Road to 350: What Does the US Navy Do Anyway?

[Hair Warrior]

Hawkeyes Forever!

Looks like the Navy still got theirs - budget proposes killing USAF AWACS and having “expeditionary” joint E2Ds fill the gap. 😂

Aircraft	Range
E-3 Sentry	~4,000 nautical miles (7,400 km)
E-2D Hawkeye	~1,500 nautical miles (2,800 km)
E-7A Wedgetail	~3,500 nautical miles (6,500 km)

Aircraft	Endurance
E-3 Sentry	~8 hours (can be extended via aerial refueling)
E-2D Hawkeye	~5–6 hours
E-7A Wedgetail	~10+ hours (can also be refueled in flight)

Aircraft	Service Ceiling
E-3 Sentry	~30,000 feet (9,100 meters)
E-2D Hawkeye	~34,700 feet (10,600 meters)
E-7A Wedgetail	~41,000 feet (12,500 meters)

Metric	Best Performer
Range	E-3 Sentry
Endurance	E-7A Wedgetail
Ceiling	E-7A Wedgetail

 

[Griz882]

@Hair Warrior your table failed to note Age of Airframe. They aren’t going to make any new E-3’s (B707) so that might knock the aircraft down a notch h or two.

 

[Hair Warrior]

@Hair Warrior your table failed to note Age of Airframe. They aren’t going to make any new E-3’s (B707) so that might knock the aircraft down a notch h or two.

Certainly! Here's a comparison of the average age of airframes for the E-3 Sentry, E-2D Hawkeye, and E-7 Wedgetail:

---

✈️ E-3 Sentry (AWACS)​

• First Flight: 1976
• Average Age (as of 2025): Approximately 49 years
• Notes: The E-3 Sentry is based on the Boeing 707 airframe, which first flew in 1957. The U.S. Air Force began receiving E-3s in the early 1980s. Despite their age, these aircraft have undergone numerous upgrades to maintain operational effectiveness.

---

✈️ E-2D Advanced Hawkeye​

• First Flight: 2007
• Average Age (as of 2025): Approximately 18 years
• Notes: The E-2D is the latest variant of the E-2 series, which has been in service since the 1960s. The E-2D introduced significant technological advancements over its predecessors.

---

✈️ E-7 Wedgetail​

• First Flight: 2006
• Average Age (as of 2025): Approximately 19 years
• Notes: Based on the Boeing 737-700 commercial airliner, the E-7 Wedgetail is a newer platform compared to the E-3 and E-2D. The Royal Australian Air Force was the first to receive the Wedgetail, with deliveries beginning in 2009.

---

🔍 Summary​

Aircraft	First Flight	Average Age (2025)
E-3 Sentry	1976	~49 years
E-2D Hawkeye	2007	~18 years
E-7 Wedgetail	2006	~19 years

---

The E-3 Sentry has the oldest airframe, reflecting its long service life and numerous upgrades. The E-2D and E-7 Wedgetail are relatively newer platforms, with the E-2D being the youngest among them.

If you need more detailed information on specific upgrades or capabilities of these aircraft, feel free to ask!

 

[Hair Warrior]

I think chatgpt’s math got messed up on that one. But yes I agree with you.

 

[Brett327]

When asked about classified markings, he asked for clarification about 'classified mark times?' It's what someone who is out of his depth would say...he did a lot of bs hand talking but looked like a child when questioned by other veterans.

Like a child… exactly my thoughts while watching.

 

[Brett327]

I think chatgpt’s math got messed up on that one. But yes I agree with you.

That you, a supposed intel professional, are pulling obvious nonsense out of ChatGPT, and gleefully offering to take additional RFIs, is both the most absurd and least surprising thing you could have done in this thread.

 

[Hair Warrior]

That was Chatgpt gleefully offering to take additional RFIs.

 

[BigRed389]

I think chatgpt’s math got messed up on that one. But yes I agree with you.

Definitely messed up.

E2D has been an active production line. Makes no sense the average airframe age is 18 years. The oldest airframe would be 18, by definition is way lower with some being brand new.

Wedgetail is also picking the wrong numbers. A US variant doesn’t exist yet, hence average is either zero or negative (doesn’t exist yet)

And I’m guessing the pure performance numbers are not at all what’s driving this decision

 

[sevenhelmet]

In this midst of all this chatGPT nonsense, has anyone else realized that the E-2D is also capable of inflight refueling?

 

[PhrogPhlyer]

The look of bemusement on Hegseth's face is absolutely priceless.

 

[Flash]

Aircraft	Range
E-3 Sentry	~4,000 nautical miles (7,400 km)
E-2D Hawkeye	~1,500 nautical miles (2,800 km)
E-7A Wedgetail	~3,500 nautical miles (6,500 km)

Aircraft	Endurance
E-3 Sentry	~8 hours (can be extended via aerial refueling)
E-2D Hawkeye	~5–6 hours
E-7A Wedgetail	~10+ hours (can also be refueled in flight)

Aircraft	Service Ceiling
E-3 Sentry	~30,000 feet (9,100 meters)
E-2D Hawkeye	~34,700 feet (10,600 meters)
E-7A Wedgetail	~41,000 feet (12,500 meters)

Metric	Best Performer
Range	E-3 Sentry
Endurance	E-7A Wedgetail
Ceiling	E-7A Wedgetail

That you, a supposed intel professional, are pulling obvious nonsense out of ChatGPT, and gleefully offering to take additional RFIs, is both the most absurd and least surprising thing you could have done in this thread.

JFC...I helped lead an AoA for an aircraft/capability a few years ago and folks who didn't know much about planes were enamored with UAV's but the size, weight, complexity and capability made a larger manned aircraft the only real 'alternative'. UAV's weren't even in the same ballpark, wiffle ball vs MLB.

That chart does little to really go into any detail whatsoever on the significant differences in capabilities between the E-2, E-3 and E-7. Any actual analysis of the three would highlight those different capabilities and even with the increased cost of the platform I can guarantee the E-7 would come out far ahead of the E-2D.

 

[Randy Daytona]

JFC...I helped lead an AoA for an aircraft/capability a few years ago and folks who didn't know much more about planes were enamored with UAV's but the size, weight, complexity and capability made a larger manned aircraft the only real 'alternative'. UAV's weren't even in the same ballpark, wiffle ball vs MLB.

That chart does little to really go into any detail whatsoever on the significant differences in capabilities between the E-2, E-3 and E-7. Any actual analysis of the three would highlight those different capabilities and even with the increased cost of the platform I can guarantee the E-7 would come out far ahead of the E-2D.

Are there any similarities between this proposal and what happened with the EA-6B / F-111 decades ago?

BTW, a wiffle ball is hard to hit.

 

[Flash]

Are there any similarities between this proposal and what happened with the EA-6B / F-111 decades ago?

That is what they seem to be trying to do but this is much more a 'core' capability that I don't see the USAF giving up without a fight, and I think there are a few folks in Congress who are rightfully skeptical as well.

While I don't know many details about the space-based radar effort I am wary that it'll be an effective replacement for AEW/AWACS within the timeframe some folks seem to think it may be, and those assets have their own significant limitations, liabilities and vulnerabilities as well. The whole thing seems to be a bit short on in-depth thinking.

 

[PhrogPhlyer]

BTW, a wiffle ball is hard to hit.

 

[hlg6016]

Swing for the stands!