Wedgetails delayed
-
At the risk of sounding like a certain noisy lion....
Australian defence department is facing more delays over Boeing's Wedgetail surveillance aircraft
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24699528-31477,00.html
Looks like RSAF will get its G-550s earlier than the wedgetails. The RSAF will receive its first G550 in 2008 and all 4 by 2010.
-
btw,
just curious, what advantages does the wedgetail have in relative comparison with the g550 ?
increased loiter time, greater spare parts avaliability (same engine as commercial 737s) bigger engine/thrust ?
does it posesses elint attack capability ? (sorry i m a real noob when it comes to EW and AWACS)
but recieve dosent necessarily mean intergreation and full operation right ? we still need some time to get the crews up to mark and fit it in with out vipers and mudhens right ?
-
Hi,
Our G550 is based on a commercial platform too! Based on the Gulfstream G550! :)
So the "platform" operating cost of the G550, smaller platform, smaller engines should be much lower then the wedgetail.
I don't think we really know how much it cost to maintain the G550's avioics vs the wedgetail's...
I can imagine the wedgetails having longer enduration probably... not just in terms of endurance/loiter time, but also crew endurance... it is a bigger a/c and probably have more space for crew to skretch and rest... and can maybe even have spare crews to rotate.....
I can't imagine that there will be much space in the G550 after putting in all the avionics.. it will be more spacious then a E2C probably, but still cramp.
With more operators, can probably handle more scenarios and with greater internal room, maybe more room for upgrades later on??
-
I can imagine the wedgetails having longer enduration probably... not just in terms of endurance/loiter time, but also crew endurance... it is a bigger a/c and probably have more space for crew to skretch and rest... and can maybe even have spare crews to rotate.....
AMEN! Crew Comfort!
-
hmm but arent business jets more costly to operate if you compare to a 737 ? i.e, there are several hundred 737s flying all over the world, and with airasia , lionair and tiger using 737s, parts should be somewhat readily avaliable in SEA region.
at least in terms of parts avaliability, gulfstream may not be exactly the most economical platform, but i do wonder, why 4 gulfstreams when we can make do with 2 of the larger wedgetails ?
turnaround/downtime for maintainence ? but is there significant tradeoffs in terms of performance ?
-
Avionics wise, I think the MESA is definitely a more advanced radar.
Plane wise, the 737 has lower cruising speed and 1/2 the range of the G550 (primarily because of the size and almost 2 x weight issue).Fuel wise the G550 carries about 6,000 US gallons compared to 6,800 US gallons of the 737 (which is not too far off) and can include a fuel probe.
The G550 also operates at an higher altitude. From a radar range angle, an higher altitude gives a longer look-down detection range (due to impact of earth curvature if there is sufficient power for the radar which the phalcon has).
A smaller aircraft also provides added safety eg shorter detection range by enemy jet due to lower RCS and lack of a dome or hump compared to the 737 makes visual id a little bit more difficult from range. The radar signature is similar to any other business jet which complicates id.
Commercially, G550 costs more to operate as a business jet cos 737 carries more passenger = more passenger $. However, plane to plane, fuel cost will be lower. Spares are likely to be cheaper for the 737 as there are/will be over 4,000 737s. At 120+ G550s, the difference in spare costs and maintenance will not be significantly higher esp for a smaller jet.
The CFM-56 on 737 is also very widely used. However, the rolls-royce engine (more than 500 built by 2007) is also used by many business jets including the Gulfstream V (191) and Bombardier global, so there'll be sufficient spares for those. For military, no issue of parking rights and cost so that's a consideration deducted.
Don't forget that Australia is a major ally so it has access to most technologies whilst Singapore is not and likely will get down-graded versions. For IS-SG co-op, no such hang-ups as SG is able to access all Israeli tech (so long as its able to afford it and US tech transfer is not an issue).
G550 has shorter runway take off distance (3500 ft at full fuel load) and 2800 ft landing which is significantly shorter than the 737-700.
Cabin volume for the 737-700 is triple the G-550 but again, how much of that is excess space is another issue.
Yes, the G550 will have elint and comint capability. One can check out all the juicy details on elta's website which can be accessed from www.iai.co.il.
-
Just 2 of the systems as examples....
Elta -2085
http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/files/7/35467.pdfElta -8382 (also used for wedgetail)
http://www.iai.co.il/sip_storage/files/3/36133.pdf -
wow..no joke...cancel this project???
Australian Ddefence Magazine: Wedgetail cancellation a possibility?
pl read my 15 June 10 pm posts....really no joke.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Hi can i join u guys?
u can read what did the DMO and military top brass said in
Pariliment
http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/s11361.pdf
and some info here
http://www.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/329569?page=10
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/Australias-Troubled-E-737-Wedgetail-AWACS-Program-05173/#more-5173
Aerodynamics
which one can fly at lower fuel and faster?
http://www.defense-update.com/features/2008/july08/caew_elta.htm
@@@@@@@@
First of the class--risks and benefits?
I think most of u miss this utmost important point?
The radar and the compatablity with other systems!
(Australian)Senator JOHNSTON—Northrop Grumman. Who else is using this radar in the same sensing role that we anticipate using it?
(RAAF)Air Vice Marshal Deeble—We are the first customer of this particular radar. The AEWAC capability is the first of type.
Senator JOHNSTON—Yes.
Air Vice Marshal Deeble—The same radar is also going to be installed on the Turkish aircraft currently undergoing flight test in the US. I think there may be an aircraft flying in Turkey as we speak. That is the sameradar.
Senator JOHNSTON—Is their radar operational?
Air Vice Marshal Deeble—Their radar is very much reliant on us resolving those issues. We are the first customer. A lot of the testing that we are conducting will confirm baseline performance for those other nations.
Korea is also on contract for this capability, and it is the same radar that is inherent in the Korean aircraft—what they term their EX program.
Senator JOHNSTON—But we are at the head of the queue?'orphan systems'---risks and benefits
http://www.sgforums.com/forums/1164/topics/329569?page=11
bbbbb
-
www\
IOC end 2011
FOC around 2012
"I have significant technical risks in the case of the MESA radar, which will really bound that problem for me."---Air Vice Marshal Deeble
OMG---the planes are flying in Oz already!!
Therefore,oz asks Lincoin Lab of MIT to check the radar.
pl
Air Vice Marshal Deeble said:
Air Vice Marshal Deeble—I believe we have schedule risk associated with the program. Next week will help me confirm exactly where I sit with the radar, which will bound my overall problem space. What I have told Chief of Air Force and CDF is that I believe that we could, if we worked through some of these significant
issues, look at initial operational capability at around the end of 2011 and a full operational capability around 2012—assuming that there is some risk that will be realised in the not-too-distant future. That is what my
current planning base is. I do not want to set expectations that I cannot achieve. I have significant technical risks in the case of the MESA radar, which will really bound that problem for me.The issues I am confronting relate to the fact that we are talking about
a highly developmental system in terms of the MESA radar. We are a first of type and we have to look at those issues and work with Boeing through those issues.Official info
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/ic/aewc/docs/737AEWC_overview.pdf
http://www.boeing.com/defense-space/ic/aewc/index.html
vvvvv
-
pl forgive my unorgainised info.But i think u guys can understand.
unique configuration is very danger.
Do u remember the causes of other failed oz military projects--
systems not compatable!!For example,21 st century technology
affixed to Vietnam era platform!!
i let u guys dig out .
http://www.aph.gov.au/hansard/senate/commttee/s11361.pdf
page 68
"That system is currently resident in the AP3C but we have expanded those capabilities in the AEWAC context."
Air Vice Marshal Deeble—That is okay. The ESM—electronic support measures, the ability to passively determine what is occurring in the electromagnetic arena around the aircraft—is also another system that we are working on closely. BAE Systems Australia is currently responsible as a subcontractor to Boeing for the
provision of that system. ....................
Air Vice Marshal Deeble—There is no other system out there that is deployed in the same configuration.
We are a very significant modification of the ALR 2001. That system is currently resident in the AP3C but we have expanded those capabilities in the AEWAC context.@@@@@@@@@@@@@2
Why did they ask for independent review after the planes had been
assembled and flying?The asks Lincoln Lab of MIT to help!!
page 69..
Air Vice Marshal Deeble—I want to further clarify this: the important thing is that we have written to Boeing seeking their understanding that we would be undertaking an independent review. It is my aim that that independent review be effectively run by DSTO, which has significant expertise in this particular area. DSTO
worked closely in the program prior to contract signature, at the point in time that the requirements were developed, and has been engaged in the program sets. MIT Lincoln Lab is a pre-eminent research organisation
in the US. It supports the US government and we will be seeking its services through the US government agencies to support that independent assessment. That will be important for us to understand the baseline performance and any path forward for remediation of any shortfalls of the radar.ssss
Forget about IOC and FOC.
I think starting from Collins SSK, ADF can deploy platform for years without
declaring IOC or FOC or both.Operational Release is the term they use!!
i will not suprised wedgetails fly at end of next decade,without
declared FOC. Changing the spec of expected performances is
one of the way to declare IOC or FOC earlier!!
-
Originally posted by lionnoisy:
pl forgive my unorgainised info.But i think u guys can understand.
unique configuration is very danger.
Do u remember the causes of other failed oz military projects--
systems not compatable!!For example,21 st century technology
going by your argument, singapore's local defence industry also provides unique research and equipment uniqeuly specified to meet out local defence requirements.
so all our unique stuff like the BMS for the tanks, and all the rest of the locally made stuff catered to SAF not considered unique? therefore not considered dangerous??
or does the unique configuaration integration issues don't apply to Sg? i'm sure every armed force organisation will have some teething issues when introducing new equipment, integration problems and stuff but with good R&D and operational evaluations all this issues can be smoothened out in due time.
-
i like official info.At least they put their heads on the
chopping board.
22 Feb 2008 DSTA to enhance capabilities of Gulfstream G-550 jet aircraft
The Ministry of Defence is likely to draw on DSTA's expertise in system development to enhance the capabilities of the Gulfstream G-550 jet aircraft, which will replace its existing fleet of E2-C Hawkeye carrier-based tactical warning and control systems.@@@@@@@@@
http://www.defense-update.com/features/2008/july08/caew_elta.htm
this reports SG buys CAEW!!
-
Which one shall we use?
@@@@@@@@@@
u can treat it as salesman talk.
http://www.gulfstream.com/special_missions/_pdf/SPM_brochure.pdf
Special Missions brocgure
Since 1967, when the U.S. Navy selected the
Gulfstream I® as the weapon system and navigational
trainer for its A-6 crews, Gulfstream aircraft have
earned widespread recognition as the definitive
choice for special missions platforms. Today, more
Gulfstream aircraft perform government and military
service than any other large-cabin business jet aircraft
in the world.More than 30 countries worldwide
operate Gulfstreams, including 23 nations that use
our aircraft to transport their heads-of-state. Within
the United States, Gulfstream aircraft account for the
majority of all large-cabin business jets delivered to
the government from 1967 to the present. Gulfstream
performance and mission reliability has even earned
us the distinction and privilege of serving all five
branches of the U.S. military.Unlike other business jet aircraft manufacturers,
Gulfstream maintains a long-established Special
Missions Program Office, staffed by program
managers and project engineers with the experience
and expertise to meet the most demanding
challenges.Working with domestic and international
governments and defense contractors, we design our
platforms to meet specific national requirements.
Then, in conjunction with our technology partners,
we coordinate aircraft modifications and oversee the
integration of state-of-the-art mission equipment to
meet each customer’s unique needs.
Gulfstream aircraft have been defining and redefiningnnn
-
Gulfstream is just part of
Air defence gets networked (23 Apr 07)
Singapore Establishes Networked Air Defense - Singapore Airshow 2008
-after reading this,i will know why the tail is bigger in CAEW.
Singapore will receive the first aircraft of this year, and all four are expected to be operational by 2010. No details were released about the electronic and radar suite to be installed in the aircraft, but, it is a known fact that the only system currently available for this platform is the Israeli IAI/Elta 2085 PHALCON radar, developed for four Israel Air Force G550 AEW aircraft known as Eitam, currently being delivered by IAI/Elta. The first aircraft was handed over by Gulfstream on September 2006.
The PHALCON suite includes four sensors - radar, friend or for identification system (IFF), Electronic Support Measures electronic intelligence (ESM/ELINT) and Communications Signal Monitoring / Communications Intelligence (CSM/COMINT) systems. All sensors are fed through a unique fusion technique, providing continuous cross-correlation of targets generated by all sensors, providing automated system-wide tracks of targets detected by each sensor. The multi-beam, electronically scanning phased array radar utilizes time-space energy management technique facilitating effective, multi-mode operations and coverage of 360 degrees using only four planar sections - two in conformal arrays, and two at the nose cone and tail sections.
-
do u believe SG Gulfstream
The G550-AEW is a business jet that has a long endurance of nine hours and can operate at an altitude of 41,000 feet, with a crew of eight, including two pilots.
http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_events/nr/2007/apr/23apr07_nr/23apr07_fs3.html
@@@@@@@@@@@@@
1.Have u seen Gulfstream flying here?
2.ST reported that E2C flys at 7600 m atitude ,with a radar
radius of not more than 200nm. A low flying plane
flys at 1 mach can be detected 23 mins away from SG.
This 2007 news stated SG should have received 4 in late 2007.
"23 Apr 2007 DSTA develops the brain of the radar systems onboard the Gulfstream G550s
DSTA and the defence industry played a significant role in building the mission system software to optimise the capability of the Republic of Singapore Air Force's new Gulfstream G550s to ward off aerial intruders."
The Straits Times page 3ddd
-
man.. we need backup, i hope the T-rex gets back in here soon and asian aussie too. this lion simply cant get it in his head.
and noisy lion, the tail isnt bigger FYI. the tail has a bulge at the bottom to handle the 2 arrays. not bigger tail.
this is a platform discussion, not a WHY SOME PEOPLE DONT LIKE AUSTRALIA WEAPONS SYSTEM THREAD. bugger off, quit spreading your anti-australia rhetoric. i honestly dont see the link between the wedgetail and the collins sub or whatever you have just mentioned.
and in any case, you ever heard of the head-start theory ? you invest in something, you develop and obtain a significant comparative advantage in it, and you exploit it for all its worth until your rivals catch up. but until then, you'd have the advantage. same reason why we are investing in the CAEW, to maintain our advantage.
and is Australia the only country acquiring the MESA radar system ? seems like Turkey and Korea are also buying them. question time : if this AESA CAEW platform is going to last us 20 years, like our e2c hawkeyes which we bought in 1987, are we throwing money into a technology/radar form that may be supersceded in terms of its potential capabilities and reach the peak of its development cycle ? in the VLR we might be the ones getting screwed for all you know.
@weasel,
just curious, i cant see how the wedgetail fits in with things like JORN. ok, JORN gives you long range detection capacity.
isnt the wedgetail a duplication of this capacity ? or is it a dedicated airborne asset that gives the RAAF an added dimension to its capabilities ?
what is the difference between a MESA/AESA and PESA radars ? i know Su-30 has PESA radars but thats about it.
is a MESA radar the same as an AESA radar ? does it have anything to do with SAR (synthetic apeture radar?)
-
http://www.clients.star-digital.co.uk/gulfstream/g550/
take a look of VIP version.
u can see the size of AEW!!
-
Oie we are not here to play with your farking anti aussie agenda. Stop comparing and lambasting the aussie stuff or i swear i will edit every one of your pathetic unreadable post and replace with some nicer pictures.
-
OTH radars serve a purpose in that it has very long range detection capabilities. However, any other GCI, its suffers from earth curvature issues. In layman's terms, the radar, like a car suffers from blind spots.
An airborne radar is downward looking. As such, it suffers from less blind spots. However, the amount of power output one can put on an aircraft is still a limiting factor. Aircraft are also limited by fuel consideration and thus cannot stay in the air forever whilst a ground radar can operate 24/7.
Hence whilst SG has Awacs, it still relies on ground radar like the FPS-117. Both have advantages and disadvantages. Ground radar is also a lot less mobile. In large battlespace, battles can (and normally will as far as possible) take place in ground radar blind spots. AEW can follow the battle more consistently but again can be shot down.
On the issue of radar difference, it's 101. I would suggest Carlo Kopp's write up.
http://www.ausairpower.net/aesa-intro.html
Whilst his conclusions are generally suspect, his facts are likely correct. In layman's term, the difference between PESA and AESA are the T/R modules. Both use electronic beam steering but AESA has multiple transmitters and receivers that can generate and receive multiple beams on specific frequencies. A PESA probably has a single source feeding the frequencies which if fails, effectively means the radar can't work. That's accounts for the "active" vs "passive" element. For MESA, that's just a fancy name for an AESA that is integrated with other functions eg IFF id etc. Just like networking.
Having said that, the PESA is still a better radar than mechanically scanned ones as the above article indicates.
-
interesting read.
thank you.
now i understand why our F15s need better airconditioning / cooling systems.
i understand, so the wedgetail fulfills a different purpose in the RAAF inventory ? while the JORN is meant to give australia more strategic depth in terms of time to detect and react to the enemy, the wedgetail provides C&C and covers immediate battlespace gaps ?
-
have u seen this in SG lately?
http://www.defense-update.com/products/n/nachshon.htm
IAF Nachshon
G500 / 550 Special Mission Aircraft
IAF/ Gulfstream
-
Originally posted by sgstars:
man.. we need backup, i hope the T-rex gets back in here soon and asian aussie too. this lion simply cant get it in his head.
and noisy lion, the tail isnt bigger FYI. the tail has a bulge at the bottom to handle the 2 arrays. not bigger tail.
this is a platform discussion, not a WHY SOME PEOPLE DONT LIKE AUSTRALIA WEAPONS SYSTEM THREAD. bugger off, quit spreading your anti-australia rhetoric. i honestly dont see the link between the wedgetail and the collins sub or whatever you have just mentioned.
and in any case, you ever heard of the head-start theory ? you invest in something, you develop and obtain a significant comparative advantage in it, and you exploit it for all its worth until your rivals catch up. but until then, you'd have the advantage. same reason why we are investing in the CAEW, to maintain our advantage.
and is Australia the only country acquiring the MESA radar system ? seems like Turkey and Korea are also buying them. question time : if this AESA CAEW platform is going to last us 20 years, like our e2c hawkeyes which we bought in 1987, are we throwing money into a technology/radar form that may be supersceded in terms of its potential capabilities and reach the peak of its development cycle ? in the VLR we might be the ones getting screwed for all you know.
@weasel,
just curious, i cant see how the wedgetail fits in with things like JORN. ok, JORN gives you long range detection capacity.
isnt the wedgetail a duplication of this capacity ? or is it a dedicated airborne asset that gives the RAAF an added dimension to its capabilities ?
what is the difference between a MESA/AESA and PESA radars ? i know Su-30 has PESA radars but thats about it.
is a MESA radar the same as an AESA radar ? does it have anything to do with SAR (synthetic apeture radar?)
Further delay of the completion of any project make the technlogy
in specified contract outdated,if it is finally completed.
The good example is Collins SSK.
When the A$5 billion contract was signed in 1987,
computer CPU may be 286 or 386 model.
When the 6 platforms were commissioned from 1996
to 2003,what were the progress in computers CPU??
Bear in mind the spec of the contract may be drawn one or 2 years
before the contract was signed!!
My view is u can never catch up with technology.
But u have to make sure the time span between
the draft of spec and the final successful completion of contract
and running of the platform as short as possible!!
The platform MUST WORK according to spec!!NO LESS!!
Again,Wedgetail will take at least 10 years from contract before
it can fly and run properly,according to spec!!
Collins Submarine Development Review -
ASC - Company History
http://www.vostokstation.com.au/RAAF_aircraft_weapons.pdf -
-
supriseingly,Wedgetail looks small when grounded.
i hope they will not think 2 or 3 hours test flights are enough!!
below--oz Wedgetail
Flight testing of the first
Australian-modified
Wedgetail
It was ‘tools down’ on 22 December 2007 after
Boeing Australia’s Wedgetail team completed
modifications on the first Wedgetail Airborne
Early Warning and Control aircraft to be
modified at Royal Australian Air Force Base
Amberley. During its 23-month transformation,
the aircraft underwent the most complex
commercial-to-military aircraft modification
ever undertaken in Australia, which included
the installation of an advanced Multi-role
Electronically Scanned Array antenna, ventral
fins and mission system equipment. On 22
January 2008, Boeing conducted a successful
two-and-a-half hour functional check flight
that verified the airworthiness of the aircraft’s
systems and structures (photo right).http://defence.boeing.com.au/website_33/pages/page_35102/uploads/Business_Review_Part_2.pdf
2 out of 6 platforms are modified in Seattle.
This refer to the first out of 4 platforms which are to be modified in Oz.
dddd
-
flag !
repeated warnings not to have country bashing ignored ! moderator please take note of this.
flag !
off topic and totally irrelevant collins class SSK mention
flag !
illiteracy, lionnoisy cant read. he's basically resummarizing what he has been posting and considered as anti-australia rants.
3 strikes and you are out ! raise the red flag ! wooohooo !
-
lionnoisy hijacked another thread to bash Australia.
