US AWACS recapitalization for the 21st century

Two new variants (or even one) sounds like a 100% guarantee of broken budgets and deadlines. Should have just bought a carbon copy of the existing one.
 
sferrin said:
Two new variants (or even one) sounds like a 100% guarantee of broken budgets and deadlines. Should have just bought a carbon copy of the existing one.
Click to expand...

There have to be some differences, if only for compatibility with U.S.-specific data links and comm systems. Those changes are outlined here:

breakingdefense.com

Lawmakers press Air Force on speeding up purchase of Boeing E-7 Wedgetail - Breaking Defense

"Getting the airplanes is about a two-year process, and then modifying them is another two year process," Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall said Tuesday. "There are things that we could do, however, to maybe get access to aircraft earlier one way or another.”
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
 
Nato /US?

NATO would mean a plane that has specifics data link protocols for French and others air Forces.

Similarly, US data transfer are specifics across a wider range of platforms (F-22, F-35...).
 
TomS said:
aonestudio said:
boeing.mediaroom.com

Boeing Receives U.S. Air Force E-7 Airborne Early Warning & Control Aircraft Contract

SEATTLE, Feb. 28, 2023 — Boeing [NYSE:BA] will begin development of two new U.S. variants of the E-7 Airborne Early Warning & Control (AEW&C) aircraft through a $1.2 billion Undefinitized...
boeing.mediaroom.com boeing.mediaroom.com
View attachment 694600
Click to expand...

Wonder what they mean by " two new U.S. variants." Just two examples of the US version or two distinct versions for different roles?
Click to expand...

To answer my own question, this is really bad writing by whoever did the Boeing press release. It's two examples of the USAF E-7A variant, not two different variants. Here is the USAF contract award press release, which is much less ambiguous (emphasis mine):


The Department of the Air Force awarded The Boeing Company a contract to begin work on the E-7A weapon system Feb 28. The value of this initial contract will not exceed $1.2 billion.

The DAF selected the E-7A to replace the E-3 Airborne Warning and Control System. The E-7A will provide advanced Airborne Moving Target Indication and Battle Management, Command and Control capabilities, and advanced Multi-Role Electronically Scanned Array radar that enhances airborne battle management and enables long-range kill chains with potential peer adversaries.

In fiscal year 2022, the DAF selected the E-7A to replace the E-3 AWACS and established an E-7A Program Management Office. The DAF is using the rapid prototyping acquisition pathway to acquire the first two E-7As.
Click to expand...

TomcatViP said:
Nato /US?

NATO would mean a plane that has specifics data link protocols for French and others air Forces.

Similarly, US data transfer are specifics across a wider range of platforms (F-22, F-35...).
Click to expand...

NATO would be a separate procurement, and they have not yet committed to the E-7. Though honestly, it's just a matter of time now.

breakingdefense.com

NATO begins assessment of E-3A replacement; Wedgetail, GlobalEye in the running - Breaking Defense

The AFSC capability program aims to define “a new generation of surveillance and control capabilities” underpinned by a systems of systems architecture approach, intended to integrate “multiple capabilities and platforms” for future multidomain operations, according to the RfI.
breakingdefense.com breakingdefense.com
 
Last edited:
sferrin said:
Two new variants (or even one) sounds like a 100% guarantee of broken budgets and deadlines. Should have just bought a carbon copy of the existing one.
Click to expand...
Impossible to say without knowing more context. I don't see why there would need to be two variants unless one was perhaps an "as is" version based on the RAF purchase (option not taken on two aircraft), which should largely be USAF compatible (and USAF personnel have already been exposed to it in RAAF ride alongs). The follow on version would be more USAF system specific (probably a BACN type gateway for one thing) if that was the plan. In that case, the use of two variants would be explicitly to speed the process, most likely with the initial version ultimately being brought to a Block 20 standard once enough were available.
 
Last edited:
TomcatViP said:
Nato /US?

NATO would mean a plane that has specifics data link protocols for French and others air Forces.

