SOR 206 : E-3 AWACS competitors

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Very interesting!

I wonder why nobody thought of placing a radar antenna on a B-52 to create a 8,800 mile radius AWACS

The Soviet Tu-126 was based on the civilian version of the Tu-95, so that's roughly comparable, but it was far from an AWACS in capability. I'm not sure there's enough room inside a B-52 for all the electronics, operators, stations etc of a full AWACS, at least with 1970s era electronics.

The Tu-126 had the fuselage of the Tu-114, which has a similar fuselage diameter as the B707, and it's longer.

Yep, the civilian version of the Tu-95, with a larger diameter fuselage.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Wind tunnel model of the early Boeing AWACS from Aviation Week 19 May 1969.

 

[hesham]

From Air Pictorial 1966.

 

[Foo Fighter]

So, if the DC-8 has better range etc, why go for the B 707? I could easily guess at cost but I'd rather have the truth. Thanks.

 

[1635yankee]

So, if the DC-8 has better range etc, why go for the B 707? I could easily guess at cost but I'd rather have the truth. Thanks.

I can't give you the truth, but I can give a good surmise: 707s were in USAF service, and DC-8s weren't

 

[Foo Fighter]

Thanks mate, being in current service would have made them cheaper to run at least.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Boeing Airborne Warning and Control System Brochure Dec 1967 | The Airchive

theairchive.net

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

This brochure from 6 years later shows the actual E-3A - https://theairchive.net/boeing-awacs-e-3a-april-1973/

 

[Archibald]

Why did they dropped the "radome on inverted tail" ? Just being curious. Doesn't seem to have bothered the Soviets and their An-74 madcap (geez, what a codename !)

 

[fightingirish]

R.G. Smith drawing of DC-8 AWACS
R.G. Smith artist drawing of Douglas Aircraft's DC-8 AWACS Entry, circa 1970. Douglas photo #179598.

https://flic.kr/p/seRggf

View: https://flic.kr/p/seRggf

 

[64jmb]

Boeing Airborne Warning and Control System Brochure Dec 1967 | The Airchive

theairchive.net

Looking for this Brochure, is this for sale?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Looking for this Brochure, is this for sale?

Boeing AWACS Brochure

Boeing AWACS brochure: Aerial reconnaissance at its finest.

theairchive.net

 

[64jmb]

I did see that. was wondering if you had an original 1967 brochure

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

It's not my website. The scan was provided by Le Jetee Press, that copy's probably owned by Tom Harris I'd say.

 

[64jmb]

It's not my website. The scan was provided by Le Jetee Press, that copy's probably owned by Tom Harris I'd say.

Ok Thanks!

 

[64jmb]

It's not my website. The scan was provided by Le Jetee Press, that copy's probably owned by Tom Harris I'd say.

I am curious, how do you become unrestricted?

 

[Grey Havoc]

1969
Boeing proposal is identical to E-3 but it was powered by 8 engines instead of 4.
Engine selected was GE TF-34-GE-2 (40 kN) turbofans in order to match the required unrefuelled endurance specification.

In this SLIM artwork from 1972 (h/t overscan), it is difficult to make out, but I think that is the eight engined version in the background.

 

[Grey Havoc]

A powerpoint presentation from back in 2021:
The AWACS story: History of the Airborne Warning and Control System (AWACS) Radar
William A. Skillman, Westinghouse Retiree AWACS Radar System Engineer July 26, 2021

 

[Grey Havoc]

From the aforementioned presentation:

Response to SOR 206

AIRFRAME Proposals: Boeing, Douglas, Lockheed (later dropped)

RADAR Proposals: Westinghouse, Hughes, Raytheon, GE, 3 others

AIR FORCE: SAB determined proof of concept needed,
ASD formulated Overland Technology Program(ORT)
DOD funded ORT program – 1964


SAB=Air Force Scientific Advisory Board

ASD=AF Aeronautical Systems Division (Wright-Pat)

DOD=Department of Defense

 

[64jmb]

VERY rare prototype AWACS 707 model in Camo. Original stand was missing. Looking for one.

 

[Springtime]

Not sure if this has been asked before but was the B-52 engine version for fleet commonality or just for survivability or both

 

[64jmb]

Not sure if this has been asked before but was the B-52 engine version for fleet commonality or just for survivability or both

I do not know. I do not think they ever actually built one, just drawings I believe.

 

[iverson]

Not sure if this has been asked before but was the B-52 engine version for fleet commonality or just for survivability or both

If I recall correctly, it was proposed primarily for higher performance, but was rejected because said performance was not obviously necessary and could not justify the additional cost.

 

[64jmb]

If I recall correctly, it was proposed primarily for higher performance, but was rejected because said performance was not obviously necessary and could not justify the additional cost.

Makes sense, they just used turbofans from the Boeing 707's.

 

[Yellow Palace]

Not sure if this has been asked before but was the B-52 engine version for fleet commonality or just for survivability or both

The initial E-3s did use the same engine - the TF33 - as the B-52H. Four on the former, eight on the latter. The eight-engine version of the E-3 was to have used TF34s, the same engine as the S-3 and A-10, seemingly mostly for increased endurance. The later CFM56-engined versions got there without needing to double the number of engines.

 

[Springtime]

The initial E-3s did use the same engine - the TF33 - as the B-52H. Four on the former, eight on the latter. The eight-engine version of the E-3 was to have used TF34s, the same engine as the S-3 and A-10, seemingly mostly for increased endurance. The later CFM56-engined versions got there without needing to double the number of engines.

Thanks I've known they were TF33 anyway but had no idea they for the eighth engine version were TF34's considering the KC-135 and IFR was still very new increased endurance before needing more fuel would be important

 

[Kiltonge]

Why Boeing moved the radome from the tail.

AvWeek, 23 June 1969:

Boeing Co has changed its radar antenna location from the tail to atop the fuselage on its ... AWACS design as an answer to engine-out stability problems on take-off.

Going back a bit:

AvWeek, 19 May 1969:

One of the two airframe competitors ... recently discovered that the giant search radar can cause serious aircraft instabilities during take-off in event of engine failure. The company has not yet officially advised the Pentagon. One possible fix would be to use eight engines instead of four.