Canada to Spend $5.0Bil on AEW Aircraft

[dimsum]

View attachment 86819

That’s the “fighter pilot” version, yes…

 

[GR66]

A 3rd possible AEW platform option for Canada?

GA-ASI Adds Saab Airborne Early Warning Capability to MQ-9B

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) is partnering with Saab to develop Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) capability for its line of MQ-9B Remotely Piloted Aircraft, which includes the SkyGuardian® and SeaGuardian® models, the United Kingdom’s Protector, and the new MQ-9B...

www.ga.com

General Atomics and Saab are partnering to offer an AEW version of the MQ-9B.

GA-ASI will pair Saab’s AEW sensors with the world’s longest-range, highest-endurance unmanned aircraft system (UAS), the MQ-9B. At sea or over land, the AEW mission package on MQ-9B will put air dominance within reach at a lower cost than legacy platforms.

The MQ-9B AEW solution will offer critical aloft sensing to defend against tactical air, guided missiles, drones, and other threats at a fraction of the cost of manned platforms. Operational availability for medium-altitude long-endurance UAS is the highest of any military aircraft, and as an unmanned platform, its aircrew are not put into harm’s way. AEW for MQ-9B will augment existing AEW fleets by extending their effective ranges. It also gives air forces that need AEW, but lack legacy platforms, a powerful and affordable means to counter threats.

Even if the systems aren't as capable as the manned alternatives, I wonder what quantity you could get for the $5 billion projected cost vs. the manned systems? Somewhat less capable but in larger numbers, unmanned and no new airframe to be supported by the logistics system. Worth the tradeoffs?

 

[Czech_pivo]

A 3rd possible AEW platform option for Canada?

GA-ASI Adds Saab Airborne Early Warning Capability to MQ-9B

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) is partnering with Saab to develop Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) capability for its line of MQ-9B Remotely Piloted Aircraft, which includes the SkyGuardian® and SeaGuardian® models, the United Kingdom’s Protector, and the new MQ-9B...

www.ga.com

General Atomics and Saab are partnering to offer an AEW version of the MQ-9B.

Even if the systems aren't as capable as the manned alternatives, I wonder what quantity you could get for the $5 billion projected cost vs. the manned systems? Somewhat less capable but in larger numbers, unmanned and no new airframe to be supported by the logistics system. Worth the tradeoffs?

Maybe a mixed bag?
Less manned AEW and then a bunch of these unmaned

 

[Maxman1]

A 3rd possible AEW platform option for Canada?

GA-ASI Adds Saab Airborne Early Warning Capability to MQ-9B

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) is partnering with Saab to develop Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) capability for its line of MQ-9B Remotely Piloted Aircraft, which includes the SkyGuardian® and SeaGuardian® models, the United Kingdom’s Protector, and the new MQ-9B...

www.ga.com

General Atomics and Saab are partnering to offer an AEW version of the MQ-9B.

Even if the systems aren't as capable as the manned alternatives, I wonder what quantity you could get for the $5 billion projected cost vs. the manned systems? Somewhat less capable but in larger numbers, unmanned and no new airframe to be supported by the logistics system. Worth the tradeoffs?

 

[KevinB]

A 3rd possible AEW platform option for Canada?

GA-ASI Adds Saab Airborne Early Warning Capability to MQ-9B

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems, Inc. (GA-ASI) is partnering with Saab to develop Airborne Early Warning and Control (AEW&C) capability for its line of MQ-9B Remotely Piloted Aircraft, which includes the SkyGuardian® and SeaGuardian® models, the United Kingdom’s Protector, and the new MQ-9B...

www.ga.com

General Atomics and Saab are partnering to offer an AEW version of the MQ-9B.

Even if the systems aren't as capable as the manned alternatives, I wonder what quantity you could get for the $5 billion projected cost vs. the manned systems? Somewhat less capable but in larger numbers, unmanned and no new airframe to be supported by the logistics system. Worth the tradeoffs?

It’s an interesting idea.

However I tend to think that the sensors will be significantly worse than a manned system like the E-7 Wedgetail, simply as -9 platform can’t handle the size and power requirements for large AESA radars and the AI/ML systems required to analyze the data gathered, nor the C2 aspect.


Seems to be tailored to countries who don’t have expansive territories or search areas, or who can afford to have huge fleets of them.

 

[Good2Golf]

It’s an interesting idea.

However I tend to think that the sensors will be significantly worse than a manned system like the E-7 Wedgetail, simply as -9 platform can’t handle the size and power requirements for large AESA radars and the AI/ML systems required to analyze the data gathered, nor the C2 aspect.

The radar on a wedge tail is probably bigger than the entire fuselage of an MQ-9B…size = aperture = power & resolution & diversity (beam forming and EPM/ECCM).

 

[IKnowNothing]

It’s an interesting idea.

Seems to be tailored to countries who don’t have expansive territories or search areas, or who can afford to have huge fleets of them.

They use the AEW&C acronym, but reading the article I only see a hint of lipservice towards being a (barely) viable substitute to a traditional AWACS type aircraft.

I'm likely completely wrong, but the "vibe" I got was that the niche this is intended to fill is the same relative to ground based C-UAS /C-RAM sensors as legacy AEW&C is to ground based radar and control. Defensive sensors evolving to match the changing threat environment with more range, more coverage, and more survivability. Not as much to take over the active control of the airspace/ provide vectors etc.

 

[KevinB]

They use the AEW&C acronym, but reading the article I only see a hint of lipservice towards being a (barely) viable substitute to a traditional AWACS type aircraft.

TBH I think it’s more of a bolt on option to those who already have some.

I'm likely completely wrong, but the "vibe" I got was that the niche this is intended to fill is the same relative to ground based C-UAS /C-RAM sensors as legacy AEW&C is to ground based radar and control. Defensive sensors evolving to match the changing threat environment with more range, more coverage, and more survivability. Not as much to take over the active control of the airspace/ provide vectors etc.

I’m not thinking this is a good plan for a number of reasons.