The RAF’s E-3 Sentry airborne early warning aircraft fleet has now been retired with their replacement not due until 2023.

The UK will rely on the NATO Airborne Early Warning and Control Force to plug the gap.

In August, a Boeing E-3D Sentry has returned to its home base at RAF Waddington following its final mission on Operation SHADER, bringing to a close 30 years of operational service. The Royal Air Force say here in a news release:

“The E-3D Sentry aircraft flew its final operational sortie on the 30th July over Iraq as part of the counter-Daesh Operation SHADER. The aircraft from 8 Squadron had been deployed to RAF Akrotiri in Cyprus and was the latest and last deployment since 2015. The aircraft returned to RAF Waddington in Lincolnshire on 4th August and was greeted by Air Vice-Marshal Al Marshall, the Air Officer Commanding Number 1 Group and also Major General Thomas Kunkel United Stated Air Force Commanding Officer of the NATO Airborne Early Warning and Sea Control Force.”

Describing the aircraft’s lengthy service, the Commander of the Intelligence, Surveillance, Targeting and Reconnaissance Force, Air Commodore Hay Commander said:

“Sentry’s return from a hugely successful overseas deployment heralds a fitting end to over 30 years of continuous service in support of NATO, other coalition and national operations.  Whether operating from their home base at Waddington or airfields from across Europe and the broader Middle East, Sentry has contributed by providing a Recognised Air and Maritime Picture that has enabled others to operate with significant freedom of action against the most hostile of threats.”

The Royal Air Force say that during the period between retirement and the Wedgetail becoming operational, the Intelligence, Surveillance, Targeting and Reconnaissance requirements will be covered by a combination of other aircraft and E-3s from the NATO Airborne Early Warning and Control Force.

What is the NATO Airborne Early Warning and Control Force?

Under NATO Allied Air Command’s operational control, the Airborne Early Warning and Control Force operates a fleet of Boeing E-3A ‘Sentry’ Airborne Warning & Control System aircraft, better known as AWACS. These aircraft provide members with an immediately available air and maritime surveillance as well as airborne command and control and air battle management capability.

NATO say on their website that the Airborne Early Warning and Control Force is “the Alliance’s largest collaborative venture”.

“A venture that exemplifies NATO’s ability to facilitate multinational cooperation and to exploit the benefits of that the pooling of resources can bring.”

Further confirmation of this came recently thanks to a written Parliamentary question.

Mark Francois, Member of Parliament for Rayleigh and Wickford, asked:

“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, what estimate he has made of the date on which the (a) last E-3D sentry aircraft will be retired from operational service and (b) first E-7 Wedgetail will achieve initial operating capacity in Royal Air Force service.”

Jeremy Quin, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence, responded today:

“We will retire the E-3D Sentry from operational service later in 2021, as part of the transition to the more modern and more capable fleet of three E-7 Wedgetail aircraft, which are expected to enter service in December 2023. The United Kingdom remains part of the NATO AEW&C Force Headquarters.”

An E-7 Wedgetail of the Royal Australian Air Force. Photo by Bidgee [CC BY-SA 3.0], from Wikimedia Commons.
Wedgetail (pictured above) is an airborne early warning and control system, commonly known as AWACs or AEW&C. They are designed to track multiple targets at sea or in the air over a considerable area for long periods of time.

This aircraft is replacing the E-3D Sentry, pictured below.

FILE PHOTO: E-3D Sentry

What is the status of Wedgetail?

The UK recently cut its order for five E-7 aircraft to three. The Defence Command Paper released earlier in the year, titled ‘Defence in a Competitive Age‘, states:

“We will retire the E 3D Sentry in 2021, as part of the transition to the more modern and more capable fleet of three E 7A Wedgetail in 2023. The E 7A will transform our UK Airborne Early Warning and Control capability and the UK’s contribution to NATO. The nine P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft will help to secure our seas. The introduction into service of the 16 long range Protector remotely piloted systems will be the backbone of persistent, multi spectral surveillance, with the ability to strike and act decisively against our potential adversaries around the globe.”

You can read more about that here. You can also read more about the status of the first E-7 for the Royal Air Force by clicking here or clicking the link below.

First UK E-7 Wedgetail ready for conversion work

What is the NATO Airborne Early Warning and Control Force?

Under NATO Allied Air Command’s operational control, the Airborne Early Warning and Control Force operates a fleet of Boeing E-3A ‘Sentry’ Airborne Warning & Control System aircraft, better known as AWACS. These aircraft provide members with an immediately available air and maritime surveillance as well as airborne command and control and air battle management capability.

NATO say on their website that the Airborne Early Warning and Control Force is “the Alliance’s largest collaborative venture”.

“A venture that exemplifies NATO’s ability to facilitate multinational cooperation and to exploit the benefits of that the pooling of resources can bring.”

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

121 COMMENTS

  1. Can I ask the silly question first….why not retire the E-3D Sentry once the E-7 Wedgetails are on the tarmac and ready to go? What or who is going to take up the slack in the 1-2 years between?

    • From Georges article para 7 I believe:
      “The Royal Air Force say that during the period between retirement and the Wedgetail becoming operational, the Intelligence, Surveillance, Targeting and Reconnaissance requirements will be covered by a combination of other aircraft and E-3s from the NATO Airborne Early Warning and Control Force.”

        • In 1979 the UK took the typical unilateral decision to not join the NATO programme introducing the very first fleet of aircraft, 18 E3A AWACS into NATO service in1981. Many NATO countries participated, each contributing and each sharing the rewards of maintenance contracts. The UK were non-contributors and therefore received no benefits.The UK finally gave up on their go-it-alone, and failed Nimrod/GEC attempt to fulfil their obligation to NATO in providing AEW support some 10 years later and were finally convinced to procure seven E-3D AWACS from Boeing.
          The UK has been unable to keep pace with the necessary updates during the last 30 years because they could not afford it in the way the participant NATO countries have jointly been able to do so with the NATO fleet during the 40 years of service. When the procurement of the 7 RAF E-3D aircraft finally took place the MOD failed to recognise the need to purchase the software source code for this sophisticated mission system, thus preventing the aircraft mission system from being kept up to date.

          Airframe fatigue and costly maintenance has reduced the NATO fleet numbers, but the NATO AWACS fleet is still operational and with the retirement of tbe UK fleet, will once again have to perform the AEW role without the UK’s support.

    • Why…? I can think of no acceptable reason for a country the size of the U.K. not to have a sovereign AEW capability. Not that 3 Wedgetails will give us a sufficient capability. Who will take up the slack? The NATO AEW cooperative system, so basically us relying on other country’s info. The downside to this is we can’t deploy any of our own AEW when or where we might need them.

      • ECLIPSE, I know,what you mean there should have been an overlap in time so as we don’t have too depend on others ,,I do believe the same happened with Those Nimrods, which were to be upspected but all ended in the breakers yard Our MOD seems too enjoy having more gaps in defence capabilities than Terry Thomas’s teeth Remember the Navies 3 Invincible class carriers thank god nothing between that gap and the QEs class becoming operational Whitehall must forever have their fingers crossed praying nothing does happen

      • No, not “other country’s info” because NATO isn’t a country. It’s an organisation funded by many countries, including the UK (which is the 2nd largest contributor, after the USA)

        • 2nd largest contributor? Yes. But until the E-7s come into service we will not be a contributor at all to NATO’s AEW capability. And, it is not other country’s info but it is gathered by other countries; French, American, German planes etc. And I’d argue that both of those points are unacceptable.

    • Nato… and from what I heard these E-3D Sentrys are outdated because they never got upgraded like the yank ones. But the yanks still bought one of ours, for training i think though.

    • Hi Quentin,

      To make a stab at answering your first question I think it comes down to retaining a small cadre of people. In the past squadrons would disband and then reform later on a new type. On fighter squadrons the process meant to fighter force would be down say 2 squadrons, but with other squadrons to fill in some of the gaps. With only 3 airframes that is obviously not possible so it basically means gapping the capability while you retrain the force on to the new capability.

      We know that a small number of RAF people have been flying on RAAF Wedgetails, but that would only give an insight into what was needed – invaluable information and exprience to build on, but now is the time to start that building work. So I would expect RAF people to be in the US and possibly still in Australia learning to operate and crucially maintain the aircraft and very different systems. All of which takes time.

      I also suspect that given the age of the airframe and system the RAF would have had its more experienced people on AWACS force, so I would not be surprised if there is not a few coming up for, or stayed on past, retirement…

      Cheers CR

    • My mind has gone blank. Which NATO countries are ahead of the UK in the task of building their capabilities year on year? Has the UK failed to defend Europe at some point?

      I’m not sure it isn’t a good thing to ask other NATO countries if they are still in the business of working with us in defending our democracies😀

    • We did learn lessons at the time, but these have been conveniently forgotten over the years, including of course the most critical of all………our lack of AEW!!

        • Sadly yes. Two of the E3s were recently co-ordinating for the QE on her IOD in High threat areas……there has been little or no word on how Crowsnest has been fairing on the trip. To dispense with existing platforms prior to replacements being available is just plain dumb.

  4. This might seem like a REALLY silly question… but could the radar dome be taken off, plonked on top of a tall-ish coastal building and be deployed as a backup ground station? For when things come to us? Extra set of eyes for the Quick Reaction team? Just crazy blue sky thinking haha.
    M@

    • No! The RAF has plenty of radar coverage for the UK home defence role. 😂

      I can see the Spinnaker tower now…!

      • I wonder how big the blind spot is over the north atlantic?
        Do modern airliners share their radar data in real time which probably means there isn’t a blind spot in normal circumstances unless all flights are grounded.

        • Modern airliners don’t really have radars in that respect (apart from weather radars but not much coverage far off nose and not sure how good they are for aircraft)… they mostly use IFF transponders which rely on the other planes having there responding system turned on.

        • There is zero radar coverage over the N Atlantic. Remember, radar at ground level does not have a particularly great range.

          Air Traffic control is pretty much on trust until aircraft fly in to the UK’s Air Identification Zone which is when ATC pick them up by their transponders. It’s how we know Russian aircraft are approaching, they typically don’t have their transponders on so RAF QR have to be scrambled to identify and track to ensure there’s not conflict of airspace with civilian aircraft

    • I suspect the design of the radome has more of a “look down” function, so plonking it on a tall building might only give you a view of the people wandering around looking at the weird flying saucer that had just landed!😂

    • What about the Sampson Radar on the ridge above Portsmouth. This is obviously a training establishment, but I would guess that this would be quite a useful system in an elevated position, should an operational one be required. I hate gaps in our capabilities as much as I hate our services being handicapped by political micromanagement and incompetance.

      Looks like the Wedgetail order for a miserly 3 airframes will be padded out with drones, when it gets here. Maybe that will be the UK component, while manned Wedgetails will be used for our overseas committments.

      Just thinking out loud. I enjoy reading the comments from some very well informed people on this site. Often so much more informative than the original story. Thank you.

    • That reminds me of a former defence sec and now former education secretary who (allegedly) asked if we could mount tank guns on tractors.

  5. This is a very sad day, the E3D has served the UK well over its 30 odd years of service often in operations in support of allies which was not headline news. I fail to understand how the French, who bought their E3s at virtually the same standard as the UK in the same deal with Boeing, have managed to upgrade all of their fleet to the latest E3 Standard. The claim that the E7 will “transform the UK AEW capability” is only true if you consider a reduction from 7 platforms to 3 to be transformational! One E7 cannot cover the same volume of airspace as 2 E3s and one platform, no matter how good, can only be in one place at a time. It would be interesting see the operational justification for a force of only 3 aircraft operating over a prolonged period of time some distance from their base such at Iceland Norwegian Gap or providing real long range AEW cover to the Carriers in the Indo/Pacific region

    • because the French chose to spend the money on the upgrade, the UK did not. Having said that, even the USAF are really struggling keeping their E3s flying & are desperate to get a replacement.

      • The USAF E3s are about 20 years older then the UK E3s and have flown many more hours including significantly more AAR events which increases fatigue usage. Added to this the USAF E3s have supported significant numbers of long term deployments into difficult desert environments which adds to general wear and tear of moving parts. They were planned to be replaced by the E10 ( a 767 variant) but that grew like topsy and was eventually cancelled some years ago – so they are probably desperate but have yet to conclude the E7 is the answer.

          • I don’t believe the E7 is big enough to carry all the additional equipment and crew carried on the USAF E3 and I doubt the E7 mission system is able to replace all that additional equipment. That’s assuming the radars are broadly equivalent in performance. Not much mention is made of the Japanese 767 variant of the E3. A Block 41 upgrade of that system may make a more compelling case, again assuming there are sufficient low hours 767’s in the US desert storage areas. I am quite certain that if the USAF were seriously looking at the E7, we would be hearing rumours of presentations and proposals and mention of the likely site of the conversion line from Boeing. I cannot see anything in the USAF budget approved by Congress.

          • The E3 uses a 1980s era PESA radar, the E7 uses a 2010 era AESA radar. The performance difference is an order of magnitude. The rear end processing of the E7 uses swappable GPU blades, so are much easier to keep up to date, whereas the E3’s are dedicated blade based CPUs. With the E7, it is easier to upgrade its performance purely through software upgrades. Whilst the E3 is stuck with the PESA’s limitations. The E7’s multi-role electronically scanned array (MESA) does not have the limitations of PESA. It has a much wider operating frequency and can transmit multiple tracking beams whilst still carrying out a full sweep of the sky.

            In regards to the actual radar’s performance, it is a widely known fact that the AN/APY-2 has problems detecting slow targets as well as small RCS targets against the ground’s background clutter. As the radar is mounted in the mechanically rotating radome it has the problem of a continually rotating dead zone, that must use predictive tracking algorithms to show where airborne threats are. Whereas, the MESA has a constant 360 degree coverage.

            Furthermore, as the height of the antenna is restricted due to the size of the radome, the beam shape is more like a beaver tail, than a torch beam. The E7’s MESA has a more rounded beam, making it better for target resolution/recognition. The power output of the AN/APY-2 is bit of a monster, its good for about 600km at 40,000ft. The MESA has a published range similar to the E3 at 600km, but against a 1m3 fighter sized target. The E3 does not have that capability, where’s it’s more like 5m3 at that range.

            The Wedgetail can do everything the E3 can, but better and a lot more. It is a full intelligence, surveillance, target acquisition and reconnaissance (ISTAR) platform. Though they are being tight lipped about it, the radar should be able to do fairly detailed ground mapping much like the Sentinel, as the transmitted beam diameter is much narrower. But it can also do a wide swath of the jobs that the Rivet Joint does as well.

            Alabama Boy raises a good question about the size of the 737, is it too small for future growth. Possibly, but a lot of the systems currently fitted to the AWACS are antiquated and have been significantly condensed down in size. In terms of scopies, the E3 can use 14, whilst the E7 uses 10, though the RAAF use 12 plus there’s space for two more.

          • Davy you make some interesting statements about the E3 radar antenna what’s the source of your information ?

        • How come the E7s are a fair bit smaller and twin engined? Newer smaller better tech?
          I would love to see the recieved data difference between the two.

      • Not **** likely!

        And besides that…..France has a total of just four E3F’s and they have 30 year old airframes so I think UK might have made the right call personally.

        • You do realize that for 10 years the French were doing our ASW patrols with Dassault Atlantiques because we retired Nimrod MR.2 without a replacement, till the P-8 arrived last year?

          • As stated in an earlier post , fair enough the Treasury was empty But those Nimrods were halfway through their updates when they went to the breakers yard what a waste of time and money , same happened with the Invincible class Carriers

          • Yes. But likely a very small number. I have found only one case on the public record of that occurring – back in 2015 to look for a Russian sub. The US is likely to have helped a lot more in that time.

      • Nato has a multinational E3 squadron based in europe, I would be surprised if some RAF guys don’t transfer over there and maybe some of our old planes too. Don’t the yanks base any awacs in UK or is that just tankers based here.

    • No but times have changed, the smart money from the experts is that in 10 years awacs aircraft will be not needed, drones will fly, transmit the rough data to operators safely in a bunker somewhere, meaning high tech computers arent flying around in danger, this then greatly lowers the cost of platforms and lowers risks to humans.
      3 is enough to cover us in a stand alone war against a minor player, if we are going up against anyone bigger I would hope NATO is in play.
      Updating aircraft this old with the speed tech is changing was seen as a waste of cash

    • think the reasoning is that manned AEW will be obsolete in 10 years and that drones are the future. also, these aircraft don’t do just AEW, they do ISTAR and we have alternatives…unlike the french

    • You would have to go back a very long time, when we last operated 7 E3’s. Basically 3 E7’s can do the job of 5 or more E3’s. Why? because of the availability and serviceability rate. E3 struggled to achieve a 60% serviceability rate. E7 will easily surpass 95% like the Voyager fleet does. And it is much more capable. Combined with the P8 fleet and the 16 Protectors, RAF ISTAR and AEW will be far more capable compared to the E3 day’s. The gap isn’t ideal, but money needs to be saved to pay for the new toy’s. E3 was simply bleeding cash that could be spent on new capability.

      • I wasn’t proposing that no investment be made on the E3. Comparing past performance under a flawed support contract with the first of Type aircraft yet to come off the conversion line is interesting. As for Voyager the availability rate is a direct result of the much criticised PFI deal where availability is fixed and the MOD/RAF cannot easily mess about with support options as the aircraft is maintained to civil standards.

    • Well Atleast NATO now has its own multinational awacs squadrons in Germany, maybe where our planes might go for spares or even upgrade.

      And surely the RAF guys will now go help/work with NATO’s E3s as it’s an area and plane we know well, II we don’t already have guys there helping.

      • A good idea but not new; the first RAF E3D crew and Sqn/Stn Execs trained on the NATO Sqns in the late 1980’s prior to the delivery of the first E3D. They remained for some months after completing training to augment the NATO Operation as recompense for the training. However I doubt the RAF will want to invest further in the E3 as the E7 is very different aircraft. A few RAF crewmembers are already serving on the RAAF E7 and will presumably form the nucleus of the Sqn when the first E7 is ready for delivery.

  6. Now waiting for the typical MOD delay on its replacement, followed by the new Labour government cancelling the purchase and giving them to Moscow as an example of our good faith.

  8. Disagree. So I thought I’d write the usual response to you TH, or Harold, to add some balance to your hate filled venomous rant.

    “So this is the reality of so-called ‘Global Britain”

    P5 UNSC member.
    G7 member.
    Worldwide economic, cultural, trade links. One of the worlds major or medium powers.

    The Military has nothing to do with the term “Global Britain” as Great Britain has been global for centuries, has it not? The term “Global Britain” has just been hijacked by the left to mock.

    “constantly shun our closest allies in Europe” We do? Or do they shun us? If we are shunning them why are we in Africa helping them? Why does GCHQ and the Met CTC assist European police forces in fighting extremists?

    “aggravate them” How? By choosing to leave a political construct called the EU? We are still European and still call them allies and we still trade.

    “then invite them back to drive our trucks ” That is the VERY ESSENCE of Brexit. We should rightly be able to choose what skills we need and when and invite workers from abroad here. That was the whole point, having that control and not a free for all as free movement entailed.

    “assist in protecting our air space.”

    The AWACS force is not used for that on a daily basis in any case. The RAF ASCS with QRA force does it every day without AWACS capability being needed. We supply heavy lift helicopters to France in Mali for their gaps. When Nimrod was retired France helped out fill the MPA gap.

    “if I were our European allies, I know what my response would be”

    Ah, like their behaviour over Galileo? Or being excluded from intelligence organisations ( even though we are a part of a bigger one ) Or the endless, obstructive behaviour of France over anything whatsoever to do with the UK?
    Right.

    “Less ‘Global Britain’ more ‘Litte Britain’!”

    Only in your and Corbyn’s wet dreams.

    “Little Britain”

    Nuclear Power.
    G7.
    G20.
    P5 UNSC.
    English spoken worldwide.
    Soft Power.
    Science Power.
    Engineering Power.
    One of worlds biggest economies.
    Universities top the charts.
    Migrants the world over want to come here.
    Jobs galore. ( I know, there are none in Italy and my relatives all want to come here to work )
    Olympic sports teams 4th, 3rd, 2nd, 3rd in last 4 Olympics.

    Little Britain? I don’t think so. Most of the nations of the world can only dream of what GB has achieved.

    Your invited to deconstruct every paragraph with any corrections.

    Or is this just another drive by shooting designed to provoke a response?

  9. Boom! And Daniele shoots and scores and we have a troll down, troll down, we have a troll down on the site! Ah you can always rely on TH, Harold, PierrLM, John or whatever new avatar and IP address the saddo comes up with to regurgitate the same drivel.

  10. Another pathetic attempt in a very long line of ‘savings’ initiatives. Mind you a capability gap of only 2 years or so? Progress!

  11. Yet another unacceptable capability holiday. And the government trots out the same garbage they did with MPA. Shameful.

  12. We are entering a next phase of defense warning as technogy advances at pace.
    What was created in science fiction comics is becoming reality through research and development.
    If one knew what the future holds in aeriel defence we would be blown away.

  14. If we were able to fit refuelling probes to our E-3s (so they can be refuelled without a boom), why aren’t we fitting our P-8s and E-7s with them? Seems like an inexpensive and simple(ish) addition that can add a whole lot more of *soverign* capability…

    • Fitting a probe would require a whole series of changes to the front of the aircraft and flight trails and updated maintenance procedures and manuals to Certify the aircraft all of which would add to the acquisition cost. The MOD has learned a lesson that buying off the shelf means exactly that and any changes come with a significant extra cost. No doubt this would have been debated during the decision making process and the RAF have concluded that for local operations refuelling will not be require very often except for training and currency and the US or NATO could support these scheduled events. On deployments these will more likely be as part of a coalition where the US or NATO would provide AAR. Of course it probably means the E7 will find it hard to operate in the Falklands as I doubt NATO or the US would be prepared to support us so lets hope we can avoid a conflict there.

    • We never had 11 E3s, the RAF planned to have 11 Nimrod AEW 3’s but that programme was cancelled due to lack of performance and increasing development costs (it was a cost + contract.). 7 E3s were purchased under fixed price terms after a competition between all the existing major contenders, including GEC the prime for Nimrod AEW. When the UK selected Boeing the French joined the purchase as Boeing offered a deal where a common system for both nations had some significant cost savings. I understand the French are showing some interest in purchasing some parts of the UK Sentry’s to support their fleet I doubt the MOD will sell them complete aircraft as that might be a little embarrassing for the MOD.

  16. Does someone know if the reason for the retirement is due to the electronics being out of date or the airframes have no further life in them.
    The reason for my question is simple really, if it is the airframes that are shot then ok I understand, but if it is due to the electronics not being upto to peer to peer standard then I question the logic.
    We do not need peer to peer in every area of operations, as an example the Caribbean we could use the older E3s to help in anti drug running patrols, possibly even over the English Channel for anti trafficing patrols etc. It is the same with the Hercs, why not use them for humanitarian tasking rather than getting rid of them. This would free up front line units to do front line jobs. It is my opinion that we get rid of equipment to fast where with some thinking we could use older equipment for second line tasking. Possibly we could even use some creative finacial thinking in how to pay for the upkeep and running of the older equipment such as international aid etc.

    • The E3 is been retired because the airframe needed very serious maintenance and the Electronics was out of date. Unlike other E3 users, the MOD/RAF had given the aircraft no significant updates during its whole life (30 years). The extent of work to address these issues was high and consequently so would have been the costs. These were deemed to be unaffordable against other higher priorities for investment. It took the RAF a great effort to keep the 3 remaining aircraft flying so the aircraft has been given the ‘coup de grace’ to save all this effort and expense for other uses. The US Coast Guard routinely conduct Caribbean Surveillance sorties with their own aircraft and the RN usually have a vessel there which can conduct anti drug smuggling and disaster relief missions far more effectively that keeping a very difficult aircraft and crew out there at very high cost . .

  17. If UK E-3 retired why is ZH101 flying nearly everyday? currently circling west of RAF Boulmer (20211007 12:30z) Callsign SOLEX01

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here