columba
Topic Author
Posts: 5045
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Wed Nov 20, 2013 1:37 pm

Hi, just came across this picture:

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Luxem...NATO/Boeing-E-3A-Sentry/2348231/L/

Can anybody tell me what the Nato E3s doing at Boeing ? Are they receiving an update ?

Thanks in advance
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2166
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Wed Nov 20, 2013 1:56 pm

The US have/is getting the 40/45 upgrade. I wonder if NATO is getting the same thing.

At first I thought it was part of Nato Mid-Term. But that contract is done.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
wingman
Posts: 2799
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Thu Nov 21, 2013 12:06 am

Europe still lets those old Pratts prattle around? I assume the big military jets are exempt but you don't see those very much anymore hanging on USAF 707s, at least not the airports I frequent.
 
rc135x
Posts: 258
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:46 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Thu Nov 21, 2013 1:27 am

Quoting wingman (Reply 2):
but you don't see those very much anymore hanging on USAF 707s

I believe you will find that all USAF 707s (E-3 and E-8) still have those old Pratts. Only the USN E-6 has the CFM-56 engines. I think that accounts for all 707s in US government/military service.
KC-135A, A(RT), D, E, E(RT), Q, R, EC-135A, C, G, L, RC-135S, U, V, W, X, TC-135S, W
 
fsnuffer
Posts: 174
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:38 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Thu Nov 21, 2013 2:38 am

Don't know if it is the same aircraft but it reminded me of this Youtube video. Would not have wanted to be in the backend of that aircraft

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YcLiAAVeYhk
 
Max Q
Posts: 5634
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Thu Nov 21, 2013 3:14 am

I don't think military aircraft have to comply with civilian noise rules.
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
columba
Topic Author
Posts: 5045
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Thu Nov 21, 2013 6:06 am

IIRC it was planned once to refit the Nato 707s with new engines but Nato got hold on a huge amount of spares and spare engines that they decided that it is not worth it to replace the engines.

But still no idea what the E3 is doing at its birthplace ?
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
 
columba
Topic Author
Posts: 5045
Joined: Fri Dec 10, 2004 10:12 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Thu Nov 21, 2013 12:55 pm

The E3 will receive a for a flight-deck and avionics upgrade:

http://www.dvidshub.net/news/113504/...eattle-major-upgrade#ixzz2lGhyXo3T
It will forever be a McDonnell Douglas MD 80 , Boeing MD 80 sounds so wrong
 
TheSonntag
Posts: 4303
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:23 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Fri Nov 22, 2013 11:20 am

Quoting wingman (Reply 2):
Europe still lets those old Pratts prattle around? I assume the big military jets are exempt but you don't see those very much anymore hanging on USAF 707s, at least not the airports I frequent.

Yes. Actually, Geilenkirchen Airbase population was complaining about that for many years. IMHO it is nothing less than a scandal.
 
AWACSooner
Posts: 1774
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:35 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Fri Nov 22, 2013 3:56 pm

It's getting a mod that gets rid of my position (NAV) on the flight deck...basically going all glass cockpit.
 
wingman
Posts: 2799
Joined: Thu May 27, 1999 4:25 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:21 pm

I must be seeing Navy version at West Coast airports then.

Quoting TheSonntag (Reply 8):
Yes. Actually, Geilenkirchen Airbase population was complaining about that for many years. IMHO it is nothing less than a scandal.

I love the sound of those old gals, but maybe day after day it would wear thin.
 
AWACSooner
Posts: 1774
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:35 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Fri Nov 22, 2013 4:42 pm

It's mostly the folks across the Dutch border in Schinveld...they even put out flyers that accuse us of chem-trailing. It's pretty laughable.
 
FlyingSicilian
Posts: 1383
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:53 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Sat Nov 23, 2013 3:36 am

Quoting AWACSooner (Reply 9):
It's getting a mod that gets rid of my position (NAV) on the flight deck...basically going all glass cockpit.

USAF should have also but the nav mafia got one guy at the puzzle palace who managed to change the project, sad and impressive all at once.

For all the complaints at GK the local population is not happy numbers have been drawn down a bit, both on the Canadian and US fronts as they lose money.
“Without seeing Sicily it is impossible to understand Italy.Sicily is the key of everything.”-Goethe "Journey to Italy"
 
AWACSooner
Posts: 1774
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:35 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Sat Nov 23, 2013 10:14 pm

Quoting FlyingSicilian (Reply 12):
USAF should have also but the nav mafia got one guy at the puzzle palace who managed to change the project, sad and impressive all at once.

For all the complaints at GK the local population is not happy numbers have been drawn down a bit, both on the Canadian and US fronts as they lose money.

Yep...when I was at TIK, we were hearing that we'd get DRAGON done before NATO did...now it sounds like they're not even bothering anymore. That's what happens when you're at the bottom of the funding barrel.

I haven't heard about us cutting our flying personnel back at GK...just the support ones. Of course, our Canuck brethren will all be gone (and sorely missed) in a few more months. One crazy rumor I was hearing was that the Brits would come in and replace them.
 
