why no winglets on this airplane? i would think that since the mission of this airplane includes staying aloft for hours that winglets would be beneficial...
"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
If you view the picture larger you can see the sensors located on the wingtips. Due to their presence the raked wingtip or blended wingtip is not installed.
KC135TopBoom From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11714 posts, RR: 52 Reply 2, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2436 times:
Notice the additional generator buldges on each side of the engine nacelles, too?
Has the first Wedgetail been delivered yet to the RAAF? I know it was late and Boeing paid a contract penelty.
Cancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 13 Reply 4, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2280 times:
Quoting Ozair (Reply 1): If you view the picture larger you can see the sensors located on the wingtips. Due to their presence the raked wingtip or blended wingtip is not installed.
i saw that, but couldn't those be mounted on the outside of the winglets?
"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
Ozair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 663 posts, RR: 1 Reply 5, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2257 times:
Quoting DL021 (Reply 3): They're talking about delays until 2010. There's some issues with software integration and such.
There is still talk of a 2009 date but realistically your right it won't be until 2010 that we actually start using the aircraft.
Quoting Cancidas (Reply 4): i saw that, but couldn't those be mounted on the outside of the winglets?
The raked wingtips would be too fragile to hold the sensor and I imagine (my speculation only) the blended tip would degrade the sensor coverage of the radar, not really worth it for an extra 1/2 hour of station time when the aircraft can be refuelled by our KC-30s.
L-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29352 posts, RR: 62 Reply 6, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 2255 times:
Quoting Ozair (Reply 5): The raked wingtips would be too fragile to hold the sensor and I imagine (my speculation only) the blended tip would degrade the sensor coverage of the radar
That would be my guess also. You would end up with a couple of dead spots in the radar coverage.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 7, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 2203 times:
Quoting Ozair (Reply 5): There is still talk of a 2009 date but realistically your right it won't be until 2010 that we actually start using the aircraft.
I hope to God it works well then. I can't see why every time Australia orders a piece of equipment there are so many software issues. The subs, the helos, the ships, and now these things. Once they're there Australia will have eyes they only dreamed of having available 24/7.........it'll be an awesome airplane.
HanginOut From Austria, joined May 2005, 545 posts, RR: 0 Reply 8, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 20 hours ago) and read 2139 times:
Quoting DL021 (Reply 7): I hope to God it works well then. I can't see why every time Australia orders a piece of equipment there are so many software issues. The subs, the helos, the ships, and now these things.
That's probably because they have to change the software to understand Australian English.
But seriously (and to all of you Australians, I'm just joking - I love Australia and Australians and hope to be able to visit your incredible country one day), I've noticed the same thing and have to wonder what the hell is going on for the Aussies to always have these problems?! Maybe one of our Australian anetters can shed some light.
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 10, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 19 hours ago) and read 2121 times:
Quoting MDorBust (Reply 9): I've heard that most of the issues have to deal with integrating the barbie and the cold storage for the prawns.
Quoting HanginOut (Reply 8): That's probably because they have to change the software to understand Australian English.
You guys are gonna be in trouble.......Crocodile Dundee is a lurker on these threads.....
Ozair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 663 posts, RR: 1 Reply 11, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 15 hours ago) and read 2078 times:
Quoting HanginOut (Reply 8): That's probably because they have to change the software to understand Australian English.
Quoting MDorBust (Reply 9): I've heard that most of the issues have to deal with integrating the barbie and the cold storage for the prawns.
Lol, yes well said and well deserved except you forgot the beer!
Quoting HanginOut (Reply 8): I've noticed the same thing and have to wonder what the hell is going on for the Aussies to always have these problems?!
With regards to our recent purchases, the C-17 has been the only smooth acquisition. The issue of australianising our equipment is all very well and good but falls down when the contractor or the DMO (Defence Material Organisation) aren't honest with each other regarding the potential or required outcomes and the risk involved.
This fact was an influence in the recent F-100 purchase over the evolved DDG-51. The procurement process is now based around an existing design, for example the F-100, compared to an evolved design, the DDG-51, both having their strengths and weaknesses. The evolved design costs more, arrive later, will be more capable and adaptive but comes at the price of technological and design uncertainty. (For your info we chose the F-100 so it will be interesting to follow the program and see if the existing design worked)
I think we have chosen the evolved design a few too many times and been subsequently burnt by the design time, budget and risk being more than we expected.
Unfortunately we are a small Air Force trying to do a lot of things and leverage the most out of our small budget, hence these things happen as we endeavour to secure the most capable platform we can.
Quote: "The Defence Materiel Organisation has exercised its rights under the Air 87 Tiger Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) acquisition contract and stopped payment to Australian Aerospace on 1 June 2007 as the contracted milestone for ARH Initial Operational Capability has not been achieved.
Initial Operational Capability for the Tiger ARH Project is defined as the ability to conduct collective training. Delays in the Franco/German Tiger program have negatively impacted the development of the simulators and establishment of the Australian based training needed to achieve this milestone."
HanginOut From Austria, joined May 2005, 545 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 14 hours ago) and read 2044 times:
Quoting Ozair (Reply 11): Unfortunately we are a small Air Force trying to do a lot of things and leverage the most out of our small budget, hence these things happen as we endeavour to secure the most capable platform we can.
Trust me, this is a problem too often faced by Air Command, aka the Royal Canadian Air Force and the rest of the CF as well.
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 14, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 3 days 13 hours ago) and read 2041 times:
Quoting DEVILFISH (Reply 12): Quote:
"The Defence Materiel Organisation has exercised its rights under the Air 87 Tiger Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) acquisition contract and stopped payment to Australian Aerospace on 1 June 2007 as the contracted milestone for ARH Initial Operational Capability has not been achieved.
Initial Operational Capability for the Tiger ARH Project is defined as the ability to conduct collective training. Delays in the Franco/German Tiger program have negatively impacted the development of the simulators and establishment of the Australian based training needed to achieve this milestone."
AAARRRGGHHHH!!!! I was sort of hoping the Australians would be able to ground the old gunships and replace them with the new ones. Hey...they can always buy some Bell AH-1Zs.....they're coming off the line new. I think they're a good bit less than a new AH-64D.
Checksixx From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 996 posts, RR: 0 Reply 15, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1947 times:
Why not just buy some old AH-64A's and have them converted to 'D's'? Not sure how much the conversion would cost or entail though.
HanginOut From Austria, joined May 2005, 545 posts, RR: 0 Reply 16, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 21 hours ago) and read 1944 times:
Quoting Checksixx (Reply 15): Why not just buy some old AH-64A's and have them converted to 'D's'? Not sure how much the conversion would cost or entail though.
The problem is that there are no old AH-64As just lying around that anyone is willing to part with.
UH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 17, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 1926 times:
Quoting Checksixx (Reply 15): Why not just buy some old AH-64A's and have them converted to 'D's'? Not sure how much the conversion would cost or entail though.
Quoting HanginOut (Reply 16): The problem is that there are no old AH-64As just lying around that anyone is willing to part with.
Agreed. If the Army hasn't already flown them into the ground maintenance wise, the A models are almost all being converted to the Longbow. While we're purchasing some brand new Longbows, the majority will be converted A models. Interestingly, when they convert the A to a D, very little of the original aircraft remains - mostly the inner skeleton and frame.
--------------------
Anyway, this wedgetail... where does it rank against the E-3?
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 18, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1923 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 17): Anyway, this wedgetail... where does it rank against the E-3?
Dude...it's a smaller version of the E-3 with more modern radar (electronically scanned array called MESA rather than the older rotodome radars). With the ongoing modernization of computers and other electronics the size requirement for such aircraft is significantly reduced. The British are performing JSTARs missions with Global Express jets. Israelis replaced the 707 Phalcon with a G-V.
The wedgetail system is basically the same as the one ordered by the Koreans and Turks. It's got a 200m+ range on it's radar and performs the AEW&C functions.
UH60FtRucker From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR: Reply 19, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1920 times:
Quoting DL021 (Reply 18): Dude...it's a smaller version of the E-3 with more modern radar
Well I know that... I mean if the USAF wants to replace the E-3s, would this be a suitable aircraft to fill our needs? Or is their benefits to having a larger aircraft such as the 767?
Or would it be better to buy the E-767? Just curious.
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 20, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 1917 times:
Quoting UH60FtRucker (Reply 19): Well I know that... I mean if the USAF wants to replace the E-3s, would this be a suitable aircraft to fill our needs? Or is their benefits to having a larger aircraft such as the 767?
We're currently upgrading the E-3 fleet, and the cost-benefit ratio doesn't support replacement of the E-3s. The airframes are paid for, and we've got the engines and spares. They will probably be upgraded to use the CFM engines, but for now they have the same 200 mile+ range and are getting new computers....NATOs will probably be upgraded similarly and they're getting new engines.
Our current E-3s and the Wedgetails will be similarly capable....the Wedgetail advantages are smaller size and costs.
The Japanese AWACs had more advanced radars, but I believe ours got caught up.
On checking...yeah...the Japanese are now playing catchup in the radar upgrade process.
