Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
- The Armchair Soldier
- Site Admin
- Posts: 1756
- Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
- Contact:
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Just a rumour but there might still be some truth in it, much like with the MBT leak (they're not all going to be scrapped but they're still being cut).
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3249
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
South Korea are also investigating a replacement. Thats 2 of the 3 existing operators (and 2 of the most switched on militaries around). It's worth remembering that E-7 should have a service life of 50 years (E-3 Sentry is going to hit at least 60). For them to be even looking now, for a platform that has only been in service for 10 years, is a little concerning to say the least. If those 2 bail that would leave Turkey as the only operator...SW1 wrote:If you take a step back your proposing developing a brand new future air system of systems and your wanting saab and Sweden involved to help develop it and put up money to cover costs but don’t want them involved in what could arguable be a central part of it and go with Boeing to have commonality with Australia who are now talking replacement.
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Yay, Lucy Fisher. Her pal at the Telegraph will be next.
Looks at calendar: says it's still review silly season.
Mind you, without AEW how will the RAF do their speedy, available, global reach thingie??
Looks at calendar: says it's still review silly season.
Mind you, without AEW how will the RAF do their speedy, available, global reach thingie??
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Difficult without US refuelling help!Ron5 wrote:Mind you, without AEW how will the RAF do their speedy, available, global reach thingie??
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Almost impressive. We've begun cutting things which haven't even been built/converted yet!The Armchair Soldier wrote:Just a rumour but there might still be some truth in it, much like with the MBT leak (they're not all going to be scrapped but they're still being cut).
I appreciate this might be a contentious suggestion...
But I say, bring back the A330 based Saab Erieye solution.
If Boeing isn't desperate smart enough to jump for the business then I'm sure Airbus and Saab will be.
The E-7, and to a lesser extent the P-8, deals speak to exactly the sort of blinkered, overly ambitious magpie thinking that the MoD is obsessed with. With P-8 there was only a limited number of alternatives, many of which were either far inferior, paper planes or else didn't offer existing synergy, like the P-1. E-7 is neither in production, based on an in-service UK aircraft, nor particularly widely adopted (of which two customers are already seeking replacements - the less said about the third user the better). It is only marginally better, in this sense, than a brand new, bespoke solution.
By constant the RAF already operates the largest A330 MRT fleet in the world, has massive domestic industrial interests in the aircraft and already has up to six airframes available for usage, without the need to buy more. (which doesn't seem to matter much, seeing as there are many airfields around the planet littered with mothballed airliners, unlikely to ever see revenue service again)
The Saab Erieye system is in service with eight air forces and nearly all of its weaknesses would be addressed by fitting twin radar sets as proposed. In the time since E-7 was selected, the need for airborne C4 has grown due to the emergence of greater peer threats and interest in using Voyager as a comms platform has appeared. The interior space of the A330 offers the potential for numerous additional capabilities to be added to the aircraft during its service life, including consoles for managing UCAVS and 'Loyal Wingmen', whilst retaining plentiful rest space for additional crews and cargo or passengers for oversea deployments.
The ability to still offer some A2A refuelling capability from underwing pods seems like a novel capability for many circumstances and the extra range on internal fuel is invaluable for its primary role, as our current sightseeing flights over the black sea are proving.
"Gentlemen, you can't fight in here! This is the War Room!" - Dr. Strangelove (1964)
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Bearing in mind that the MOD are cutting Sentinel next year, cutting the E7 is plain bonkers. The MOD have become the laughing stock of the defence world, I am surprised Boeing and the Australians will want to continue business with them.
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Ordering the most expensive aircraft option without considering the most expensive bit maintaining them! For a budget they never had Shocked I tell you shocked they’ll never learn
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Twitter catching up ; only 6 hrs behind it seemsas the airframes will be available en-mass, pushing the cost down, perhaps the quantities will be just staggered. 3 being a like for like replacement, for starters.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Whether it's true or not I don't know. However one should treat all stories from the press with healthy scepticism.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
It was a little joke... allegedly (:D ) stories being plucked off these pages. Hence you are right!J. Tattersall wrote: one should treat all stories from the press with healthy scepticism
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3249
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
It's not just the 'press' who have picked this up. It's also the defence journo's and analysts. Most of whom have called their sources and been given the same detail. Looks like LOS Fisher was quickest off the mark this time.J. Tattersall wrote:Whether it's true or not I don't know. However one should treat all stories from the press with healthy scepticism.
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
So is this an official assumption being looked at as the three Services try to balance their books? To even propose such an assumption, means that the people giving advice have not got a full understanding of the minimum capacity to make a capability effective. With just three we would if lucky have two available at any one time meaning that we would have another either/or decision. Have AWACS coverage over the UK of have it deploy elsewhere. THis is why I hope it is just one of many assumption being made as part of the IR, arbeit one being seriously looked at due to the amount of money involved.
-
- Donator
- Posts: 3249
- Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
When we took AWACs seriously (which you'd have to argue we haven't for a long time given the run down of the fleet) for full coverage of the UK, and crucially its approaches, you needed 2 airborne AWACS aircraft orbits. Which means 2x3 aircraft to keep it up 24-7 in a short war scenario. Add in an attrition reserve (or just general reserve aircraft for contingency) and you need a fleet of 7. Guess how many E-3's we purchased originally...7. Buying 5 E-7 was never enough for the full UK defence task. We could probably manage to operate 2 orbits 24-7 for a very, very limited time with 5, but no chance of overseas work.Lord Jim wrote:To even propose such an assumption, means that the people giving advice have not got a full understanding of the minimum capacity to make a capability effective. With just three we would if lucky have two available at any one time meaning that we would have another either/or decision. Have AWACS coverage over the UK of have it deploy elsewhere.
If we were being serious about this in terms of providing a full UK defence capability and the ability to maintain 1 AWACS orbit overseas for a time we would be looking to buy 11-12 E-7 or equivalent, not 5.
One of the questions not answered by the very odd E-7 procurement was 'what is better? 5 x E-7 Wedgetail or 8 x Saab Globaleye or IAI Eltam'. Would getting a Bombardier based platform also enable the RAF to retain Sentinel? Long term ELINT/SIGINT aircraft? MPA?
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
I have always felt that the RAF Top Brass simply saw the E-7 Wedgetail as being in service and so thought it a safe, low risk option and therefore grabbed it with both hands, Not wanting the complication of a competition involving other systems that were still in development but that would probably be in service before the requirement date could have been another factor.
Looking at the Swedish entry, now initial deliveries have been made to the UAE I think and the Swedes actually beginning to look at it as a replacement for their AEW&C it may have been the better choice.
Looking at the Swedish entry, now initial deliveries have been made to the UAE I think and the Swedes actually beginning to look at it as a replacement for their AEW&C it may have been the better choice.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
... and they have as much as said that they could be 'impressionable' as to on which airframe - if they could share that dealLord Jim wrote:the Swedes actually beginning to look at it as a replacement for their AEW&C
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Think it’s likely the global 6500 as a platform choice with the RR pearl engines they would likely tag it on to the Finnish offering if it’s selected there. UAE has actually started exercising with there’s https://aviationweek.com/defense-space/ ... r-exerciseArmChairCivvy wrote:... and they have as much as said that they could be 'impressionable' as to on which airframe - if they could share that dealLord Jim wrote:the Swedes actually beginning to look at it as a replacement for their AEW&C
Mind you if you read the first few pages of this very thread were probably exactly were we thought we would be with this.
- ArmChairCivvy
- Senior Member
- Posts: 16312
- Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Reminds me of the Saab 36 (their nuclear bomber) onto which they were going to put a RR Pegasus appended with their own afterburner to make the plane go Mach2 - as the Pegasus design wasn't (as of then) for supersonic flightSW1 wrote:likely the global 6500 as a platform choice with the RR pearl engines
- but went on, to be on... TSR-2 and Concorde
Not any strict similarity of solution; just tending towards forward-thinking. Whereas Wedgetail was just about buying into an "assured" upgrade path - allegedly. Again, just emphasising the mindset.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
I never really understood the mindset to be honest for pushing the upgrade path with Australia especially when we are courting Saab so heavily in developing the future combat air system.ArmChairCivvy wrote:Not any strict similarity of solution; just tending towards forward-thinking. Whereas Wedgetail was just about buying into an "assured" upgrade path - allegedly. Again, just emphasising the mindset.
-
- Retired Site Admin
- Posts: 2657
- Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Are there any tech specs on it? Ultimately if it's not as capable but just dirt cheap then that could be every bit as much a failure as less Wedgetails too.Lord Jim wrote:I have always felt that the RAF Top Brass simply saw the E-7 Wedgetail as being in service and so thought it a safe, low risk option and therefore grabbed it with both hands, Not wanting the complication of a competition involving other systems that were still in development but that would probably be in service before the requirement date could have been another factor.
Looking at the Swedish entry, now initial deliveries have been made to the UAE I think and the Swedes actually beginning to look at it as a replacement for their AEW&C it may have been the better choice.
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
You mean the same old suspects!Timmymagic wrote: It's not just the 'press' who have picked this up. It's also the defence journo's and analysts. Most of whom have called their sources and been given the same detail. Looks like LOS Fisher was quickest off the mark this time.
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
Now if the E7 decision is above projected costs, would it be better to upgrade the E3 sentry force to keep them going for a decade or so ( hopefully by then the F35/carriers/new trident subs, maybe even tempest will require less money ) then maybe look for a replacement, ok it would be another kick the can down the road situation,
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
In other news our QE has sailed with 14 jets onboard, there is little AEW due to the lack of Crowsnest, and E3 on its last legs. Cutting the E7 is sheer madness. But I also ask myself why are the Australians and S. Koreans eager to find a E7 replacement in 10 years. Makes me wonder what it costs to run the E7, and is that a factor.
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
serge750 wrote:would it be better to upgrade the E3 sentry force
Boeing are involved in E3 as well as E7
Re: Boeing E-7 Wedgetail (RAF)
bobp wrote:In other news our QE has sailed with 14 jets onboard, there is little AEW due to the lack of Crowsnest, and E3 on its last legs. Cutting the E7 is sheer madness. But I also ask myself why are the Australians and S. Koreans eager to find a E7 replacement in 10 years. Makes me wonder what it costs to run the E7, and is that a factor.
The project to replace will start in 2029 not the aircraft themselves. Remember the first flight in testing was in 2004 and aircraft accepted in 2009. The airframes will be around 30 years old when replaced
New aircraft will be coming online in the late 2030’s it could be 3-4 years untill acceptanceWedgetail Replacement project, designated AIR7002 Phase 1, will commence in 2029. At that point the programme “is designed to begin scoping and risk reduction studies, informing potential platform replacement and technology options for the E-7A [Wedgetail]. The replacement of the [E-7A] Wedgetail fleet will begin in the second half of the 2030s.”
https://www.google.com.au/amp/s/www.jan ... Fp1cVMwPQ2