The first two of three E-7 Wedgetail airborne early warning aircraft for the Royal Air Force are starting to take shape.
Air Marshal Andrew Turner of the Royal Air Force tweeted the following:
Really pleased to see the first two of our Wedgetails coming together. Great team @STSAviation with @BoeingDefense that will give us a World-leading Air command & control capability. pic.twitter.com/aPEU3d3DOu
— Air Marshal Andrew Turner, Royal Air Force (@AndrewTurnerRAF) November 22, 2021
STS Aviation is converting three Boeing 737 airliners into E-7 Wedgetail airborne early warning aircraft at its facility at Birmingham Airport.
Wedgetail 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.
The plan, previously, was five aircraft but the recent ‘Defence Command Paper’ reduced the order from five to three. The Defence Command Paper released, titled ‘Defence in a Competitive Age’, stated:
“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.”
Not nearly the number needed to undertake the role. Minimum of 6 needed, the Auzzies have a better balanced Air Force than we have and spent a lot less. Even with high tech you need numbers………..😟
I quite agree Angus. Sadly, nothing ever changes in the minds of politicians when it comes to Defence of the Realm. The fingers crossed approach (hope it never happens) when it comes down to the number of viable and meaningful assets is disgraceful.
I’m no expert Angus but I have worked on aircraft before and can appreciate the overhead maintenance and training places on a fleet, not to mention the unpredictable nature of un-serviceability. Throw in some logistic challenges you might face when operating ‘000s miles from your home base and a fleet of just 3 E-7s means we’re only ever going to be able to ‘reliably’ support 1 operation/mission and, with that, a mission duration a single crew can sustain. Maybe a relief crew might increase the availability but you then place more of a strain on your 1 operational E-7 in my scenario. The numbers in this plan don’t support a truly global aspiration now talked about in government nor support our allies effectively. Should any kind of conflict kick off, a fleet of 3 only ever looks like a token contribution to a larger, multinational operation supported by other allies. We should have stuck to the original plan of 5, at least. Your last point is one that worries more now than ever, the most capable system, no matter how brilliant, can’t be in two geographic regions at once.
Great observations DP, I agree as you are spot on. My Air Force experiences echo your comments.
👍
I agree, three Wedgetails limits the amount of availability on station. Many will argue about cost which I suppose is a major limiting factor and yet can you ever have enough defence. I would have thought with the RAF having the P8 and the E7 that airframe and engine costs would come down. Possibly we could think of a two teir EAW system, maybe we could use the E7 as the command and control, get some more 737s and install SAAB GlobalEye and combine the lost capabilities of the Sentinal into this model.Again cost, but I think this method would give flexibility, reduce fleet cost and give forward deployed presense.
There’s probably something in what you suggest Ron although I’m no expert to suggest what the solution would look like. I’d hope someone up high is planning something like this going forwards. As the Voyager fleet has shown to some extent, with flight refuelling, cargo and passenger all wrapped up into one air frame, we probably need one air frame shell that all facets of ISTAR could be rolled up into. I appreciate what I’m suggesting won’t be as easy to implement as simply loading one piece of software in place of another but, imagine a 737 air frame (for example) with Command & Control systems, Wedgetail and MAD antenna, sonar buoy tubes and all manner of other listening antenna, for use right across the radio spectrum? I have to be careful with this suggestion here though, this could be used as an excuse to ‘refine’ the numbers even further with a rationalised fleet …. but in theory could improve all manner of logistic support?
I suspect that the MoD/RAF are eyeing a hybrid AEW force incl. a future UAV capability …
Going to take a seriously large UAV to have the power to not only carry but actually provide power to the radar and also have long endurance. I haven’t seen anything remotely close to this.
Check out Northrop’s Global Hawk (called Triton by the USN). The RAF has been salivating for 6 for a number of years.
Guys you’re living in the past the future is more unmanned assets and fewer but more advanced manned assets.
The future is almost certainly UAV based OkamsRazor to a large extent, I agree with you on that but where are these systems now or in the foreseeable future? It’s not about living in the past so much as maintaining capability with what is available now. It seems to me that, yet again, we’re facing a capability gap of a few years while Wedgetail is integrated into the fleet but when it eventually is we’ll have a significant capability limit. We’re only thinking and looking at AEW UAV ideas right now but have nothing concrete to make up the shortfall in assets. I’ve long supported the idea we need to expand the capability of the Protector fleet (possibly with more numbers) to make up the shortfall in P-8 numbers. Indeed, in some aspects (extended loiter), the Protectors could offer an extension to P-8 capability to counter-balance the subsurface limitation the Protector option might currently have. We need the introduction of new assets to dovetail with the old and a plan that sees UAV tech enhancing what we already have …. with some eventual decision being made whether to replace manned systems with UAVs once they’ve demonstrated their ability to do so effectively.
Precisely!
It would be great to see some of these unmanned assets in the air….
Where are these assets being tested ,
Many thanks Ian
Long Endurance Vehicles have some advantages but are generally controlled via sat up links which are not as secure as you may expect and delays etc etc of info rather than team there. AI may be a way forward but do we really want computers deciding what actions need taking? Killer robots? I think not. Man in loop a must no matter what. Got to have rules to safe guard human life in such cases.
If unmanned is the future, why is the USA now looking at a wedgetail buy ?
Reality is three airframes provides little scope for deployed ops, we should have stuck with the five (two less than the original E-3 purchase but the air force has coped with this for a good few years and the performance of E-7 Is better) and kept them at RAF Waddington, keeping all the air forces E-8, E-7 and half the fast jet fleet on one station is asking for trouble at Lossie.
However the move to Lossie appears to be down to the jets reduced range and our inability to air refuel the E-7, so the jets need to be nearer to their normal operating location.
I hate to sound negative but the shrinking fast jet, transport, maritime and now AWAC’s fleet is so frustrating. Having seen the RAF of the 80’s and 90’s, disappear at the end of the cold war, it is concerning the we are still reducing our force size despite fresh and re-emerging threats.
Two more E-7, a few more E-8’s and grab a passenger 737 for crew training.
Either keep the C-130 fleet or purchase extra A400’s if they can definately perform the C-130’s role.
Stick a boom on some of the tankers and replace T1 Typhoons with new builds to keep the build skills present ready for Tempest. Typhoon could then be kept in service post Tempest as a workhorse and to increase the fast jet fleet. I’ve never understood why the RAF scraps aircraft that still has airframe life!?
I really have no technical or inside knowledge to support my thoughts, but I just don’t see how we can become ‘global Britain’ with an Air Force that is shrinking this rapidly ?
Mind you when the US interest was mentioned previously the question was about whether it was a stop gap solution till unmanned and satellite solutions were fully operational or whether it was to a long term multi layered approach. I suspect they will persist with the latter approach for as long as possible though it will be interesting to see if they replace like for like. I guess they can afford multi layered better than us mind even if they are feeling the pinch somewhat too in their military ambitions.
I am hoping there is some secret we will also buy 3x more E7 and are part of the bigger US order to get a lower cost / efficiency? Wishful thinking there it is too sensible 🙂
Thx CO, I’m liking your plan. 5 does appear to be the practical number.
We all pine for the good old days, but unfortunately those days are not coming back, all modern airforce are getting smaller as forces use more holistic methods to prosecute goals, which include better technology reach due to advances in software and processing power and more available platforms.
I think everyone recognises that military fleets have to reduce from the old cold war strengths but a fleet of 3 ? (Can 3 even be a fleet ?!) This is tokenism, just saying that we have a capability on the pretence of still being a major power. What is the fast jet fleet down to now ? @150 ? And staying that way when the Tranche 1’s go. At least get a boom on the voyagers to extend the E-7 and E-8’s mission time.
I think this is the frustrating part, we drop/gap capabilities, reduce desired fleet sizes and ignore force multiplying upgrades which in the grand scheme would not cost much more.
A quality, sensibly funded and technically advanced military will keep the country at the forefront of the global nations and bring more money back into the country. Funding the military if done sensibly will put money back into the economy as well.
I just hope that this is a temporary reduction until the economy gets back onto it’s feet when some small but sensible additions can be made to the forces.
So why is the US on the way to returning to Cold War levels to combat the Chinese and Russians?
It just means the 3 E-7s will be worked into the ground. Even 5 wasn’t enough. The US has 31 E-3 AWACS. You could argue the RAF needs at least 9- 12 to ensure at least 3- 4 will always be available. And the P-8s? Really at least 24. Why have KC-30s (stupid name Voyager) without booms? Makes no sense. Meanwhile the USAF is expanding the number of it’s squadrons so it can combat the red Chinese. Now is comparable to the 1930s and Britain is even in a worse state of preparedness. Meanwhile the Australian military is in the process of having its budget increased from 2.0% to at least 4% of GDP (when the nuclear submarine decision is made).
Unmanned AEW can easily be interfered with, and jammed, or even to blind it!
Our adversaries will stop at nothing to counter our defence capabilities!
Neither are the public ready for uncrewed jet liners in the sky.
The problem with unmanned assets is they need a comm link with the ground. Until AI gets so good that it can react and retask it’self, it will need a pilot on the ground. The issue with that is near peer actors (list growing by the day) will flood and trash the entire comm spectrum in a war. You’ll have no reliable communication with your UAVs.
I presume, as a reader of this blog, that you have heard of low probability of intercept communications protocols being used by the F-35 and rolled out to the rest of the fleet.
LPOI is detection. Detection means nothing. The entire EM spectrum will be flooded and unusable for any reliable comms. Think of it as EW’s version of area denial.
fit 2 Lockheed Vigilance pods to the outboard missile wing mount on P8’s ?
Don’t let Jeremy Clarkson here you talk like that…he reviles us orse-tralians as it is. It’s appalling that the Royal Air Force, “The Few”, Clarkson, “The Dam Busters” would stoop to taking ideas from us.
The purchase of such low numbers will only make sense if we actually get some form of a drone or networked swarm in good time as per what the mod have alluded to. I get the E7 may be vulnerable in certain environments, but would a drone have the power and radar size to recreate anything like what the E7 has in regard to reach and detail?
News flash drones like Predator/Protector are no longer small
I’m hoping that the mod might order 2 or 3 more when the US puts in any order for them. Might help keep the cost down.
yes that would be best + get a older passenger airplane/2 for crew training or make them go through BAs pilot training courses?
The RAF has it’s own multi engine traning for it’s tanker/transport fleet crews. They don’t need old passenger aircraft. That is just a massive waste of funds that could be much better spent.
All this talk about numbers… I’m just happy to see them going green!
They’ll name the first one ‘Pride of Greta’.
(I’m on a roll… Lusty Tuesdays might have to be a thing now too…)
Indeed you are! You’ll be hard pressed to up the anti on Friday, but I look forward to it! I do hope the green mantra applies to the crew meal options.
Vegan organic ready meals with a nice soy/almond milk latte. Ethically sustainable sourced beans off course. Cups and plates made from re- cycled compost from a medicinal cannabis co operative commune in the US Pacific North West. Tune in and drop out, man!
The bean counters most probably think the promise of jam tomorrow in the shape of advanced unmanned systems justifies procuring the absolute minimum of air-frames now.
Problem is the uncertainty around if and when drones can offer the same level of capability. How many years until a stopgap is no longer a stopgap?
I think i’ve found the best job in the world. Be a high up in the UK armed forces. It doesn’t matter how bad a job you do everyone will blame the politicians for not giving you enough money. The world is full of armed services to compare our own with. Some do a better job some worse. If you want to know where ours are in the league table just compare what we get for our money and what they get for more but overwhelmingly less. For what little it’s worth my own gold standard is the USMC.
3 is not enough even with proposed drone capability. It really defies logic and once in service we will be told that one will be online with 2 in use reserves which means one in the shed and one with snags. These airframes are going to have very busy lives.
3 is simply insufficient. When there is a surge requirement for a sustained ops tempo, watch the wheels come off. To exacerbate things, there is not only the maintenance requirements on the aircraft, but all the internal systems, software and hardware. My overriding memory from my experiences as an Air Force Ops officer ” If something can brake down – it wilI”
The being said , I mean no disrespect to the maintenance and ops crews. Thank you for your tireless efforts, professionalism and dedication, I’d value any input on the subject from ex E3 Sentry drivers/crews.
I’ve always wondered if the cut from 5 to 3 was also because the MOD didnt want to pay for new built aircraft. Still hoping that when 2 and 3 are further along, they will go get a couple more ex airline 737-700s.