They do have better range and comfort on their widebodys (AWACS-XWB ) but with refuelling it doesn't matter....and with comfort...it's the Air Farce...who cares? They'll be eating steak tonight.
Ozair From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 663 posts, RR: 1 Reply 21, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 16 hours ago) and read 1881 times:
Quoting DL021 (Reply 18): The wedgetail system is basically the same as the one ordered by the Koreans and Turks.
The Wedgetail will be a more capable platform, not to mention the quality of the aircrew.
Quoting DL021 (Reply 20): Our current E-3s and the Wedgetails will be similarly capable....the Wedgetail advantages are smaller size and costs.
The real advantage the Wedgetail will have is the MESA. The electronically scanning array comes with all sorts of cool features especially as we upgrade to fighter aircraft similarly equipped...we just need to get them.
The RAAF is in for the biggest upgrade in it's history. In 10 years time the oldest aircraft in our fleet with be the C-130Js. It's going to be a pretty hectic next few years as all our new aircraft and capabilities come online
Quoting DL021 (Reply 20): They'll be eating steak tonight.
I'm not as keen on mess food although the dessert bar is a great feature.
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 22, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 1845 times:
Quoting Ozair (Reply 21): The Wedgetail will be a more capable platform, not to mention the quality of the aircrew.
I'd have to say that the Koreans will be highly qualified....but it appears that the Aussie ships will have more crew stations than the Korean or Turkish birds.....so there's something extra happening in the Oz birds. Jindalee over the horizon coordination? Additional barbeque chefs....there's gonna be a big modern radar range....
Quoting Ozair (Reply 21): The RAAF is in for the biggest upgrade in it's history. In 10 years time the oldest aircraft in our fleet with be the C-130Js. It's going to be a pretty hectic next few years as all our new aircraft and capabilities come online
It's a seriously exciting time for the RAAF....It'll be the most modern force in Oceania for sure, and one of the most modern anywhere. F-35, F/A-18E/F, C-130J, A400, KC-30, C-17 and .... are there any Chipmunks or GAF birds still flying?
Quoting Ozair (Reply 21): I'm not as keen on mess food although the dessert bar is a great feature.
StealthZ From Australia, joined Feb 2005, 5434 posts, RR: 49 Reply 23, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 1798 times:
Quoting DL021 (Reply 22): It'll be the most modern force in Oceania for sure
Now there is a backhanded compliment!!
On a $ for $ & per capita basis likely one of the most modern and capable anywhere!
Not being parochial about this.. ask people that know me, I can be pretty critical of the ADF but I hope in a constructive way!
If your camera sends text messages, that could explain why your photos are rubbish!
DL021 From United States of America, joined May 2004, 11433 posts, RR: 81 Reply 24, posted (5 years 10 months 3 weeks 2 days ago) and read 1781 times:
Quoting StealthZ (Reply 23): On a $ for $ & per capita basis likely one of the most modern and capable anywhere!
I did say that after I made a little fun.
The RAAF is one of the more professional AFs anywhere. Plus....you guys still fly the 'Vaarks....that's enough for me.
Is my Pan Am ticket to the moon still good?
25 Ozair: The only thing I'm flying is a desk. Of course if they gave me the chance I wouldn't say no, doesn't everyone in the Air force want to fly? Indeed, I
26 DEVILFISH: Speaking of which, what is the latest development on that other project?
28 Lt-AWACS: The wedgetail isn't even close to a replacement for the E-3. Aside from the fact I spent two years at Tinker training the Aussie (great folks who drin
29 UH60FtRucker: Thanks LT for that insightful post. How much longer are we looking to keep the E-3 in the inventory? And in regards to Israel, where do they fly thei
30 Lt-AWACS: Hi, I've been a a Capt for years and just hit my majors board actually. But you can't change your name here. I actually just seperated into the Reserv
31 DL021: THe big difference there is that you've got twice the scopes/operators who can manage more stuff. Yeah, but they're putting their AWACs into a smalle
32 Lt-AWACS: Yes as I said that above. Yes though I never said anything about the small airframes. The Phalcon birds are alive and well and do plenty of Battle Ma
33 Glennstewart: We seem to take a lot of new aircraft as the launch country (e.g. Wedgetail and Airbus refueller). The only implementation that went from approval to
34 StealthZ: Exactly the same philosophy adopted by the RAF for their C-17(although they were initially leased) and the RAAF has taken with the F/A-18F.. although
Sponsor Message: 
From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2005, 663 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 11714 posts, 
From Austria, joined May 2005, 545 posts, 
From Philippines, joined Jan 2006, 4429 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
