USAF News and Discussion

John Fedup

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
colay1 said:
A number of years back there was an article highlighting a major issue affecting future B-52 viability and it had to do with the upper wing surfaces which had experienced a lot of abuse. Anyone know how this was addressed? A lot of older jets were scrapped so perhaps they had new units built?
Click to expand...
This issue with upper wing surfaces is also addressed in rjtjrt's link. If current usage remains unchanged, the upper surfaces will last until 2040.
 
t68

t68

Well-Known Member
ngatimozart said:
Article in SLD suggesting that the USAF buy Wedgetail to replace the AWACs. Not a silly idea and would save a lot of time and money.

Why Not Buy Wedgetail and Move Out Beyond AWACS: Coming Terms with a 5th Generation Enabled Force | SLDInfo
Click to expand...
I was thinking about this the other day I regards to GF's comments on the RNZAF thread with P8 and battlespace management capability for NZ. Is there enought capabilty with only 6 airframes for the RAAF and with P8 coming into RAAF hands could that force the hand on any further buy of Wedgetail in the future if needed?
 
ngatimozart

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
t68 said:
I was thinking about this the other day I regards to GF's comments on the RNZAF thread with P8 and battlespace management capability for NZ. Is there enought capabilty with only 6 airframes for the RAAF and with P8 coming into RAAF hands could that force the hand on any further buy of Wedgetail in the future if needed?
Click to expand...
It's interesting because the RAAF Wedgetail is blazing the trail for 5th gen battlespace management and I see this as a result of Plan Jericho. IMHO the Wedgetail, P-8 & F-35 together are a formidable airborne system. Combine that with the RAN combat management capabilities the Aussies have a very formidable force; more so when their army is fully networked for 5th gen capabilities.

This is why I believe that the US would be better served by adopting and introducing the E-7A Wedgetail as it is now. All the integration and proving has been done. The aircraft is IOC. It will never be FOC because it will always continue to be upgraded and changed, so I suppose one could categorize it as IOC+. The USAF could have it IOC within three years of ordering, as against 10 - 20 years of research, design, prototyping, political shenanigans, and LRIPs, before having a viable platform along with the associated hundreds of billions in costs.
 
V

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
Seen the same article and does make one wonder why the US seeing that there is an off the shelf option has not jumped on board. Googled further into it and on F-16.net there was a thread on it with one commentator mentioning that with the size of the Wedgetail there would be limitations as to what it could do.

Wedgetail AEWC - Modern Military Aircraft

Being a smaller aircraft I do imagine there would be limitation in how much power, range, and systems can be fitted into it but considering the time frame to develop new aircraft (also mentioned in the thread) logically even a partial replacement of there E-3 Sentry fleet would still be worth while because even if everything went right they would still be looking at over a decade before they got there own system all the while the wedgetail would have seen mutliple upgrades in the same time.
 
T

the concerned

Active Member
I've wondered if it is possible for the awacs to be up in the air but the people who usually operate the work stations to be data linked so that they are actually on the ground a bit like a uav ground system. Maybe even design a universal station that could be used for awacs/mpa and so on
 
T

Toblerone

Banned Member
Wouldn't this level of data linking dependency make it vulnerable to electronic warfare? I am not knowledgeable in this area but there seems to be a lot of respect/concern over russian EW capabilities from what I am reading online.

Personally, I appreciate the robustness of closed systems, like wire-guided ATGMs for example.
 
S

swerve

Super Moderator
vonnoobie said:
Seen the same article and does make one wonder why the US seeing that there is an off the shelf option has not jumped on board. Googled further into it and on F-16.net there was a thread on it with one commentator mentioning that with the size of the Wedgetail there would be limitations as to what it could do.

Wedgetail AEWC - Modern Military Aircraft

Being a smaller aircraft I do imagine there would be limitation in how much power, range, and systems can be fitted into it but considering the time frame to develop new aircraft (also mentioned in the thread) logically even a partial replacement of there E-3 Sentry fleet would still be worth while because even if everything went right they would still be looking at over a decade before they got there own system all the while the wedgetail would have seen mutliple upgrades in the same time.
Click to expand...
There are precedents for fitting already-developed systems into new airframes. For example, the Japanese E-767s have E-3 systems (the E-3 platform was out of production). The original Erieye was fitted to three airframes, & the Erieye ER to a fourth - with the option of upgrading the three old ones. P-3 AEW aircraft used by US customs use E-2 systems in a bigger, longer-range, longer-endurance aircraft.

So, history suggests that it'd be much quicker & easier to fit the Wedgetail systems (or a future iteration of them) in a larger aircraft than developing everything from scratch.
 
V

vonnoobie

Well-Known Member
swerve said:
There are precedents for fitting already-developed systems into new airframes. For example, the Japanese E-767s have E-3 systems (the E-3 platform was out of production). The original Erieye was fitted to three airframes, & the Erieye ER to a fourth - with the option of upgrading the three old ones. P-3 AEW aircraft used by US customs use E-2 systems in a bigger, longer-range, longer-endurance aircraft.

So, history suggests that it'd be much quicker & easier to fit the Wedgetail systems (or a future iteration of them) in a larger aircraft than developing everything from scratch.
Click to expand...
Just read an article on Boeing with them stating that they will be using the 737 for most future military contract's including the AWAC's so it may not be an issue. But your right, if they do choose a larger aircraft fingers crossed they go for an existing proven system to bolt straight into it.
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
ASSAIL said:
What is the usual delay on these block upgrades rolling out those allies using the aircraft? I assume the block improvements will be incorporated into the new builds as they roll out or is that too optimistic?
Click to expand...
usually the delays are about whether your FMS annual fundings are in place for the developments :)

once the devs are cleared then they tend to go on the next run - not necessarily the same as the next plane in the line

hence why the US does block releases as the blocks are defined tranches of platform

the next block gets the update inline and the prev blocks get updated on the available maint schedule (depending on severity of intrusion onto the plane to effect the upgrade

but fleet maint processes vary wildly
 
t68

t68

Well-Known Member
gf0012-aust said:
one of the DefPros (Wookie) has his oar in the water with this run off. so he'll be wishing and hoping that they get blessed... :)

Air Force leaders confirm light attack aircraft demo to take off this summer
Click to expand...

Other low-cost options could include the Beechcraft AT-6 or Embraer’s A-29 Super Tucano. If the service considers higher-performing entries, some T-X entrants — particularly Lockheed Martin’s FA-50 or Leonardo’s M-346 — could be other alternatives.*
Click to expand...
Will be an interesting one to follow and the outcomes defining the battle between turboprops and jet, if the latter would make it interesting considering that they could be dual hat in LIFT/ Light Attack and if cheaper enough might make it feasabile for the RAAF/RNZAF
 
gf0012-aust

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
breaking defence op-ed

Three Chinese Air Force Officers Scout AFA Show — In Civvies « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary

this stuff just cracks me up. I used to attend a lot of international UDT and Sub Warfare Conferences. You would always see a gaggle of chinese tourists with military haircuts running around taking happy snaps of all the models and hoovering up the company brochures.

the submarine reps used to crack up laughing as you'd see these tourists taking photographs of the stern/propulsion of the model subs - as if the USN and those companies were going to provide real models of those subs with their actual propulsion systems and propeller designs for other warships (propulsion systems were always popular due to cavitation and acoustic dilemmas - the eternal quest by engineers to minimise same)
 
Last edited:
Haavarla

Haavarla

Active Member
gf0012-aust said:
breaking defence op-ed

Three Chinese Air Force Officers Scout AFA Show — In Civvies « Breaking Defense - Defense industry news, analysis and commentary

this stuff just cracks me up. I used to attend a lot of international UDT and Sub Warfare Conferences. You would always see a gaggle of chinese tourists with military haircuts running around taking happy snaps of all the models and hoovering up the company brochures.

the submarine reps used to crack up laughing as you'd see these tourists taking photographs of the stern/propulsion of the model subs - as if the USN and those companies were going to provide real models of those subs with their actual propulsion systems and propeller designs for other warships (propulsion systems were always popular due to cavitation and acoustic dilemmas - the eternal quest by engineers to minimise same)
Click to expand...
Its perfectly normal.
During Russian MAKS air salon. Several Chinese "tourist" got detained and put on a jeT back home, for trying to steal some of the models on stand..
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top