Slug71 wrote:Or do you guys think it will likely also be based off the 767?
Slug71 wrote:http://www.defensenews.com/articles/nav ... eplacement
LightningZ71 wrote:The original RFP is basically tailor written to the 767 based KC-47 platform to be used for the E4 replacements, as well as most any other current types that need a lot of floor space (seems to include the C-32 executive transport as well). For the smaller birds, they are looking at the 737-MAX (basically, just waiting on Boeing to evolve the mil-spec P-8 setup into a Max derived form).
Stitch wrote:E-6 Mercury, E-8 JSTARS and E-3 Sentry should be replaceable with the 737-800ERX (P-8) or even the Boeing 737-700ER (737 AEW&C)
bikerthai wrote:For future re-cap Boeing will be pitching the MAX as per LightningZ71. This is because Boeing Commercial does not want an "old NG configuration" gumming up their production. Going to a MAX military derivative will allow the factory to flow more smoothly.
flyingclrs727 wrote:Why would the E-6 need to be replaced anytime soon? They aren't that old nor have that many hours on them. They were the last 707's off the line at the end of the Cold War. They have been updated with modern 737 NG derived cockpits. There are lots of other tankers and support aircraft to replace before replacing the E-6 fleet.
Stitch wrote:So they're going to convert the current P-8 line in Building 4-20 to a MAX line? I assume it's going to be ITAR-compliant, as well?
Devilfish wrote:If they were contemplating a business jet before, then the MAX7 must be acceptable too - including the power requirements? Only question is if the scimitar winglets would also need to be changed to raked wingtips.
bikerthai wrote:Stitch wrote:So they're going to convert the current P-8 line in Building 4-20 to a MAX line? I assume it's going to be ITAR-compliant, as well?
If you are BCA, you'd say current line in building 4-20 is a 737 line that handles the P-8
bikerthai wrote:This relates to what LightningZ71 mentioned about waiting for Boeing to flesh out the spec.
Stitch wrote:As I recall, Boeing can build commercial 737s on that line if they need to, correct?
bikerthai wrote:The P-8 frame slows that third line a little, so the output is not as high as the other two lines. When Renton switch over to the MAX, the third line will probably be last to switch over, as the P-8 frame will slow the MAX line even more. That is why Boeing will be eager to close out the P-8 line and move all future military derivatives to a MAX variant.
Stitch wrote:So Boeing is planning four MAX lines?
bunumuring wrote:Hey guys,
It was my understanding that Boeing was NOT going to offer a P-8 style MAX as the US military would not fork out the R&D funds needed to develop some of the more 'intrusive' air frame modifications required (eg. internal weapons bay). Is this correct? . . . . Surely it would be easier/cheaper to develop E-7 style MAXs than P-8 ones? Just my suggestion.
Stitch wrote:I could see the E-4B replacement being based on the 767-2C due to the need for large floor space for the Battle Planning Staff.
E-6 Mercury, E-8 JSTARS and E-3 Sentry should be replaceable with the 737-800ERX (P-8) or even the Boeing 737-700ER (737 AEW&C) platforms. Australia, Turkey and South Korea are all 737 AEW&C customers, Qatar has said they want some, and Boeing is pitching the same to Italy and the UAE.
Slug71 wrote:Stitch wrote:
Thought I've also read somewhere on the forum, that the E-4B capabilities could be merged into the new AF1 birds because of the advancement of technology
LightningZ71 wrote:A recent article and discussion at http://www.thedrive.com/thewarzone had a couple of people chiming in that seemed to have a bit of insight into this project. It definitely looks like the USAF and the USN want to go with frames that are as common as possible. The original RFP is basically tailor written to the 767 based KC-47 platform to be used for the E4 replacements, as well as most any other current types that need a lot of floor space (seems to include the C-32 executive transport as well). For the smaller birds, they are looking at the 737-MAX (basically, just waiting on Boeing to evolve the mil-spec P-8 setup into a Max derived form). I can hazard a guess to say that, given the common cross section between the 707 derived products and the modern 737, that anything based on the 707 could rather easily be replaced with a MAX derivative. Most of the electronics have shrunk in size since all of the 707 derivatives were purchased, reducing weight and volume enough that they should all fit in a -8 just fine.
LightningZ71 wrote:At some point, you just might see a mil-spec 787, but, it likely won't be for a long time. The military seems to like "traditional" build techniques for the heavy haulers right now. When the military gets around to looking at replacing the KC-10s in 10-15 years, you might see them take a peak at the 787-F. However, there is also a lot of requirement work going into reduced observability cargo and refueling platforms, which may completely fill the void left by the KC-10.
Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe
Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days
Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit
Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior
Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft
Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials
Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions
Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin
Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon
Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos
Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft
Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries
Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground
Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos