Sierra Nevada Survivable Airborne Operations Center - E-4B replacement

A

AE220

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
28 October 2023
Messages
88
Reaction score
163
It would be very interesting to go with an Airbus design from the beginning, but I have to agree w/everyone else that second-hand B747s (maybe 777s?) will be used and a contractor(s) chosen to convert them into the E-4B replacement.

One assumes/hopes the second-hand aircraft are gently used, if it all. Unless I'm missing something, it would seem crazy to use 15 year old aircraft for such a critical mission.

If future SECDEFs use the new "Survivable Airborne Operations Center" (SAOC) as their personal transport, as with E-4Bs today, I'm assuming the SAOC--or perhaps a sub-variant--will be developed to be and stay technologically current, unlike the E-4B which--compared to AF-1--is something of a IT/battle management dinosaur.

Before people jump on me, I fully realize that much of the E-4's systems have deliberately not been digitized as to (hopefully) avoid EMP effects. And, of course, when the E-4 was being developed, there were no digital systems like those of today.

I'm not an engineer, but would suppose that the SAOC could be built with an analog redundancy system that would come online immediately if the digital system fails.

Whats interesting to note is that unless the President is transferred to the E-4 / SAOC, if EMP disables the VC-25s, we're kind of in a delicate situation! The SECDEF, even if he's safely aboard SAOC enjoying its analog back-up, is only sixth in line to the Presidency!
 
JohnCitizen said:
It would be very interesting to go with an Airbus design from the beginning, but I have to agree w/everyone else that second-hand B747s (maybe 777s?) will be used and a contractor(s) chosen to convert them into the E-4B replacement.

One assumes/hopes the second-hand aircraft are gently used, if it all. Unless I'm missing something, it would seem crazy to use 15 year old aircraft for such a critical mission.
Click to expand...
IIRC, the planes chosen for the VC-25B/AF1 conversion were effectively new, they'd never been delivered to their ordering customer(s). And they still required something close to a total rebuild to install all the new bits.

However, there is something to be said for using somewhat used aircraft for critical roles: you know the thing works and flies right already. Look at how much rework they had to do after finding all those mini-bottles of booze on the VC-25Bs. Also, the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels use fairly old planes in their demos, not the newest.


JohnCitizen said:
If future SECDEFs use the new "Survivable Airborne Operations Center" (SAOC) as their personal transport, as with E-4Bs today, I'm assuming the SAOC--or perhaps a sub-variant--will be developed to be and stay technologically current, unlike the E-4B which--compared to AF-1--is something of a IT/battle management dinosaur.

Before people jump on me, I fully realize that much of the E-4's systems have deliberately not been digitized as to (hopefully) avoid EMP effects. And, of course, when the E-4 was being developed, there were no digital systems like those of today.

I'm not an engineer, but would suppose that the SAOC could be built with an analog redundancy system that would come online immediately if the digital system fails.
Click to expand...
Could be, the questions then become: "how much power does the backup analog system require," "how much cooling does it require," and "how much does it weigh." All are limited in a plane, and even more so when you'd have to have the analog system powered up and running 24/7 to be able to instantly take over when the digital system goes down.
 
Scott Kenny said:
IIRC, the planes chosen for the VC-25B/AF1 conversion were effectively new, they'd never been delivered to their ordering customer(s). And they still required something close to a total rebuild to install all the new bits.

However, there is something to be said for using somewhat used aircraft for critical roles: you know the thing works and flies right already. Look at how much rework they had to do after finding all those mini-bottles of booze on the VC-25Bs. Also, the Thunderbirds and Blue Angels use fairly old planes in their demos, not the newest.



Could be, the questions then become: "how much power does the backup analog system require," "how much cooling does it require," and "how much does it weigh." All are limited in a plane, and even more so when you'd have to have the analog system powered up and running 24/7 to be able to instantly take over when the digital system goes down.
Click to expand...
 
Yes, you know the plane flies . . . in its original condition.

I thought about the power that would be required to have a primary digital system and back-up analog, yes.

Now, it's not like there are zero digital components on the E-4B and its primary defense is hardening not the deliberate use of downgraded tech. The most prominent "analog" feature is the cockpit. The original comms suite was impressive and has been upgraded of course. There's no such thing, obviously, as perfect protection from EMP effects
 
I didn't know (or I forgot) that fmr SECDEF Donald Rumsfeld wanted to retire the E-4B in the 2000s. "Rummy" was a provocative figure & this isn't the place to re-litigate the early 2000s. However, while he justified killing the E-4 off on cost grounds, there was a replacement (sort of) . . . the E-10. It never materialized, so it is perfect fodder for this forum!

