Originally Posted by
Just This Once...
The UK E-3D was left to wither on the vine, with all too frequent cost-cutting and risk-taking leaving the aircraft so far behind in airworthiness, technology and sustainment that it's hard to see a way back for the youngest E-3 fleet. Chopping-up an expensive aircraft as a fun project was equally questionable. Cutting our losses and starting again is probably better and hopefully some lessons are learned by those who killed it with a thousand cuts.
Cutting up ZH105 was a seriously bad decision.
https://abpic.co.uk/pictures/full_si...2838-large.jpg
That aircraft cost around £150m when it arrived in 1993. How anyone came to the conclusion it was better as scrap after minor damage than be fixed and returned to service is beyond comprehension. I'm amazed it hasn't been raised by the Defence Select Committee as a point of egregious, shocking waste for which someone should be held accountable.
As for the fleet being, perhaps, too far gone; I doubt it. If we can bring 50+ year old Airseeker airframes back from the boneyard to airworthy condition, and that the 6 remaining E-3Ds are still flying, there's not much that can't be fixed. Certainly the Block 40/45 upgrade would rejuvenate the fleet for another 20-30 years - and would also do as we said we would at the outset: keep our aircraft aligned with the global fleet and so save on development and upgrade costs. Someone forgot that bit by the look of it when they cancelled our Project Eagle (40/45 upgrade).
Crackers!