Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
The Bizarre and Risky Future of Electronic Warfare - The E-7 Wedgetail
Vložit
- čas přidán 13. 08. 2024
- In early 2022, the US Air Force made the decision to replace its obsolete Boeing E-3 Sentry fleet, but the radical choice meant a suitable successor ought to be selected sooner rather than later.
Several options were discussed, but a candidate quickly stood out; it was the proven Boeing E-7 Wedgetail, currently serving in Australia and the United Kingdom.
Lighter and better equipped than the E-3, the Wedgetail is regarded as a much stronger defense element in the 21st-century airspace, and it also incorporates the powerful Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems Multi-role Electronically Scanned Array or MESA radar.
Still, the transition might prove a highly risky move in today’s fast-moving international landscape. But as Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall told reporters, the Wedgetail is: “The leading candidate, quite obviously.”
---
Join Dark Skies as we explore the world of aviation with cinematic short documentaries featuring the biggest and fastest airplanes ever built, top-secret military projects, and classified missions with hidden untold true stories. Including US, German, and Soviet warplanes, along with aircraft developments that took place during World War I, World War 2, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Cold War, the Gulf War, and special operations mission in between.
As images and footage of actual events are not always available, Dark Skies sometimes utilizes similar historical images and footage for dramatic effect and soundtracks for emotional impact. We do our best to keep it as visually accurate as possible.
All content on Dark Skies is researched, produced, and presented in historical context for educational purposes. We are history enthusiasts and are not always experts in some areas, so please don't hesitate to reach out to us with corrections, additional information, or new ideas.
Australia drove the product because that is what we needed. With our very large coastal area and sparsely populated land mass, a mobile long-range surveillance capability is very important. The AWAC limitations showed up sooner for us, And in case anyone needs to talk about our air force at any time we pronounce it as the R double A F as it rolls off the tongue better. It stands for the Royal Australian Air Force as distinct from the British, Royal Air Force.
We also more colloquially call it the raaf (start to say Rafael but stop at the f), and serving members of the RAAF are raafies 😁
Our geographical isolation can't protect us anymore. The world is adapting, and we must adapt with it.
@@GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket Australians are proudly the Prisoners of Her Majesty the Americans refused to take (in the declaration of independence no less) . Nevertheless I noticed you guys can aim. Keep it for the Royalists to the North that invaded you in 1812.
@@raichu0479 China is trying to buy flip the Governments of the Solomon Islands into a pro china stance. They are also seeking to buy private Islands. We may see Chinese Hyper-sonic Missiles based there able to strike our cities and infrastructure. We will need our own hyper-sonic missiles to strike back. It looks like the US will supply the B21 to the RAAF this will allow Australia to strike China should China ever attempt to strike Australia. Experience in the Ukraine has shown that defensive weapons only does not deter an aggressor like China or Russia.
@@GeorgeWashingtonLaserMusket Are you seeing anyone out that 'Royal' phobia?
The risk here isn't about the E-7 platform, it's the AF's slow procurement structure.
Shack
I would call it piss poor planning, too busy wasting money on F35 when there should be other priorities like the E7 and aerial refueling replacements
To be fair, the clip alludes to that at the end.
@@z0phi3l not really, the F35 provides a new capability. Whereas purchasing new AWACS and tankers would just provide more or less the same capability.
The F35 provides an immense new capability. The marines can now turn their heli carriers into F35 carriers, meaning not only does American now have its usual super carriers. But it also has a bunch of smaller carriers that carry more F35s.
@@guillaumelalonde7945 It's also a stealth 5th-gen supersonic fighter as opposed to a 3rd-gen subsonic jet (AV-8 Harrier)
Also the wedgetail can use smaller regional airports. They fly regular exercises out of NTL into my local (2000m runway) which handles/d A320s 737-800 and Dash8s with tarmac and infrastructure to spare so they can be dispersed as required. During covid travel restrictions they were the only jet in this airspace so they were noticed...
The E-7 is based out of Newcastle (RAAF Base Williamtown), if their not operating somewhere, that's where they live. Their operated by No.2 Squadron.
Yeah, the 707 is a BIG aircraft. The 737 is going to be a lot more flexible and efficient.
What is NTL?
They don’t usually call AWACS “electronic warfare” even though it is. Electronic warfare is usually thought of as electronic ISR and also SEAD. But it’s a complicated subject.
RJ for ISR. Wild weasel f-16 for sead. Awacs is command and control
That being said, he mentioned that this aircraft has additional ELINT hardware below the radar
No we don't.
AWACS’s younger sibling, AEW&C primarily, with EW capabilities.
All useless if you have a good tinfoil hat.
I worked on the WedgeTail program for 4 years in Kent WA (not Seattle BTW). The substantial onsite Australian team were great to work with.
Kent is in England.
Stop with the theft (we know that's what you're good for)
This is one of the reasons the new AUUKUS alliance is so important.
The American military works closely with the Aussies and the Brits and have learned over decades that if those two have somethng working and working well they can trust the results and make quick use of the tech. Australia will be doing similar with the purchase of either Astute or Virginia class SSNs.
When it comes to high tech and high end warfare we three countries together are an unbeatable combination.
Uc anh va hoaky :cannada nerelanh: day la 5anh em noi tieng anh: hao la anh em:cong nghe ko bi tuong ra ngoi:uc cong nghe lac hau:ko xung tam :
E-7 is used by Turkey, Australia, and S.Korea. The UK hasn't received its planes yet.
The UK have received all 3 aircraft.
They was delivered during the pandemic.
However they was then convinced into the E-7, At Birmingham Airport.
As of this month they have finished everything except for the livery. With is being installed now.
Once this is done and everything is OK, they should enter service with the RAF in early 2023.....
Just a few months to go 😀😀
@@aloh5613 What I meant was, they weren't in service yet. The other air forces have been actively using E7 for a decade or so.
Good Boris j can't sell its system details to Russia.
Ukraine hasn't received theirs either
Since it’s used by Turkey. Russia and China know all about it. 😀
Turkiye also has wedgetail system since 2014. The contract with Turkish authority and Boeing was signed in 2003 and the customization of the system was made by Turkish and Boeing engineers. The system has been in use since 2014 in Turkiye. There are 4 wedgetail aircraft system in Turiye in use currently. Turkiye is the 2nd user of the Wedgetail system after Australia..
Love the footage of the P-2 Neptune.
Me too, I used to see them at BNAS and they had one parked there once they were retired. Loved the P3 Orions as well.
Love the videos! In Aus we call the R.A.A.F. the R double A F or pronounce RAAF as a word.
Why not a dobbyraafer or woolywopper?
@@HubertofLiege well, we do say that, but only when we’re pissed.
A few points; as previously mentioned in other comments on this clip and others- the correct pronunciation is R Double A F.
The UK has only ordered three aircraft and that has caused a lot of controversy in the UK
Turkey was the second country to buy the E-7 and it is designated E-7T Peace Eagle. They operate four aircraft all named after the points of the compass (Kuzey, Güney, Dogu and Bati- North, South, East and West), there was an option for two more, but the option expired.
South Korea operates four aircraft (designated E-737 Peace Eye), these aircraft differ to the E-7's in the installed electronic systems, but maintain the MESA radar. All work was performed by KAI with aircraft two to four.
Other potential customers include; Italy, United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Saudi Arabia (who also wish to replace their E-3's).
The RAAF aircraft have ten stations aboard- six being for C2 operations, four being used for Battle Node network relay. Two further stations can be installed, the notion here is for Drone control for any one of the various drone types now operated by the service (this may include the MQ-28 Ghost Bat a.k.a Loyal Wingman, as a defencive aid in contested airspace).
Ja Worsley
ODIN Media- Chief Editor
(Oceania Defence Interviews and News).
I remember the E7 was risky project especially that ADF had a lot defence purchases problems. Top radar was unproven but once built flown in missions it prove its self. Some of those missions had US crew to test n evaluate E7. Just like MRRT US realise ADF had proven aircraft that they need, the problems with US is BS red tape, the US could brought E7 before UK years ago n MRRT replacement too.
The launch customer always suffers, that's why they say bleeding edge.
Wedgetail was 1 of several Australian procurements that were struggled & I think cancellation was an option for a while.
Now however, the RAAF appear very pleased with Wedgetail. As such it is now a
Yes
Good point, remember the shitshow the Nimrod AEW turned out to be...
@@casinodelonge yeah I remember Nimrod, five eyes nations should learn lessons and maybe P8A should been multi role MRRT, radar aircraft to save more money.
Interesting video, many thanks!! Strange that it's Australia that's driven the development of this aircraft, who'd have thought that?! But well done to the RAAF for doing it - I imagine that other nations have kept an eye on the development of the aircraft and are now making their move. Incidentally it's not yet in RAF service but at least the order has been placed. I understand the criticism of the decision to just go with the E7 but the fact that Australia have proven that it works should have made the decision academic.
Dont underestimate oz.
@@andgate2000 I'd never do that mate!!! Massive respect for the land down under!!!
Due to Australia's huge coast line, distance between major cities and Northern neighbours Australia has always relied on these types of aircraft so its good that the US have recognised this wealth of experience
Australia's Airforce has become highly advanced. Thanks to our close partnership with the US we have one of the most modern and capable air forces on the planet.
They actually have not driven the develop, this radar system developed as the next generation from Hughes aircraft company, was created in the Hughes research Labs located in Malibu California. Today known as HRL. And is utilized in a variety of applications including aircraft and first entered service known as the APG 90 series radar
Good on the Aussies for developing this plane! Cheers from NZ!
Bruv we are literally required to your airspace and sea will be defended by the Australian defence force at all costs regardless of shitty politics were australia goes New Zealand will support and follow and anyone who shilling or attempting harm to the little cuzzies will be wiped off the face of the earth with great hast
Great to see our RAAF getting some positive attention. We run a very lean practical fleet in Australia.
Quallas aren't that hard to beat.
The inmates seem to be content with their lives
@@procatprocat9647 So it seems, are the Trolls....
I currently work on the line at Boeing that would be building these along side the P8’s we already build. We have already built one BBJ that is to be converted into a wedgetail for the US.
Why lie?
@@spursphil81 what lie? We built an AEW&C earlier this year to be converted
Why would he lie about something so simple .. your lie statement is stupid
The funny thing is if the US procurement system was agile, it could exploit the massive downturn in passenger flights and procure a number of good B737 airframes, refurb if/as required and be ready to fit radars as fast as they can be produced.
Won't happen though.
Refurbished 737 would not be profitable for Boeing, and would require evaluation of structural fatigue.
@@ViceCoin There's a backlog of 737 max airframes sitting in storage right now. Airframe fatigue isn't an issue for new aircraft.
i was gona say if the biggest issue is that ordering new airframes is 2 years then to years to modify them then buy used 737 airframes for at least the 2 prototyps. this is asuming that there are no 737 white tails (probbly safe on that one give the 737 popularaty)
The German procurement system had become so impossible that Germany couldn't even procure a Helmet over the last 16 years. The German Parliament actually passed a law that allows them to accelerate acquisition overt the next 5 years.
@@ViceCoin The problem is that the USAF has severe requirements in regards to air frames handling Nuclear EMP, radio interference and battle damage, ie a missile burst nearby or taking out an engine. This is why it can't just buy A330MRTT
I spotted one of these at KMWH. It appears to have been a transfer ceremony, inspection, tour, something-or-other. I guessed that it was a side-scan radar (wrong!). It was in RAAF colors (OK, "colours"), but with an N-number apparently taped over the Aussie registration.
@nfw KMHW is an airport in the middle of Washington State
Just a quick note. We call it the R Double A F . 🇦🇺👍🇦🇺
Excellent and highly informative video. Thank you from Australia 🇦🇺
Timeline for acquisition is B---S---! The base 737 is currently being manufactured! Pull a couple out of the assembly line towards the front and add a couple orders to the back. Same thine for the AWACS mods. The UK and the Aussies have operational aircraft flying missions right now! That means the Wedgetail mods are being manufactured right now too! Any BS about having to start over is just contractors trying for a bigger price tag and a longer lead time which will also get them many $ millions more from the US taxpayer. If this was done the right way I seriously doubt it would take more than 15-18 months to have the first two operational!
Yeah, you are correct but in this case the MIC can't milk the taxpayer that easy and the financial kickback for the politicians would also be less.
Complain to the Air Force for being dead on their ass for years instead of replacing AWACS sooner. Also, the issue is not really about producing the commercial platform it is the Air Force's unique requirements and equipment. It would be smart to build it Identical to the Aussie or UK model but they won't....that means new equipment and testing...not to mention since not too many wedgetails have been/are being built, you can count on supply chain problems for all of that equipment the USAF will specify to install.
The problem is that ALL of those 737s have already been ordered and paid for by the airlines that made those orders years ago. You can't just appropriate them without paying a large cost (assuming the airlines are even willing).
You are 100% CORRECT! Eisenhower warned about this happening a long time ago. Sad but true.
You'd wonder, wouldnt you. You'd also think the radar manufacturer could also develop a lower "export specification" package that could almost be bolted on to existing airframes, could be a kerrching moment....
Alot of very good information in a shot time. Thank you!
Us Aussie ahead of the game for change, love it! Keep up the awesome videos.
Almost always ahead but not backed by the government as much as it should
@@scottparker2325 I’d love it if we spent more on defence, but unfortunately we have politicians who lack the courage to increase taxation to cover the cost.
@@Smokeyr67 We would also need to get smarter about defense procurements. Too often there are huge question marks over suitability.
I've seen these flying over Canberra also it's not the R, A, A, F its the R double A F
I really dont see why we don't do a limited buy based of of UK and Aussies certs, recert and go. The 737 will be around for a long time, those 707's with low bypass engines haven't been made since the 80's. Yes they served very well but it's past time to put them out to pasture.
AF Vet.
kinda neat seeing boeing featured on here. been all over every square inch of that place and nearly every business surrounding it.
The RAF E7 Wedgetail has not yet even flown as a complete airframe in the UK so you are incorrect in reporting it.
Do you have a timestamp for that?
I only heard him say they purchased 5; 2 commercial conversions and 3 purpose built.
I must have missed him saying they have flown them.
@@kanagawakenji7 nah he did say they are operated by the uk and aus
@@jameseaster9259 You guys are right, it was in the intro and I must have missed it. Apologies, gents.
Your comment seems passive aggressive
@@lordmozart3087 You are far too sensitive, my friend.
Interesting video. But in future if you're talking about the RAAF, it's pronounced R-Double-A-F not R-A-A-F. We also just say "raff" (as in riff-raff), but that becomes confusing if talking about the British flying force in the same conversation :)
Just call it a joke.
So why have I heard Australian pilots refer to it as "RHAAF"?
AWACS Galaxy brought me here
Although the E-3 is in its death throws... Let still give a shot out the B707 thats been flying for 70 plus years. What a Bird!!
Enjoyed your video and so I gave it a Thumbs Up
Well done 👍 another great educational vid bro love your work
If you have never seen a Wedged Tail eagle you should look them up. They are a huge bird, one of the largest eagles in the world and look fearsome.
They can and have taken lambs and small dogs. At the same time they are a beautiful bird and a fitting name for this Australian conceived plane.
Putting together a shopping basket of parts to suit our needs has turned out to be good enough for other countries to want them as well, especially the US, so it’s a bit of a pat on the back for such a small country in military terms. Using the 737 was brilliant as parts are easily available around the world and so is maintenance. I’m sure that if trouble broke out with China these planes as well as other Australian resources would be put at the US military’s disposal.
We drove past a Wedgetail that was eating a road-kill kangaroo, We were in a Nissan Patrol (tall car) and we were eyeball to eyeball, and its' attitude seemed to be "I found it first, piss off". The kids were asleep in the back and missed it. Huge bird, bald eagle is tiny in comparison, saw a pair in Alsaka.
@@glennmcc64 😂😂😂👍👍👍
R Double-A F, mate...
Yanks give a snappy salute to a departing aircraft...
We Aussies, just a friendly wave!
Lmfao🤣
In Australia we verbally call the RAAF the “R Double A F” or just pronounce it “Raph” for short.
I may have an idea for a video. In the future could you talk about the Boeing IC-14 STOL, with the gigantic engines?
It was understood that the E-3 was quickly becoming obsolete by the early 2000s, along with a host of other support aircraft, and a program was developed to replace all of them, known as the E-10. However, Congress kicked the can down the road for 15 years, and because of this, we're having to scramble to replace E-3s. At the same time, most of the other aircraft that were supposed to be replaced are quickly running down their airframe hours.
The E-7 is probably not the right aircraft for the U.S. Air Force. Ideally, they would have a lot more seats to manage the much larger fights the U.S. has to plan for, vice the RAF and RAAF. More range and loiter to support certain long range fights and speed up deployments, as well as a common airframe with the tanker fleet (KC-46) to simply maintenance would be nice too. However, because they waited until the last minute, they don't even have time to ask for the sensor package to integrated onto a 767, and the E-7 is the only aircraft that can be considered. Astonishing lack of foresight and planning.
The Boeing 737 has extended versions. The E7 is based on the 737-700 next generation. The 737 has the 737-800 & even longer 737-900 versions. If they want to go to even longer ranged, they have the 737 MAX 8, 9& 10 versions. They could literally add 28 feet to the E7 in off the shelf commercial models.
@@fanman71 I wonder how long it would take to integrate the E-7's sensor, data link and battle management hardware onto a different variant of the 737 vice integrating it onto a new airframe entirely, like a 767?
@@JZ909 Should be much easier as all the new variants are just lengthened bodies of the current E7. The only thing they would need to be worried about is if the actual body of the plane would be affected by the extra length of using the 800 or 900 vs the current 737/700. Same engines, same width, etc.
The 767 is an older airframe, no longer really being produced. You are probably thinking the new 787 Dreamliner. I would think testing of that would have to be much more extensive. Given it's a completely new body type w/ different composites, size, dimensions, etc.
@@fanman71 The problem with a stretched airframe is that the stretch is trading range for internal volume, and an AEW aircraft, that needs to spend many hours on station, potentially far away from where they launched, desperately need the range. The E-7 is based on on the longest range pre-MAX 737, the 737-700ER, and this still has shorter legs than the E-3. I would seriously question a decision to reduce this even further. The 737 MAX would clearly be a huge improvement, but it's a generational leap, and the E-7 conversion involved some pretty significant aerodynamic modifications. I doubt the conversion process would be quick.
As for the 767, Boeing still produces it in the form of the KC-46. While the 787 would be superior, there are probably some pretty significant cost savings in standardizing most of the maintenance with the tanker fleet. A professional number cruncher would have to look at that to know for sure.
@@JZ909 That is correct, you always trade volume for range. You could put in additional fuel tanks in the current cargo hold area of the 737, but again you are sacrificing cargo capacity for fuel/range, so yes, there will always be a tradeoff. As stated, perhaps look at the 737 MAX 9 or 10, but there are many more differences between the 737 Next Gen & MAX models.
In regards to 767, it isn't really being produced for commercial aviation anymore. They still make it for cargo & military customers but the 787 was meant to be the replacement & has far superior efficiency & range.
This is a sick looking plane
The Australian name for our air force is
'R - double A - F'
not R-A-A-F 👍
Everyone I know who is employed in the RAAF pronounces it “raaf” one word.
Who cares champ
@@ithinkurf
Aussies do
Not really. It's only R double A F because of a poorly written song from 50 yrs ago. No one say I'm in the R double A F, they say I'm in the Raaf (as one word) or they say raafie.
@@ithinkurf pronounced raff as in riff raff.
Does 'the Big Guy' get 10% on this deal? What's the risk ('above replacement value', of course) the Australian program is compromised by Chinese assets? My suspicion is that's value has a negative sign, but it's a question worth asking I think. Do regional political considerations impact acquisitions in Australia to any extent similar to the situation in the U.S.A.? Considering the burdensome political picture in U.S.A. appropriations it does kind of make sense organizations with greater opportunities for agility (e.g.. Australia) would end up leading in high-end operational infrastructure, which isn't as subject to nationalistic iconography more 'charismatic' appropriations elements (think 'air superiority' fighters) often are.
Can't say mate whether Biden gets 10% or not but can say that the program hasn't been comprised by China and Australia has robust security measures in place already. We are one of the five eyes for a start and one of the three AUKUS countries so security isn't an issue. We also kicked out Chinese telecommunications companies well before the US did and was the reason the US followed suit along with the UK and others. We are far more aware of the threat of China then just about every American, they are right on our doorstep after all and have had a trade war going with us for the last 2 years..
As for the same shenanigans that your defence companies get up to, no that doesn't exist here as the French found our the hard way. There also isn't the same level of "we have to buy US made" but that said we do buy alot of US gear. The reason behind most of our acquisitions is commonality with the US and your systems (F35, F18F/G, P8, Blackhawks and Apache's, M1A2 tanks, Himars, Aegis for our destroyers etc) but when there is a better platform/weapon that costs just as much as the US one and is NATO standard then we go with that.
P-8 Poseidon and E-7 Wedgetail use the same Boeing 737 aircraft, which means better for maintenance.
That’s a good number. 100% flight ratio is very hard. AWACS almost did it in 2013
The Wedgetail is not serving in the UK yet, we do not even have a finished E7 in this country. There is one in the factory to get the ELINT elements installed as we speak but it is nowhere near finished or tested yet. They have definitelly not been deployed yet.
Probably confused the RAF P-8
RAF member training with the RAAF in Australia at the moment.
Just one advisory & correction.....The AWAC system was designed and built by Hughes Aircraft Company.... the new system is also derived from Hughes as well.... specifically the scientists at Hughes Research Lab in Malibu, California (today known as "HRL" and jointly owned by Boeing and Raytheon) created the new gen radar system. The shape of the array (fixed/non-rotating) was made possible by the scientists "finding" a way to make the molecules change direction instead of the array having to move. This eliminated the rotation requirement and allowed a much smaller/more condensed "component" be deployed while increasing effectiveness.
AESA radar is old technology............Effective but old.
@@BennyCFD but you have to remember from the time we create something we don't just leave it alone, hundreds if not thousands of upgrades and revisions are made keeping the system incredibly effective.
I think these radars are composed of an array of tiny antennas, which are fed in phase in such a way as to constructively interfere in a specific direction. Reception is accomplished the same way, but in reverse, using fast Fourier transforms.
Compare to what??
The Rivet Joint and Compass Call both had EW career field people on board but the E-3 Sentry (AWACS real name) didn’t.
Lots of errors here. E-3s are still in use. It has and equal or better ability to detect targets at range. Given that LO aircraft are designed to be stealthy primarily against high frequency, target tracking and terminal guidance radars, the E-3 is likely BETTER at detecting LO and small RCS targets due to its lower frequency radar. The AESA radar is better sometimes. It updates tracks faster SOMETIMES, it depends on operator settings and the demand by the tracking environment. Overall, the E-7 is better, but the E-3 is no slouch…when it’s working 😅
I saw one of these taking off from the gold coast once. and I'm glad that air force cadets taught me how to identify it (and a variety of other military aircraft.)
This video repeats the Wikipedia article about the E-7 Wedgetail almost verbatim I just discovered. 🤣
The Wedgetails will work in partnership with UAVs and the P8 Posiedons
and others....in fact in theatre it will work with everyone
Very good facts & correlating video… sometimes lacking on this channel.
Interestingly, at 0:41 the aircraft in RAAF markings is registered with an N number. Prior to delivery?
This was one of the prototypes built in Seattle with US registration for testing.
Downsized AEW&C started with EMBRAER R-99 Erieye AEW&C wich was first delivered in 1998 to Brazilian Airforce as part of Amazon Defense Sistem (SIVAM). At the time it achieved 95% of the performance expected of a E-8 at a fraction of the cost 😜
Not large enough radar nor enough range
Allegedly.
Introduced in 2001, the Embraer R-99A'/E-99/EMB 145 AEW&C i Airborne early warning and control aircraft, equipped with the Erieye active electronically scanned array radar from Saab Microwave Systems (formerly Ericsson Microwave Systems) of Sweden operates at Brazilian Airforce, wichclaims that it has 95% of the capability of the larger AWACS aircraft which are in service in the air forces of other nations.😒
The stated concept in Australia in those years was always to combine the AWACS function with an electronics warfare function in one aircraft for Australia where the USA had the EW function on a separate JointSTARS and others. The crossover of Electronic Warfare and RADAR is often discussed in the Battle of Britain histories where the Observer Corps and bizarre mechanical ears and disinformation such as dinners and breakfasts of carrots allowing night-fighting eyesight for the pilots as cover for the true power of RADAR which in itself was cover for the vast listening operation and jamming and interception that ultimately came down to code breaking such that the RAF was aware of what the enemy numbers would be and also other vital aspects such as bending the German radio waves used for their night bombing navigation. The suggestion is that the technologies in the British are an advance of the ones in the Australian models and that whatever is in AWACS Sentry will be improved but all mention of the JointStar is now absent in the discussion and the need also for data links that are secure and will be swapping potentially staggering amounts of data. High speed frequency changes possible with new aesa style radars is plausibly essential not just for detection and jamming and also as protection against enemy radar seeking missiles fired from stealthy aircraft or spacecraft or carried by converted ICBMS.
Plus the distinct possibility that between satellites', the JSF radar and data links ground and sea based missiles there is a gigantic revolution in the military affairs of the USA in being able to track and kill moving targets in the air on land and sea anywhere in the world at any time. Instead of for example the previous historical problem of firing vast numbers of cruise missiles into the palaces of Saddam Hussein on the off-chance that he isn't in a golf cart just doing laps of the palace car park and golf course. It would be reasonable to assume the whole capability is in service and undergoing constant upgrades that are bound to be horrifically expensive and with the software issues and artificial intelligence constantly being upgraded and a few concepts that will be even more powerful and eventually surprise the world long after aggressors against the USA have been destroyed or their plans of aggression otherwise thwarted. There will be peace in the world and that miracle will have included Australian British and ultimately the best US versions as an element amongst the enablers. But then again alternatively it could be something less complex such as the need to change airframes due to not enough electrical power being generated off the existing airframe and engine combination and wiring issues and the sincerity of christmas cards from Boeing lobbyists.
EW/ISR will be the task of several platforms in the RAAF....principally E7 (as mentioned in the video above) EA18 Growler and P8, but the new front-line player in this field will be the new MC-55A Peregrine aircraft that the RAAF have purchased and should receive the first one inside the next year. Its great to see the RAAF finally coming to its senses and embracing EW/ISR as a required discrete skill set - so many years spent bashing heads to get them to the table
Lately I've been finding whole kernels of corn in my bowel movements. Do I need to see a doctor?
USAF is going to need far more than 18 E-7 airframes...double that number would be approximately correct. The biggest problem over the years with the E-3 fleet was that is was cut short on production because Congress, as usual, had good buddies that needed that sweet, sweet government money more than the DoD needed E-3s. Consequently, the E-3 fleet was constantly grossly over-tasked and under-equipped for the demand, which wore out the already aged airframes even faster. The E-3 radar system was a marvel in its day, but that day has now passed. USAF needs the E-7 as quickly as Congress will allow it to buy them. Therein lies another problem, of course...
Great as always.
G'day Dark, I've been an enthusiastic subscriber of your channel; then other channels, since 2013. I'm subscribed to all your channels and they greatly inform and entertain me.
By the way, I'm also a proud former member of the R double A, F. Which, my old cobber, Dark, is exactly the way it is said by absolutely everyone in the "R-double A, F" (The Royal Australian Air Force), and it is also said: "R-double A, F" by every Australian I've ever known who knows of our air force be they in uniform or in civvies.
Please don't be offended, mate; but you are the only person in the world I've ever heard say the name of our Air Force the way you do. So, come on, it's easy. "Rrr-double'A'-'Eff".
We here, downunder in the "Rrr-double'A'-'Eff" wouldn't dream of calling your Air Force "The you-ess-aay-eff" like some civvies say. We always say, as you do: "U-Saff". It's quicker, easier and doesn't make anyone laugh.
I've had the genuine privilege of working with the fine men and women of the 'U-Saff' many years ago and, oddly, we didn't have to teach them how to say, "Rrr-double'A'-'Eff", they just knew how to say it.
Now we've cleared that one up. Thank you very much for your shots of our outstanding Wedgetail squadron; which we've heard some, from other squadrons, refer to as "The Wedgies", but we won't go there! 😉 Cheers, Bill H.
With those types of aircraft using a commercial airframe I get the reason for it to lower costs and a aircraft not going to be on front line however war is a fluid thing there no guarantee that a fighter craft not going to deep penetration and shoot a plane like that down. Therefore to mitigate the risk even with extra expense shouldn’t styles the tech deign come into play.
An S400 can easily engage it from the ground. The S500 will be better, longer range.
The government should really consider designing a package that can be bolted into existing civilian 737s. That way, they don't have to wait on net new airframes. They can just pull existing stock from the market and bolt in the equipment. I'm sure they would need to add some structure, but that should be pretty straightforward.
It would also be better during times of war to have the ability to convert civilian stock instead of trying to surge production.
The 737 seriously deserves more respect. Its an incredible aircraft. Yes it mostly takes you to vacation with an uncomfortable seat. But it does it at mach .7 basically for free.
A flying coffin a winged tips death trap no sane person would get on one of those machines unless they like to be burned to death in a fiery orange ball of searing hot flame.
When the grid goes down from EMP attack, the Amish won't even notice.
Please can we can a fresh Update? UK dropped 2 out of the 5 Wedge Tails. Was this for a special mission platform the US is developing?
@5:48 "...supporting coalition forces and executing airstrikes...". The WedgeTail has no offensive capabilities and has definitely NOT been 'executing airstrikes'.
Oh yes, another interesting topic. Edwards AFB here.
If you are at EAFB, you know that there are better answers than the E-7.
We lost our E3DS at Waddington a good while ago now but the Replacements going Lossiemouth
Why does everybody have a hard on for the dated 737. If you want an old air frame, fix / update what you have.
I'm watching these POS 737 replacing the Orion P3 as ASW platforms.. What a great government jobs program.
Replacing the best, low flying cost with a high priced POS that has no loiter time.
The Aussie E7 I saw at an airshow, still had the passenger windows painted out.
The windows that are "painted out" aren't actually windows. As the airframe was originally a civilian "green skin", and the windows were originally there. Upon conversion to E-7 they were "skinned" or the same material that the airframe is made from was riveted in place. There are crew windows around the wing (four on each side) at the crew rest stations. This is actually the back of the crew cabin as there is a wall here where the avionics associated with the Radar are in the rear of the aircraft and are generally not accessible in flight.
What type of range this radars have? What type of missions they do?
Can they detect low RCS aircrafts?
they detect joe
4:28
and 4:40.
As far as public data says: against fighter-sized target, the maximum range is in excess of 370 km in look-down. In look-up around 600 km. But surely they won't tell you the real specs bc that's classified.
Their missions are c2 (command and control), airborne surveillance and as an early warning systems.
Should it detect stealth aircraft? Well usually AWACS are made for that in some way, so yeah. From how Far? That's classified 😊
have a nice day :D
Back in the 1980s during the Ronald Reagan administration, a version of these but in smaller aircraft were specifically developed and built by Hughes at their hangers located at the Van nuys airport in California. They were specifically used by the Air national guard if I remember correctly, to address the drug cartel utilizing both high-speed cigarette boats and submarines to deliver large quantities of drugs. The drug cartel in South America was so infuriated over these two aircraft that a 1 million dollar bounty was put out during their creation for anyone who could blow them up. Literally! To counter this and because the aircraft was slightly larger than the hangers could hold, as a result they were parked outside. Surrounded by portable fencing and armed guards from Hughes security Force with very large caliper weapons, they lit the two aircraft up with multi-million candle watt power lighting that could actually be seen for miles away all the way from the 405 freeway. In short anyone trying to walk, sneak, drive anywhere near these two aircraft would be easily spotted and threats neutralized.
Maybe they experienced the Krasukha jammer effects over Romanian airspace during Ukraine conflict? I would not be surprised if they did and now they are trying very hard to quickly find a replacement resistant to this jamming.
I've been in EW for years, done yet me started on the mad new direction. That new Compass Call has some serious explaining to do.
Russian EMP tech has made most all of it obsolete.
@@richardscathouse fun thought, but no...
I would think the vertical stab and rudder could be better integrated with the radar, aerodynamically that is.
That's plausible but the array wont be big or wide enough to be effective
Bright skies
Very interesting and very disturbing. Maybe the Australians and the British can help us pore Americans. Sadly, Politicians, as they always have been are the major problem here. The U.S. has already lost the Next War...
They are full of horseshit about the E-3, and if they were really serious about being able to evade the PL-15 missile, they would use the B-2 air frame and use that as the basis for a truly stealthy Command and Control Aircraft. The E-7 is not significantly more capable of evading the PL-15 than the E-3.
So you want to take an expensive to buy, expensive to operate, stealthy airframe and then tack a gigantic RF transmitter on top of it?
Newer, better radar = longer detection range, ie significantly better chance of either killing the launcher or evading the missile.
I think the idea is greater radar range, which should allow the plane to simply stay out of the range of the PL-15. In addition, though it was not said, I imagine this radar, like the APG-81 of the F-35, has a significant capability to jam radars, which should decrease the practical range of a missile like the PL-15.
Just needs trackballs... no need for the movement of the aircraft to affect all the pointers.
Modern AI could replace the Mk1 goon squad.
Not one of your better episodes.
Several factual errors, & a total misunderstanding of the causes of the 'risk' you
The E-7 is not a risky programme, assuming the USAF can avoid cocking it up by insisting on a completely new AEW&C system. The risk is in that the USAF have decided to start retiring E-3s before the E-7s are available, & that is probably down to budget limitations.
In the UK, we have done the same thing in retiring all our E-3s before our E-7s are ready. I assume we are relying on the NATO E-3 force for AEW support over the North Sea.
You are indeed correct in your assumption about relying on NATO E3's. It's a risky strategy for the UK too but at least we've placed an order. I think as well the UK order has been revised to only 3 aircraft - another risky strategy for the UK IMHO.
@@andywhite40 Scuttle butt is the US will get the other two for testing…
Lovely video
What happened with the E9 that was supposed to be the next big thing for the airforce
Hate to break it to you but the RAF ones aren't even built yet alone operated. Australia fly's them and both South Korea and Turkey fly their own variants of the Wedgetail named Peace Eye & Peace Eagle respectively. Also the UK order was cut from 5 to 3 a while ago now.
When I see video of that confused, bumbling old man presiding over a panel of military top brass, it don’t get a warm and fuzzy feeling. It’s actually terrifying
Boeing had a bunch of unsold 737's after the combo of the 2 Max crashes and the pandemic hitting. I don't know exactly how many or of which models, but they still have a surplus sitting parked in WA state.
More in Mojave California
Australia has used this since 2009. What took the US so long?
Surprised Airbus isn’t trying to compete in this space?
Don't know, but they're building lots of airliners for the 'sandbox' countries so maybe they don't need the business or the headaches that come from dealing with US Mil.
Imagine if that wedge tail was replaced by what's a Cessna or a good one Learjet that would be the way to go.
whats that intro music, it hits hard.
The next generation AWACS should be based on the 787 Dreamliner, it has a longer range and much more modern technology than the 737 Max. Also, you can nickname it the Sandman.
too expensive; 737 platform is magnitudes more versatile and cheaper. 787 AWACS would be gorgeous tho
No, it should be based off the B-2 platform. There is no reason for the next generation AWACS to not be less observable.
@@mpeugeot 🤣😂🤣
The Austrailan one has a keg in the back.
Makes the USAF went with the E-7 as it has parts commonality with the P-8A. I am willing to bet the USAF will buy variants of the P-8 to replace the E-8 as well.
the P8 & Wedgetail are both based on the 737.
As opposed written above It is not in service with just UK and Australia but also South Korea and Turkey
Whilst I agree that Australia 'could' help the US with their test data, software and firmware issues, it would have been nice if they supplied us with M1 Abrams that didn't need to have their targeting/firing computers code mostly written by the ADF, as they 'could' have shared some, if not all of that with 'their ally'
thats one of the many issues the new 'aukus' deal is designed too eliminate, there's a lot more to it than just subs..
They are retiring the E-3??? I've seen them flying over my house my whole life and it's probably one of my favorite planes
"100% mission success against ISIS" Ummm, a cardboard box would also have the same success rate against ISIS if it could fly. BFD
E3 isn't obsolete air frame can't handle stress of flight for the past 50 years!🇺🇲👍
Ye hitech system hote pur Esme suna tha America plane dusra doosra usme ye sub fit kurta
The E3 is not obsolete at all. The wedge tail is just absolutely awesome.
Yes it is. Most parts on the air frame have not been in production since the 1980's.
@@truckert9729 ok and? The USS Nimitz was launched in the 70s but still plays a vital part in keeping the US safe. Same goes with the E-3. Just because it’s a 70s plane doesn’t mean it’s tech is 70s.
I have heard that the triangular shape of the radar leaves blindspots, as opposed to the 360 degree view of a circular radar. Is there any accuracy to this claim? I’m not sure I buy it ( *HIGHLY* questionable source), but it sounds reasonable. I don’t know much about radar though.
there are areas of reduced (reduced but not blind) visibility immediately fwd and aft but the effect is pretty easily managed by playing with the aircraft direction.
@@PeteMcConvill ok, cool. Thanks for the info! 😊
The RAAF rocks!
Will they incorporate a weapons system like they do with the P8? Cause that was brilliant… search and destroy…
Lowest bidder
Just an FYI the Royal Australian Air Force is generally referred to as raf as in raffle or R double A F.