Similarly, US data transfer are specifics across a wider range of platforms (F-22, F-35...).
Click to expand...

Aren't NATO protocols very standardized anyway? Do the French use a proprietary datalink? The F-35 MADL is certainly used by at least a half dozen NATO members, but it is newer and E-7 likely isn't equipped for it. I bet that is one of the changes the USAF will want with its E-7s (I think they will want it to be a BACN node which it probably isn't out of the box). The F-22 IFDL is a one off no one else uses, not even other US air arms.
 
No. AdlAE (FASF) have their own data protocols that are, for example, integrated now with NATO E-3.
 
Last edited:
GTX said:
www.airandspaceforces.com

USAF Selects Boeing's E-7A Wedgetail as Successor to AWACS | Air & Space Forces Magazine

Boeing will build a prototype E-7A Wedgetail for the Air Force under a $1.2 billion contract awarded Feb. 28. Production will begin in 2025.
www.airandspaceforces.com www.airandspaceforces.com

www.defensenews.com

US Air Force awards Boeing first contract for fleet of 26 E-7 aircraft

Boeing's contract will be worth up to $1.2 billion, as the service begins work on a fleet to replace the iconic E-3 Sentry.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
Click to expand...

The E-7 was really the only option that the USAF had in terms of a Sentry replacement and the fact that it is currently in service with the RAAF, Turkey and soon the RAF.
 
Random silly question - since E-7 was essentially created for the RAAF, could that deal be even loosely related to AUKUS ? "I train your nuclear submariners, you train my AWACS guys" ?
 
I think it was just a case of the only machine in production that could fill the requirements and no time or money to build from scratch.
 
Josh_TN said:
I think it was just a case of the only machine in production that could fill the requirements and no time or money to build from scratch.
Click to expand...

And you can also say that the USAF does not want to operate a foreign aircraft look at what happened to the Airbus KC-30 tanker for example.
 
AFAIK all foreign AEW solutions were biz jet platforms and I don’t think there was any way that could have met USAF requirements. They still seem to want a heavily manned platform for this role.
 
FighterJock said:

The E-7 was really the only option that the USAF had in terms of a Sentry replacement and the fact that it is currently in service with the RAAF, Turkey and soon the RAF.
Click to expand...
Don't forget Sth Korea who has operated 4 for over a decade now.
 
GTX said:
FighterJock said:

The E-7 was really the only option that the USAF had in terms of a Sentry replacement and the fact that it is currently in service with the RAAF, Turkey and soon the RAF.
Click to expand...
Don't forget Sth Korea who has operated 4 for over a decade now.
Click to expand...

Oh no, yes my mistake thanks GTX. I had forgotten that South Korea had bought four E-7s.
 
bring_it_on said:
It is probably related to the Vanguard in which case it would operate in both X and Ku bands which would help for the type of JADC2 and multi-function applications it is claimed to have been developed for.
Click to expand...
Hi mate, have you diasppeared from twitter and if so, is there any means to follow you ?
 
Josh_TN said:
rooster said:
This kind of fits here in that there isn't a thread for the doomsday planes.... Its back to the future with turboprops....

www.thedrive.com

This Is Our First Look At The Navy’s Next 'Doomsday Plane,' The EC-130J TACAMO

The next-generation EC-130J TACAMO will replace the current fleet of E-6B Mercury jets in a throwback to the Cold War era.
www.thedrive.com www.thedrive.com
Click to expand...
Interesting...if these are only to serve in the TACOMO mission, what is going to fulfill LOOKING GLASS?
Click to expand...
www.defensenews.com

Northrop, Lockheed, Raytheon team up on Navy’s E-XX ‘doomsday’ plane

The airplane would be built from a stretched version of the C-130J and allow the president to communicate with nuclear-armed submarines in case of war.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
 
Josh_TN said:
Interesting...if these are only to serve in the TACOMO mission, what is going to fulfill LOOKING GLASS?
Click to expand...
Something else. Maybe E-6B Mercuries if they have any hours left. NEACP could do it, but the E-4Bs are up for replacement.

