Fighters on Civilian airfields.

[Rule of cool]

I'm reading this book and have been thinking about airfields, initially in the Falklands scenario and most recently in the modern Australian scenario now we've fired our first Tomahawk from a RAN ship and are getting long range missiles. Presumably in a scenario where we fire fire long range missiles we will have long range missiles fired at us, and airbases are juicy military targets.

There are a considerable number of airfields north of the Tropic of Capricorn servicing small towns and the mining sector that look like they might be able to handle fighters in a national emergency, however the Falklands has shown that the devil is in the details. The Port Stanley runway was 4,100' and had a Load Classification number of 15 with LCN 30 in some places, but no taxiway and very little hardstand. This meant it couldn't handle A4s, Daggers and Mirages as it was too short given it was always wet, but it did handle B737s and BAC111s. I've read that the F4 required an LCN of 45, F/A18A LCN 35 and F15E LCN 60.

The details I can find on the many sealed airfields most certainly don't include LCN numbers, so how do I find out if for example Super Hornets of F35s could use some of these airfields? It looks like a B737 can operate from a runway with an LCN of 15, so knowing jets like B737s use these airfields and knowing they're 5,000'+ long doesn't mean much.

As for the airfields themselves, some (maybe half) are very basic; a sealed runway with a small hardstand with room for maybe 2 fighters but they go up from there to places like East Kimberley Regional Airport with it's full length taxiways and large hardstand for a town of 4,600 people.

 

[Dilandu]

Better dig underground hangars in solid rock. Dispersion may not work well in the era of cheap long-range drones. At very least, hardened shelters and decoys.

 

[Rule of cool]

Better dig underground hangars in solid rock. Dispersion may not work well in the era of cheap long-range drones. At very least, hardened shelters and decoys.

I'm not too worried about drones in the Australian context. A drone with the range to operate against the Australian mainland will be big to carry enough fuel so won't be cheap or plentiful.

The RAAF bases themselves are pretty tough with multiple redundant taxiways that allow both rapid sorties from the runway and use as runways themselves in an emergency. The have dispersed and hardened aircraft shelters, buried fuel etc and plenty of handstand. However there are only 6 of them over a 5000+km arc, so a few extra airfields will be handy.

 

[Ainen]

I'm not too worried about drones in the Australian context. A drone with the range to operate against the Australian mainland will be big to carry enough fuel so won't be cheap or plentiful.

Shahed?
Plus, as usual, everything is aggravated by China factor.
Unless it's something "capital", you can expect it to be...more plentiful than usual.

 

[Dilandu]

I'm not too worried about drones in the Australian context. A drone with the range to operate against the Australian mainland will be big to carry enough fuel so won't be cheap or plentiful.

Well, a Shahed 135 drone have 2500 km max range. Which is pretty enough to hit Brisbane from as far as Port Morsby, and Perth from Bali. A drone with 3000 km max range - i.e. only 20% more - would be able to hit as far as Melbourne. So... assuming your opponent is serious, he would likely send A LOT of drones.

 

[DWG]

The issue with dispersed bases isn't knowing you can hit them, but knowing which one to hit. And even knowing which one's in use today, it's difficult to suppress the aircraft there if the dispersal area is every barn within a five mile radius. Australia has a particular advantage in sheer size, you're not checking every strip without satellite imaging, and that's predictable and gameable.

WRT available airstrips, the WWII experience might be informative: https://www.ozatwar.com/airfields.htm Many will have been built on, but others may still be usable even if not currently used as airfields - you find old runways used for all kinds of things in the UK and I don't imagine Australia's any different.

 

[perttime]

You can operate F/A-18, Gripen, F-35A, and many others, from straight pieces of highway. Why not from other runways with a hard surface?

 

[Rule of cool]

You can operate F/A-18, Gripen, F-35A, and many others, from straight pieces of highway. Why not from other runways with a hard surface?

It depemds on what you mean by 'operate'. There are sections of highway in remote Australia that are actual marked-out runways used by the Royal Flying Doctors Service, but they fly light-ish aircraft whereas a Super Hornet or F35 is heavy with small wheels and high ground pressure so likely to at least leave ruts in the pavement if they don't punch right through it.

I have no doubt that a Super Hornet or F35 could conduct an emergency landing at many of the paved strips in northern Australia, the question is can they take off again? Further again could these airstrips be included in an air campaign plan where they are used semi-regularly by fighters?

 

[Rule of cool]

Shahed?
Plus, as usual, everything is aggravated by China factor.
Unless it's something "capital", you can expect it to be...more plentiful than usual.

Well, a Shahed 135 drone have 2500 km max range. Which is pretty enough to hit Brisbane from as far as Port Morsby, and Perth from Bali. A drone with 3000 km max range - i.e. only 20% more - would be able to hit as far as Melbourne. So... assuming your opponent is serious, he would likely send A LOT of drones.

IIUC the Shahed 136 is at best a loitering munition, at worst a cruise missile with slow speed and tiny warhead. When I think of 'drone' I think of something like a Predator which flies return missions and carries ordnance like a combat aircraft. To operate against Australia such drones will have to be big like the Loyal Wingman types that are being developed. These can be used for both surveillance and attack.

 

[Rule of cool]

The issue with dispersed bases isn't knowing you can hit them, but knowing which one to hit. And even knowing which one's in use today, it's difficult to suppress the aircraft there if the dispersal area is every barn within a five mile radius. Australia has a particular advantage in sheer size, you're not checking every strip without satellite imaging, and that's predictable and gameable.

WRT available airstrips, the WWII experience might be informative: https://www.ozatwar.com/airfields.htm Many will have been built on, but others may still be usable even if not currently used as airfields - you find old runways used for all kinds of things in the UK and I don't imagine Australia's any different.

This website shows the airstrips and has links to overhead pictures of them, from there you can figure out which are sealed and which are not and how long they are. I suppose from there an adversary could rank these strips into usefulness and therefore their priority for surveillance and attack.

Leaving aside the open question of whether these airstrips have pavement strong enough to hold fighters the usefulness in my mind is the big question. For example fighters usually operate in pairs or flights, often larger military aircraft operate in multiples as well. This requires the ability to gather a number of aircraft at the end of the runway for almost simulataneous takeoff and clearing the runway upon landing. When returning from Black Buck 1 a number of Victor tankers landing at the same time parked at the end of the runway, so the last tanker pilot hoped his brakes were working so he didn't crash into a bunch of other tankers bunched up at the end of the runway.

Many of the airfields in the north are totally inadequate for this, they have no taxiways or anything at the end of the runway to allow planes to take off closely together and clear the runway upon landing. Even the hand-built Sid's Strip in the Falklands had a loop at the end of the runway so Harriers could taxi and take off together.

 

[Dilandu]

IIUC the Shahed 136 is at best a loitering munition, at worst a cruise missile with slow speed and tiny warhead. When I think of 'drone' I think of something like a Predator which flies return missions and carries ordnance like a combat aircraft. To operate against Australia such drones will have to be big like the Loyal Wingman types that are being developed. These can be used for both surveillance and attack.

Your thinking is a bit outdated. The main advantage of Shahed is that they are extremely cheap, and you could launch a freaking hordes of them - hundreds, or even thousands - and they are accurate enough to hit the plane on the airfield. The war changed.

 

[Dilandu]

The issue with dispersed bases isn't knowing you can hit them, but knowing which one to hit. And even knowing which one's in use today, it's difficult to suppress the aircraft there if the dispersal area is every barn within a five mile radius. Australia has a particular advantage in sheer size, you're not checking every strip without satellite imaging, and that's predictable and gameable.

