Australia urged to seriously consider next-gen British, Italian, Japanese Global Combat Air Programme

In the evolving landscape of global security and technological advancements, the importance of air superiority capable fighter aircraft in the 2030s and beyond cannot be overstated. As nations continue to develop and deploy increasingly sophisticated military technologies, control of the skies remains a critical component of national defence and strategic dominance.

Air superiority or air dominance aircraft, as they have become known, are equipped with advanced avionics, stealth capabilities, and cutting-edge weaponry, serving as pivotal assets in ensuring that a nation’s airspace is protected from both traditional and emerging threats.

The geopolitical environment of the 21st century is marked by rapid advancements in artificial intelligence, cyber warfare, and unmanned aerial systems which necessitate a new generation of fighter aircraft that can seamlessly integrate these technologies.

These aircraft must not only outperform adversaries in terms of speed, manoeuvrability, and firepower but also possess the ability to operate in highly contested environments where electronic warfare and anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) systems are prevalent.

Moreover, the role of air superiority fighters extends beyond mere defence. They act as force multipliers, enabling the projection of power, support of ground and naval operations, and ensuring the security of critical infrastructure and supply chains. In coalition operations, these aircraft are essential for maintaining air dominance and interoperability among allied forces.

In summary, as we look to the 2030s and beyond, the development and deployment of advanced air superiority capable fighter aircraft will be crucial for maintaining national security, ensuring global stability, and adapting to the fast-paced technological advancements shaping modern warfare.

Bringing us to Australia’s fast combat jet fleet of 72 F-35A Joint Strike Fighters, 24 F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets, and 12 E/A-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft which the government has committed to maintaining throughout the 2030s and into the 2040s.

VIEW ALL

The 2024 Integrated Investment Program (IIP) reinforces this approach, particularly for the Super Hornet and Growler, respectively, stating, “The F/A‑18F Super Hornet and EA‑18G Growler will be provided with lethality and survivability upgrades, while maintaining their interoperability with the United States and other key partners. Defence is looking to extend the operational life of both these capabilities to 2040.”

All of this comes at a time when across the Indo-Pacific, friend and foe alike are engaging in a comprehensive modernisation of their own air combat capabilities resulting in the fielding of some truly awesome, high-capability air platforms from China’s J-20 and FC-31 to South Korea’s KF-21 through to Japan’s in-development F-X.

Now yes, the advent of autonomous “loyal wingman” style aircraft are important developments in the future of air combat capability but crewed platforms still have an important role to play across the Indo-Pacific.

Yet Australia is remaining committed to the F-35A (not such a big deal) and the F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets, and E/A-18G Growler which will have an average airframe age of between 20 years for the Growlers and 30 years for the Super Hornets (by comparison, Australia’s classic Hornets were retired with an average age of approximately 33 years).

Importantly, for Bill Sweetman, aerospace industry executive and the leading open-source expert on stealth technology and author of Trillion Dollar Trainwreck: How The F-35 Hollowed Out the U.S. Air Force, there is a need for Australia to consider joining the United Kingdom, Italy, and Japan in their collaborative development of a next-generation air combat platform.

Sweetman, in a piece for ASPI, titled GCAP: a big fighter designed for Pacific (and Australian) distances, urges Australian consideration of the platform saying, “GCAP is supposed to become the mainstay of Japan’s combat aircraft force after entering service in 2035, as well as the chief fighter of partners Britain and Italy. The stealthy aircraft is also a clear candidate as Australia’s next fighter.

“What we see from the design is a long-range fighter that far better suits Pacific (and Australian) distances than aircraft now available, though it lacks extreme flight performance, which is looking ever less useful in air combat,” Sweetman explained.

The joint UK, Japan, and Italian option

Perhaps one of the most unforeseen partnerships is the partnership between the UK, Japan, and Italy to develop the “sixth-generation” Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) resulting from the Tempest and F-X programs, respectively.

As part of the joint development program, the GCAP airframe is expected to replace the Eurofighter Typhoon in British and Italian service and the Mitsubishi F-2 (an enlarged Japanese-specific variant of the Lockheed Martin F-16) in Japanese service, respectively, with a flight demonstrator expected by 2027.

As a sixth-generation platform, the GCAP is set to incorporate a host of revolutionary technologies including directed energy weapons, an augmented reality cockpit, biometric and psycho-analytical monitoring, artificial intelligence, and the capacity to partner with loyal wingman platforms.

Sweetman detailed the departure from traditional European and Japanese aircraft design, which have typically been evolutions of, or broadly comparable to US combat aircraft, saying, “The team at the air show did not disclose dimensions, and a journalist who produced a tape measure in the exhibit was, I am told, encouraged to leave at his earliest convenience. GCAP has been described as one-third bigger than Typhoon – roughly F-15 size, perhaps 20 metres long, but with a 50-degree swept classic delta wing spanning around 16.5 metres and having twice the area of the F-15’s.

“GCAP leaders were firm that the model reflected the evolution of the design. The design has probably changed to meet changing requirements,” Sweetman added.

As a collaborative program, the original partners have identified the potential for further international collaboration drawing in Sweden, Germany, and Saudi Arabia, with the development program currently supporting approximately 9,000 jobs and more than 1,000 suppliers worldwide.

Key industry partner BAE Systems’ chief executive, Charles Woodburn, said of GCAP, “The launch of the Global Combat Air Programme firmly positions the UK, alongside Japan and Italy, as leaders in the design, development and production of next generation combat air capability. With our UK industry partners, we look forward to strengthening our ties with Japanese and Italian industries as we work together to deliver this program of huge importance to our global defence and security.”

Sweetman built on this, highlighting the “evolutionary” design places a strong emphasis on range in a major departure from recent Western fighter aircraft design, saying, “The last generation of European fighters were essentially F-16 or F/A-18-type fighters with added capabilities. South Korean and Turkish designs today, and the Shenyang FC-31, are US-inspired. Not so GCAP, formed to a Euro-Japanese requirement that edges towards the light-bomber end of the fighter spectrum, with an emphasis on payload and range, in a way we have not seen since the 1960s and the (much bigger) F-111.”

Unpacking the impact of this further, Sweetman added, “The wing’s shape and size contribute to performance in two ways: massive fuel volume and low drag in cruising flight. Both promote range. It’s not a classic delta in the style of the Mirage III’s; it’s more like the capacious wing of the promising but never built F-16U, from 1995, or that of the Boeing X-32 contender for the Joint Strike Fighter program...

“The GCAP should have a usefully greater combat radius on internal fuel than most other current combat aircraft can manage with external tanks, while leaving space in the lower fuselage for weapons. That makes a lot of sense for a stealth aircraft, where fuel and bulky weapons must be carried internally. Among the tactical opportunities of greater range is use of bases farther from the territory of the opponent – say, China. They would be more costly to attack with missiles and easier to defend,” he detailed.

While platform specifics remain scarce, the collaborative nature and interoperable focus of the program provides important scale while also ensuring that the platform can operate seamlessly with other key allied platforms, namely from the United States.

It must also be said, that given Australia’s emphasis on interoperability, particularly with the United States and, to a lesser extent, the United Kingdom and Japan, making the “right choice” as it relates to our next-generation air combat capability is paramount with the GCAP clearly filling the niche tactical and strategic requirements Australia faces.

This is something that Sweetman acknowledged, saying “GCAP is different, better adapted to the Pacific than shorter-range jets, and has growth potential. As the largest Europe–Asia joint defence project and a major technological advance for all parties, the program faces challenges. But the design seen at Farnborough suggests that the requirement has been well thought through. It’s a promising start.”

While there are, however, American options worth considering although they are being impacted by their own challenges hindering their development and potential fielding in a timely manner.

However, it is important to remember that budget considerations and industry partnerships play significant roles in these programs’ success, providing an interesting and exciting opportunity for Australia to engage early to the maximum benefit of the Royal Australian Air Force’s future air combat capability.

One thing Australia has learned (or at least we hope we have learned) in recent years is that it is never too early to start planning for the next major acquisition and in the case of next-generation crewed air combat capabilities, the world is indeed our oyster.

Final thoughts

With the Australian government identifying in the 2024 Integrated Investment Program that it intends to keep the nation’s small fleet of F/A-18 E/F Super Hornets and E/A-18G Growlers in service well into the 2040s, alongside the 72 F-35 Lightning IIs and an as yet undisclosed or perhaps unknown final number of MQ-28A Ghost Bat aircraft, it is time to think outside the box.

Air combat and air superiority, in particular, is only going to increase in importance over the coming decades and keeping the Royal Australian Air Force at the leading edge of that shift will require a more nuanced, bespoke approach that delivers Australian decisionmakers with a robust, focused, and balanced military capability and advantage of peer and near-peer competitors alike.

Yet little remains changed in the way of material difference for the Royal Australian Air Force. Ultimately, in the case of the Air Force, little remains changed from the earliest incarnations of the 2016 Defence White Paper and, arguably, even further back than that to the 2009 Defence White Paper.

In this case, it is hard to clearly see how, beyond a series of by now well “known knowns”, the Air Force is going to be materially in a significantly different place in five years’ time, let alone a decade’s time as is the proposed funding timeline for the 2024 Integrated Investment Program and the 2024 National Defence Strategy.

One can’t help but feel that this comes as a result of the Army being positioned as the “long-range strike” partner of choice for Defence via the acquisition of HIMARS and weapons systems like the Precision Strike Missile (at least until the arrival of our nuclear submarine fleet), leaving Air Force with a confused role and undefined sense of being beyond the “application of expeditionary air power”.

Perhaps a reinvigorated Raptor capability could be the solution to beefing up Australia’s expeditionary air capability.

Get involved with the discussion and let us know your thoughts on Australia’s future role and position in the Indo-Pacific region and what you would like to see from Australia’s political leaders in terms of partisan and bipartisan agenda setting in the comments section below, or get in touch at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it..