E-7 Takes Flight

[KevinB]

US Air Force awards Boeing first contract for fleet of 26 E-7 aircraft

Boeing's contract will be worth up to $1.2 billion, as the service begins work on a fleet to replace the iconic E-3 Sentry.

www.defensenews.com

 

[OldSolduer]

US Air Force awards Boeing first contract for fleet of 26 E-7 aircraft

Boeing's contract will be worth up to $1.2 billion, as the service begins work on a fleet to replace the iconic E-3 Sentry.

www.defensenews.com

Cool but how many fighters will it take to protect it?
I might be a crayon eater but I hope they’ve thought this out.

 

[Spencer100]

Cool but how many fighters will it take to protect it?
I might be a crayon eater but I hope they’ve thought this out.

Its a straight replacement for the 707 based E-3. So the overall mission is the same with the same same force protection I would assume.

E-7 was first developed by Boeing for the RAAF as a "cheaper" AWAC solution but I think its now a full replacement.

On the face of it sounds like a smart procurement. US buying the off the self option! Yes they are upgrading it but It doesn't really sound that much 1.2 Billion for two airframes. RAAF paid something like $600A for each. So that don't sound like very much USAnizing at all.

 

[brihard]

Oh. I thought this was gonna be about a USMC Gunnery Sergeant who got drunk and stole a helicopter. Expectations sadly not met.

 

[dimsum]

On the face of it sounds like a smart procurement. US buying the off the self option! Yes they are upgrading it but It doesn't really sound that much 1.2 Billion for two airframes. RAAF paid something like $600A for each. So that don't sound like very much USAnizing at all.

Obviously exchange rates fluctuate but if we're using the one now, it's $1.48 AUD to $1 USD.

So, the RAAF order would have been $405.6 million USD each.

Also, where did it say it's 2 airframes? The article said $1.2B for the work on the first.

The U.S. Air Force has awarded Boeing a contract worth up to $1.2 billion to start work on the first E-7A battle management and command-and-control aircraft, with plans to field a fleet of 26 in total, the service said Tuesday.

 

[Spencer100]

Obviously exchange rates fluctuate but if we're using the one now, it's $1.48 AUD to $1 USD.

So, the RAAF order would have been $405.6 million USD each.

Also, where did it say it's 2 airframes? The article said $1.2B for the work on the first.

Sorry I was reading ahead lol.....I always go the end of the PP slides.

"As for the U.S. Air Force’s new E-7s, the service has said that production of these is scheduled to begin in 2025, with a first example ready for operational service by 2027. As well as the first two aircraft covered by this contract, the Air Force plans to buy another 24 E-7s by 2032, although this total will depend on funding decisions over the next few years."

Air Force Orders First E-7 Jets To Replace Aging E-3 Sentry

So it seems on the face it a good buy. Two airframes and the USAF custom stuff for the 1.2 billion. That sounds cheap for the US lol.

 

[dimsum]

Oh. I thought this was gonna be about a USMC Gunnery Sergeant who got drunk and stole a helicopter. Expectations sadly not met.

Or something about enlisted pilots.

 

[RDBZ]

Its a straight replacement for the 707 based E-3. So the overall mission is the same with the same same force protection I would assume.

E-7 was first developed by Boeing for the RAAF as a "cheaper" AWAC solution but I think its now a full replacement.

On the face of it sounds like a smart procurement. US buying the off the self option! Yes they are upgrading it but It doesn't really sound that much 1.2 Billion for two airframes. RAAF paid something like $600A for each. So that don't sound like very much USAnizing at all.

I don't think the rationale for the E-7 was ever only that is would be "cheaper," but more a realisation that even by the late 1990s the E-3 was looking "old tech," not just in terms of radar technology but also in its ability to act as a data hub. Lower operating and support costs were certainly a bonus though.

 

[Spencer100]

I don't think the rationale for the E-7 was ever only that is would be "cheaper," but more a realisation that even by the late 1990s the E-3 was looking "old tech," not just in terms of radar technology but also in its ability to act as a data hub. Lower operating and support costs were certainly a bonus though.

I meant as a 90 percent solution already developed by a loyal ally and insevice with three and order by a fourth.

Also I think if the USAF did a full on development replacement it would have been gold plated and more expensive. That is just my thoughts on it. They may have even put it on a bigger jet like the 767 same as the Japanese. It so would match the past by using the tanker aircraft as the base. Or maybe the contractor would have come back with something different but more expensive and with a clean sheet R&D costs to be paid.

 

[RDBZ]

I meant as a 90 percent solution already developed by a loyal ally and insevice with three and order by a fourth.

Also I think if the USAF did a full on development replacement it would have been gold plated and more expensive. That is just my thoughts on it. They may have even put it on a bigger jet like the 767 same as the Japanese. It so would match the past by using the tanker aircraft as the base. Or maybe the contractor would have come back with something different but more expensive and with a clean sheet R&D costs to be paid.

Even the often mentioned open-architecture battle management system has already been flight tested on an RAAF aircraft.

Wedgetail open mission systems validated in operational environment

Boeing, in collaboration with Northrop Grumman, has successfully tested the open mission systems approach on the E-7 Airborne Early Warning and Control platform.

www.defenceconnect.com.au