tkc10chief Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 (edited) http://www.aviationtoday.com/av/military/Boeing-Awarded-AWACS-Avionics-Modernization-Contract_76388.html I thought this was only a rumor. But we'll see how many tails actually end up with the upgrade. Edited May 24, 2012 by tkc10chief Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosuper Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Got a bud in NATO AWACS who told me just ten are slated for it for now, it more or less still has the same flight director and instrutments from when the first one was delivered in 1977. The engineers panel has never been upgraded except for the generator oil temp gauges. I am curious on how they are going to incorporate the the old engine technology TF-33's were everything runs of pitot air or hyromechanically and with nothing electronic on that engine into the glass cockpit. They have done this with the E-6 TACOMO's but they have modern CFM -56 engines Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sky_king Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Hmm, there's only a handfull of JSTARS. Maybe they could throw us a bone as well. Aw, hell... Who am I kidding? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon_Tanerite Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Hmm, there's only a handfull of JSTARS. Maybe they could throw us a bone as well. Aw, hell... Who am I kidding? They were going to do this back around 2002 or so, but that got turned off because of funding. I saw a few pictures of the proposal, and it looked promising. Looked similar to the E-6B setup. The engineer's panel was going to remain more or less unchanged, but he was going to get a monitor on an arm (kind of like the FBCB2 displays in back) that he could access more parameters that aren't necessarily displayed on the flight deck normally. The WX radar we have right now was supposed to be the first step to it, and if you look in the -1 there is (or maybe WAS) verbiage about how "it provides building blocks for future expansion" or some shit. Notice how 69% of the buttons and knobs on the WX radar panel are non-functional. When I first got here we didn't even have TCAS, and the arc mode page didn't exist. The TA/VSI we have right now was an off-the-shelf solution when the glass upgrade got turned off. Europe was ready to BAN us until we got TCAS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosuper Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 They were going to do this back around 2002 or so, but that got turned off because of funding. I saw a few pictures of the proposal, and it looked promising. Looked similar to the E-6B setup. The engineer's panel was going to remain more or less unchanged, but he was going to get a monitor on an arm (kind of like the FBCB2 displays in back) that he could access more parameters that aren't necessarily displayed on the flight deck normally. The WX radar we have right now was supposed to be the first step to it, and if you look in the -1 there is (or maybe WAS) verbiage about how "it provides building blocks for future expansion" or some shit. Notice how 69% of the buttons and knobs on the WX radar panel are non-functional. When I first got here we didn't even have TCAS, and the arc mode page didn't exist. The TA/VSI we have right now was an off-the-shelf solution when the glass upgrade got turned off. Europe was ready to BAN us until we got TCAS! What happened to the JT8D conversion? Those JT3D's make a E-3 TF-33-P-100 almost look modern and up to date. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BQZip01 Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 B-52 still doesn't have TCAS... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ram Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 B-52 still doesn't have TCAS... Because everyone in the world is tally BUFF at 14 miles. No need for a fish finder when you can just follow the 10 mile chem trail smoke trail. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sky_king Posted May 24, 2012 Share Posted May 24, 2012 Because everyone in the world is tally BUFF at 14 miles. No need for a fish finder when you can just follow the 10 mile chem trail smoke trail. Phew, almost blew our cover there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPStryker Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 I can totally see this shit run out of money after, like, 5 are upgraded. Block 40/45 is the #1 priority for the U.S AWACS fleet; everything else is second fiddle. They have been working on this stuff forever - I'm convinced it will never come to fruition or will become a watered-down, half-assed version of that totally awesome "artist's rendering". Doesn't really matter. Just like TCAS, RVSM, RNAV, and RNP we'll be late to the party (although not as late as some) but we'll muddle through. You don't miss what you never had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Champ Kind Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 ^ "2" Reference C-130 AMP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon_Tanerite Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 What happened to the JT8D conversion? Those JT3D's make a E-3 TF-33-P-100 almost look modern and up to date. Same story. We got as far as OT&E on the test jet, but to my understanding the program is zero funded currently. Somebody has to pay for those F-35 over-runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoHum Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 ^ "2" Reference C-130 AMP. Yeah, the AMP is a worn-out excuse in the money-holding game...maybe they found their new mule! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HiFlyer Posted May 25, 2012 Share Posted May 25, 2012 Same story. We got as far as OT&E on the test jet, but to my understanding the program is zero funded currently. Somebody has to pay for those F-35 over-runs. The current Senate marks for the FY13 budget put some money back in (not a huge amount) to restart this effort, but the House didn't. We'll have to see what happens in the final Conference Committee bill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon_Tanerite Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 The current Senate marks for the FY13 budget put some money back in (not a huge amount) to restart this effort, but the House didn't. We'll have to see what happens in the final Conference Committee bill. We'll see what happens now that the final decision has been made to not buy the 737 that the Navy is buying as the P-8. They were taking a hard look at buying that to replace the 707 based JSTARS fleet. Anecdotally I heard through our XP shop that they could have bought 10 new 737s ready to go to war for the cost of re-engining the 707 fleet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prosuper Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 We'll see what happens now that the final decision has been made to not buy the 737 that the Navy is buying as the P-8. They were taking a hard look at buying that to replace the 707 based JSTARS fleet. Anecdotally I heard through our XP shop that they could have bought 10 new 737s ready to go to war for the cost of re-engining the 707 fleet. There was the the E-10 a 767-400 that at least the airframe was built to replace the E-3 and E-8 into one airframe. Of course the money dried up, at least the R&D has already been done if the USAF wants to put a AWACS in a 737 with Australia and Turkey already taking delievery of 737 AEW&C platforms. There is not huge supply of 707 parts out there, most structure parts have to be made from scratch at OC/ALC in one of those water jet milling machines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napoleon_Tanerite Posted May 27, 2012 Share Posted May 27, 2012 There was the the E-10 a 767-400 that at least the airframe was built to replace the E-3 and E-8 into one airframe. Of course the money dried up, at least the R&D has already been done if the USAF wants to put a AWACS in a 737 with Australia and Turkey already taking delievery of 737 AEW&C platforms. There is not huge supply of 707 parts out there, most structure parts have to be made from scratch at OC/ALC in one of those water jet milling machines. There were more problems with the E-10 than just funding. That many trons in one place tends to have a lot of interference issues. You're right about the 707 parts problem. There are a bunch of 707-320s at DM that the Air Force bought for parts, but most of them have been stripped of the "common" parts. The 707 platform just isn't going to be sustainable for much longer without an astronomical increase in the cost of parts. Most factory made parts are drying up (or have long since dried up) and thus there will be an astronomical increase in cost as these parts need to be re-engineered and fabricated from scratch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sky_king Posted May 28, 2012 Share Posted May 28, 2012 Maybe we should pick another aging airframe and retrofit them for our purposes. I suggest the 727. Just think of the majesty of flying a 40-50 year old airplane instead of a 50-60 year old one. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JarheadBoom Posted May 28, 2012 Share Posted May 28, 2012 Maybe we should pick another aging airframe and retrofit them for our purposes. I suggest the 727. No. There's only room for one three-holer in the USAF inventory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magnetfreezer Posted May 28, 2012 Share Posted May 28, 2012 No. There's only room for one three-holer in the USAF inventory. BQZip's mom? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now