Erm. Let's assume I order Planet Labs photos of Australian airbases every day, and send a hundred of drones to strike each. Of course, some planes would be moved between me getting photos & drones hitting the targets (albeit I could send drones in advance, and only upload new coordinates in flight). But still SOME would hit, and SOME planes would be destroyed/damaged in each attack. Now, let's say I have 1000 of Geran-class drones per month...

 

[Desertfox]

If it was that easy, there would no Ukrainian F-16s left. And as far as we can tell, not one has been lost to a drone.

 

[eagle]

Many of the airfields in the north are totally inadequate for this, they have no taxiways or anything at the end of the runway to allow planes to take off closely together and clear the runway upon landing. Even the hand-built Sid's Strip in the Falklands had a loop at the end of the runway so Harriers could taxi and take off together.

If you have a runway, you can add the other surfaces pretty quickly: https://www.twz.com/air/australian-f-35-tests-expeditionary-base-concept

 

[Rule of cool]

If you have a runway, you can add the other surfaces pretty quickly: https://www.twz.com/air/australian-f-35-tests-expeditionary-base-concept

I saw that, it could be used to quickly upgrade the very rudimentary airstrips with end of runway loops, extra handstand, extra runway exits to handstands etc.

 

[EwenS]

If you have a runway, you can add the other surfaces pretty quickly: https://www.twz.com/air/australian-f-35-tests-expeditionary-base-concept

But you have to not just have a runway, but a runway capable of operating F-18/F-35.

 

[Rule of cool]

But you have to not just have a runway, but a runway capable of operating F-18/F-35.

That's the big unknown in my mind. The Falklands is instructive in this regard, as port Stanley lacked the LCN to operate Phantoms but Jetliners as big as B737 flew in and out over 70 times. The airfields I'm looking at can handle B737s or EMB 100s but that doesn't mean they can handle F18 or F35.

That said the Australian government routinely coopts industry for things like fuel storage so the ADF can use it in an emergency. I wouldn't be surprised if many of these airfields were upgraded during construction for military use in an emergency.

 

[Rule of cool]

Your thinking is a bit outdated. The main advantage of Shahed is that they are extremely cheap, and you could launch a freaking hordes of them - hundreds, or even thousands - and they are accurate enough to hit the plane on the airfield. The war changed.

War has changed but the laws of physics have not. The Shahed 136 exported to Russia had a unit cost of $193,000, and when it's all said and done this is a reasonably sized cruise missile that flies at a mere 115mph. If fired from an island in Indonesia it would take 6.5 hours to fly 1200km to reach Port Headland for example, and if it couldn't find a target it would have to fly another hour to get to Karratha to search for a target there. This assumes that it can do the loiter, search and divert over such vast distances. When it gets somewhere it then has a 52kg warhead which is only good for un-hardened and undefended targets.

This isn't to say that a drone like the Shahd 136 isn't a threat, it most certainly is, but that they work best in limited war scenarios where the defence against them is passive or reactive. In a war where such drones are employed against Australia a solution might be to sink the ships they are carried on by submarine, bomb the ports and airports where they land and have the SAS roam the areas where they operate covertly attacking the commanders.

In any case drones aren't a reason to give up and buy a white flag, having alternatives to the big 6 Air bases is one way to make the drone user's job harder.

 

[Scott Kenny]

I'm trying to pull the 737 ACAPS, but the Boeing site is being stupid slow. Here's the link: https://www.boeing.com/content/dam/boeing/boeingdotcom/commercial/airports/acaps/737_RevA.pdf

But remember that the "Jurassic 737s" with skinny engines are capable of landing on gravel. So 737s are probably not the aircraft we want to compare against.

 

[Rule of cool]

I'm trying to pull the 737 ACAPS, but the Boeing site is being stupid slow. Here's the link: https://www.boeing.com/content/dam/boeing/boeingdotcom/commercial/airports/acaps/737_RevA.pdf

But remember that the "Jurassic 737s" with skinny engines are capable of landing on gravel. So 737s are probably not the aircraft we want to compare against.

If I'm reading this correctly a 737-100 with Low Pressure tyres has an LCN of about 29, but regular 737-100&200s are in the LCN 42-50 range and 737-300, 400 & 500 are slightly higher. It would appear that airfields capable of currently operating a 737 would be able to handle a Super Hornet or F35, I'm going to go on a limb and say B717s and Embraer E jets are compatible with some limitations.

 

[Dilandu]

In a war where such drones are employed against Australia a solution might be to sink the ships they are carried on by submarine, bomb the ports and airports where they land and have the SAS roam the areas where they operate covertly attacking the commanders.

With all respect, but it have nothing to do with reality. You can't attack every truck, every shipping contrainer, every building in range pre-epmtive. Those drones are compact; their launchers are compact & highly mobile.

Seriously, you are dismissing the experience of actual warfare in favor of some good-looking theory of the past. It's like in 1920s to claim that "enemy planes are not much threat. we could always send cavalry to raid airfields."

 

[Bounce]

F-35s have been landing at various mining site airstrips recently up north, these airstrips service A320s/717s/Fokkers etc but are nothing more than an airstrip and unloading apron.

F-35s visit Pilbara - CONTACT magazine

Share the post "F-35s visit Pilbara" FacebookLinkedInPinterestTwitterShare…Email You wouldn’t typically expect to see F-35A Lightning II aircraft flying around in

www.contactairlandandsea.com

 

[Rule of cool]

F-35s have been landing at various mining site airstrips recently up north, these airstrips service A320s/717s/Fokkers etc but are nothing more than an airstrip and unloading apron.

F-35s visit Pilbara - CONTACT magazine

Share the post "F-35s visit Pilbara" FacebookLinkedInPinterestTwitterShare…Email You wouldn’t typically expect to see F-35A Lightning II aircraft flying around in

www.contactairlandandsea.com

I'm attempting to count how many of these airstrips there are north of RAAF Learmonth in WA and RAAF Townsville. I count 17, plus 4 civilian airports well equipped with taxiways etc as well as the 2 RAAF bases in northern WA.

I'm trying to count the ones in the NT and will try Qld after that, but so far it's looking like there might be several dozen.

 

[Rule of cool]

With all respect, but it have nothing to do with reality. You can't attack every truck, every shipping contrainer, every building in range pre-epmtive. Those drones are compact; their launchers are compact & highly mobile.

Seriously, you are dismissing the experience of actual warfare in favor of some good-looking theory of the past. It's like in 1920s to claim that "enemy planes are not much threat. we could always send cavalry to raid airfields."

Firstly I'm focusing on the Shahaed 136 because it appears to be the thing people are talking about, I'm awre that there are other loitering munitions in the world as well as actual drones that are flown remotely and fire their own ordnance.

Secondly, I'm not burying my head in the sand about drones, rather I'm trying not to fall for thinking this latest thing makes everything else obsolete, just like it did for every other new thing in the last 4,000 years.

As for chasing every truck etc, that isn't necessary. According to the Wall Street Journal in the 6 months to May 2024 the Ukrainians intercepted 82% of the 2,628 Shahed 136s and in October a missile strike destroyed some 400 of them in an ammo dump. Nor did they prove overwhelming in strikes against Israel in April 2024, despite being used in conjunction with other weapons.

In any case while there is talk of such loitering munitions being cheap and plentiful 2628 in 6 months in Ukraine equates to 15 per day, which is hardly overwhelming against 6 defended airbases, let alone a similar number of major civilian airports and dozens of jet capable airstrips. Even when fired in much larger waves the effort will be diluted by the huge number of targets in Australia. The fact of the matter is that loitering munitions are just a new type of weapon that will be used in conjunction with other new weapons like hypersonics as well as the array of existing legacy weapons and good, old-fashioned tactics like dispersal of high value assets will still be effective as long as you don't expect miracles.

