USAF News and Discussion

[swerve]

E-3 is also operated by France, Saudi Arabia & a NATO consortium, & Japan has the same system on Boeing 767s. There's quite a good market for a replacement.

 

[Terran]

This is opinion based. I have no solid to point to.

The Saudis 10 years ago I think would have been a safe bet but in 2015 they started operating SAAB E2000 with the Erieye radar. though last reports were only 2 units the RSAF only had 6 E3 so it wouldn’t be hard to see how they could replace Sentry very quickly.
Though they could still buy E7s given new options on the market it’s not a sure bet. That said I doubt any Israeli bird (E550 CAEW) would get the time of day. The Russian options are not great and the Chinese would cause all kinds of problems. Once you those out of the picture it’s really only SAAB ( most of the other configuration on the market use SAAB radars) or Boeing. With the new Globaleye configuration of the Global Express 6000, I feel they will follow the UAE and buy SAAB.

Japan I think will keep using the E767 for the foreseeable. It’s airframe is younger than the E3. As such it’s mostly a question of electronics. When they did move to replace them I suspect they would go indigenous. Building on the Kawasaki P1 airframe which is about the same size but either importing or developing their own radar. They seem to have already started that back in 2014 these images were posted of a wind tunnel model.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/534601525880815616

NATO will buy off the shelf. E7 I think would be the primary candidate. however, I suspect that France and Germany (France more than Germany) would demand a “Fair competition” With Airbus Thales, SAAB and IAI E550 options looked at. Airbus I think falls flat as to small to low altitude. IAI has one established NATO user Italy in the AEW configuration it’s fairly modern and gives full 360. SAAB Globaleye hasn’t made a NATO sale but has a European bloodline and tech chain.

The French Air and Space force I have a hard time seeing buying another Boeing. As I just stated I suspect they would demand an alternative, preference being a European option (preferably French).
I am looking at the storm the French kicked up when the Germans looked at F35 and the MAWS program burn they just got. Add in the AUKUS deal and France is likely to be sour on sending money to Chicago.
These make me feel that France will maintain E3 until they feel it’s due. Then look at options with a European bias. Off the shelf that’s the SAAB Globaleye, Or Airbus EC295.
Developmental could be derived from the developing A320NEO/A330 or Dassault Falcon X10 based platforms.

 

[ngatimozart]

I think AIRBUS had flown a C295 with a rotordome blank on top for some aerodynamic tests but I think that's about as far as it went. They have released a wish list of A320 military capabilities from MPA through to AEW, but that's all it is. Much like the much talked about A319 MPA that never left the PR desk. Personally I believe that the A330 is to large for the AEW role, especially when you look at the E-7A Wedgetail.

They definitely could go with an A320 or A321 AEW&C using an AESA either in a way rotordome or a bar. Of course if it's in a rotordome it's not actually physically rotating. I would think that the AESA weight would be lighter than the legacy mechanical rotordome radar of the E-3. Not 100% sure though. Anyway if there's a way of stuffing it up, I am sure that Airbus will find it.

 

[Gryphinator]

I vaguely remeber reading years ago (possibly here on DT) that the RAAF would get a "cut" of future sales of the Wedgetail because of its development investment in the type. Is that even true? Has that come to fruition? MRTT maybe...

 

[Terran]

I think AIRBUS had flown a C295 with a rotordome blank on top for some aerodynamic tests but I think that's about as far as it went. They have released a wish list of A320 military capabilities from MPA through to AEW, but that's all it is. Much like the much talked about A319 MPA that never left the PR desk. Personally I believe that the A330 is to large for the AEW role, especially when you look at the E-7A Wedgetail.

They definitely could go with an A320 or A321 AEW&C using an AESA either in a way rotordome or a bar. Of course if it's in a rotordome it's not actually physically rotating. I would think that the AESA weight would be lighter than the legacy mechanical rotordome radar of the E-3. Not 100% sure though. Anyway if there's a way of stuffing it up, I am sure that Airbus will find it.

Good points, I remember reading of it but wasn’t sure how far it went.
That would basically boil it down to a SAAB option. I mean if you are shopping AEWs right now in the west you get E2 Hawkeye from NG, E7 Boeing, SAAB on any number of mother ships Embraer, SAAB, Bombardier and the IAI CAEW.
Of course I was pretty pessimistic on any potential of the C295 AEW anyway. I mean if someone threw money at them I am sure Airbus would happily to deliver. The A330 came to mind as I believe it was the offer for Airbus as the UK E7 alternative based on the idea of trying to save on cash by using the MRTT as the basis ergo common maintenance and parts. UK MoD: Other bidders didn’t have a chance against Boeing Wedgetail
Was also Looked at for India. A330 selected for AWACS India project
I would farther point to the Chinese and Russian IL76 based AWACS which are not exactly compact. My main point is that I think the French would rather buy a European option than Boeing. Even if that option is just an A320 with a SAAB radar bolted on the roof.

 

[Boagrius]

Makes me wonder if NG might have a shot at integrating their new Terracotta AESA in lieu of the current MESA (also from NG) on the E7.

Northrop Grumman tests new ‘Terracotta’ sensor

The global defence contractor new sensor — a fully-digital open mission systems (OMS)-compliant wideband active electronically scanned array (AESA) — has been successfully deployed during a flight test.

australianaviation.com.au

Would make for a nice MLU path on the RAAF birds...

 

[ngatimozart]

Makes me wonder if NG might have a shot at integrating their new Terracotta AESA in lieu of the current MESA (also from NG) on the E7.

Northrop Grumman tests new ‘Terracotta’ sensor

The global defence contractor new sensor — a fully-digital open mission systems (OMS)-compliant wideband active electronically scanned array (AESA) — has been successfully deployed during a flight test.

australianaviation.com.au

Would make for a nice MLU path on the RAAF birds...

That would depend very much on the physical size and the foot print of the radar. If it has the same physical shape and weight than the current MESA radar then aerodynamically there is no difference. However if it doesn't than you are looking at a whole lot of extra work because the aerodynamics of the aircraft will have changed.

 

[Boagrius]

That would depend very much on the physical size and the foot print of the radar. If it has the same physical shape and weight than the current MESA radar then aerodynamically there is no difference. However if it doesn't than you are looking at a whole lot of extra work because the aerodynamics of the aircraft will have changed.

Definitely, and given the growing urgency of the requirement, the USAF may prefer a totally MOTS solution.

That said, it would be great if the new AESA could be scaled to the same footprint as the MESA arrays. I imagine that if anybody knows whether it's feasible, it would be NG.

 

[Terran]

Lockheed wins $10.9B contract to modernize F-22

However, by the time the F-22′s modernization is finished, it could already be nearing the end of its life span.

www.defensenews.com

I know, I am supposed to comment in some constructive manor on the content of a story. But my only response is the single word “FINALLY!!”

 

[John Fedup]

Lockheed wins $10.9B contract to modernize F-22

However, by the time the F-22′s modernization is finished, it could already be nearing the end of its life span.

www.defensenews.com

I know, I am supposed to comment in some constructive manor on the content of a story. But my only response is the single word “FINALLY!!”

The article mentions the work will be completed near the end of the fighter’s lifespan. Ten billion buys 100 new F-35s or perhaps 30-50 (optimistic guess) 6th Gen fighters. Not sure this is a good investment.

 

[Terran]

Well you can’t leave the F22 as they are without any updates between now and whenever the 6th generation machine enter service. They are already approaching midlife as they are due like any aircraft to the need updates to sustain relevance. It’s important as though the 6th Gen program has an ambitious plan of acquisition it’s not likely to have large numbers until optimistically the middle of the 2030s. Ergo the F22 fleet is needed to bridge that gap. Program management has over the years with F22 cut or deferred intended systems integration of features like Helmet mounted cueing, next gen air to air missiles, modernized large multifunction display and the like. As such the cost point climbed and to equip these demands an industry and system design hence the price.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

Well you can’t leave the F22 as they are without any updates between now and whenever the 6th generation machine enter service.

That sounds like a reasonable argument.

I think the article should be read as saying the upgrades will be complete around the time the F-22 is scheduled to start being replaced, not that the F-22s will be upgraded and then shortly taken out of service. There's no guarantee that NGAD will be on time, nor that production in large numbers will be possible so that Raptors will quickly come out of service.

 

[swerve]

... Program management has over the years with F22 cut or deferred intended systems integration of features like Helmet mounted cueing, next gen air to air missiles, modernized large multifunction display and the like. As such the cost point climbed and to equip these demands an industry and system design hence the price.

That happened with the RAF's E-3s, until it was worked out that it'd cost almost as much to bring 'em up to date as to buy E-7s, which would be cheaper to run & last much longer. So we did.

 

[Musashi_kenshin]

That happened with the RAF's E-3s, until it was worked out that it'd cost almost as much to bring 'em up to date as to buy E-7s, which would be cheaper to run & last much longer. So we did.

Sure, but the UK has ended up with a capability gap as a result. Plus we're only getting three Wedgetails because they're so expensive. Do three Wedgetails do the job adequately?

As for the Raptor and NGAD, the latter is still under development let alone ready for production. How much of a capability gap would there be if the F-22 was not upgraded?

I see this as the US being responsible and doing what the UK should have done (upgrading the E-3s much earlier). The UK's approach is why we had no maritime patrol aircraft for years and our surface vessels may end up without a decent anti-ship missile for the best part of a decade, there seems to be some strange hatred of interim solutions in the MoD/Treasury.

 

[swerve]

... My main point is that I think the French would rather buy a European option than Boeing. Even if that option is just an A320 with a SAAB radar bolted on the roof.

Probably. In its favour, SAAB has successfully integrated Erieye onto five different platforms so far (SAAB 340, SAAB 2000, EMB-145 & Global 6000, plus something I don't remember for development), & the current version of the system is something like grandfather's axe. GaN, & all that now.

 

[swerve]

Sure, but the UK has ended up with a capability gap as a result. Plus we're only getting three Wedgetails because they're so expensive. Do three Wedgetails do the job adequately?

As for the Raptor and NGAD, the latter is still under development let alone ready for production. How much of a capability gap would there be if the F-22 was not upgraded?

I see this as the US being responsible and doing what the UK should have done (upgrading the E-3s much earlier). This is why we had no maritime patrol aircraft for years and our surface vessels may end up without a decent anti-ship missile for the best part of a decade, there seems to be some strange hatred of interim solutions in the MoD/Treasury.

Three Wedgetails costs significantly less than renovating the old E-3s, IIRC. It's not a question of the price of the Wedgetail, but the combination of MoD incompetence leading to huge waste (endless mismanaged projects that cost a fortune & don't deliver), & squeezing of budgets.

It wasn't just the US. The NATO consortium & France have upgraded their E-3s in step with the USAF, & I think Japan's kept the radar & systems on their E-767s up to the same level. Dunno for sure about the Saudis, but witht the possible exception of them there's been one upgrade/update programme, in effect, for all users apart from the RAF. Part of the mind-boggling price of getting the RAFs E-3s up to date was due to them having been outside that programme, & needing a bespoke massive upgrade instead of a series of incremental upgrades on a production line for dozens of aircraft. Typical bloody British defence procurement penny wise, pound foolish planning. I could give a list of examples, but it'd be far too long to read. I sometimes wonder if the UK's defence procurement could be improved by shooting everyone involved & outsourcing it to some other country.

BTW, the capability gap was because the MoD decided to retire the E-3s early to save money, although they could have been kept flying a bit longer. It was a deliberate decision, not a necessary effect of the E-7 purchase.

 

[Terran]

That happened with the RAF's E-3s, until it was worked out that it'd cost almost as much to bring 'em up to date as to buy E-7s, which would be cheaper to run & last much longer. So we did.

Even had they gone though E3 upgrades the jet is still aging out. At most you have till the middle of this decade. Which is what is happening to USAF E3 the readiness rates are dropping. Of course the question of numbers is valid. The USAF would likely buy 25-28 units. Which though not a 1to1 is fairly close.
The RAF though is probably going to end up like the ROKAF short shifted. I mean the ROKAF has 4 Peace Eagle versions of the E7 and is shopping for more AEWs to supplement their fleet. Source* So the whole NATO fleet of E3 is likely to be more critical and more stressed even when the RAF fleet comes online operationally. Leading in my opinion to the French and NATO looking at replacement options.
But I digress.

F22 is the oldest of the 5 Gen fighters and even with F35 in full production and operational in the USAF it’s still a mission critical asset especially now. The curtailing of F22 production has left the door open to the now two main technology near peer competitors of China and Russia.
The Chinese J20 is the closest in numbers of units produced, though in the global scale No where near enough to match the quantities of the USAF alone they can regionally create a strong position that would be hard to match by deployed F35 units alone as well as creating a shift in dynamics if facing only 4th generation fighters in the Island chain theater.
Having F22 in the Mix for the near to midterm helps keep the dynamics at the tactical level until F-XX units become operational in the next decade.

 

[76mmGuns]

I do wonder what % of the stealth comes from the shape of the aircraft, and % from the coating. I can't find anything in a 3 page google search.

Imagine if a plane could get, say, 50% of stealth from just the shape, with normal paint (like Russian and Chinese 5th gen planes seem to be). They'd be much cheaper to buy and maintain than the gold plated version. Would the US military consider buying 2 versions? a Not bad version, and a Gold plated version? And the Not bad version could possible garner a lot of exports. Imagine the US being willing to sell Australia a non coated B-21. Australia hasn't had a medium or long range bomber/attack aircraft since the F-111. Suddenly, they'd be able to fly from Darwin to Japan, Korea and China.

 

[Terran]

Just about all the 4th Gen fighters have had stealth materials added into them in the last 3 decades. Thing is the degree of simply shaping to adding paint is more than skin deep. F16 has a rcs of about 5m2. Now that’s a small fighter most machines in its size class are about the same but adding stealth materials maybe a DSI probably would net you 1m2 which is about what you get on super Hornet.
F35 comes in with as a fifth Gen with shaping and cutting edge materials, to give 0.005m2 or a metal gulf ball. The thing is to get that is more than paint deep. It’s the very skin of the machine at almost every layer. Check out these of an F22 in need of a reskin. These Images Of An F-22 Raptor's Crumbling Radar Absorbent Skin Are Fascinating
It’s three or four layers of material underneath the surface. Farther even the compounds used are sensitive to something as mundane as WD40. Even the canopy, inlets and illumination have to be stealthy. The pilots helmet has an RCS that has to be considered. Parts of the aircraft are actually translucent to radar. Radar goes through it other parts deflect some absorb.
So building two versions one “Stealth” the other not falls flat as to get the max effectiveness of the Stealth requires more than just a surface treatment or shaping. What you basically end up doing in your scheme is building two different aircraft that share engines and some parts. The degree of which makes it impractical.

 

[John Fedup]

It would be interesting know about the difference in stealth maintenance between the A and the B/C versions, the latter two operating in the harsh marine environment.