Will be really interesting to see how the "Survivable Airborne Operations Center" shakes out, since Boeing doesn't make any 4-engined aircraft anymore. After a quick dive, neither does Airbus, A340 stopped production in 2011, A380 in 2022. I almost suspect that the SAOC will end up on a 4-engine airframe, even if someone has to custom design one for the job. Between the need for electrical generation and the need for failure tolerance on the job, I don't see a twin jet passing muster. Yes, I know how statistically unlikely it is for a CFM56 to stop running. The cost for failure is too high for AF1/SAOC aircraft.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Something else. Maybe E-6B Mercuries if they have any hours left. NEACP could do it, but the E-4Bs are up for replacement.

Will be really interesting to see how the "Survivable Airborne Operations Center" shakes out, since Boeing doesn't make any 4-engined aircraft anymore. After a quick dive, neither does Airbus, A340 stopped production in 2011, A380 in 2022. I almost suspect that the SAOC will end up on a 4-engine airframe, even if someone has to custom design one for the job. Between the need for electrical generation and the need for failure tolerance on the job, I don't see a twin jet passing muster. Yes, I know how statistically unlikely it is for a CFM56 to stop running. The cost for failure is too high for AF1/SAOC aircraft.
Click to expand...
I can't see a purpose built airframe being used. Something commercial and off the shelf would have to be adapted, or alternatively an in production military airlifter. I suspect whatever fulfills the NEACP role will be downgraded into a Looking Glass level machine using a common airframe.
 
Josh_TN said:
I can't see a purpose built airframe being used. Something commercial and off the shelf would have to be adapted, or alternatively an in production military airlifter. I suspect whatever fulfills the NEACP role will be downgraded into a Looking Glass level machine using a common airframe.
Click to expand...
What airlifter is still in production?

C-17 stopped production in 2015.
KC-46 has 2 engines, not likely to be accepted for reasons I have already given.
C-130J is still in production, do you know of any others?
 
Scott Kenny said:
What airlifter is still in production?

C-17 stopped production in 2015.
KC-46 has 2 engines, not likely to be accepted for reasons I have already given.
C-130J is still in production, do you know of any others?
Click to expand...
Not domestically made, no. And I can't see the US adopting a foreign build for the role. It would basically have to be a C-130 or a Boeing commercial airframe of some kind, almost certainly the latter. That would limit it to two engines, but I don't think that is a major problem. The P-8s were able to double their electrical production over the base civilian 737 model.
 
Josh_TN said:
Not domestically made, no. And I can't see the US adopting a foreign build for the role. It would basically have to be a C-130 or a Boeing commercial airframe of some kind, almost certainly the latter. That would limit it to two engines, but I don't think that is a major problem. The P-8s were able to double their electrical production over the base civilian 737 model.
Click to expand...
Except a P8 isn't running as many systems as Looking Glass or SAOC. Some of those antennas are potentially megawatt power, especially any trailing wire ELF stuff. And ELF has very low data rate, which means it is transmitting for more of the time...

Like I said, they need a stupid amount of electrical power. 1200kVA power panels in the E-4s, probably even more power needed for the SAOC.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Something else. Maybe E-6B Mercuries if they have any hours left. NEACP could do it, but the E-4Bs are up for replacement.

Will be really interesting to see how the "Survivable Airborne Operations Center" shakes out, since Boeing doesn't make any 4-engined aircraft anymore. After a quick dive, neither does Airbus, A340 stopped production in 2011, A380 in 2022. I almost suspect that the SAOC will end up on a 4-engine airframe, even if someone has to custom design one for the job. Between the need for electrical generation and the need for failure tolerance on the job, I don't see a twin jet passing muster. Yes, I know how statistically unlikely it is for a CFM56 to stop running. The cost for failure is too high for AF1/SAOC aircraft.
Click to expand...

