Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Stitch wrote:Still say it will eventually be based on the 767-2C / KC-46 platform.
fsnuffer wrote:The 767-2C/KC-46 does not have the generator/lift capacity with only two engines to meet mission requirements.
fsnuffer wrote:The AF is currently studying purchasing used 747-800 aircraft to fill the need.
fsnuffer wrote:The 767-2C/KC-46 does not have the generator/lift capacity with only two engines to meet mission requirements. The AF is currently studying purchasing used 747-800 aircraft to fill the need.
bikerthai wrote:The one study that I am aware of where generating capacity is maxed out is when they try to put both an air search and a ground search radar on the same frame.
bt
angad84 wrote:Saab has both A2A and A2G on the GlobalEye, although I am not sure both work simultaneously
Buckeyetech wrote:Well, the USAF has now bought a brand new simulator for the E-4 fleet.
https://www.airforcemag.com/usaf-buys-f ... day-fleet/
To retire JSTARS platforms, the air force must now certify to Congress that it has identified a capability with sufficient capacity to replace the current fleet of 16 JSTARS aircraft. It must be in a manner that meets global combatant command (cocom) requirements and potential global basing locations for such capability. The USAF must also certify that such replacement delivers capabilities that are comparable, or superior, to those provided by JSTARS aircraft.
A critical Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on ABMS from April 2020 demonstrated that the USAF was unsure about what it wanted to do with the system, experts told Janes at the time. The USAF would likely acknowledge that it is taking an unconventional development approach with ABMS.
A pair of experts agreed that the FY 2021 NDAA strengthens the standard for the USAF to retire JSTARS platforms. Todd Harrison, director of the aerospace security project and defence budget analysis division at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) research institute in Washington, DC, told Janes
bikerthai wrote:Getting a used 747-8i should be cheap in the near future. I know the 747-400 would be more plentiful and much cheaper, but the 8i exists as a digital plane, thus making any mod work much easier.
bt
747classic wrote:bikerthai wrote:Getting a used 747-8i should be cheap in the near future. I know the 747-400 would be more plentiful and much cheaper, but the 8i exists as a digital plane, thus making any mod work much easier.
bt
At the moment two 747-8I are available (discounted) :
L/N1435, 747-830, 2011 built, LH ntu, for sale, owned by Boeing, only flight test hours, stored at VCV from June 2018.
L/N1446, 747-8JA , 2012 built, for sale, owned by a Saudia entity, stored in "green "condition in a hangar at BSL, < 100 hrs
747classic wrote:
At the moment two 747-8I are available (discounted) :
L/N1435, 747-830, 2011 built, LH ntu, for sale, owned by Boeing, only flight test hours, stored at VCV from June 2018.
L/N1446, 747-8JA , 2012 built, for sale, owned by a Saudia entity, stored in "green "condition in a hangar at BSL, < 100 hrs
Stitch wrote:- I don't know if any design/study work was done on that for the VC-25B before the requirement was deleted or if it was decided from the start that they would not have IFR so no work was done.
Elshad wrote:Isn’t the rejected Lufthansa frame oveweight or something? I thought that’s why they rejected it.
Elshad wrote:Isn’t the rejected Lufthansa frame oveweight or something? I thought that’s why they rejected it.
CX747 wrote:Too many security concerns of who has access while they sit or fly awaiting possible sale.
LyleLanley wrote:Buckeyetech wrote:Well, the USAF has now bought a brand new simulator for the E-4 fleet.
https://www.airforcemag.com/usaf-buys-f ... day-fleet/
If that’s the case, I give the E-4 program 2 weeks until program termination.
ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:And an opponent would have to somehow know that a certain commercial aircraft was going to be picked up by the USAF later to make sure all the gubbins were installed.
I doubt the USAF would have any real worries about a second hand B747-8 if they were going to tear it down to the skin when doing any tweaks.
Phosphorus wrote:ZaphodHarkonnen wrote:And an opponent would have to somehow know that a certain commercial aircraft was going to be picked up by the USAF later to make sure all the gubbins were installed.
I doubt the USAF would have any real worries about a second hand B747-8 if they were going to tear it down to the skin when doing any tweaks.
Well, I agree with your main point -- a strip-down of the plane, prior to modification, would probably make the "bugging" of the plane beforehand a relatively futile affair.
On the other hand, finding a target group of aircraft for bugging would not be too impossible.
If the opponent knows USAF plans to pick a few used airline 747-8i for E-4 conversion, they need to infiltrate exactly three airlines. (One of them Air China, BTW).
Now, if the infiltration is done correctly, we can assume the moles have influence on not only enabling the bugging, but also on determining which part of the fleet is potentially for sale. So they don't need to bug all 45 or so planes, 4 at each of the 3 airlines would suffice...
texl1649 wrote:With space-based communications at this point I don’t really understand how much value a widebody on orbit at 40K feet really offers. Certainly no need for an A380/747 size platform.
GalaxyFlyer wrote:LyleLanley wrote:Buckeyetech wrote:Well, the USAF has now bought a brand new simulator for the E-4 fleet.
https://www.airforcemag.com/usaf-buys-f ... day-fleet/
If that’s the case, I give the E-4 program 2 weeks until program termination.
Watch for the new BX at Offut!
Stitch wrote:I continue to believe that the USAF will source new-build 767-2Cs for the role and build them from the frame up rather than convert a passenger or freighter 747 or 777 airframe.
fsnuffer wrote:Stitch wrote:I continue to believe that the USAF will source new-build 767-2Cs for the role and build them from the frame up rather than convert a passenger or freighter 747 or 777 airframe.
The airframe has little to do with what will be selected as a replacement. It will come down to electrical generating capacity. In the end they may need to part out capability to multiple aircraft but if they want to keep it on a single aircraft it will need to be a 747 class airframe.
Slug71 wrote:Power consumption requirements have dropped considerably with today's electronics.
bikerthai wrote:Slug71 wrote:Power consumption requirements have dropped considerably with today's electronics.
True, but even so we have alreasy learned how to power huge radars and massive electronic suite using a twin. See 767 AWACS, E-7 and P-8A with AAS.
If you think about it, the amount of energy saved by switching from the CRT monitors to LCD on the E-4B alone would make up for any short fall in power production of a twin. The only lacking is the floor space.
bt
PS. A while back our company replaced all of our 19" LCD monitors with 24" LED monitor all in the name of energy saving.
Slug71 wrote:The massive gains in processing power has also allowed many things to become much smaller, and multi-functional.
bikerthai wrote:Slug71 wrote:The massive gains in processing power has also allowed many things to become much smaller, and multi-functional.
An example of this can be found even on the P-8A. All mission system data recording is now done by the upgraded mission computing system. Before that it was spread out among 3 systems with their own sets of drives and recording LRU's.
bt
fsnuffer wrote:bikerthai wrote:Slug71 wrote:The massive gains in processing power has also allowed many things to become much smaller, and multi-functional.
An example of this can be found even on the P-8A. All mission system data recording is now done by the upgraded mission computing system. Before that it was spread out among 3 systems with their own sets of drives and recording LRU's.
bt
Agreed the electronics have all come down on power but the amount of power required for the ELF and VLF radios to talk to the boomers is staggering. Also on a cynical note, all the recent SECDEFs have gotten used to using the E4-B as their aircraft of choice when they are traveling outside CONUS.
fsnuffer wrote:the electronics have all come down on power but the amount of power required for the ELF and VLF radios to talk to the boomers is staggering