NATO selects new AEW Platform
Discussion
OK so it's been an open secret for a while but now it is official and announced at the Ankara NATO meeting:
https://www.government.se/press-releases/2026/07/n...
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/nato-buys-globaley...
It is a hugely capable platform (as is the Wedgetail that, until recently, was the way NATO was going but US Politics put paid to that).
Given world events the need for airborne early warning has never been greater, just at a time as the 'original' AWACS (E-3) is hitting retirement age all round the world. Fingers crossed for a smooth introduction and integration into service.
https://www.government.se/press-releases/2026/07/n...
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/nato-buys-globaley...
It is a hugely capable platform (as is the Wedgetail that, until recently, was the way NATO was going but US Politics put paid to that).
Given world events the need for airborne early warning has never been greater, just at a time as the 'original' AWACS (E-3) is hitting retirement age all round the world. Fingers crossed for a smooth introduction and integration into service.
Edited by Manners79 on Tuesday 7th July 11:12
Eric Mc said:
What does it look like?
Is it based on a current airframe (Airbus, SAAB etc) or is it a brand new design?
Bombardier global 6000 with a big radar “sail” on the topIs it based on a current airframe (Airbus, SAAB etc) or is it a brand new design?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GlobalEye
Seems they opted for cheap and relatively disposable with minimal crew vs big, expensive and lots of crew.
The smaller platforms can do a lot but not quite the same as stuff like E-7. Have to wonder if it's driven by doctrine or budgets.
American wavering over Wedgetail seems like it's more politically driven.
The smaller platforms can do a lot but not quite the same as stuff like E-7. Have to wonder if it's driven by doctrine or budgets.
American wavering over Wedgetail seems like it's more politically driven.
JoshSm said:
Seems they opted for cheap and relatively disposable with minimal crew vs big, expensive and lots of crew.
The smaller platforms can do a lot but not quite the same as stuff like E-7. Have to wonder if it's driven by doctrine or budgets.
In the conflict between India and Pakistan last year it was reported that Pakistan having more AEW platforms (Saab Erieye) allowed them to exploit gaps in Indian AEW coverage when the latter were changing shiftThe smaller platforms can do a lot but not quite the same as stuff like E-7. Have to wonder if it's driven by doctrine or budgets.
JoshSm said:
Seems they opted for cheap and relatively disposable with minimal crew vs big, expensive and lots of crew.
The smaller platforms can do a lot but not quite the same as stuff like E-7. Have to wonder if it's driven by doctrine or budgets.
American wavering over Wedgetail seems like it's more politically driven.
Well to be fair the NATO order for GlobalEye is 'up to' 10 whereas the (potential) order for NATO E-7 Wedgetail was 'up to' 7. Even in modern defence, and especially when you need to be in several places at once, quantity can have a quality all of its own.The smaller platforms can do a lot but not quite the same as stuff like E-7. Have to wonder if it's driven by doctrine or budgets.
American wavering over Wedgetail seems like it's more politically driven.
The NATO aircraft will have provision for additional crew (not as many as an E-7 but more than current fielded GlobalEye).
Plus these are part of a wider NATO nation owned AEW fleet. UK is getting 3 x E-7 that will, under certain circumstances, be available to NATO. Additionally, several other nations are also negotiating for their own GlobalEye purchases (made more likely by this announcement).
Compatibility / interoperability is much more about common data links etc than common physical platforms and the baseline GlobalEye as will be delivered initially is extremely capable in this regard. Plus it will, of course, undergo mid-life enhancements.
lufbramatt said:
NATO version will be 6500 based and in addition to the solid state radar will have a myriad of other comms and sensors on itEdited by Manners79 on Tuesday 7th July 13:55
JoshSm said:
Seems they opted for cheap and relatively disposable with minimal crew vs big, expensive and lots of crew.
Yeap, if you're expecting to lose a HVT like an AEW platform it's better to have more available, plus the specialised crew needed on an AWACS is now safe in a bunker somewhere using downlinked AEW radar data so even if an AEW does get shot down its less of an impact overall (still sucks though).JoshSm said:
The smaller platforms can do a lot but not quite the same as stuff like E-7. Have to wonder if it's driven by doctrine or budgets.
I'm guessing a 60/40 split. Russia knows that they "have" to deal with the AWACS in some way, whether on the ground or in the air, so buying more AEW to cover the threat of loses, plus ones that have a smaller support footprint making them more deployable anywhere, makes for a good choice................plus budgets are tight too 
Countdown said:
It's a shame that this happened only after the USAF had cancelled the E-7.
Except they haven't cancelled it.Senate approved continued funding, as Pentagon have realised that what they thought they could make do with, the recent spat with Iran proved that they can't, so USAF E-7 is back on.
Manners79 said:
JoshSm said:
Seems they opted for cheap and relatively disposable with minimal crew vs big, expensive and lots of crew.
The smaller platforms can do a lot but not quite the same as stuff like E-7. Have to wonder if it's driven by doctrine or budgets.
American wavering over Wedgetail seems like it's more politically driven.
Well to be fair the NATO order for GlobalEye is 'up to' 10 whereas the (potential) order for NATO E-7 Wedgetail was 'up to' 7. Even in modern defence, and especially when you need to be in several places at once, quantity can have a quality all of its own.The smaller platforms can do a lot but not quite the same as stuff like E-7. Have to wonder if it's driven by doctrine or budgets.
American wavering over Wedgetail seems like it's more politically driven.
So, 10 still isn't enough. In current climate of increased Russian aggressive actions, they should have upped the order to 15 at least.
Given the interminable time the RAF are taking to actually get the thing operational, is the E7 a pup or is it just the usual MoD attempting to do something that requires actual money spent, but with no money, and failing in an entirely predictable way? As reliable as the 737 is, buying only 3 airframes seems like yet another bad decision entirely driven by budget which might render the fleet(is 3 planes a fleet? 
) prematurely useless at the other end of the lifecycle.
) prematurely useless at the other end of the lifecycle.hidetheelephants said:
Given the interminable time the RAF are taking to actually get the thing operational, is the E7 a pup or is it just the usual MoD attempting to do something that requires actual money spent, but with no money, and failing in an entirely predictable way? As reliable as the 737 is, buying only 3 airframes seems like yet another bad decision entirely driven by budget which might render the fleet(is 3 planes a fleet? ) prematurely useless at the other end of the lifecycle.
The RAF only got the first one delivered to them last month, so its a bit unfair to lay blame at the RAF.) prematurely useless at the other end of the lifecycle.Blaming Boeing and the MOD bean counters on the other hand, fill yer boots.
The RAF think it was delivered in 2024? Obviously getting it worked up and writing procedures takes time but 3 years seems quite leisurely.
Manners79 said:
OK so it's been an open secret for a while but now it is official and announced at the Ankara NATO meeting:
https://www.government.se/press-releases/2026/07/n...
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/nato-buys-globaley...
It is a hugely capable platform (as is the Wedgetail that, until recently, was the way NATO was going but US Politics put paid to that).
Given world events the need for airborne early warning has never been greater, just at a time as the 'original' AWACS (E-3) is hitting retirement age all round the world. Fingers crossed for a smooth introduction and integration into service.
I spent 8 years as crew on Sentry E3-D until it ceased flying and prior to that I spent 5 years writing code for the tactical datalink systems on board. Bearing in mind how old the kit onboard was it was still hugely capable. https://www.government.se/press-releases/2026/07/n...
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/nato-buys-globaley...
It is a hugely capable platform (as is the Wedgetail that, until recently, was the way NATO was going but US Politics put paid to that).
Given world events the need for airborne early warning has never been greater, just at a time as the 'original' AWACS (E-3) is hitting retirement age all round the world. Fingers crossed for a smooth introduction and integration into service.
Edited by Manners79 on Tuesday 7th July 11:12
The NATO E3 went through what was called the block 40/45 upgrade program to upgrade it from what the E3D was loosely, they were never identical but very similar.
40/45 was mostly a ground up new mission system (not going in to detail on here as it’s still an active flying aircraft and I’m bound by the official secrets act. I got the chance to do an exchange with the NATO E3 fleet out in GK. Exceptionally capable aircraft.
Problem with the E3-D was the airframe was getting harder and harder to maintain. So much so we were struggling to maintain our NATO commitment flying hours whilst spending a fortune. Still regret that it went without us knowing beforehand. It’s normal for Sqn bosses to get a couple hours of heads up notice to give them time to brief the troops so to speak so it’s not a shock. Wasn’t even part of the speech in parliament. Just a couple of lines in the defence review about 100 pages in.
UK_Scat_Pack said:
Some people above are forgetting that the E7 Wedgetail is an AUSTRALIAN product! It s just the base airframe that is American.
The US E7 s are back on track with the first one being constructed in the UK.
I must have wasted a lot of time in Baltimore and Rolling Meadows thinking my product was going on the MESA radars. Where in Australia did they develop/build the radar?The US E7 s are back on track with the first one being constructed in the UK.
hidetheelephants said:
The RAF think it was delivered in 2024? Obviously getting it worked up and writing procedures takes time but 3 years seems quite leisurely.
It wasn't.....that's when they were expecting it to be delivered by Boeing, but the first one wasn't delivered to Lossie until last month, and that was only the 2nd time it had flown since Nov last year. Its believed that the radar still has never even been switched on yet.
Edit:
Actually, it was not last month, it was May 21st, so a month ago to be more accurate.
And while its been delivered to Lossie, its still not been handed over to RAF yet, Boeing will be be testing it from there prior to handover to the RAF. When that will be is anyones guess.
Edited by aeropilot on Wednesday 8th July 21:44
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff