E-3 REPLACEMENT
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E-3 REPLACEMENT
What platforms are being developed to replace the E-3. I suspect they will need replacing in about 2025ish so a replacement should be on the drawing board now.
Do we need a big platform with a whole load of supplimentary personnel to service the needs of old inefficient systems?
I have heard the F-35 can do everything so maybe a few extra operating as AEW?
RPAS must be a player in the 2025+
Fleet with CROWSNEST and SAMPSON look like their requirement is sorted.
Would a fleet of smaller aircraft such as E-2 do the job if fitted with suitable tools to enhance the effectiveness of the mission crew?
I have seen pictures of a slightly large tuboprop than the E-2 which may do the trick at one end of the scale and a large Russian transporter with big dome operated by the Indian Air Force?
Do we need a big platform with a whole load of supplimentary personnel to service the needs of old inefficient systems?
I have heard the F-35 can do everything so maybe a few extra operating as AEW?
RPAS must be a player in the 2025+
Fleet with CROWSNEST and SAMPSON look like their requirement is sorted.
Would a fleet of smaller aircraft such as E-2 do the job if fitted with suitable tools to enhance the effectiveness of the mission crew?
I have seen pictures of a slightly large tuboprop than the E-2 which may do the trick at one end of the scale and a large Russian transporter with big dome operated by the Indian Air Force?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,563
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
I suspect they will need replacing in about 2025ish
Add a good few years to that. The mid-life update is only just in place on the majority of fleets (the original mission system is still based upon 1970s technology). Although I have been out of the loop for a couple of years, I would guess that the system will still be around in 2035 if not later.
Add a good few years to that. The mid-life update is only just in place on the majority of fleets (the original mission system is still based upon 1970s technology). Although I have been out of the loop for a couple of years, I would guess that the system will still be around in 2035 if not later.
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Colchester
Age: 40
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
E-3 REPLACEMENT
You really think the F-35 has anything like the observational power of the radar system fitted to the E-3, or even the Hawkeye? You might want to go check your sources over...
The Russians have been flying radomes on airframes almost as long, you refer to the Shaanxi turboprop and the Ilyushin 76, there was also a heavily modified Antonov Coaler.
Look up the Japanese 767 AEW, the Australian Wedgetail program, and quite a few others...even the Iraqis modified an Il-76 off their own back for this once.
The Russians have been flying radomes on airframes almost as long, you refer to the Shaanxi turboprop and the Ilyushin 76, there was also a heavily modified Antonov Coaler.
Look up the Japanese 767 AEW, the Australian Wedgetail program, and quite a few others...even the Iraqis modified an Il-76 off their own back for this once.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, the Australian RAAF, and both the South Korean and Turkish air forces fly the militarized B737-700 with the big electronically scanned array radar antenna atop, looks like a surfboard, not a revolving dish! This AEW&C airplane type has been in service for a couple of years now.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: England
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dash8driver1312
Although I can't be 100% certain on this, I feel that there is a very slight possibility that post the post above, from Phoney Tony may have contained a subtle degree of sarcasm with regard to the enormous list of claimed capabilities of the marvellous and magnificent F-35.
This post may also contain a degree of sarcasm, as did my last post.
Hope this helps.
Although I can't be 100% certain on this, I feel that there is a very slight possibility that post the post above, from Phoney Tony may have contained a subtle degree of sarcasm with regard to the enormous list of claimed capabilities of the marvellous and magnificent F-35.
This post may also contain a degree of sarcasm, as did my last post.
Hope this helps.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: England
Posts: 576
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a 1/72 scale model I made last year - it's not of a real aircraft, of course, but was to illustrate a "What if" solution to the AEW requirement of a possible future Scottish Air Force.
I have also made a model of a Hawk on floats, to help out the Royal Navy with an idea for a current sea-going fast jet. I like helping!
I have also made a model of a Hawk on floats, to help out the Royal Navy with an idea for a current sea-going fast jet. I like helping!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P6 Driver
I hope you have secured the IPR on your design!
Interesting that Boeing have 2 ac types being used for MPA and AEW. Put a GMTI/SAR under a 737 and you have the set.
Has anyone tried a RPAS AEW capability. With a big pipe it may be possible.
I have seen the USN balloons used against the drug runners.
As we move to a home defence force a few balloons out in the UK ADR should do the trick.
I hope you have secured the IPR on your design!
Interesting that Boeing have 2 ac types being used for MPA and AEW. Put a GMTI/SAR under a 737 and you have the set.
Has anyone tried a RPAS AEW capability. With a big pipe it may be possible.
I have seen the USN balloons used against the drug runners.
As we move to a home defence force a few balloons out in the UK ADR should do the trick.
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: S of 55N
Posts: 360
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AIOS
The Air ISTAR Optimisation Study (AIOS) is looking to understand the most appropriate future air ISTAR mix. As part of its remit, the AIOS is looking at Multi-Mission Aircraft and the role they might play in intelligently brigading air ISTAR capability.
While I'm sure this study will be lampooned by many on this forum, this is the way capability development is conducted. Senior decision makers, who are actually responsible for making decisions, as opposed to armchair generals and armchair air commodores, seek objective information on which to base their decisions. Now, that decision may well subsequently be subverted by political expediency, but they do try.
See here for an interesting perspective on how the AIOS is being presented to the political elite.
Sun.
While I'm sure this study will be lampooned by many on this forum, this is the way capability development is conducted. Senior decision makers, who are actually responsible for making decisions, as opposed to armchair generals and armchair air commodores, seek objective information on which to base their decisions. Now, that decision may well subsequently be subverted by political expediency, but they do try.
See here for an interesting perspective on how the AIOS is being presented to the political elite.
Sun.
Howiehowie93,
That will be serial ZH105 that was withdrawn from use.
ZH105 - UK - Air Force Boeing E-3D Sentry AEW.1 at Waddington | Photo ID 324812 | Airplane-Pictures.net
ZH105 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
That will be serial ZH105 that was withdrawn from use.
ZH105 - UK - Air Force Boeing E-3D Sentry AEW.1 at Waddington | Photo ID 324812 | Airplane-Pictures.net
ZH105 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
Has anyone tried a RPAS AEW capability. With a big pipe it may be possible.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Worcestershire
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radar 101,
Was his paper published? The SAAB radar only looks left and right so may not be a good candidate. I think you really need 360 degree cover.
Was his paper published? The SAAB radar only looks left and right so may not be a good candidate. I think you really need 360 degree cover.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Lincoln
Age: 54
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Multi-msn (E-10): was considered and discounted by the US a few years back with costs, integration, different operating characteristics, system fusion and most importantly COST being the driver for the block40/45 E-3G upgrade and P-8 Poseidon procurement.
RPAS: available bandwidth for comms and data relay likely to be the biggest hurdle. Perhaps the great great grandson of 5G may be a potential answer.
Dirigible: may offer greater persistence but manned or unmanned with bandwidth for unmanned yet again needing to be considered.
Smaller platform = smaller crew = potentially more limited capabilities ie smaller sensors suite with more limited range.
Satellites: geosynchronous offers persistence & wide field of regard at massive cost. Sensors with bandwidth for data/comms and counter satellite capabilities are very big questions?
Upgrade: current production line in place (for sister fleets) and most likely to be the most cost effective solution (in near term) with probable life extension beyond OOS date.
Different variant: reopening production lines (E767) won't be cheap.
Cost vs need vs another capability 'vacation'?
RPAS: available bandwidth for comms and data relay likely to be the biggest hurdle. Perhaps the great great grandson of 5G may be a potential answer.
Dirigible: may offer greater persistence but manned or unmanned with bandwidth for unmanned yet again needing to be considered.
Smaller platform = smaller crew = potentially more limited capabilities ie smaller sensors suite with more limited range.
Satellites: geosynchronous offers persistence & wide field of regard at massive cost. Sensors with bandwidth for data/comms and counter satellite capabilities are very big questions?
Upgrade: current production line in place (for sister fleets) and most likely to be the most cost effective solution (in near term) with probable life extension beyond OOS date.
Different variant: reopening production lines (E767) won't be cheap.
Cost vs need vs another capability 'vacation'?
Was his paper published? The SAAB radar only looks left and right so may not be a good candidate. I think you really need 360 degree cover.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Lincs
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Radar 101
The Wedgetail does in fact have 360 degree cover, it would appear that it is fast developing into the best AEW&C system in the world. Looks like Turkey and South Korea have made very clever choices. Yes these systems have been very late into service but it looks like the wait may have been worth it.
The Wedgetail does in fact have 360 degree cover, it would appear that it is fast developing into the best AEW&C system in the world. Looks like Turkey and South Korea have made very clever choices. Yes these systems have been very late into service but it looks like the wait may have been worth it.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Oz
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For Wedgetail, if only we'd put the NG radar on a larger airframe - the 737-700, even in IGW/BBJ form it just doesn't quite cut it.
Perhaps an -800 would have been better, or even a KC-46 as a donor platform? Then we're back to E-10 again I guess...
Perhaps an -800 would have been better, or even a KC-46 as a donor platform? Then we're back to E-10 again I guess...
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ssssh, don't tell the politicians Pikey, but the new RJ is the same airframe as the E3. Buy RJ, rip out all that expensive stuff and then bolt a plate to the roof. Simples. 