 

[Dilandu]

As for chasing every truck etc, that isn't necessary. According to the Wall Street Journal in the 6 months to May 2024 the Ukrainians intercepted 82% of the 2,628 Shahed 136s and in

Yeah, in static warfare over populated area with extremely extensive air defense network combining literally everything, from SAM to mobile autocannons and FPV-drones as interceptors.

Now please, show me, where exactly Australia have such defense network?

Nor did they prove overwhelming in strikes against Israel in April 2024, despite being used in conjunction with other weapons.

That's better example. Problem is, that its not exactly relevant either. To reach Israel from Iran, drones were forced to traverse an open killing ground over Iraq and Jordan, controlled by a massive fleet of interceptors and then face the most advanced air defense system in the world.

Now show me, where exactly Australia have anything of that? Do it even have full radar coverage of the outback?

Secondly, I'm not burying my head in the sand about drones, rather I'm trying not to fall for thinking this latest thing makes everything else obsolete, just like it did for every other new thing in the last 4,000 years.

It did not make everythig else obsolete; but it make obsolete PLANNING that did not took it into account. Dispersion without hardening is an example of obsolete planning; basically you are suggesting the idea that was perfectly right for 1980-2000s, but not for 2020s.

 

[Justo Miranda]

The development of military aviation is linear, the development of robots with artificial intelligence is exponential, the air bases of the Cold War are dinosaurs.

The next generation of drones will have almost unlimited autonomy: lightweight batteries, electric motors and solar power.

A drone the size of a private jet can carry hundreds of highly maneuverable and undetectable mini-drones, with enough intelligence to attack the vents of underground fuel tanks, command and control bunkers, radar antennas, and can destroy any combat jet simply by entering through the air intake, the jet exhausts or the cavities where the landing gear is housed. They can also disperse chemical or biological agents that prevent the use of the facilities for a hundred years.

We can continue to manufacture Yamatos or we can change our way of thinking, the contributors will appreciate it.

Jurassic Park and its mosquitoes - Mosquito Alert

[…]

www.mosquitoalert.com

 

[Rule of cool]

Now show me, where exactly Australia have anything of that? Do it even have full radar coverage of the outback?

Australia has complete, overlapping over the horizon radar coverage of the entire Northern arc from the coast deep into mainland China.

 

[Dilandu]

Australia has complete, overlapping over the horizon radar coverage of the entire Northern arc from the coast deep into mainland China.

The JORN? It quite doubtful it would be able to detect something as small as drones (not to mention that it would be one of obvious first strike targets for any attacker to knock down)

 

[DWG]

Erm. Let's assume I order Planet Labs photos of Australian airbases every day, and send a hundred of drones to strike each. Of course, some planes would be moved between me getting photos & drones hitting the targets (albeit I could send drones in advance, and only upload new coordinates in flight). But still SOME would hit, and SOME planes would be destroyed/damaged in each attack. Now, let's say I have 1000 of Geran-class drones per month...

If you're expecting daily (California-based) Planet Labs photos of every Australian airport during a war against an AUKUS / Five Eyes power you may be somewhat disappointed by the delay in delivery (I'm sure they'd be glad to take your money though).

100 drones per airport per day, you say? So, there are 613 airports in Australia, which comes to 61,300 drones a day. Are your magazines that deep? And that's excluding private fields and highway strips - remember, Australia's big enough the sheep stations often have airstrips.

And what exactly are you targeting with those drones? Because you don't have the imagery analysts or depth of detail to do pattern of life analysis across all of the potential operating sites. Any barn, factory, garage, or supermarket could be functioning as a dispersed hangar, any pub or shop could be an ops centre. If road strips are in use, how do you even tell where they are?

Russia hasn't been able to suppress the Ukrainian Air Force in almost three years of ongoing combat operations, in a country less than a tenth the size of Australia (people underestimate how big Ukraine is, they really, really underestimate how big Australia is), and that with Ukraine sitting on Russia's border, with no target further than 800km away.

I'm not a fan of the USMC plan for dispersed operations in the Pacific islands, not enough (dry) territory to disperse across, but you can absolutely make that kind of shell game work when you have a continent to play with.

 

[DWG]

The JORN? It quite doubtful it would be able to detect something as small as drones (not to mention that it would be one of obvious first strike targets for any attacker to knock down)

JORN's weakness is its minimum range, OTOH that's what Wedgetail is for.

As for taking it out, all the JORN sites are about 1,800km from the nearest non-Australian territory, Stonehenge is the closest to open water at about 800km, but anything launching from off NSW you're probably not getting back. On top of which the JORN transmit and receive sites are area, not point targets, so the best you're going to get short of a saturation attack is a degradation, not a knockout blow.

JORN's public sensitivity target is a Hawk sized aircraft, in 1987. It's been through two upgrade cycles since, with a third in progress that's supposed to significantly upgrade capacity. Probably safe to say it's considerably better than a Hawk nowadays.

If you're in position to attack JORN, Australia's had months to prepare for what's coming.

 

[Dilandu]

If you're expecting daily (California-based) Planet Labs photos of every Australian airport during a war against an AUKUS / Five Eyes power you may be somewhat disappointed by the delay in delivery (I'm sure they'd be glad to take your money though).

I use Planet Labs as example; just put a Chinese analogue in its place)

 

[perttime]

It depemds on what you mean by 'operate'. There are sections of highway in remote Australia that are actual marked-out runways used by the Royal Flying Doctors Service, but they fly light-ish aircraft whereas a Super Hornet or F35 is heavy with small wheels and high ground pressure so likely to at least leave ruts in the pavement if they don't punch right through it.

I have no doubt that a Super Hornet or F35 could conduct an emergency landing at many of the paved strips in northern Australia, the question is can they take off again? Further again could these airstrips be included in an air campaign plan where they are used semi-regularly by fighters?

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7ZRfdBc7zY

 

[Rule of cool]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7ZRfdBc7zY

It looks like the about 17 sealed airstrips in northern WA can handle Super Hornet/Growler and F35 operations in terms of simple take-off and landing and even refueling. What they lack is parking space and things like taxiways and/or turning loops etc so fighters can take off in pairs or flights, not to mention any maintenance or rearming capacity. 2 of those 17 strips have a 2nd hardstand and 1 ex WW2 RAAF base could almost be used operationally. That leaves the 2 RAAF bases or Learmonth and Curtin and the 4 major airports north of the Tropic of Capricorn in WA.

I haven't finished the NT yet or started Qld but I suspect they'll also have numerous fighter capable airports, although it appears that the NT has a number of airports with good hardstand etc but runways just short of 5,000'.

 

[DWG]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7ZRfdBc7zY

And if the road surface isn't up to it, you can just lay airfield matting on top.

 

[DWG]

What they lack is parking space and things like taxiways and/or turning loops etc so fighters can take off in pairs or flights, not to mention any maintenance or rearming capacity.

If you have a road into the airfield, you have all the taxiway you need. Might need to chop down the odd streetlight or tree, but if you can takeoff from a road then you can taxi along it. And without HAS you actively want to use the local roadnet to disperse your aircraft around the surrounding countryside.

 

[Rule of cool]

If you're expecting daily (California-based) Planet Labs photos of every Australian airport during a war against an AUKUS / Five Eyes power you may be somewhat disappointed by the delay in delivery (I'm sure they'd be glad to take your money though).

100 drones per airport per day, you say? So, there are 613 airports in Australia, which comes to 61,300 drones a day. Are your magazines that deep? And that's excluding private fields and highway strips - remember, Australia's big enough the sheep stations often have airstrips.

And what exactly are you targeting with those drones? Because you don't have the imagery analysts or depth of detail to do pattern of life analysis across all of the potential operating sites. Any barn, factory, garage, or supermarket could be functioning as a dispersed hangar, any pub or shop could be an ops centre. If road strips are in use, how do you even tell where they are?

Russia hasn't been able to suppress the Ukrainian Air Force in almost three years of ongoing combat operations, in a country less than a tenth the size of Australia (people underestimate how big Ukraine is, they really, really underestimate how big Australia is), and that with Ukraine sitting on Russia's border, with no target further than 800km away.

I'm not a fan of the USMC plan for dispersed operations in the Pacific islands, not enough (dry) territory to disperse across, but you can absolutely make that kind of shell game work when you have a continent to play with.

Well said, I've had similar conversations before about the Soviets nuclear targeting of Australia.

FWIW I'm limiting my survey to sealed airstrips over 5000' long north of the Tropic of Capricorn. This drops the number in WA alone from well over 100 to 23.

I'm also mindful that Iran sold Russia 'only' 6000 Shahed 136s, whose loitering capability is disputed, and I suspect is only usable at much less than long rage. Further the Russians fired some 2600 of these in 6 months, 15 a day not 100, although it must be noted this is only 1 of an array of weapons the Russians and any other adversary would be using.

Cheap, numerous drones are a nightmare but when operating against a Continent the laws of physics mean such drones will neither be cheap or numerous.

 

[DWG]

Cheap, numerous drones are a nightmare but when operating against a Continent the laws of physics mean such drones will neither be cheap or numerous.

I can't help noticing all the "we can just throw drones at you" proposals are completely ignoring they'd have to control Indonesia or PNG first.

FWIW I'm limiting my survey to sealed airstrips over 5000' long north of the Tropic of Capricorn. This drops the number in WA alone from well over 100 to 23.

For the non-cemented ones, drop airfield matting over the existing surface, instant hardtop. It's been graded, all the hard work has already been done for you.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3fWTeN3bgY&list=PLYRp0ieaqMHSDLxWUDzcacOIpuQLf7zlS&index=4

 

[Rule of cool]

If you have a road into the airfield, you have all the taxiway you need. Might need to chop down the odd streetlight or tree, but if you can takeoff from a road then you can taxi along it. And without HAS you actively want to use the local roadnet to disperse your aircraft around the surrounding countryside.

There is no local road net.

I've taken screen shots of 2 of the airfields that RAAF F35s have visited, referenced in the article that @Bounce linked to, as well as where they are in northwest Australia. In the last screen shot that encompasses 1/3 of the country Darwin has 140,000 people, Alice Springs has 30,000 and Broome has 14,000 and the 2 airfields are a long way from those but sort of in between RAAF bases at Exmouth and Derby.

Ginbata has a B737 parked, for scale.

The defence environment in northern Australia is hard to get your head around, the rules that apply elsewhere don't apply here.

 

[Rule of cool]

I can't help noticing all the "we can just throw drones at you" proposals are completely ignoring they'd have to control Indonesia or PNG first.



For the non-cemented ones, drop airfield matting over the existing surface, instant hardtop. It's been graded, all the hard work has already been done for you.

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c3fWTeN3bgY&list=PLYRp0ieaqMHSDLxWUDzcacOIpuQLf7zlS&index=4

Yes, although I think it mightn't be as hard as people think to grab a patch of land in those countries and hold it for a month or 2 against the locals.

The problem isn't so much the paving but the runway length, indeed there appears to be a number of airfields in the NT with good facilities, hardstand etc but with runways less than 5,000' which makes things hard given the hot weather.

 

[DWG]

There is no local road net.

I easily picked out 25km of roadnet between Eliwara, the mine and the nearby village. I'd guess there's probably double that by the time you look in detail. Most of that looked tarmacked, but you don't need that, it just needs to be solid enough to tow a jet along behind a tractor, and you can use matting if needed. It's a bit short of buildings large enough to conceal aircraft in, but lots of lovely pre-built berms for dispersals and ordnance and if you string camo netting over all of them it creates an immediate targetting shell game.