Saab, the Swedish defence company, has showcased its inaugural Saab 340 Airborne Early Warning (AEW) aircraft specifically designed for Poland.
The reveal took place in a ceremony in Linköping on 29 September, a mere two months after Poland commissioned an order for two of these airborne systems.
“We are honoured to provide this important capability to Poland and proud to be quickly progressing towards the delivery of this airborne early warning system to the Polish Armed Forces,” remarked Carl-Johan Bergholm, head of Saab’s business area Surveillance.
The impressive speed of progress is attributed to the robust cooperation between Saab and the Polish Armed Forces. Furthermore, Saab’s existing production line for such airborne early warning solutions, along with a dedicated team with niche expertise, ensures streamlined tests and evaluations to gain requisite system approvals.
To date, nine countries have invested in various setups of Saab’s Erieye AEW/AEW&C system, affirming its position as one of the predominant airborne surveillance systems on a global scale.
Not sure if having 20 of these plus change would have been better than 3 x E-7, coiuld have couple fwd deployed to AKT & MPN and still have plenty of UK coverage
A mix of both would be useful. Ground based radar is extremely useful also.
There is an MoD program incoming regards ground based radar and UK home defence. Seems the network may be expanded, a very good thing.
What range compared to an E7, though? The UKADR is on a different scale to the area Poland needs to cover.
Yes I think a few of these to work with the E7 would be the ideal horses for courses utilisation for flexibility I think, but I don’t know how that would work in overall costs and management considerations. I remember Saab were unhappy that they couldn’t pitch this against the E7.
At the time, the Erieye radar that Saab were offering to the RAF, it wasn’t in the same league, as the Raytheon MESA radar used by the Wedgetail. Even with the latest version it still isn’t in outright detection range. The MESA pumps out more power and operates at a lower frequency in the L-band compared to Erieye’s S-band.
The RAF were looking for not only a direct replacement for the Sentry. But a system that could also detect slow and lower moving targets with a very small RCS. The RAAF deployed Wedgetail’s in support with the fight against ISIS. Which also had RAF, USAF and French Sentries operating.
The Wedgetail proved that it could detect targets further than Sentry. But more importantly detect small slow flying drones. On top of this the RAF embedded Sentry personnel on the Wedgetails. So not only did they get a first hand experience of how good the MESA radar was. But could also compare its performance against their experience with the Sentry’s.
It was was this experience I believe, that had a large part in deciding to go with the Wedgetail. Since that decision, SAAB have upgraded Erieye. Where it has around another 100km of detection range. Plus Saab have further developed the Globaleye. Which is a Bombardier Global jet, fitted with the latest version of Erieye. But with a mechanically scanning X-band AESA radar underneath the aircraft. Which means it has a very good maritime surveillance capability.
I would reckon that since we have a lacking number wedgetails , we could supplement some capability with the Globaleye system.
At least buy a couple used global jets and convert.
But I’m sure we all know the bean counters would have great difficulty spending more money let alone on an ‘existing’ capability that is already ‘sufficient’ in numbers.
With what else is happening in the World, I believe there is a really good business case to justify buying the additional two Wedgetail B737 airframes and do the installation.
But I also believe there is justification for expanding the original requirement past 5 platforms to at least match the legacy 7 Sentries. As one aircraft is not enough to cover the whole of the UK, North Sea and parts of the Atlantic. Let alone meet deployments and other NATO commitments.
The question is should we purchase additional Wedgetails? Or purchase another cheaper platform with say 75% of Wedgetail’s capability, Which is what an Erieye based platform would be?
According to site 400-500 km at altitudes but its the look down need can see surface out to couple hundred miles where as the RRH’s can only see 20? at sea level that gives lot more protection
I think some additional assets that are perhaps cheaper to buy and operate would be a huge benefit.
I suppose with Russia, China and now the Middle East situations requiring our presence, then we simply cannot continue to be spread so thinly. Or we stop committing P-8s, RN/RFA ships and Royal Marines to do whatever it is they’ll be doing close to Israel/Gaza.
There is no middle situation requiring UK *presence* The CSG isnt going to the Med either
the Canal is not Britain’s concern either
Seems I got that very wrong
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/rishi-sunak-royal-navy-ephraim-mirvis-british-israel-b2428830.html
I was relying on a few days back
The deployment appears to represent a shift in approach to Britain’s military involvement, with the Prime Minister’s official spokesman earlier this week saying there were “no plans to redeploy UK military assets to Israel”.
Sorry, I thought I’d read that we were sending a couple of ships (possibly RFA), a P-8 and Royal Marines to the region to deter any other nations getting involved and to offer humanitarian support. That sounded like a presence in another area of tension/conflict to which we were comitting.
Yes they are . I was wrong.
Rushi must be listening to the last person who spoke to him…that was Boris downfall too
We also have a T45 in the area. Noticed her a few days ago transiting the Dardanelles then shes gone dark.
It’s an utter joke. Sunak is just posturing and trying to curry favour.
Let the Levant sort themselves out. Our forces should be patrolling and training in areas where they might actually have to fight; not sitting on ships.
Hasn’t the LSG south moved into a position to better protect Cyprus and the key RAF and naval bases positioned there? Id think some supportive presence was necessary at this time. A type 45 also would be a perfect screening warship to protect the island from incoming cruise or long range rocket attack
Unless Turkey get dragged in this, which I don’t see and they are nominally our ally, I don’t see any risk to British assets in the area.
Perhaps helping Jordan, the only sane actor in the region, would be a good idea, but don’t get the impression that is the intent at all.
Another tick the box for Poland, really are going full on Defence 👍
Perhaps I’m being naive here, but could something like this work for RN carrier AEW/ISTAR if the projected catapults are fitted?
Navalising any aircraft is no minor operation, even if it were technically feasible (I’m pretty certain it wouldn’t be) it would cost an absolute fortune require far greater Carrier adaptation and mods including an angled deck for reasons of safety I suspect and be obsolete by the time it entered service. So no just a fantasy concept but doesn’t hurt to pose the questions so something practical might come out of the overall discussion.
I think if we have catapults, the world is our lobster and we wouldn’t go with something manned like this. With or without catapults, I’d expect us to have a very long duration UAV AEW rather than AEW&C, with command functions handled through connections to other platforms such as ships or ground bases. We’d then have the choice between a smaller number of exquisite and a greater number of attritable.
The Saab 340 is about the right size of aircraft needed to carry a decent long range radar. The carriers need to maintain a decent surveillance bubble around the task group at the furthest range.
However, to convert the aircraft to carrier landing and take-offs, will require a lot of modifications. The primary one being folding wings. However, if the money’s available, then yes it could be used. Notwithstanding the modifications the carriers also need.
One question that would need addressing is whether the aircraft should be manned or not? A manned aircraft will place a limitation on the aircraft’s endurance. Whereas an unmanned one, with air to air refueling could be on station for 24 hours.
With a manned aircraft, the radar’s signal processing will be done on the aircraft. An unmanned one depending on its size, could have the signal processing done onboard or with a very high bandwidth data-link have it done on the carrier. There’s pros and cons with either method.
LRG (S) deploying to the Eastern Med.
And a P8 which is frankly ludicrous since we only have a handful, are surrounded by ocean where pesky Russians could be operating and the last I heard Hamas don’t operate submarines!
Assume overwatch in MPA/ surveillance role for LRG vessels.
I agree.
They won’t have been sent for amusement.
Hopefully the fact they are needed, useful and not to expressive triggers an order for more P8. Certainly faster ASW upgrade than more frigates which will take a decade to come into service.
Not its not.
No treaty or military agreement with Israel for UK to come hither
No it’s not, what?
I was relying on earlier denial by Downing St, as mentioned in previous comment with link held in moderation
I clocked that as well Duker. Sunak said on record the UK will support our allies including Israel. I wasn’t aware of any alliance with Israel or mutual defense pact. I’m really glad Israel were never invited to join NATO otherwise we would have article 5 activation almost continuously.
Im thinking a possible evacuation… but I read Australia is just chartered Qanats planes from London to Tel Aviv.
That seems fine , of course the insurance is the main problem
This is a good aircraft and capability for the price. But it is not comparable to an E7.
nice- these plans are compact aren’t they?
As a matter of interest I wonder why the Polish Air Force signage on the Saab is in English and not Polish?🤓
ps..and if ground crew were instructed to clean up the area around such signage would they be required to polish the Polish Air Force wording…ouch🙄
I notice that on governmental aircraft they have Polish Republic in English on one side and Polish on the other. Their C-130s have Polish Air Force in English on both sides. Doesn’t answer your pondering, but it is at least consistent I guess.
Thanks Phil. As I understand it English is the language of comms in Civil Aviation and also a widespread lingua franca in Europe because of British/American influence so maybe there lies the answer.
I’m sure its a great bit of kit. However, it does look like someone bolted a scaffold board on the back!
I was wondering about how aerodynamic the ‘scaffold board’ mounts were.
There will be a good reason: Saab are not idiots.
Hi SB, aerodynamically wise the fixed canoe is actually slightly better at generating less drag than the large rotating radome, that the Sentry and Hawkeye uses. As it presents a smaller frontal surface area to the oncoming air. By using a fixed antenna array, it also means there are less maintenance requirements than the rotating radome, i.e. no electric motor and gearbox to service etc.
The downside, is that the Erieye can only “see” sideways, as it does not have transmitter-receiver modules (TRMs) in the nose or rear of the Erieye’s “canoe”. Both the Sentry and Hawkeye mechanically sweep their antenna arrays, to give a 360 degree field of view. The Wedgetail’s MESA radar has TRMs in the forward and rear parts of the “Tophat” that sits on top of the side arrays. To fill in the forward and rear views. Though SAAB are claiming Erieye has a field of view of 160 (+/-80) degrees compared to a normal AESA’s 120 (+/-60) degrees. But in reality, anything over 60 degrees faces a serious degradation in output power and therefore detection range. It also requires a lot more filtering due to the increased mutual interference, as the beam angle gets closer to the TRMs. Plus the beam’s shape dramatically changes the further the beam is bent past 60 degrees.
So shall we call this design ‘canoe on roofrack’?
I’m well aware of the issues around TRM and angles – you have to optimise for something!
Mechanical simplicity is always a winner!
Saab themselves call it a canoe, I can sort of see why. Similar with Raytheon calling the horizontal part on top of the MESA side arrays the Top Hat. Yep, always a firm believer of keep it simple stupid!
Saab have a new version of Erieye in production, which has been fitted to the Bombardier Globaleye aircraft and these Polish 340s. The TRMs now have Gallium Nitride (GaN) components instead of the previous Gallium Arsenide (GaAs). They must have done some other work to gain an additional 100km detection range over the original version, though they aren’t saying. They could fairly easily further increase the detection range, if the aircraft can generate the electrical power and additional signal processing. By placing another Erieye on top of the existing one (double decker stylee).
There has been some information circulating about a WatchEye proposition from Saab to cover a Korean 360 degree requirement, maybe it will be disclosed at the at ADEX 2023 October 18th – 10am when Saab will have a media briefing.
It is something that Saab need to address I believe. Side looking radar is all well and good, but if you are flying along a border. You will have a constant blind spot fore and aft.
The Wedgetail gets round this using its fore and aft TRMs in the Top Hat part of the antenna array. However, there will be considerably less TRMs in these positions. Meaning the beam they generate won’t be as tight or circular, as that provided by the side arrays. But it’s enough to say there’s an object at X elevation, Y distance and Z bearing. It should also provide the objects track and velocity. But the resolution will be adequate not pin point. So the crew can decide to turn the aircraft so that the side arrays get a better look at the object.
Saab do produce the Globaleye, that uses the Bombardier business jet similar to the one used for our Sentinel aircraft. The Globaleye uses two search radars. Above the cabin there’s the Erieye. But below the cabin is a single mechanically swept Seaspray 7500E V2 X-band AESA radar.
This radar is predominantly used for maritime surveillance. But it is also very good at spotting low flying targets. It also has an air to air mode.
Worth noting that the speed of delivery was because these were second hand…believe these are ex-UAE aircraft that have been replaced with new build Globaleye.
Ex-Swedish sold to UAE and now ex-UAE.
The Thai’s two Saab-340 AEW’s are also ex-Swedish.