Officially the Multi-Sensor Command and Control Aircraft or MC2A, it would incorporate the missions of the E-3, E-8 JSTARS, and RC-135 onto a single platform. When it became clear maintaining an airborne C2 mission & associated radar with a ground C2 radar would be near impossible on a practical level, the missions were split on "A" model and "B" model versions. I'm assuming the RC-135 collection mission would have been integrated with the ground-focused Alpha model.

The article below should be accessible for free. I've also included the somewhat lacking (not surprising) Wikipedia article

shorturl.at

The story behind the USAF's failed E-10A MC2A programme

The Northrop Grumman E-10A Multi-Sensor Command and Control Aircraft was an ambitious program to replace several types with a single model. As we reveal, it proved to be too ambitious and was quickly
shorturl.at shorturl.at

Northrop Grumman E-10 MC2A - Wikipedia

shorturl.at shorturl.at

The E-10 died, apparently, due to lack of clear mission focus--it was trying to do three after all! And it would not necessarily have been a natural candidate for an airborne command post role, but could have pulled it off (I think).

It's been a long time, but by the 1980s, there were a host of EC-135 variants serving as airborne command posts. Every US combatant commander had one, plus the heads of SAC, TAC, and the various Navy fleets. I don't *think* that fleet was ever replaced. That is, today they have their private military VIP jet and that's about it.
 
JohnCitizen said:
I didn't know (or I forgot) that fmr SECDEF Donald Rumsfeld wanted to retire the E-4B in the 2000s. "Rummy" was a provocative figure & this isn't the place to re-litigate the early 2000s. However, while he justified killing the E-4 off on cost grounds, there was a replacement (sort of) . . . the E-10. It never materialized, so it is perfect fodder for this forum!

Officially the Multi-Sensor Command and Control Aircraft or MC2A, it would incorporate the missions of the E-3, E-8 JSTARS, and RC-135 onto a single platform. When it became clear maintaining an airborne C2 mission & associated radar with a ground C2 radar would be near impossible on a practical level, the missions were split on "A" model and "B" model versions. I'm assuming the RC-135 collection mission would have been integrated with the ground-focused Alpha model.

The article below should be accessible for free. I've also included the somewhat lacking (not surprising) Wikipedia article

shorturl.at

The story behind the USAF's failed E-10A MC2A programme

The Northrop Grumman E-10A Multi-Sensor Command and Control Aircraft was an ambitious program to replace several types with a single model. As we reveal, it proved to be too ambitious and was quickly
shorturl.at shorturl.at

Northrop Grumman E-10 MC2A - Wikipedia

shorturl.at shorturl.at

The E-10 died, apparently, due to lack of clear mission focus--it was trying to do three after all! And it would not necessarily have been a natural candidate for an airborne command post role, but could have pulled it off (I think).

It's been a long time, but by the 1980s, there were a host of EC-135 variants serving as airborne command posts. Every US combatant commander had one, plus the heads of SAC, TAC, and the various Navy fleets. I don't *think* that fleet was ever replaced. That is, today they have their private military VIP jet and that's about it.
Click to expand...
What I remember of the E-10 was that they had major electrical/electronic interference between the air search radar and the ground search radar.



JohnCitizen said:
Yes, you know the plane flies . . . in its original condition.
Click to expand...
I mean that specific airframe is a good flier, not for whatever reason a hangar queen.



JohnCitizen said:
I thought about the power that would be required to have a primary digital system and back-up analog, yes.

Now, it's not like there are zero digital components on the E-4B and its primary defense is hardening not the deliberate use of downgraded tech. The most prominent "analog" feature is the cockpit. The original comms suite was impressive and has been upgraded of course. There's no such thing, obviously, as perfect protection from EMP effects
Click to expand...
Right. But it's not just power.

You also need to cool the analog system, which usually takes just as much cooling capacity as your digital side, so now you need double the AC plant compared to your all-digital plane. Which eats into your hull volume and gross weight.

And your analog equipment is physically larger and heavier than your digital stuff is, which also eats into both hull volume and gross weight.

So yeah, you might have a 747 with only 30-50 people inside, but it might have most of 160,000lbs of gear onboard.
 
Last edited:
www.defensenews.com

Sierra Nevada wins $13B contract to build Air Force ‘doomsday plane’

The Air Force's E-4B, which the president would use to direct forces during nuclear war, is nearing the end of its life and will be replaced by the SAOC.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
The Air Force said Sierra Nevada will build SAOC out of a hardened and modified version of a commercial derivative aircraft. And it will use a modular open system approach to include modern secure communication and planning capabilities.
Click to expand...
I suspect that that will be easier said than done.
 

