UK Defence Forum

News, History, Discussions and Debates on UK Defence.

Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Contains threads on Royal Air Force equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 11491
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 20 Jan 2020, 03:57

Lord Jim wrote: Not having installed CEC on the T-45s doesn't bode well for the RAF getting the capability on its E-7s. If the UK is going to go down the CEC route it should concentrate on linking CROWSNEST to surface platforms and also the F-35s as its priority.
Agree. The first go at it was to make the T23s, with their soon-to-arrive new SAMs, nore useful by linkng them to the superior T45 sensors
- now we've got/ are getting other new things, so let's use them as per your suggestion

seaspear wrote:, it could be expected that an an air platform would have an advantage over the allied surface platoforms radar that was bound by curvature of the earth in detection range but could assist that platform in its detection and launchagainst opposing platform


Quite. I was writing recently about the strike range of a combined nearly exo-stratospheric Mig31 using a Kinzhal against ships, and in May last year the StRN took stock of the ranges of "counter" that would be feasible (R&D, integration and the overall added cost) for us to put in place. This goes back to engaging BMs (see below for types) at the same time as air threats and very low-flying cruise missiles which are normally lumped together with air threats as 'same capabilities' apply for 'counter'.
"more affordable route [than introducing a totally new range of missiles] to achieving ABM capability would be to upgrade existing Aster 30 missile stocks. The Aster 30 Block 0 missiles that equip the Type 45s could be upgraded to Block 1 standard by a software and firmware upgrade conducted at DM Gosport where they are stored and maintained. Together with an upgrade to the ships combat management systems, this would give at least the Type 45 the ability to kill short-range anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBM).

In 2016 France and Italy committed to developing the Aster 30 Block 1NT which will enter service from 2022. The Block 1NT missiles retain the same external form and compatibility with the Sylver VLS but have the ability to deal with both short and medium-range ballistic missiles (with an effective range from 1,000-1,300 km). The main addition is a new Ka-band radar seeker head for greater acquisition range and accuracy. There is also and Aster Block 2 in development to deal with intermediate-range missiles up to 3,000km."

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby SW1 » 20 Jan 2020, 08:09

All of course assuming e7 makes it out of sdsr2020

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3857
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby Lord Jim » 20 Jan 2020, 16:23

The replacement of the E-3 is essential for the RAF as it is a force multiplier and one thing the RAF needs nowadays is a platform that provides that capability. Modern AWACS are so much more than an airborne radar and will become even more so in the future, with them co ordinating unmanned platforms to providing battle management or the complete battle space, air, sea and even land.

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby Jensy » 20 Jan 2020, 23:07

SW1 wrote:All of course assuming e7 makes it out of sdsr2020


Not to worry, a stylish, all-British 'plan B' is standing by. :shock:

With a landing distance that could even replace Crowsnest on the carriers:

Image

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 11491
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 21 Jan 2020, 04:57

Jensy wrote:could even replace Crowsnest on the carriers
:lol: and Broncos for 'strike'...

Looks like a radome, but aren't they actually configured for SIGINT?

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby Jensy » 21 Jan 2020, 17:41

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
Jensy wrote:could even replace Crowsnest on the carriers
:lol: and Broncos for 'strike'...

Looks like a radome, but aren't they actually configured for SIGINT?


The SIGINT version was the Defender 4000. I believe this AEW prototype was based on the 4000 but fitted a Westinghouse APG-66 like on the USAF F-16a/b models however possibly the smaller antenna version fitted to the Hawk 200. There was an earlier prototype with the A2A Skymaster variant of Searchwater.

Not exactly cutting edge nowadays but with 8hrs endurance and 4x hardpoints it certainly had a niche. That said, apparently the flight and landing characteristics were not exactly suitable for production. Shocking I know!

Wonder how many Fairey Gannets are still knocking about....

In all seriousness though it's pretty pathetic how in the space of 30 years the majority of our fairly impressive radar and sensor industry has been fragmented and decimated by poor procurement decisions.

Ron5
Senior Member
Posts: 3882
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Location: United States of America

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby Ron5 » 21 Jan 2020, 18:02

Jensy wrote:Wonder how many Fairey Gannets are still knocking about....


One up the road from me at the Pima Aviation museum. The guides invariably describe it as the ugliest aircraft in the world. Stored outside, not pretty enough to be allowed in.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 11491
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 21 Jan 2020, 18:40

Jensy wrote:Wonder how many Fairey Gannets are still knocking about....

Ron5 wrote: the ugliest aircraft in the world. Stored outside, not pretty enough to be allowed in.


I want the one with two counter-rotating props... that would leave the 'ugly duckling' standing on the Silver Podium; easily

User avatar
Jensy
Member
Posts: 108
Joined: 05 Aug 2016, 19:44
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby Jensy » 21 Jan 2020, 18:43

Ron5 wrote:
Jensy wrote:Wonder how many Fairey Gannets are still knocking about....


One up the road from me at the Pima Aviation museum. The guides invariably describe it as the ugliest aircraft in the world. Stored outside, not pretty enough to be allowed in.


:roll:

The guides are clearly not aware of the pre-war French aircraft industry...

Scimitar54
Member
Posts: 543
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby Scimitar54 » 21 Jan 2020, 20:19

All Fairey Gannets had Contra-rotating props and double gas turbine engines.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 11491
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby ArmChairCivvy » 22 Jan 2020, 06:03

True, this comparison https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Ga ... arison.png of early (ASW) and the later AEW versions caused me to think otherwise.

RetroSicotte
Site Admin
Posts: 2563
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby RetroSicotte » 22 Jan 2020, 08:28

I have an odd love of the Gannet. It has a lot of personality to it.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3857
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby Lord Jim » 22 Jan 2020, 08:58

Wasn't there a ground surveillance version of the Defender with a large radome up front based on the requirement that eventually led to the ASTOR programme?

Online
User avatar
whitelancer
Member
Posts: 427
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:19
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby whitelancer » 22 Jan 2020, 19:13

Their was it was CASTOP, Corpa Airborne STand Off Radar, the picture above is I believe of the trials aircraft.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby SW1 » 22 Jan 2020, 20:44

https://www.c4isrnet.com/air/2020/01/22 ... hat-didnt/

The first field test of the U.S. Air Force’s experimental Advanced Battle Management System in December was a success, with about 26 out of 28 capabilities showing some semblance of functionality during a recent exercise, the service’s acquisition chief said Tuesday.

But the service will seek to be more ambitious during a second demonstration in April, which will focus on space and bring in elements from U.S. Space Command and U.S. Strategic Command, said Will Roper, the Air Force’s assistant secretary for acquisition, technology and logistics.

"I am thrilled to say that 26 out of 28 things work. That is too high of a success rate at this point in time, but I’ll take it. We should be taking more risk than that,” he told reporters during a roundtable.

The three-day test took place at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, and involved a potential cruise missile attack on the United States simulated by QF-16 drones. Through the exercise, Air Force F-22 jets, Air Force and Navy F-35 fighters, the Navy destroyer Thomas Hudner, an Army unit equipped with the High Mobility Artillery Rocket System, as well as special operators shared data in real time in ways the services cannot currently do in an operational environment.

An AC-130 gunship connected with SpaceX’s Starlink constellation. Although Dunlap did not provide much detail on this element of the exercise, he confirmed that the AC-130 was able to pass data through the constellation of small, high-bandwidth commercial internet satellites.

The Air Force has shown interest in connecting its platforms to commercial broadband satellites through its Global Lightning experiment. A demonstration with Starlink and the KC-135 tanker aircraft is in the works, and the service also plans to evaluate equipment from Iridium, OneWeb and L3Harris.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby SW1 » 04 Feb 2020, 16:59

https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/ ... nd-control

The U.S. Air Force has released the full, sweeping vision for the Advanced Battle Management System (ABMS), a two-year-old concept that proposes to disrupt modern norms for the service’s command-and-control doctrine, military acquisition policy and industrial participation.

The scale of the project’s ambition has evolved since the ABMS was first proposed in 2018. Air Force leaders unveiled the concept two years ago as a replacement for the airborne Battle Management and Command and Control (BMC2) suite on the Northrop Grumman E-8C Joint Stars fleet. By September 2018, Roper first suggested the same technology could be applied to replace the aging fleet of Boeing RC-135 Rivet Joints and, sometime in the 2030s, the Boeing E-3C Airborne Warning and Control System.

Those aims remain intact, but the revealed architecture clarifies that the goals of the ABMS are far broader. If the system is fully realized, the Air Force will create a “combat cloud” on a mobile ad hoc network, transposing the Internet of Things model from civilian technology to the battlefield.

As a result, the nearly four-decade-old concept of a centralized command-and-control center—either ground-based or airborne—would be swept away by a future, decentralized digital network. Using computer processors and software algorithms instead of humans, machines would identify targets from sensor data, select the weapons and platforms to prosecute the target automatically, and finally notify the human operator when—or, crucially, whether—to pull the trigger.

Roper, an Oxford-trained physicist, has little patience for the military’s traditional development process, although he has made exceptions for complex, hardware-driven programs, such as the Northrop Grumman B-21 bomber and the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent. For most other programs, Roper wants to trickle out new features at Silicon Valley-speed. A common refrain by military acquisition reformers for decades has been to emphasize delivering an incomplete, “80% solution” sooner than waiting for a system that meets each of sometimes hundreds of detailed requirements. However, for Roper the timeline for delivering even an 80% solution in certain cases is far too long.

“[We should] covet the 10-15% solutions that take the next step forward,” Roper said. “Because the learning in that step is so valuable to keep the velocity.”

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 3857
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby Lord Jim » 04 Feb 2020, 18:17

In principal it could be the way forward, but I cannot help feeling it is going to be another of those programmes where the Pentagon allows people to think outside of the box and the result is an aspirational programme that will end up being a cash sponge and fail to actually deliver.

tomuk
Member
Posts: 57
Joined: 20 Dec 2017, 20:24
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)

Postby tomuk » 04 Feb 2020, 21:12

SW1 wrote:https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/us-air-force-defines-radical-vision-command-control]

. Using computer processors and software algorithms instead of humans, machines would identify targets from sensor data, select the weapons and platforms to prosecute the target automatically,


Sounds like Skynet that great product from Cyberdyne Systems. :lol:


Return to “Royal Air Force”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests