The Royal Air Force has pointed the finger at aerospace giant Boeing for delays in the delivery of the critical E-7 airborne early warning capability.
During a session with the Defence Select Committee, Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton provided stark testimony on the state of the RAF’s airborne early warning capabilities, underscoring the pressing gap left by delayed E-7 aircraft.
“We have a gap with E-7. We have a gap in airborne early warning capability,” Knighton stated, acknowledging the issue has been a recurrent topic in the committee. When pressed by Mr. Mark Francois MP on the slippage of the program, Knighton confirmed, “There are clear signs that Boeing is unable to deliver against the timeline that it had set.”
Despite the urgent need for the E-7’s capabilities, especially in the context of ongoing international tensions exemplified by the situation in Ukraine, the RAF has not yet secured these critical assets. With the original timeline for delivery already missed, the pressure is on both Boeing and the Defence Equipment & Support (DE&S) to expedite the process.
Knighton detailed the efforts being made to press Boeing, highlighting the role of a particularly “scary individual,” the senior responsible owner of the program, in driving the necessary performance and delivery.
“There are a whole range of problems, and there is no one silver bullet or magic wand that we can wave over it,” said Knighton, indicating the complexity of the issue at hand.
The difficulties, as noted by Knighton, stem not only from Boeing’s own internal challenges but also from their management of subcontractors and the underestimation of certification processes with regulatory bodies like the Military Aviation Authority.
When Mr. Francois asked for a straightforward delivery date, Knighton projected an initial operating capability (IOC) year of 2025 but hesitated to provide a specific date, acknowledging the potential for future setbacks and the importance of certainty before committing to a timeline.
“This requires us to drive Boeing, it requires Boeing to respond by driving its subcontractors, and it requires us to work tightly with the likes of the Military Aviation Authority,” he elaborated, painting a picture of the multifaceted endeavor to bring the E-7 to operational status.
In a telling exchange, Mr Kevan Jones MP sought clarity on the root of the issue, asking: “Is this Boeing’s problem?”.
Knighton unequivocally responded, “Yes, fundamentally. Boeing took on a contract to deliver a capability in a timescale that it has been unable to do it in.”
The RAF’s candidness in attributing the E-7 delay to Boeing underscores the level of urgency and frustration within the UK’s defence circles. It seems clear that the RAF is actively working to mitigate the delay’s impact on national security, but the message to Boeing is unequivocal: the current state of affairs is unacceptable, and time is of the essence.
Three ! one for each current hot spot……
Lucky then that it’s not 5!
It was originally 5 but the UK found out it could save £190 million of they only got 3. We still brought and paid for 5 radars for the the original aircraft. 2 will be mothballed as soon as they are delivered.
Boeing would not be in business if it wasn’t for the American social support pork barrel politics of their arms industry
I think that true of the Boeing of the past 10-15 years and perhaps during and after WWII but Boeing did have a spell where they were doing good things and innovating. Douglas merger seems to have had a negative impact.
The Douglas merger has been a disaster for Boeing and the quality of their products.
I do not blame Boeing, other countries got theirs on time! It’s easy to screw Brits, because they seem not serious about delays, it has become a British culture and this big companies know it , so when they cut corners they keep the Brits last, because they know others won’t tolerate what Brits tolerate 🤷🏼♂️
You might have a point generally, but seriously it doesn’t take much to research the years long problems and incompetence of Boeing though other major US contractors too because to a great degree as Brom related because they have traditionally had the unshakable (some might claim corrupt) support of very powerful political individuals and enter-ties and the combined power to manipulate the Court system not unlike what Blue Origin have been repeating in recent years. Delays, overspends and mediocre results are as a result rife and this is in the US not little old easy to manipulate Britain who has in the past already threatened to exclude Boeing for its terrible behaviours. And let us not forget that it’s even more appalling efforts in SLS and yep almost unbelievably worse still Starliner it was actually removed from offering a Lunar Landing System years back because an ex associate employed by the contract issuing authority was actively and illegally passing on sensitive secret information to them to help them attain one of the contracts on offer. So not all Douglas’s fault I suspect whatever that company’s shortcomings there is inherent Managerial machinations and long term incompetence too.
Yep, but for important support in high places and the fact that they are, despite their awfulness vital to military, and indeed commercial aerospace ventures they would no longer be in business. And to think Bae gets a bad press, Boeing are pretty much the British Leyland of the Air, so in this one I give the Ministry something of a pass if not a totally free one.
Will the MOD ever understand the old adage, ‘Do not throw the baby out with the bath water?’ Their continuous habit of ditching assets before they are replaced is not only risky but plain daft! The Wedgtail programme is a laughing stock, just three airframes mean only two can be serviceable at one time…..so reassuring!
Never learn 🙄
Its STS in Birmingham that is an issue, they are as equally to blame as boeing
I don’t think STS are the problem, Boeing are notorious for their supply chain issues and data inaccuracies on works orders.
Nothing to do with STS. All Boeing incompetence
Boeing can’t deliver on time then cut price or one extra Aircraft for our Money .That might shake things up 💰😮
Typical Boeing. There has never been such a badly mismanaged company. It exists solely because of corporate welfare
Nearly every frigging time we rely on a US company they fail to deliver.
How come they do not have these issues in Australia? Operational, minimal delays for basically the same aircraft.
Oh wait MOD procurement is involved
Why doesn’t UK lease or co-crew 1-2 off the RAAF?! Isn’t there a RAAF E-7 in Europe at the moment?
All of this was predictable at the time the contract was placed – inexperienced (in military systems) contractor – need to build up skills in team.- poor work package definition (E7 is about 10 yrs out of production) – delays in identifing replacement technologies which are either obsolete or out of production – UK documantation requirement for safety case greater than Boeing antcipitated. I could go on.
Boeing should fully understand the MAA requirements. Boeing UK has been in partnership with the MoD for 20+ years. Having supported aircraft such as the Chinook, Apache and C17. Which now also include the P8 Poseidon. So the safety case requirements for the E7 Wedgetail would not have been a completely new requirement. Beggars belief!
Boeing Divisions are each large companies in their own right and like all major US Corporations different divisions do not share data. The Helicopter Division is different to the Division under which the E7 sits. Also a major problem for the MAA is the conversion of secondhand aircraft where probably very poor documentation was available from the previous owners. Similar problems were experienced with the 3 UK Rivet Joint aircraft because they had been based on USAF aircraft which had been stored for some time and the level of detailed ‘evidence’ was not present. In this instance Boeing was not involved in their conversion. The C 17s were delivered well before the establishment of the MAA.
They are having problems with the replacement tankers as well.
There is an Airbus option but I cannot see the Americans taking that one.
Taking an airbus tanker! More chance of president Biden taking a gravity jet pack, a long hose then refuelling the aircraft and cleaning the windshield with his crotch while twerking over it.
Boeing have made a real mess of lots of projects this past decade.
Saab Goldeneye??
“the complex and increased assurance activity required to enable flight certification following Boeing 737 MAX aircraft accident investigation”
In other words the Assumption that delivery of a military capability on a proven civilian aircraft base will lower the cost and risk is wrong for Boeing and cannot be changed no matter how scary the responsible person might be.
Given that 737 MAX debacle is a strategic threat to Boeing it’s unlikely that they will not be putting maximum focus on return to service of that type for their many civilian customers (Airlines).
Burning trust in both civilian aircraft and military (KC-46) does put Boeing at risk generally and cast doubt on their selection for future projects.
With Airlines looking to divest 737 MAX the right response from Boeing would be to provide more E7 for the same money as they are worth less.
Begining to appreciate Mark Francois’ direct approach. Yet to discern the value of Gavin Robinson, though.
And where were DE&S and the MAA in all this. Seems like there hasn’t been enough honest and open conversations over the table. I suspect as is the norm, it descended into a mud slinging contest where no one comes off looking good.
Why did they not mention the E3 and why that was removed early, obviously to save money, leaving no capability?
And did the RAF or the politicians who provide the funds make that decision?
Daniele, its just typical MoD incompetence. Somebody – or possibly a whole team – will be moved upstairs over this.
Until private sector management techiques are successfully introduced, with consequences for incompetence and particularly office backstabbing, it won’t change
You mean the Private Sector Management Techniques exemplified by Boeing? Are there jails big enough. Well I guess if you can’t beat them join them eh.
In the private sector you are only as good as your last cock-up. You get employed because you dont lose the company money, its the other way, you have to make money for them. If you don’t you won’t last long.
With the MoD, there’s few consequences for incompetence, So we just bumble along, ending up with no E7 because of circumstances beyond our control. Doubtless, some committee decided to scrap the E3 too early. But we “saved” a few £million.
Sorry David that is just not true..the big multinationals are some of the worst examples of inefficient poor management and UK companies are especially prone to it….I have worked for both the public and private sectors and I can truthfully say that both can be shit and both can be good…but I can tell you some of the most ruthless target driven..extract everything you can from the workforce and extract every penny..practices I’ve seen have been in the pubic sector..far far worse than anything I have seen in the private sector….my private sector jobs have generally been lovely holidays compared to some of my public sector roles that have flogged me into the ground..with unrelenting 80-90 hour weeks ( the…if you don’t do it people will die motivator..is more powerful by a long way than the financial reward motivator) .
Probably because they sold the E7 deal on the back of the claimed unsuitability of keeping the E3 in service and the existence of the NATO AEWF to bridge the capability for a ‘short’ period. The purchase of 3 E3s by Chille must be embarrassing.
At the time of the initial requirement, Saab offered the Erieye mounted to a Bombardier Global Express aircraft as per Sentinel. However, the Erieye radar being offered then had about 1/3 the performance of the MESA radar fitted to the Wedgetail.
Subsequent developments of Erieye have narrowed the gap. But it still falls well short on detection range. The gap is going to widen again after the update Northrop Grumman has got planned for MESA.
I know someone who worked on the project. His view is that the RAF and MOD have no idea what they are doing.
Do think it’s time to start looking else were , just take a look at Archer (Swedish) good platforms 🇸🇪
The govt can blame Boeing but they created the problem by eliminating their existing capability before the new capability was in place. The govt also started the process of ordering the new aircraft too late
I’m worried about this. Having experience of the RAF’s release to service (RTS) process and the MAA, this might well turn out like another Rivet Joint certification/qualification process, or worse, the dreaded Chinook saga. Following Haddon-Cave, the approval, certification and release to service procedures have just become too complicated. Arse covering by senior RAF Staffs. No Air Marshal wants to go to jail! Problem is the boys and girls never end up getting the kit they need when in fact it’s perfectly airworthy and fit for purpose with perhaps only a few workarounds.
Geez I forgot about the Chinook debacle.
If there is one thing to learn here, is that it is unwise to retire a critical service before its replacement has at least achieved IOC. See also Nimrod MR2.
It’s Crazy but they never do learn 🙄
We don’t need a scary person,- what are they going to realistically do, judo chop the Boeing board if they don’t hurry up and deliver, or maybe put a horse head on the CEO’s pillow as a warning – we needed a water tight contract that places large financial penalties on Boeing if it didn’t deliver on the date specified, and then some scary Lawers to enforce it
You can put as many penalties in a contract as you like but the supplier will either price them into their bid or decline the contract – Boeing dosn’t need this work especially as much is being done under subcontract in the UK and they have the large USAF contract coming over the horizon which is likely to be followed by NATO. The problem is that the MOD/RAF jumped too soon and should have persevered with the E 3 for a few more years and been closer to the USAF and their intentions. Of course if MOD had invested in the E3 earlier, as the French and NATO have, there wouldn’t have been in such a hurry to change horses.
I would say this is more about ordering to late…and gapping the capability issue…everyone knows complex programs like this have risks of delay…it’s the job of government and the executive agency ( in this case the RAF) to ensure they have mitigated the risk by ordering in plenty of time and ensuring they can run the present capacity until the new one is in place…with a good risk margin…if they can’t they are shite and to blame…same issue with the escort fleet I’m afraid….
Had it been ordered earlier the order might not of been cut to three. The exchange rate was better among other things. The costs increased so much partly due to delays with ordering after the original quoted price.
So much problems with the need to meet each years budget. Delaying and scaling back projects only for them to cost millions more later.
Completely agree, the annual budget issue does really stop proper strategic thinking…it’s a curse on all the executive agencies of government, that really should be funded strategically but instead are at the mercy of annual budgets.
This is disgraceful, I think the MOD should set an example by cutting the number of planes to 1 that will show them.
🤣😂🤣😂 please don’t give the MOD Mandarins any ideas, otherwise you can bet your sweet derrière that some honch will write a 150 page report about how the UK AEW capability only needs a single elite aircraft and aircrew which will be summoned to scramble by the Batman search light beaming out over the airfield.
Meanwhile 12 RAF pilots will train in Italy in M-346 due to Hawk engine problems.
Italy is the best alternative place for training for RAF pilots due to both airforces having same combat planes for over 30 years. Tornado>Eurofighter>F-35
So long as the pilots are getting trained. They are needed asap. Trying to run all aspects of the military with just enough and just in time is fraught with problems.
Why did Liam Fox the conserative MP destroy all our early warning planes?
And now years later we’re waiting for replacements, at massive expense to our tax payers.
Once again short sighted crazy actions by the tories, that has left the UK exposed and unprotected. The tories have left the UK military in a shocking state of depletion.
We now need 5% of GDP for the UK defence forces so as to get us back on track to be able to defend our country.
Begs the question, why not put penalties in place into the contract when awarding it? If the promised delivery date is not met, Boeing have to pay huge fines?
We are only getting 3. How the heck can the miserly 3 we are getting be delayed? Just put the order back upto 7 and be done with it.
I still recall when the Airbus tanker won the USAF tanker competition outright and then Boeing complained and pulled some strings and had the contest redone so only the US offering could win…..