AF1 of course will continue to be a 747 (new build 747-8s currently in the conversion process).

I think it's likely that the SAOC birds will also be rebuilt from used 747-8s, for maximum commonality. The Air Force listed used commercial aircraft as an option in the FY23 budget.
 
TomS said:
AF1 of course will continue to be a 747 (new build 747-8s currently in the conversion process).

I think it's likely that the SAOC birds will also be rebuilt from used 747-8s, for maximum commonality. The Air Force listed used commercial aircraft as an option in the FY23 budget.
Click to expand...
Used 747-8s is definitely the best option there, I wasn't considering used aircraft. But IIRC the AF1 birds weren't built for the USAF, were they?
 
Scott Kenny said:
Used 747-8s is definitely the best option there, I wasn't considering used aircraft. But IIRC the AF1 birds weren't built for the USAF, were they?
Click to expand...

The most recent ones I believe were used aircraft undergoing mods. Considering how few NEACAP airframes are needed, it does seem likely that the 747 is just retained and that the AF1/NEACAP fleet has a lot of commonality. Used parts and aircraft would be very inexpensive I'd imagine.

Not sure where that leaves Looking Glass, but I think it would have to be put into a two engine product of some kind eventually with some kind of power work around, perhaps an auxiliary engine of some kind.
 
Josh_TN said:
The most recent ones I believe were used aircraft undergoing mods.
Click to expand...

They were white tails taken over by USAF for conversion. They were never delivered to commercial customers.

I don't think there are any remaining white tail 747-8s but there are some used 8Fs in storage and possibly some available 8i airframes as well.
 
Josh_TN said:
The most recent ones I believe were used aircraft undergoing mods. Considering how few NEACAP airframes are needed, it does seem likely that the 747 is just retained and that the AF1/NEACAP fleet has a lot of commonality. Used parts and aircraft would be very inexpensive I'd imagine.

Not sure where that leaves Looking Glass, but I think it would have to be put into a two engine product of some kind eventually with some kind of power work around, perhaps an auxiliary engine of some kind.
Click to expand...
Or buy some more used 747-8s? I mean, there are 16x E-6B Mercuries, 4x E-4B NEACPs, and 2x VC-25s. Wouldn't need to replace all the Mercuries, I don't think, since their TACAMO role is going to Navy EC-130Js. So probably 12-16 aircraft between Looking Glass and NEACP, as the VC-25Bs are already bought and under conversion.

I wonder how many more 747-8s are in boneyard storage?
 
Well they better hurry up and make up their minds. One 747-8 BBJ with extremely low hours has already been broken up for parts. Anything in the desert ain't going to be there forever.

I think most of the 47 B747-8i built are now back in service after the pandemic. Lufthansa is now using all its 19 again. May be just an odd one in storage.

Of the 107 747-8F freighters, I'm not sure what happened to the 12 Airbridge Cargo were returning to the lessors after Russian sanctions hit last year. The rest seem to be very active.
 
EwenS said:
Well they better hurry up and make up their minds. One 747-8 BBJ with extremely low hours has already been broken up for parts. Anything in the desert ain't going to be there forever.

I think most of the 47 B747-8i built are now back in service after the pandemic. Lufthansa is now using all its 19 again. May be just an odd one in storage.

Of the 107 747-8F freighters, I'm not sure what happened to the 12 Airbridge Cargo were returning to the lessors after Russian sanctions hit last year. The rest seem to be very active.
Click to expand...
That -8 BBJ was too expensive to modify the cabin from whatever the sheik had set up.
 
Why don't they do what we're doing and convert some stock 737 fuselages?
 
Hood said:
Why don't they do what we're doing and convert some stock 737 fuselages?
Click to expand...
Given the backlog of Max deliveries, most of those NG's are still in revenue service. The few that aren't in passenger service are in process of conversion to cargo. Furthermore, USAF has little interest in used airframes unless forced into it. Finally, the long pole in the tent (so to speak) isn't the airframe but the radar.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom