The Bomber Takes ChargeThe liberation of Kuwait was the first military operation for the new OCDF. Even before the forces returned, the analysis of the operations began. Just as in the Indonesian war a few years earlier, the largely Australian forces had performed superbly. It was noted however that some of the platforms (especially the carrier Gallipoli, Destroyers and F-111s) were getting somewhat ‘long in the tooth’. The fact that for many, this was their forth war was not overlooked as well. It was quickly decided that a major re-equipping would soon be needed.
Luckily for the OCDF, the right man was in place to lead this push. In June 1991, Australian Prime Minister Hawke declared his intention to retire. In his place, the former Defence Minister Kim “Bomber” Beazley was elected – this was part of a secret agreement (the so-called "Kirribilli agreement") between the two. The new Prime Minister Beazley quickly made the re-equipping of the OCDF a priority – the Soviet coup d'état was also a contributing factor in this decision. With the Oceanic Confederation Economy booming, this was an easy decision though. The first priority was to launch a major update of the two carriers. This would see the ships equipped with a multitude of newer systems. Concurrently, a project to design replacement ships would begin. With the Collins Class SSNs already well underway, it was soon decided that the new carriers would also be nuclear powered.
With the Oceanic Confederation’s (in reality Australia’s) naval architects totally committed to the design, development and construction of the new Collins class SSNs and now carriers, it was decided that the replacement destroyers would be based on a largely off-the shelf design. Following a review of options, it was decided to acquire a design virtually identical to the new USN Arleigh Burke class. This new class would be known as the Confederation class (although there was no actual ship named OCS Confederation) with all eight ships of the class being named after founding members of the Oceanic Confederation: OCS Timor, OCS Solomon Islands, OCS Vanuatu, OCS Samoa, OCS Fiji, OCS West New Guinea, OCS Yogyakarta and OCS ANZAC (this last represented both Australia and New Zealand). The ships were built around the Aegis combat system and the SPY-1D multi-function phased array radar. Their armament was centred upon a 90 cells Mk 41 vertical launch system with RIM-66 Standard SAMs. The first ship, OCS ANZAC, was commissioned on 15 November 1993. Over the coming years they would gradually replace the earlier Bismarck Sea class.

For the army, the aging Chieftain AS-3 tanks were also to be replaced. In June 1992, after competition with the M1A2 Abrams and the Leopard 2, it was decided to acquire some 200 Challenger 2 MBTs. In addition, it was decided to adapt the Echidna turret to the Challenger 2 Hull to develop what was soon called the Echidna II. The existing turrets were completely refurbished with new systems including a more reliable/capable radar and sensor turret. The formidable GAU-8 armament remained unchanged, although the RBS70 missiles were replaced with the more potent Oerlikon Aerospace Air-Defense Anti-Tank System (ADATS) in two sets of four missiles. Apart from providing a longer ranged, more potent punch, these also gave the Echidna IIs a useful anti-tank capability.




At the same time it was decided to replace the aging M113 armoured personal carriers and FV101 Scorpion light tanks. After considering the options, it was decided to acquire both a tracked and a wheeled solution – each had their advantages and would allow greater tailoring of forces for operations. For the tracked vehicle, a version of the new Swedish CV90 was selected. This the CV90-AS had the standard 40 mm Bofors cannon replaced with a new Rheinmetall 35/50 mm Rh 503 cannon. It also had two box launchers for TOW missiles added to the turret to give a more potent punch along with numerous other changes to better operate in the Oceanic conditions.


Supplementing this was the Australian Light Armoured Vehicle (ASLAV), an Australian manufactured version of the Canadian LAV (itself a version of the Swiss MOWAG Piranha 8x8). This was purchased in multiple versions including:
• ASLAV-35 (Reconnaissance) - A three-man reconnaissance vehicle armed with the same Rheinmetall 35/50 mm Rh 503 cannon as the CV90-AS;
• ASLAV-PC (Personnel Carrier) - A two man vehicle armed with a .50 BMG M2 machine gun and capable of carrying 7 scout troops;
• ASLAV-AD (Air Defence) – a dedicated air defence variant to supplement the heavier Echidna IIs and fitted with an electric turret mounting a 25 mm GAU-12 Equalizer Gatling cannon, and two, four missile pods, containing FIM-92 Stinger SAM (Surface-To-Air Missiles).
• ASLAV-M (Mortar) – a fire support version with a turret mounted 120mm mortar;
• ASLAV-C (Command) - A vehicle equipped with enhanced radio installation and radio masts, map board, stowage compartments, appropriate seating and annex;
• ASLAV-S (Surveillance) - A specialised surveillance vehicle equipped with thermal imager, laser range finder, day television camera and battlefield surveillance radar RASIT or AMSTAR on a hydraulic mast;
• ASLAV-A (Ambulance) - Equipped with medical equipment and litter stations this ASLAV can carry three lying patients or six sitting patients;
• ASLAV-F (Fitter) - Maintenance support vehicle with HIAB 650 crane, crewed by soldiers of the Royal Australian Electrical and Mechanical Engineers (RAEME) for the repair and maintenance of ASLAV vehicles; and
• ASLAV-R (Recovery) - Maintenance support vehicle with recovery winch, also crewed by RAEME soldiers for recovering damaged or bogged vehicles.
Finally, a small batch of Wiesel 2 light Armoured Weapons Carriers were acquired to replace the Scorpion light tanks in the airborne assault role. These were armed with either 25mm cannon or TOW missiles and were able to be carried by the CH-47 Chinooks as well as C-130 transport aircraft to support airborne assaults


In the case of combat aircraft, it was decided that both the F-111C+, F-111B+ and eventually the F-14B would be essentially replaced by a single type – the F-23. This was the result of a joint development program since the mid-‘80s.
In 1981 the USAF and USN had developed a requirement for a new air superiority fighter, to replace the capability of the F-15 Eagle and F-14 Tomcat – this would be known initially as the Advanced Tactical Fighter (ATF) and Naval Advanced Tactical Fighter (NATF). This requirement was aimed developing next-generation air superiority fighters to counter emerging worldwide threats, including development and proliferation of Soviet Su-27 "Flanker"-class fighter aircraft. It was envisaged that the resulting platforms would incorporate emerging technologies including advanced alloys and composite materials, advanced fly-by-wire flight control systems, higher power propulsion systems, and low-observable/stealth technology.
By mid 1985 however, it was becoming increasingly apparent, that such a program would be extremely expensive, even for the USA. Concurrent with this, a number of the US’s allies were also starting to formulate requirements for new combat aircraft. In the UK, the recently collapsed Future European Fighter Aircraft (FEFA) programme had been planned to satisfy this need. Alas, political wrangling amongst the European partners over work share had seen this program collapse (eventually Germany, Italy and Spain joined the French Avion de Combat eXpérimental (ACX) program which would eventually produce the Rafale fighter).
In the case of Australia, having relatively recently acquired F-14Bs, the requirement not so much for a air superiority fighter, but rather for a strike aircraft to replace the various F-111 variants in service with the RAAF and RAN (they were not alone in this requirement though – both the USAF and RAF were also starting to consider replacements for their F-111 variants as well). That said, the search to replace a fighter often begins at the time it enters service, therefore the Australians were interested to see what the ATF/NATF program would deliver.
These threads now all started to come together. The result was that in late 1985, the USA formally asked the UK and Australia if they would like to join the ATF/NATF program. Shortly thereafter, Canada was also offered, and accepted, the opportunity to join (Germany, Italy, Spain and Japan were also offered but declined – the first three joining the ACX program, whilst Japan considered an indigenous program).
The program was quickly renamed the Joint Advanced Tactical Fighter (JATF). A request for proposal (RFP) was issued in July 1986, and two contractor teams, Lockheed/Boeing/General Dynamics and Northrop/McDonnell Douglas were selected in October 1986 to undertake a 50-month demonstration/validation phase, culminating in the flight test of two prototypes, the YF-22 and the YF-23, respectively.
On 23 April 1991 the Joint Program Office (JPO) ended the design and test flight competition by announcing Northrop-Grumman’s YF-23 as the winner. The resulting F-23 was to be built in three main versions:
• The land based F-23A,
• The carrier based F-23B, and
• A two seat combat capable trainer, the F-23C.
Interestingly, a number of names were to be used for the F-23s. The original name chosen by Northrop-Grumman was the "Black Widow II", although the F-23B also quickly picked up the name “Hellcat II”. In RAF service, the F-23A was named the “Tempest II” whilst in Australia, although initially referred to by the official name, it quickly received the nickname “The Red-back” after the spider by the same name (which it was jokingly noted, also had a stealthy attack style!)

