4 ms·

> "Even if American equipment is superior ..." To address the article's context, is the E-3 Sentry superior to the Erieye/GlobalEye?

nickff 5mo ago
The comparable aircraft is the more modern E-7 Wedgetail, which has many features that are superior for Canada's use case (notably including range and NORAD integration). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-7_Wedgetail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-7_Wedgetail Canada has unfortunately been in conflict with Boeing since before either of Trump's terms, originally triggered by Boeing's trade complaints regarding Bombardier's government subsidies.
- 8note 5mo ago
  is norad integration actually important? norad might not exist in 5-10 years
  - nickff 5mo ago
    Canada has little used for airborne early warning outside of NORAD; the country has little independent air defense, and has not performed any foreign air superiority missions since the Cold Warz
bigfatkitten 5mo ago
The E-3 is a dinosaur. The E-7 Wedgetail is a vastly more capable platform than the Erieye/GlobalEye in pretty much every way, but costs four times as much, and there are other issues with Canada and Boeing as have been pointed out by another commenter.
- stackghost 5mo ago
  >The E-7 Wedgetail is a vastly more capable platform than the Erieye/GlobalEye in pretty much every way The airframe itself, perhaps. As for the radar, that remains to be seen. The E-7 uses an L-band AESA radar, whereas the GlobalEye's radar operates in the higher-frequency S-band. In general, higher frequencies are better for engaging smaller/faster targets, but perform worse in adverse weather conditions. It's been a long time since I took my electronic warfare courses, but in a situation where the radar is expected to spot small drones and other targets I would prefer a higher frequency radar. It should be noted that the US military itself didn't want the Wedgetail in favor of a space-based solution, until Hegseth forced them for publicity reasons.
  - nradov 5mo ago
    Was it just a publicity issue? There was a real risk of a capability gap in that all of the old E-3 airframes would have to be retired long before a space based solution could possibility come online. Plus in an era of anti-satellite weapons proliferation, a crewed aircraft might actually turn out to be more survivable.
    - stackghost 5mo ago
      Hypocritically, Kegsbreath himself is on record saying the concern was about E-7 survivability: https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/2025/06/us-defence-secretary-casts-further-doubt-on-e-7-acquisition-plan/ https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/2025/06/us-defence-s...
- nradov 5mo ago
  Delivery schedules are also likely a factor. Assuming the USAF actually orders the E-7, they'll probably get first priority on the Boeing production line. Any export orders would have to wait.

nickff 5mo ago

The comparable aircraft is the more modern E-7 Wedgetail, which has many features that are superior for Canada's use case (notably including range and NORAD integration). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-7_Wedgetail https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_E-7_Wedgetail Canada has unfortunately been in conflict with Boeing since before either of Trump's terms, originally triggered by Boeing's trade complaints regarding Bombardier's government subsidies.

8note 5mo ago
is norad integration actually important? norad might not exist in 5-10 years
- nickff 5mo ago
  Canada has little used for airborne early warning outside of NORAD; the country has little independent air defense, and has not performed any foreign air superiority missions since the Cold Warz

bigfatkitten 5mo ago

The E-3 is a dinosaur. The E-7 Wedgetail is a vastly more capable platform than the Erieye/GlobalEye in pretty much every way, but costs four times as much, and there are other issues with Canada and Boeing as have been pointed out by another commenter.

stackghost 5mo ago
>The E-7 Wedgetail is a vastly more capable platform than the Erieye/GlobalEye in pretty much every way The airframe itself, perhaps. As for the radar, that remains to be seen. The E-7 uses an L-band AESA radar, whereas the GlobalEye's radar operates in the higher-frequency S-band. In general, higher frequencies are better for engaging smaller/faster targets, but perform worse in adverse weather conditions. It's been a long time since I took my electronic warfare courses, but in a situation where the radar is expected to spot small drones and other targets I would prefer a higher frequency radar. It should be noted that the US military itself didn't want the Wedgetail in favor of a space-based solution, until Hegseth forced them for publicity reasons.
- nradov 5mo ago
  Was it just a publicity issue? There was a real risk of a capability gap in that all of the old E-3 airframes would have to be retired long before a space based solution could possibility come online. Plus in an era of anti-satellite weapons proliferation, a crewed aircraft might actually turn out to be more survivable.
  - stackghost 5mo ago
    Hypocritically, Kegsbreath himself is on record saying the concern was about E-7 survivability: https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/2025/06/us-defence-secretary-casts-further-doubt-on-e-7-acquisition-plan/ https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/2025/06/us-defence-s...
nradov 5mo ago
Delivery schedules are also likely a factor. Assuming the USAF actually orders the E-7, they'll probably get first priority on the Boeing production line. Any export orders would have to wait.