E-3D Final Sortie
Joined: May 2009
Posts: 1,912
Likes: 130
From: Here
Always a chance the other 2/3 remaining airworthy ones could be picked up by existing CFM-56 powered 707 operators for similar duties (France, Saudi) or perhaps for conversion!
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zon...r-force-rc-135
Joined: Sep 2006
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 6,024
Likes: 102
From: Somewhere flat
Joined: Jul 2013
Aviation Qualifications: Non-Aircrew
Posts: 5,683
Likes: 3,356
From: Everett, WA
Parts obsolescence is a huge problem with older aircraft - and with an electronics dominated asset like AWACS it's magnified many times.
In the 'good old days', military procurement was a major contributor to electronic components, and the component advancement wasn't nearly as rapid as today - so it was economically feasible to keep production going of otherwise obsolete components to support military and other aviation users. Today, the commercial market totally dominates the electronic component market - military and aviation are a tiny sliver of the market - and it no longer makes economic sense for a manufacturer to be making a few hundred of some obsolete component when they could be cranking out modern parts by the millions. Further, mil-spec electronics have become pretty few and far between - most military and aviation electronics use "COTS" - Commercial Off the Shelf parts that are simply screened to more rigid environmental requirements (e.g. temperature and vibration).
With something like AWACS, the cost of the electronics is actually a fairly small portion of the overall costs - it's the integration that's killer. Making all those boxes seamlessly talk to each other, while making sure the electromagnetic emissions don't interfere with other components is a massive task - made all the worse when you throw in high power radar systems.
No first hand knowledge of the E-3D, but I suspect they can no longer get the electronic bits to keep the AWACS functional, and it's cheaper to buy the Wedgetail 'off the shelf' than to create a new AWACS system from scratch.
Military aircraft seldom see 1,000 hrs/year of use, so 40 year old 707 airframes are maybe halfway through their available life, but all the AWACS systems are a different matter.
In the 'good old days', military procurement was a major contributor to electronic components, and the component advancement wasn't nearly as rapid as today - so it was economically feasible to keep production going of otherwise obsolete components to support military and other aviation users. Today, the commercial market totally dominates the electronic component market - military and aviation are a tiny sliver of the market - and it no longer makes economic sense for a manufacturer to be making a few hundred of some obsolete component when they could be cranking out modern parts by the millions. Further, mil-spec electronics have become pretty few and far between - most military and aviation electronics use "COTS" - Commercial Off the Shelf parts that are simply screened to more rigid environmental requirements (e.g. temperature and vibration).
With something like AWACS, the cost of the electronics is actually a fairly small portion of the overall costs - it's the integration that's killer. Making all those boxes seamlessly talk to each other, while making sure the electromagnetic emissions don't interfere with other components is a massive task - made all the worse when you throw in high power radar systems.
No first hand knowledge of the E-3D, but I suspect they can no longer get the electronic bits to keep the AWACS functional, and it's cheaper to buy the Wedgetail 'off the shelf' than to create a new AWACS system from scratch.
Military aircraft seldom see 1,000 hrs/year of use, so 40 year old 707 airframes are maybe halfway through their available life, but all the AWACS systems are a different matter.
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,139
Likes: 55
From: virginia, USA
No sense having a full up crew and fully missionized aircraft banging circuits, although I'm sure the rear crew love doing touch and gos for the nugget co-pilots after a long mission...
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 628
Likes: 11
From: UK
Joined: Sep 2006
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 6,024
Likes: 102
From: Somewhere flat
Usually 17-18 (depending upon the activity) although the aircraft can carry up to 34.
Flight Deck Crew:
Pilots x 2
Flight Engineer
Navigator
Mission Crew:
Tactical Director
Weapons team x 3 or 4 people
Surveillance Team x 5 People
Communications Operator
Communications Technician
Display Technician
Radar Technician
I will admit that pounding the circuit in an aluminium tube with no windows after a long sortie is not the most enjoyable pastime (also being bounced around behind a tanker for 20 minutes).
Flight Deck Crew:
Pilots x 2
Flight Engineer
Navigator
Mission Crew:
Tactical Director
Weapons team x 3 or 4 people
Surveillance Team x 5 People
Communications Operator
Communications Technician
Display Technician
Radar Technician
I will admit that pounding the circuit in an aluminium tube with no windows after a long sortie is not the most enjoyable pastime (also being bounced around behind a tanker for 20 minutes).
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,110
Likes: 291
From: Nevada, USA
USN buying one of the E-3Ds for $15M to use as a trainer for the E-6B fleet.
"The aircraft will help reduce an estimated 600 flight hours and 2,400 landings/cycles per year from the E-6 mission aircraft."
PMA-271 works quickly to purchase E-6B trainer aircraft | NAVAIR (navy.mil)
"The aircraft will help reduce an estimated 600 flight hours and 2,400 landings/cycles per year from the E-6 mission aircraft."
PMA-271 works quickly to purchase E-6B trainer aircraft | NAVAIR (navy.mil)
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,583
Likes: 11
From: Darling - where are we?
I really do despair at the way things are going. Sadly the Emperor really does think he’s wearing splendid new clothes.
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,254
Likes: 1,663
From: Ferrara
It was originally going to be 5 Wedgetails IIRC - but then , once again, economic reality intervened
Of course the UK COULD afford 5 but then a sacred cow or three would have to suffer - say increase taxes, or do away withe pension triple lock, or cut funding for University expansion.......
Of course the UK COULD afford 5 but then a sacred cow or three would have to suffer - say increase taxes, or do away withe pension triple lock, or cut funding for University expansion.......
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 2,968
Likes: 104
From: Devon
Would the NATO force have been able to cover UK commitments like when the CSG21 group was in the Mediterranean? What about operations outside of the NATO area?
Joined: Jun 2013
Aviation Qualifications: ATCO
Posts: 1,530
Likes: 101
From: Róisín Dubh
Joined: Oct 2018
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 12,254
Likes: 1,663
From: Ferrara
"Would the NATO force have been able to cover UK commitments like when the CSG21 group was in the Mediterranean? What about operations outside of the NATO area?"
NATO covers NATO commitments - if anyone wants to go elsewhere they have to provide their own cover - if they can afford it of course
NATO covers NATO commitments - if anyone wants to go elsewhere they have to provide their own cover - if they can afford it of course