USAF News and Discussion

[Terran]

US Air Force will buy E-7 Wedgetail in 2022, Boeing exec claims - Breaking Defense

“I’m very confident that the Air Force is choosing the E-7 to replace its E-3 fleet,” Mike Manazir, Boeing’s vice president for defense business development, said during a news conference ahead of the Dubai Airshow.

breakingdefense.com

Boeing seems like it’s already counting the money on a E7 buy.

 

[John Fedup]

US Air Force will buy E-7 Wedgetail in 2022, Boeing exec claims - Breaking Defense

“I’m very confident that the Air Force is choosing the E-7 to replace its E-3 fleet,” Mike Manazir, Boeing’s vice president for defense business development, said during a news conference ahead of the Dubai Airshow.

breakingdefense.com

Boeing seems like it’s already counting the money on a E7 buy.

Given Boeing’s mis-steps lately, Boeing certainly needs the revenue. E-7 is developed and deliverable so no pint screwing around, especially wrt to significant USAF desirable mods.

 

[Terran]

SAAB seems to want in but they don’t seems to be making a hard push.

Saab's CEO wants a shot at an AWACS replacement competition - Breaking Defense

“Of course, I would like to be part of an open competition when it comes to airborne early warning and surveillance,” Saab CEO Micael Johansson said. "But whether that's possible or not in the US, I don't know."

breakingdefense.com

I don’t think the USAF will open it up. Yet as I have said with the USAF and UK moving to replace the E3 I suspect that NATO and France will be looking at their own options which should include SAAB as an option.

 

[John Fedup]

SAAB seems to want in but they don’t seems to be making a hard push.

Saab's CEO wants a shot at an AWACS replacement competition - Breaking Defense

“Of course, I would like to be part of an open competition when it comes to airborne early warning and surveillance,” Saab CEO Micael Johansson said. "But whether that's possible or not in the US, I don't know."

breakingdefense.com

I don’t think the USAF will open it up. Yet as I have said with the USAF and UK moving to replace the E3 I suspect that NATO and France will be looking at their own options which should include SAAB as an option.

So Saab’s CEO thinks Canada’s acquisition process is professional wrt to the fighter replacement. It may be, until junior and his minions step in. A decision by first or second quarter 2022, we can only hope!

 

[Ananda]

Testing of Ultra-Deadly AIM-260 Missile Appears to Be Underway

The new weapon could be placed on U.S. Air Force and Navy aircraft as soon as next year.

nationalinterest.org

AIM-260 AAM testing seems going will begin soon. Personally I still see this missile will not be the AIM-120 replacement, but more as complement.

 

[Boagrius]

I think we'll have to wait and see. The original message was that AMRAAM production would wind down as JATM ramped up (ergo AMRAAM replacement)...

Air Force Developing AMRAAM Replacement to Counter China | Air & Space Forces Magazine

The Air Force is developing a new air-to-air missile, dubbed the AIM-260, that offers longer range than Raytheon’s Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missile and would be used to counter the Chinese PL-15 weapon.

www.airforcemag.com

...but time will tell. Between SACM, JATM and LREW I get the impression the US may be pursuing a suite of AAMs in lieu of the current Sidewinder/AMRAAM duo.

 

[swerve]

So Saab’s CEO thinks Canada’s acquisition process is professional wrt to the fighter replacement. It may be, until junior and his minions step in. A decision by first or second quarter 2022, we can only hope!

Perhaps he's just being polite. And it's bad salesmanship to be rude to potential customers.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

With T-7 on the way, why is ACC eyeing a new trainer?

While the Air Force has a new trainer designed to teach new pilots how to fly in 5th generation fighter aircraft, the T-7A Red Hawk, Air Combat Command has started exploring the possibility of another Advanced Tactical Trainer.

www.defensenews.com

A remarkable plan of the USAF, to think about a new advanced jet trainer other than the Saab/Boeing T-7A Red Hawk.

|"And, Kelly said, ACC needs a trainer that can fly at a much lower cost than aircraft like the F-35, which costs between $34,000 and $36,000 to fly for one hour.

“I need something … that’s not $20,000-plus cost per flying hour, closer to $2,000 to $3,000 cost per flying hour, that comes a little closer to our modern avionics,” Kelly said."|

1. So they actually want a more advanced trainer, but with 90% less operational cost per flying hour.

2. $36.000 per hour is a lot. Something to think about if countries want the F-35 because of prestige, when they only have a budget which is more suitable for something like a F-16V.

 

[Boagrius]

2. $36.000 per hour is a lot. Something to think about if countries want the F-35 because of prestige, when they only have a budget which is more suitable for something like a F-16V.

Apparently the Norwegians would dispute this, although how and why their figures are so different I don't know.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1460652153308127232

Would be interesting to dive deeper into it, if only the information was in the public domain.

 

[Sandhi Yudha]

Apparently the Norwegians would dispute this, although how and why their figures are so different I don't know.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1460652153308127232

Would be interesting to dive deeper into it, if only the information was in the public domain.

Thank you for sharing.

From the Netherlands we hear other sounds.

The maintenance and operational costs for the F-35 is twice as expected.

Rapport: kosten onderhoud en gebruik F-35 hoger dan verwacht

-

www.luchtvaartnieuws.nl

The operational costs of the F-35 (around €25.000 per flight hour) is more than twice the F-16 costs (€12.000). But the project is just too big and expensive to pull back from it.

Joint Strike Fighter geland in Nederland: duur project dat niet mocht falen

Na jaren van tegenslag is vandaag de eerste Joint Strike Fighter in Nederland geland. Een feestje, volgens Defensie, maar volgens experts zijn de problemen nog lang niet voorbij.

nos.nl

 

[FormerDirtDart]

The USAF has successfully conducted a live munition test with it's palletized weapon deployment system as part of the Rapid Dragon program.
The type of weapons utilized has not been identified. The test involved a MC-130I over the Gulf of Mexico deploying a pallet containing one live cruise missile flight test vehicle (FTV) and three mass simulants. New targeting data for the FTV was updated in flight prior to deployment. The FTV and all three simulants were released sequentially from the palletized system while under parachute to demonstrate weapon deconfliction. After separation the FTV deployed it's tail and wings, ignited it's engine and proceeded to the updated target successfully destroying it (target type not identified)\Next step in the program is another live test using a C-17 in spring 2022

Dragon unleashed in palletized weapon's first live fire test

Weapon released from MC-130J hits target.

www.eglin.af.mil

 

[John Fedup]

The latest news on the KC-46. The new boom imaging system (paid by Boeing) is ready but won’t be okayed until the panoramic vision system situation is resolved. KC-46 for Boeing is beginning to look like Airbus’s A400M as the contract from hell.

KC-46's new vision system in limbo as panoramic issues come into view - Breaking Defense

The Air Force worries that if it approves Remote Vision System 2.0 before concerns about the tanker's panoramic display system are resolved, it could be locked into paying for a fix.

breakingdefense.com

 

[swerve]

Lockheed Martin's fighter featured impressive stealth capabilities, advanced systems, and powerful armament. So why did the US stop making the F-22? The whole F-22 Raptor program received a lot of criticism from the beginning. Their two main concerns were its cost and role. So, many believed that the F-22 will be a really expensive aircraft that won't see important combat. Additionally, its cost was crazy enough to reach the impressive amount of $350 to $380 million per unit, including the cost of research and development.

So why did the US stop making the F-22?
View attachment 48870View attachment 48870

A high price including development isn't a reason to stop making something. The development money has been spent, & can't be recouped by not buying more aircraft. The unit price including development will fall if more are bought.

The price of building & operating more are what matter. If it's very expensive to build, or operate, or both, then there's pressure to keep numbers down.

 

[ngatimozart]

It was a political decision made in 2012 by then US SECDEF Robert Gates. It took me 20 seconds to verify my info. Mr Google is always your friend and it doesn't take long to find the required information, especially about something like this. This is a topic that has been done to death on the relevant forums on here so have a look through and you will be educated.

 

[Terran]

The Search To Replace The Air Force’s Geriatric E-3 Sentry Radar Jets Has Officially Begun (Updated)

Officials from across the service have earmarked the Boeing E-7 Wedgetail as their preferred Sentry successor.

www.thedrive.com

It’s official.

Air Force eyes contract for AWACS replacement in 2023

The Air Force wants to know how a potential contractor would provide at least two prototype replacements for the AWACS by 2028.

www.airforcetimes.com

 

[ngatimozart]

The Search To Replace The Air Force’s Geriatric E-3 Sentry Radar Jets Has Officially Begun (Updated)

Officials from across the service have earmarked the Boeing E-7 Wedgetail as their preferred Sentry successor.

www.thedrive.com

It’s official.

Air Force eyes contract for AWACS replacement in 2023

The Air Force wants to know how a potential contractor would provide at least two prototype replacements for the AWACS by 2028.

www.airforcetimes.com

If they used their brains they would go with the E-7A Wedgetail without any fancy USAF modifications. It would save them money and time. They would also have E-3 operators in Australia learning how the RAAF operate their Wedgetails and more importantly undertake their software upgrade systems.

Of course that won't happen because the USAF is too political, bureaucratic, and immature. It needs to be in total control at all times and couldn't possibly have squadron level operators discussing and organising upgrades directly with the software OEM.

 

[Terran]

There will always be some degree of modifications to meet user needs. However it’s the question of how much. Probably the addition of some defensive systems. The biggest technical issue would be sourcing the airframes. Boeing stopped building commercial 737NG that the E7 is based on. The British truncated order is all used airliners. I doubt the USAF would do that so either Max based airframes or P8 based airframes

the USAF has to ask for and at least study alternatives to at least try and counter protests before they happen.

 

[Boagrius]

There will always be some degree of modifications to meet user needs. However it’s the question of how much. Probably the addition of some defensive systems. The biggest technical issue would be sourcing the airframes. Boeing stopped building commercial 737NG that the E7 is based on. The British truncated order is all used airliners. I doubt the USAF would do that so either Max based airframes or P8 based airframes

the USAF has to ask for and at least study alternatives to at least try and counter protests before they happen.

Given that the E-7A's MESA array no longer represents the state of the art, I imagine the temptation to gold-plate the USAF solution could be strong. That said, as an Aussie I'm not going to rush to complain - if the USAF wants to foot the R&D bill for an RAAF Wedgetail MLU I'm ok with that

 

[Gooey]

There is a degree of urgency here by USAF due to the operational threat together with a *very* trusted relationship with RAAF. Additionally, this has been shaped by these Air Forces, and RAF, for a period of time. So, while I agree with Nga about traditional yankee bureaucratic practices over the years, this may well be an exception. I would strongly suggest that if E-7 systems and airframe(s) are to be upgraded by USAF, this has been worked in parallel with RAAF, RAF & USAF.
AUKUS is a significant, earthquake, sign of this deep relationship.
Sadly, for RNZAF it is also a sign of just how out of touch and irrelevant it has become. Sigh. Pause for dramatic effect. I say that as a broken hearted kiwi who fears that NZ participation in Five Eyes is also broken, token, and irrelevant.

 

[John Fedup]

There is a degree of urgency here by USAF due to the operational threat together with a *very* trusted relationship with RAAF. Additionally, this has been shaped by these Air Forces, and RAF, for a period of time. So, while I agree with Nga about traditional yankee bureaucratic practices over the years, this may well be an exception. I would strongly suggest that if E-7 systems and airframe(s) are to be upgraded by USAF, this has been worked in parallel with RAAF, RAF & USAF.
AUKUS is a significant, earthquake, sign of this deep relationship.
Sadly, for RNZAF it is also a sign of just how out of touch and irrelevant it has become. Sigh. Pause for dramatic effect. I say that as a broken hearted kiwi who fears that NZ participation in Five Eyes is also broken, token, and irrelevant.

Same applies to Canada.