Being older, the priority to replace the F-111B+ and C+ took priority. The F-14Bs, although well used in battle, were still relatively young (when they were eventually replaced, some were sold to South Africa, Chile and Italy – the latter using them as a stop gap whilst awaiting the Rafale). As such, the OCDF’s F-23A/Bs initially took on a strike/ground/maritime attack focus. For this they were equipped with a new weapon – the Kerkanya winged guided bomb. This fitted a standard MK80 series bomb with a tail unit and pop out wings to extend range. The weapon was also able to be fitted with various sensor heads (typically laser guided or anti-radiation, though later on GPS guidance was also added) to aid targeting. In addition, all the typical OCDF airborne weapons were able to be carried either internally or externally.
During the development of the F-23, a proposal also was put forward by Northrop Grumman to develop a replacement for the FB-111H. This grew out of the obvious need for a replacement for the various FB-111H incarnations in RAF, RAAF and USAF. The proposed FB-23 would be a scaled up aircraft using many common systems from the F-23 but be dedicated to the same strike role as the FB-111H. Lockheed also proposed a similar version of their losing JATF candidate, the FB-22. With the option of spreading development costs across both programs, the option of the FB-23 was soon adopted. By being developed slightly in lag of the F-23 but sharing many systems, this was able to progress quite quickly. The resulting aircraft was much larger though, being approximately 50% larger than a standard F-23. It also came with a dedicated weapon systems operator. Power was supplied by two F-119-200 engines – these being more powerful versions (40,000+ lb thrust rather than 35,000lb thrust) of the engines used by the F-23. A much larger weapons bay bas also fitted. Being so different, the FB-23 name was quickly deemed inappropriate and thus it was changed to the FB-24 upon entering service. Unlike its F-23 sibling, only a single name was ever used for the FB-24: Wraith. In the OCDF, the FB-24 started to replace the FB-111Hs in the late ‘90s, and were initially dedicated to the nuclear strike mission.
Of course, this still left the F/A-16s, A-10Cs and indeed Harrier IIs without a comparable replacement. Once again, a similar need was also being experienced with the Oceanic Confederation’s allies. Since the mid ‘80s, both the USA and UK had been studying Harrier replacements under the guise of the Advanced Short Take-Off/Vertical Landing (ASTOVL) program. In addition, in 1990 the USAF had initiated the Multi-Role Fighter (MRF) program in order to develop a relatively low-cost F-16 replacement. With the JATF program already in progress, and with similar requirements in all countries, it was only a matter of time before somebody suggested another joint program. The result was the Joint Common Affordable Lightweight Fighter (J-CALF).
The J-CALF program's aim was to develop both an ASTOVL aircraft as a Harrier/Harrier II replacement and a highly-common conventional flight variant as an F-16/F/A-18 (and similar) replacement. In 1991, the Oceanic Confederation was offered the chance to join. Shortly thereafter, Italy, the Netherlands, Turkey, Norway and Denmark also joined seeking replacements for either their F-16s or Harrier IIs.
From a technical point of view, the most difficult part of the J-CALF program was to develop a workable STOVL system. A number of concepts were investigated and trialled (this had actually been going on since the mid ‘80s) before it was decided to focus on the shaft driven lift fan technology. Once selected, competing design teams were asked to propose concepts for a fighter that could be manufactured in two versions:
• The ASTOVL version using the shaft driven lift fan technology; and
• A conventional version with the lift fan and associated equipment replaced by additional fuel.
Three teams submitted proposals: Lockheed Martin, McDonnell Douglas/Northrop-Grumman and Boeing. In 1994, the design submitted by McDonnell Douglas/Northrop-Grumman was selected. This team had the advantage of being able to transfer knowledge and experience gained in the F-23 program into their submission. In fact, their design even had the appearance of being a smaller F-23. The resulting F/A-25 would be built in three versions:
• The F/A-25A conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) variant,
• The F/A -25B STOVL variant, and
• The F/A -25C two seat combat capable conversion trainer variant.
The name team Demon II was initially proposed as the name for all variants, though this never received much support. In the case of the OCDF, the name Kittyhawk II was quickly adopted and became popular. This soon started a trend in other users with the name Warhawk II being adopted by the USAF, USN, USMC, whilst the RAF also used Kittyhawk II.
The Oceanic Confederation placed an order for all three variants – the F/A -25A would replace the F/A -16s, the F/A -25B would replace the Harrier IIs whilst the F/A -25C would support both and be used to supplement the A-10Cs in the FAC role (the A-10Cs were still kept however).


With the main fixed wing platforms now being replaced with low-observable (or stealthy) platforms, it was felt that perhaps their rotary wing brethren should also be so-equipped. After all, the survivability rational that drove the fixed wing need was equally applicable here as well. Conveniently, there was a solution becoming available. In April 1991, a Boeing-Sikorsky team was selected to build the RAH-66 Comanche stealthy armed reconnaissance helicopter. The OCDF quickly ordered a substantial number as part of Project AIR 87 – the first would enter service in 1995 following an accelerated development program (the acceleration was largely driven by the US Army’s desire to get this platform in service to face the renewed Soviet threat). These new Comanches would replace the existing Kiowa reconnaissance helicopters and serve alongside the AH-1T+ Improved Taipans, which although not stealthy were able to carry a larger payload.

Finally, the aging KC-135As and E-3 Sentries were also due for replacement. These would be replaced by two new Airbus developments: the KC-330 tanker/transport and the related EA-340 Wedgetail AEW&C aircraft. A total of 24 and 12 of these respectively were acquired. Concurrently, the E-2 Hawkeyes received an upgrade whilst the SE-2A Albatrosses were replaced by new build S-3B Vikings. This latter change was due to the SE-2As being found to be suffering extensive fatigue due to their constant use at low level.