TheSonntag
Posts: 4303
Joined: Wed Jun 15, 2005 7:23 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Mon Nov 25, 2013 9:09 am

Quoting wingman (Reply 10):
I love the sound of those old gals, but maybe day after day it would wear thin.

Me too, dont get me wrong. The population of Geilenkirchen is also pro-Nato, but they still want new engines. I think using un-hushkitted TF-33s in 2013 in such a densely populated area is totally unneccessary.
 
U271437
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:07 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Tue Nov 26, 2013 5:00 pm

The NATO E-3As already received some sort of cockpit update earlier, as it looks to me! These instruments are not the original 707 ones, or have those planes already been fittet out like that during the production? Here's the view: http://youtu.be/LcxlQKP3Lx4

[Edited 2013-11-26 09:02:41]
 
AWACSooner
Posts: 1774
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:35 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Tue Nov 26, 2013 6:52 pm

The problem with re-engining either the US or NATO birds at this point is that you'd have to completely redo both the landing gear and wing-spars due to the thrust and clearance of the new engines...and since everyone's economy is in the toilet at this point, they only see the $$'s up front, not what the $$ savings are in the long-term. Sorry, but I think you'll bee seeing our old, smoking engines for a long time to come.
 
rc135x
Posts: 258
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 11:46 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Tue Nov 26, 2013 9:53 pm

Quoting AWACSooner (Reply 16):
you'd have to completely redo both the landing gear and wing-spars due to the thrust and clearance of the new engines

I don't believe this is necessarily true. The -135R conversions (on KCs, TCs, and RCs) did not involve changes to the landing gear beyond addition of 5-rotor brakes for improved stopping capability on heavy-weight takeoff aborts. The engine struts accounted for the required engine ground clearance (if they can do it on a 737 they can do it on a 707). I also presume you refer to these struts rather than the actual wing spars.

Recall that the Boeing 707-CFM56 demonstrator (N707QT) showed that these engines could easily be installed on a 707 with minimal modification. The airplane was eventually demodified and handed over, I believe, to the Moroccan government. The Boeing E-6, UK and French E-3s, and Saudi E-3s and KE-3s also have the CFM56 engines and did not require substantial modification to the landing gear or height above ground.

You are indeed correct about the lack of $$$ and resolve to support the restart of the BMAC re-engining process, which returned from dormancy long enough to pop out a few engine sets for the RAF RC-135Ws. This narrow-minded vision really hurts the lifetime of the E-3, unless someone in DoD is secretly planning to procure 737 AWACS for USAF or, even more unlikely, request an AWACS version of the KC-46 such as Japan's.

This is equally problematic for the RC-135 community. Airplanes such as 62-4139 have amassed nearly 50,000 hours on an airframe originally designed for 19,000 and later extended to 33,000. When these fail they will do so utterly and there is no replacement on the immediate horizon.

Edit: typo correction

[Edited 2013-11-26 14:01:58]
KC-135A, A(RT), D, E, E(RT), Q, R, EC-135A, C, G, L, RC-135S, U, V, W, X, TC-135S, W
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Tue Nov 26, 2013 10:08 pm

Quoting rc135x (Reply 17):

You are indeed correct about the lack of $$$ and resolve to support the restart of the BMAC re-engining process, which returned from dormancy long enough to pop out a few engine sets for the RAF RC-135Ws. This narrow-minded vision really hurts the lifetime of the E-3, unless someone in DoD is secretly planning to procure 737 AWACS for USAF or, even more unlikely, request an AWACS version of the KC-46 such as Japan's.

That would be my guess long-term is that you will see the P-8 line basically convert to making AWACS replacements and replacing almost all the specialist aircraft out there. I don't think there is any need for the 767 sized airframe going forward for most specialist missions that need to be replaced.

P-8 line would be largely open by 2020 which is not a bad time frame to start squeezing out an AWACS replacement.
 
FlyingSicilian
Posts: 1383
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:53 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Wed Nov 27, 2013 12:49 am

The next AWACS will be a UAS on something "Global Hawk-esq" with the Air Battle Managers and Air Surveillance Officers in Ground TACS like boxes well behind the FEBA/FLOT.
“Without seeing Sicily it is impossible to understand Italy.Sicily is the key of everything.”-Goethe "Journey to Italy"
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Wed Nov 27, 2013 2:17 am

Quoting FlyingSicilian (Reply 19):
The next AWACS will be a UAS on something "Global Hawk-esq" with the Air Battle Managers and Air Surveillance Officers in Ground TACS like boxes well behind the FEBA/FLOT.

I doubt it. Having the pilots and operators in the plane is a marginal expense really and makes it much more robust against electronic attack. There is just not much to be gained and a lot to be risked by taking the UAS route for something like this.
 
FlyingSicilian
Posts: 1383
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:53 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Wed Nov 27, 2013 2:55 am

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 20):
I doubt it. Having the pilots and operators in the plane is a marginal expense really and makes it much more robust against electronic attack. There is just not much to be gained and a lot to be risked by taking the UAS route for something like this.

"nonsense"

I have over 1,000 hours on the plane and I have family with nearly 3,000 hours on the plane. I am aware of how it works and can tell you the expense of the crew is enormous as is what Boeing charges for 707 repair let alone the age and the cost to forward deploy crews for 24/7 coverage.

I was also on several of the NATO/AF strat teams that were guiding policy papers on it...the USAF wants to make it a UAS.
“Without seeing Sicily it is impossible to understand Italy.Sicily is the key of everything.”-Goethe "Journey to Italy"
 
bigjku
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Feb 17, 2007 10:51 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Wed Nov 27, 2013 3:10 am

Quoting FlyingSicilian (Reply 21):

I was also on several of the NATO/AF strat teams that were guiding policy papers on it...the USAF wants to make it a UAS.

I am sure they want to but I think the loss of the drone to Iran sobered people up just a bit.

You have the expense of the battle staff regardless of if they are on the plane or on the ground. The presumption that data links of the necessary capacity for that volume of radar information can be secure and reliable is pretty big. The benefit of putting the staff on the plane is that it is relatively self contained. If the radar and radios work you can do your job. If you do it via UAS you need satellites to get it back to wherever the battle staff and then the same to get that information back out the people who need it. It just adds more links that can be electronically or kinetically disrupted.

The idea of a persistent UAS feeding radar data back to some god-like command post is great in theory. I am sure everyone would like to do it because the idea in principal makes a lot of sense. But I think the question they won't be able to answer is how does this all work in an environment where all those communication links might be under some form of assault and how much does it cost you to harden those extra links against such attack rather than just put the battle staff in the airplane.
 
FlyMKG
Posts: 183
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:49 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Wed Nov 27, 2013 3:17 am

Why are there no openings for the tubrocompressors on the engine pylons?

FlyMKG
Essential Power, Operating Generator.
 
User avatar
bikerthai
Posts: 2166
Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 1:45 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Wed Nov 27, 2013 1:53 pm

Quoting BigJKU (Reply 18):
That would be my guess long-term is that you will see the P-8 line basically convert to making AWACS replacements

Not quite. The 737 AWACS equivalent is already available as the 737 AEW&C. Unless the Air Force decide to order 50-100 aircrafts, the 737 AEW&C would probably not be integrated in-line and will continue as a mod program.

The 737 line is converting over to the 737MAX, so frame availability will be an issue when the P-8 program completes.

The 767 line will be open until the Tanker is complete which open the possibility for a more expensive 767 AWACS. But that would be more expensive than the 737 AEW&C.

Quoting FlyingSicilian (Reply 19):
The next AWACS will be a UAS on something "Global Hawk-esq" with the Air Battle Managers and Air Surveillance Officers in Ground

Perhaps, but with current technology, the computing requirement for integrating the RADAR, ESM, EWSP and other mission system are so intense that you require much computing power on board to reduce the bandwidth requirement of sending all the data back to a ground base control center.

The need for a human interface is very fundamental. You just can't design these cutting edge system to be reliable enough to avoid needing a human on board to trouble shoot, reboot, put-out fires, so the mission can continue even if minor incidents would occur. In order to replicate the flexibility of a manned system, you many need a small fleet of UAV's to have overlap coverage in case one or two have to go back to base for troubleshooting. Not to say that it could not be done, but it would be more complicate than it seems.

The current model is have both manned an un-manned sytem integrated in the system.

bt
Intelligent seeks knowledge. Enlightened seeks wisdom.
 
sentrymechanic
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2010 12:08 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Thu Nov 28, 2013 11:09 pm

TF-33P-100s are not equipped with turbo compressors. They only have a heat exchanger with a Pressure regulating shuttoff valve under the kneecap fairing.
 
U271437
Posts: 15
Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:07 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Sat Dec 07, 2013 9:20 pm

See and hear the TF-33s here, fantastic: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JIiD0IwPyT8
 
AWACSooner
Posts: 1774
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:35 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Sun Dec 08, 2013 3:03 pm

Quoting sentrymechanic (Reply 25):
TF-33P-100s are not equipped with turbo compressors. They only have a heat exchanger with a Pressure regulating shuttoff valve under the kneecap fairing.

When I was in the 4th, we had a pilot that was dumb enough to think that the bleed air was what heated the ovens in the galley  
 
Max Q
Posts: 5634
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Mon Dec 09, 2013 5:13 am

Quoting AWACSooner (Reply 27):

When I was in the 4th, we had a pilot that was dumb enough to think that the bleed air was what heated the ovens in the galley

Or was it you that was dumb enough to believe that ?
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.
 
AWACSooner
Posts: 1774
Joined: Tue Jan 22, 2008 12:35 am

RE: Nato E3 Awacs At Boeing

Mon Dec 09, 2013 4:13 pm

Quoting Max Q (Reply 28):

Or was it you that was dumb enough to believe that ?

How about no?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests