Subscribe via RSS

Archives by Date
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009

See all Archives
Archives by Category
'Canes
Afghan Update
Ammo and Munitions
Armor
Around the Globe
Av Week Extra
Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
Bizarro
Blimps
Blog Bidness
Body Armor Blues
Bomb Squad
Brownshoes in Action
Bubbleheads, etc.
Cammo Green
Catch the "Buzz"
Chem-Bio
Civilian Apps
Cloak and Dagger
Commandos
Comms
Contingency Ops
Cops and Robbers
Cyber-warfare
Data Diving
Defense Tech Poll
Defense Tech Radio
Dissent Tech
Door Kickers
Drones
DT Administrivia
Eat DT's Dust
Extra! Extra!
Eye on China
Fast Movers
FCS Watch
Fire for Effect
FOS Files
Friday Funnies
Gadgets and Gear
Going Green
Grand Ole Osprey
Ground Vehicles
Guns
Homeland Security
In the Weeds with Eric
Info War
Iraq Diary
Jarhead Jazz
JSF Watch
Just War Theories
Lasers and Ray Guns
Less-lethal
Logistics
Los Alamos and Labs
M4 Monopoly
Medic!
Mercs
Missiles
Money Money Money
Most Wanted
MRAP Edge
Net-Centric
Nukes
Old Skool
Our Shrinking Planet
Planes, Copters, Blimps
Podcast
Politricks
Polmar's Perspective
Popular Mechanics
Rapid Fire
Raptor Watch
Red Team
Retro-Futuro
Robots
Roll Your Own
Sabra Tech
Ships and Subs
Snipertech
Soldier Systems
Space
Special Ops
Star Wars
Strategery
Stray Trons
Tactical Development
Terror Tech
The Deadlies
The Defense Biz
The Peoples' Site
The Sunday Paper
The Tanker Tango
The View from Av Week
Those Nutty Norks
Training and Sims
Trimble on the Case
Video Lounge
War Update
Ward'z Wonderz
You can run...

See all Archives
Newsletters

Edited by Christian Lowe | Contact

Oops! Will the US Air Force lose Joint STARS?

jstars.jpg

I believe I have seen the future replacement for the E-8C Joint STARS fleet (shown pictured), and it's not going to be a US Air Force aircraft.

The US Navy is preparing to replace the EP-3E ARIES II, an electronic intelligence aircraft, with a new-start acquisition program called EPX.

But the navy's requirements for EPX call for an aircraft that would not only spy on enemy electronic signals, like the EP-3E, but also find and track moving targets, like the E-8C.

Interestingly, the EPX program of record will acquire 19 to 26 aircraft to replace only 11 EP-3Es flying today. At the high end of that range, 26 aircraft would nicely replace all 11 EP-3Es and all 17 E-8Cs in service. (One E-8C is a testbed, and doesn't count.)

If the air force can't pay for an E-8C replacement to appear after 2015, or even to modernize the radar on the current fleet, watch for the navy to steal this mission with the EPX. It's the roles and missions equivalent of a pick-pocketing.

And it's happened before. In 1998, the air force lost the EC-135 Looking Glass mission to the navy's E-6 take-charge-and-move-out (TACAMO) aircraft. Now, it's happening again, unless the air force acts very quickly.

This all became clear to me during my weeklong tour of Boeing's defense sites based in the Pacific Northwest. Paul Summers, Boeing's capture lead for EPX, briefed reporters about the navy's requirements, explaining that the size of the future EPX fleet had grown from 14-19 aircraft to 19-26 aircraft since last year.

The obvious question later occurred to me: Why does the navy need 26 EPX aircraft to replace 11 EP-3Es. Clearly, the navy has bigger ideas for this fleet.

Paul also discussed the new radar for the EPX. This in itself is noteworthy. The EP-3E does not have a radar. The aircraft intercepts and maps enemy communications and other electronic transmissions.

We've known for about a year that Boeing and Raytheon have installed the new littoral surveillance radar systems (LSRS) on a subset of the P-3C fleet, giving the navy its own mini-Joint STARS capability.

It is now clear that the LSRS is the proverbial trojan horse, injecting the navy into the Joint STARS business for the long-term.

Paul also explained that Boeing will consider the LSRS or another radar for EPX. The only possible alternative is a new variant of Northrop Grumman's wide area surveillance sensor developed under the multi-platform radar technology insertion program (MP-RTIP).

This will force Northrop to make a tough choice. Northrop, you see, is the prime contractor the E-8C, so it has everything to lose if the navy takes over the mission. However, if the company decides to join Boeing's EPX bid, that could be a signal that it believes the air force will never get around to replacing the E-8C.

The navy has money in the budget beginning next year to launch EPX. The air force has no funds to replace E-8Cs for the foreseeable future, and now faces a potentially disruptive leadership transition.

I'm not a betting man, but, if I was in Northrop's position, I know where I'd place my bet.

The air force has only itself to blame. The folly of the E-10 program, which spectacularly failed to combine an E-8C, and E-3A AWACS and an airborne operations center onto the same platform, has left the air force without a discernible plan to replace its aging fleets of 707-based aircraft.

The air force's only hope to stay in the E-8C business may be to observe the adage: if you can't beat them, join them.

Establishing a true "joint" partnership to acquire and operate a new fleet of narrowbody-class aircraft to serve all of the specialized missions performed today by 707s looks like the only way back in. (This idea also has the charm of making sense.)

Indeed, it has been proposed several times in the past. The only difference now is that the air force won't be calling the shots.

The navy, meanwhile, is not in this position merely through good fortune.

In 2004, the navy picked the Boeing P-8A -- based on the 737-800ERX -- to replace the P-3C, giving itself a versatile and capable platform to expand into new missions.

That's not to say that Boeing won't have to face challengers to win the EPX contract. The navy is inviting other companies to compete for EPX, but it will be difficult for the Airbus A320 and the Embraer E190 to overcome the incumbent advantages of the P-8A.

Paul Summers told us that Boeing had to make more than 50 modifications costing $1 billion to simply adapt the basic 737 airframe to meet the navy's more demanding certification requirements. The A320 and the E190 would face similar costs, possibly killing the chances for holding a fair airframe competition on EPX.

I expect that the navy will try to level the playing field in other ways. Perhaps, the navy will select the P-8A as the baseline platform and invite bidders -- including Boeing, Lockheed Martin and Northrop -- to compete for the systems integrator role.

-- Steve Trimble

Comments

The Articles assumptions that the proposed fleet size based on a one for one replacement is whishful thinking, tha'ts even assuming the EPX would be a full multimission capable BMC2&ISR platform that the E-8 is evolving into. Also let's not for get the fact that the EPX will be assuming part of the role and responsibilities of both EP-3E and USAF RC-135 Rivet Joint. The current 11 aircraft EP-3E fleet doesn't actually meet the exsisting need for dedicated SIGINT platforms it's just how many the Navy could field and maintain with given funding.

Posted by: KW at June 17, 2008 12:11 PM


With all the choices on the market, it's hard to be sure that you're getting the best value for your investment. But when it comes to oriental
gifts, apparel, Silk Bags, Embroidery Bag, Chinese clothing & Oriental clothing long & short dresses,Blouses, tops and Jackets.we can eliminate the guesswork. We are the direct exporters and wholesalers of collectible
gifts and oriental items. All the items shown in our store are made by ourselves, so you may be rest assured that our prices are the best.

more info:http://www.onesilk.com


If you are not familiar with our company and your first contact with us is online: We would be pleased to hear from you! Please let us know what your needs and questions are, we will be more than happy to help.Comments or questions, write us an email :onesilk@gmail.com


Posted by: helen at June 17, 2008 04:04 AM


Well, the original idea of the E-10A certainly did fail. The USAF originally intended to put both the JSTARS and AWCAS system on the 767-400ER, in addition to the BMC2 back-end system, but realized in late 2002 that it would be impossible.

Posted by: Stephen Trimble at June 10, 2008 05:49 AM


FYI...NG has already teamed up with L-3 for bidding on the EPX: http://www.primenewswire.com/newsroom/news.html?d=133171

And as far as E-10 goes, if the AF would of stuck with the original plan for RTIP (before it was MP-RTIP) on the E-8C, it would have almost been fielded by now.

Posted by: WC at June 9, 2008 05:50 PM


Just a clearification.

The E-10 MC2A (Multi-Sensor Command and Control Aircraft) did not fail. It was cancelled to make room in the budget for other priorities...

Posted by: pfcem at June 9, 2008 05:38 PM


I agree that the USAF is having a very tough time getting off the 707 (E-3, E-8, KC-135), at a time when this transition needs to be made ASAP. Competition is also rising from other countries as they field AW, EW and surveillance radar capabilities on biz jets and turboprops.

But I don't think the ground surveillance radar mission is exclusive to any branch. Both the USAF and USN have a right to it, and whomever has the radar needs to cue the Army in as well. I would hope that the USAF follows on the USN's lead for the system pick and not try to develop its own system at this time, but it should not think that the Navy has exclusive rights to it either. ALL services need it.

Posted by: Smith at June 9, 2008 11:07 AM


Post a comment




Remember Me?


Please enter the code as seen in the image below to post your comment.