UK Defence Forum

Sentinel and GR4 with RAPTOR, were the best recce and targeting assets available to the coalition. The USAF, USN adored ISTAR.

Tinman wrote:the coalition

A couple of "thumbs up" contributions defining what it means to be in/ have a coalition.

Couldn't find where Raptor was being discussed but here goes. The EO sensor was basically that used by the U-2 squeezed in to a "Hindenburg" fuel tank an used by the Tornadoes. With a counter weight and wiring, could it be used under wing on a Typhoon? Secondly was any thought given to mounting it on a Global Express platform and buy say four or five to give to No6 Squadron to operate along with the Sentinels?

Wish list probably, but there’s hope of hanging a slab off the P8, with a further buy of 6.

Lord Jim wrote:where Raptor was being discussed but here goes.

Lord Jim wrote:With a counter weight and wiring, could it be used under wing on a Typhoon?

There was a photo of a test a/c (painted orange? and w/o a counterweight, despite being lopsided) but that does not seem to sit on the net anymore (the net never forgets??)
- but the short answer (from the test): no

There is a MS-110 sensor pod which is the next generation of what formed raptor, the pod would have options to perhaps add other things to it as well. It has the potential to be a centre line fit on typhoon, possibly also a fit to Hercules or voyager or reaper or p8 in pod form. Also the possibility it could go space based, many options like with anything else in defence the budget is committed far beyond what is actually available.

SW1 wrote:also a fit to Hercules or voyager or reaper or p8 in pod form

All that pod'ded goodness... BUT: a question

Do you think we could do some cost avoidance here, with special ref to P-8?
- namely the US over-the-ground-too version due to come out of testing 2022 (or -23)
- obviously, adding that mission, we will need a larger fleet (cost; not avoidance)
- but, if we can have the OVTG mission with the pod (added, only when needed), THEN there could be a big saving here?

More likely outcome, we purchase the pod, the P-8 gains an additional mission but we do not buy any more planes.

An ever present danger that strategically illiterate politicians will allow (or want) this to happen. So I am afraid could not bring myself to "like" the previous post.

RAAF E-7A tour

Nice tour, found it interesting to compare to the NATO E-3 I had a close look at courtesy of a family friend who was a USAF Col. seconded to the NATO AWACS programme as it was being set up and I was at AFCENT where the programme office was housed. I do remember a bigger fridge on the E-3, thought there were more crew.

It appears there will be a mix of second hand airframes in the conversation to wedgetail! The de-modding will make for entertainment!!

http://m.aviationweek.com/awindefense/s ... il-program

Marshall's are pretty good at this.

When I went to Fairford last year there was both an raf e3 and and raaf e7 wedgetail there as static displays (at least when I was there you couldn’t see inside just from outside and the thing that really struck me on first impression was the huge size difference. The E3 really does look massive next to the wedgetail. To be fair though as long as it’s big enough to carry the personnel needed to do its role the size alone is of no importance. To my eye the wedgetail even outside from a short distance appears more modern. I guess the more modern radar placement is a big part of that but I felt the way the aircraft appeared to be designed and made showed the E7 as a more recent generation, though both are starting to appear old hat when compared to the most modern designs of their passenger type.

Sorry should be Poseidon cannot delete

Procurement only no training
2 airframes second hand and 3 new
https://www.parliament.uk/documents/190 ... ng_E-7.pdf

More on the second-hand aircraft:

Dr Julian Lewis, chair of the Defence Committee, asked in a letter:

“For what reason are you confident that the aircraft will be delivered in four and a half years, when the production line has been closed for five years and historically the minimum time between contract signature and first delivery of these aircraft has been at least six years?”

Stuart Andrew, Minister for Defence Procurement, answered:

“The Seattle production line for the 737NG aircraft, which is then modified to become an E-7 AEW&C, is still operating and producing multiple military variants of the 737NG (including the Poseidon P8) for the US, UK and other customers.

Boeing has sourced two 737NG from the commercial market and secured a further three production slots on this Seattle production line in 2021 and 2022 to meet our needs. The conversion of these five aircraft to the E-7 AEW&C standard will be undertaken at Marshall Aerospace’s facilities in Cambridge.

That is interesting, so the E-7 and P-8 are both build on the 737NG airframe are they?

Lord Jim wrote:That is interesting, so the E-7 and P-8 are both build on the 737NG airframe are they?

Yep. The E-7 uses (before mods) an -700ER airframe, P-8 an -800ERX. Same family, different lenghts.

I wonder if they will use the same base airframe for the UK E-7 as the P8s? It should not be a challenge as the airframe is larger but otherwise very similar?

The P8 has different wings to the civilian example, you can't by that second hand.

So for me the stand out parts are that we will be getting 2 second hand air-fames and 3 new and the conversion will be done at Marshall's for me this is the part that could fall behind as they get up to speed with this work

Yes p8 has different wings, different fuselage, different fuel tank system, different engines, different avionics but yes apart from that it the same a 737ng.

Maybe we should ask for a option to buy an extra 3 to 6 P-8's at the end of the production run just to cover off any short falls

So which actual versions of the 737NG are the E-7 and P-8 based on. How big are the differences in the parts mentioned above? For example are the engines on the P-8 a more powerful version of those fitted to the E-7 possibly with digital control and monitoring, or are they totally different? More importantly it is thing like consumable and repairable items that are important to see if it possible to simplify the supply chain.