Replacement AWACS

ugly

LE
Moderator
The interoperability comes from having compatible data links and radios.
Cheers, that's enough, earlier you mentioned missing a manufacturers upgrade package, would the money make up for that? Is there enough in the pot to play catch up on capability or are we going to be struggling again?
 
Cheers, that's enough, earlier you mentioned missing a manufacturers upgrade package, would the money make up for that? Is there enough in the pot to play catch up on capability or are we going to be struggling again?
Even if I knew them, it would be inappropriate to comment on the commercial aspects; I suspect that even potential bidders have yet to submit their offers.

Ultimately, we face the considerable short term cost of fixing the problem, either from procuring a new type or integrating, certifying and trialling an entirely new mission system for our E-3Ds. However, a more modern and cheaper to operate platform type would inevitably present the benefits of shorter delivery times, greater availability, access to spares and lower manpower requirements.

As ever, getting the shiny ‘stuff’ (either new or updated) is just the easy part.

Regards,
MM
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Is this going to end up like nimrod?
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Binning an airframe because after wasting cash on upgrades a new one works out cheaper
What upgrades are these then?

Regards,
MM
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
The ones promised in sdr15
Exactly. An AWACS upgrade was approved but no money has yet been spent.

Regards,
MM
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
Exactly. An AWACS upgrade was approved but no money has yet been spent.

Regards,
MM
So is it enough or are we better off buying new?
AIUI the money in SDSR 15 was for the sustainment of the capability out of 2035 not necessarily the E-3D itself. Upgrades or new platform were both options on the table from the start. Not similar to MRA4 etc as I think you are suggesting.

In answer to your question though. IMO buying new is both cheaper in the long term and provides better capability into the future.
 
So is it enough or are we better off buying new?
As mentioned earlier, I doubt the commercial details are even known to potential bidders yet. If I knew them, I certainly wouldn’t comment here old chap.

AIUI the money in SDSR 15 was for the sustainment of the capability out of 2035 not necessarily the E-3D itself. Upgrades or new platform were both options on the table from the start. Not similar to MRA4 etc as I think you are suggesting...
Correct.

Regards,
MM
 
I had no idea Diddy Dave and Co wanted to bin AWACS in 2010. As well as Liam Fox the failed GP trying to redesign an aircraft carrier and sending redundancy notices to guys going to Afghanistan. Jesus wept.
 
Well, we’re going to now....
Is that so?

Have the nice people in the Treasury signed the cheque then?

If so, for how many aeroplanes? Did we get the necessary synthetic training? Were we able to afford an appropriate logs contract? Did we get all the necessary Air Traffic Management, C2 and EW systems required to meet legal and operational requirements in the next few years? What about the training, infra and personnel aspects?

Or do you perhaps have no idea?

Once again, even if and when a contract is signed, getting shiny new aeroplanes is just the easy bit; the devil’s in the small print.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
How feasible is it that Sentry can limp along for another 10 15 yrs** until the US adopts son of Sentry and the UK can tag onto that.


** admittedly becoming increasingly obsolescent / obsolete - but is that any different to shack soldiering on until Sentry arrived
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top