4 ms·
Sounds like the USAF decided last year that the E-7 was the wrong approach (too expensive, more interested in a distributed solution), so this isn't terribly su
by macintux 1y ago
Sounds like the USAF decided last year that the E-7 was the wrong approach (too expensive, more interested in a distributed solution), so this isn't terribly surprising.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- jauntywundrkind 1y agoThe first could e-7a aren't even slated to have particularly good radars. The US kept trying to do whatever it takes to get the price down & it keeps being hideously expensive anyways, with who knows what capabilities left on the cutting room floor. There was a request for information that went out in April, asking, hey, uh, if we do want to make this an actually good awacs, what should we do with the platform? https://breakingdefense.com/2025/04/air-force-eyes-advanced-e-7-wedgetail-with-upgrades-including-new-radar/ https://breakingdefense.com/2025/04/air-force-eyes-advanced-... Seems incredibly silly to me that such an incredibly crucial capability is being so sorely neglected. Having superior signals has loon been a key US advantage, that's core to enabling so many other capabilities to be used well. Theres what feels like absurd fantasy going around saying we can skip airborne platforms & just use space for all awacs needs. And who knows maybe, but it feels like a lot of ridiculous wish casting, that's leaving us with horrendous woefully inadequate eyes, ears, & links today. We need a real e-7 plan, one with a really good sensors not the decades old tech that the US's E-7A defined.