need to fix the manning issue first. Then there's the pissing contest between RAAF and RAN over who should own maritime fixed wing capability. Simple analysis, but only KZbin comments, so.

[@kenfowler1980]

An excellent analysis and the realistic solution you have floated rather than the earlier very expensive F35B concept well done!

[@YaMumsSpecialFriend]

Ha! Was just last night I was wondering if or when we’d get your next top shelf production from you. Glad I survived the night to enjoy it👌🏻

[@FW190D9]

Excellent Video Sir !!

[@robbierobinson8819]

Great presentation. Well done, Oz.

[@NPC-fl3gq]

I love that 2x F-35's flew (very noisily) over my house while I'm watching this video!! Thanks RAAF!!

[@plflaherty1]

Just another great video. Thank you.

[@jimmythehand4248]

Talking to senior RAAF INTELOs the arguments against F-35B have never been based on considerations of capability. The arguments all stem from previous acquisitions having zero plan for the F-35B. Primarily the fact that the LHDs cannot sustain the aircraft (due to various factors which make retrofitting impractical).

[@stevebell7288]

Agree. Ship needs to be built for purpose or we’ll end up needing another squadron of KC 30s just to chase them all over the Indo Pacific. An enormous drain on resources

[@peterinns5136]

It's great to see a defence project that has achieved its aims. Too many defence projects have been a disaster.

[@m.streicher8286]

This channel is in my top 3, my one complaint is that there's only one of you.

[@garry19681]

You are spot on about the supposed smart people in ASPI . If aircraft carriers could be so easily sunk why are Countries still building them.? Why is China building larger ones? The F35b could provide long range targeting for the missiles the RAN will soon deploy. It makes no military sense not to have them.

[@MrLachlan1903]

I'm grateful for your work. Thank you.

[@aussie807]

thanks mate for the quality analysis...love your work

[@Shirocco7]

Great content. Was not aware of the significance of this project. Leaves me wondering about similar such systems being developed elsewhere...

[@graemewilson1400]

If Turkey can do it we should have a go. Thanks mate good to see you back 👍 was getting a little worried.

[@davidingham1248]

An excellent presentation. Common sense is the hallmark combined with practically. Congratulations! I enjoy your work. Thank you for the time and effort.

[@terminusest5902]

There has been talk of getting the B-21 Raider for the RAAF. I suggest the Northrop Grumman X-47B could be a very capable system for Australia's needs. Provides a reusable cruise missile capability. More capability than the F-111. Though, I am not certain if the X-47B has been fully developed with weapons and sensor systems. A family basic array of guided bombs would be useful. The X-47Bs carrier landing capability is impressive. My past suggestion was for the old classic RAAF Hornets could be adapted to UAVs. This could have a number of advantages. This would not be popular with the Ghost Bat being a competitor. Preferably, they could share the same ground control units. And other retired Hornets from other countries could be adapted. Could operate in wingman mode. Would need less actual flying time for training with old airframes. They would only have basic flight hours to maintain operability. Ready for an actual conflict. Performance is suitable for use with F-35 and F-18F. Seems Ukraine has no interest in the Hornets. I would like to see some Ukrainian troops come to Australia this summer for some rest and training during the northern winter. I expect Ukraine may attempt further attacks during this winter as Russian soldiers may not be suitably supported for the cold weather. Given the failure of front line logistics for Russian fighters. Russians are meant to be winter experts but that may not apply considering the horrific conditions we have seen. Russia has very low population growth and is now destroying a new generation of fathers. And Putin remains intent in destroying the Russian Army. Russia will not be a significant military threat for a decade. And Russia should consider that China may be a greater threat to Russia than NATO. China can not expand into the Pacific, even if it takes Taiwan. China has much better opportunities in Central Asia along its Silk Road infrastructure into areas of Russian influence. Also, historic land claims by China on Russian controlled regions. Rich in resources and low populations. Regarding Hornet UAVs the aircraft already have weapons systems, capable radars, fly-by-wire, existing infrastructure and experience, numerous weapons already comparable, navigation, secure communications, experienced operators, good weapons load and range. The technology for basic conversions of jet fighters is well-developed in the US. Lately, with many F-16s. Israel likes to use heavily armoured D-9 Dozers for its urban combat. They will likely destroy any Hamas positions, regardless of collateral damage. People may be underestimating just how angry and determined the Israelis are. Room to room clearing may not be a preferred tactic. Especially as Hamas may have mined whole IED buildings. And the IDF is well-prepared to destroy tunnels and bunkers. If Hamas wants to build its bunkers under civilians, who is in the wrong. I do not think the IDF will stop for any temporary ceasefire. Unless all of the hostages are handed over. Then the IDF will wipe out Hamas. The ceasefire may allow more civilian evacuations if Hamas allows them. The IDF has been aware of tunnels for years. Some going to Egypt or Israel. Smuggling equipment and supplies from Egypt. And attempts to attack Israel.

[@tillkorten7252]

Thank you for this great video about how future drones would fare against current technology. But what would the scenario look like if the other side also had capable drones?

[@NoName-ds5uq]

There is so much logical thought put into this, and all your other videos! Thank you! I couldn’t agree more about the aviation fuel capacity on the LHDs, it’s the same reason the ski jump was retained with no intention of ever using STOVL aircraft at that time. Too expensive to redesign and remove. No doubt it would’ve put the whole programme back as well. You have already released a video putting forward a very good argument to my mind a case for a squadron of F-35Bs and modifying the LHDs. Perhaps that was luck falling our way…now we just need the ADF and government to understand they should never look a gift horse in the mouth! Upsizing MQ-28 to be a missile carrier is interesting though. Stockpiles of those missiles would need to be quite large, just to make it worthwhile the development cost, and those stockpiles aren’t cheap. I’m sure you’ve thought this through more than I… Love your work mate!

[@vmpgsc]

Great video! One point I'd make is that JASSM-ER and LRASM are $2-4 million each, so you'd be launching the equivalent cost of the carrier aircraft on every mission. This, obviously, would not be sustainable for an extended conflict, so you would need something for the longer term that can penetrate and drop much less expensive munitions like SDB or JDAM.

[@concernedaussie1330]

Keeping a skills based aircraft manufacturing & design capabilities is paramount imo for Australia, especially in our geographical location & population vs landmass & sea air territory. A very cheap agricultural utility aircraft could play a huge roll in defending Australians against a multitude of dangers & threats. From firefighting, search and rescue, logistical supplies & other civilian rolls to a abundance of rough runway utility aircraft that could loiter & carry large payloads ( missiles ) that are guided by other smarter platforms! Very cheap , robust & safe to fly for basic flight training pilots. Basically disposable to a point. All of the performance can be in the weapons & other support platforms. Australia can’t afford to lose its front line aircraft or replace them or the skilled pilots that fly them . A near disposable, dependable multi roll aircraft is a must in such a vast continent as Australia imo , will some outside the box thinking we can dictate the terms in which we tackle problems, not throwing bundles of taxpayers debt a far away manufactured weapons that supply routes can be blocked & we are left with nothing.

[@user-Pk6cv3wl7j]

Well put together and it makes sense

[@highwayman6805]

Fantastic video. Thank you very much for the insight.

[@bambi8179]

Great to see more content man

[@m.gardner6173]

Listening to your combat description/story reminded me of David Weber’s combat writing.

[@reallyhappenings5597]

You lay golden eggs of content

[@johnsamsungs7570]

You have put a lot of work into this video and it's research! Maybe we should get another Canberra class For fleet defence. Not keen on F35 B but with smaller, cheaper planes makes some sense. Good on your team! Cheers mate!

[@Longstuff]

I dont know how i ended up here BUT this video is fantastic !!!!!👌