Attachments

  • 20240427_Sierra Nevada Corporation_Survivable_Airborne_Operations_Center_Contract_1.jpg
    20240427_Sierra Nevada Corporation_Survivable_Airborne_Operations_Center_Contract_1.jpg
    36.9 KB · Views: 71
fightingirish said:
I am also very sceptical about this future Survivable Airborne Operations Center (SAOC), based on a Boeing 747-8.
Source:
theaviationist.com

Sierra Nevada Corporation Will Build E-4B ‘Doomsday’ Plane Replacement

The new commercial derivative aircraft will replace the 1970s’ E-4B Nightwatch in the National Emergency Airborne Command Post role. Sierra Nevada
theaviationist.com theaviationist.com
Click to expand...
I have the same opinion, I think it will be based on some variant of the 777 instead of the 747-8
 
serg.gonzp said:
I have the same opinion, I think it will be based on some variant of the 777 instead of the 747-8
Click to expand...

The solicitation apparently specified four engines. That doesn't leave a lot of options and A340s are too old, so 747-800 is pretty much the only option.
 
Desertfox said:
But are there 12 low-mileage 737-800s out there?
Click to expand...

I think it's just 8-10, and probably yes. I would expect that they have identified specific airframes as part of their bid, because otherwise that would be very high risk. At least one source says that they are taking the Korean Air 747-8i fleet, which is slated to be retired in a few years anyway.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1784436715496870119
View: https://twitter.com/avgeekjake/status/1784436715496870119
 
Grey Havoc said:
www.defensenews.com

Sierra Nevada wins $13B contract to build Air Force ‘doomsday plane’

The Air Force's E-4B, which the president would use to direct forces during nuclear war, is nearing the end of its life and will be replaced by the SAOC.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com

I suspect that that will be easier said than done.
Click to expand...
One advantage of buying the KAL 747-8is is they will have been through at least one major phase check, so no rude surprises like the mini-bottles on AF1-to-be (and all the re-inspections around where they were found causing delays and stupid amounts of money).

There probably will be some major repairs to happen on the cargo deck stringers, those get beat to hell on planes. But when you're doing a total rebuild like this, you can just replace the entire damaged floor stringer instead of cutting and splicing in new sections. Pretty sure Boeing uses the same extruded cargo floor stringers on everything. 727 and 737s did, so I'd expect 707s and 757s as well. 747 and 767 have a wider cargo bay but the same floor loading, so it makes sense to use the same stringers at the same spacing. I'd assume 777s are the same way, but those were just entering service when I was working on planes so I never saw the insides.
 
Sierra Nevada Corporation (SNC) released more concept images of the Survivable Airborne Operations Center (SAOC).
IMHO, just wait and see, where the real SAOC and the VC-25B will have the refueling receptacle and other features.
Link:
www.twz.com

E-4B Doomsday Plane Replacement Concept Art Has Some Interesting Features

The Survivable Airborne Operations Center concept from Sierra Nevada Corp. has major similarities and differences with its E-4B predecessor.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
 

Attachments

  • SAOC-E4-side.jpg
    SAOC-E4-side.jpg
    191.5 KB · Views: 34
  • SNC-E-4-copy.jpg
    SNC-E-4-copy.jpg
    113.2 KB · Views: 34
I know there 'were' a shed load (Pun intended) of brand new passenger aircraft stored when covid hit which, IIRC, meant the end for the Airbus A380.

Why, if there are airframes available like this, have the US bought used airframes from Korean air?
 
Foo Fighter said:
I know there 'were' a shed load (Pun intended) of brand new passenger aircraft stored when covid hit which, IIRC, meant the end for the Airbus A380.

Why, if there are airframes available like this, have the US bought used airframes from Korean air?
Click to expand...

Because there aren't any brand-new 4-engine jets sitting around in storage anymore. The Air Force grabbed the last undelivered 747-8s for the VC-25 replacement program a couple of years ago.
 
Foo Fighter said:
I know there 'were' a shed load (Pun intended) of brand new passenger aircraft stored when covid hit which, IIRC, meant the end for the Airbus A380.
Click to expand...
The A380 had other reasons it was on the way out. ETOPS and the 777 were killing it in terms of operational costs.

Same reason the A340 4-engine didn't last.


Foo Fighter said:
Why, if there are airframes available like this, have the US bought used airframes from Korean air?
Click to expand...
There's also some advantages for the USAF, making sure that the planes generally work and don't need a frackton of reinspection like the AF1 planes.
 
Also, the B747 is now out of production, as the last B747 of any type (a 747-8F) was delivered to its customer on 13 January 2023.
 
jsport said:
www.defensenews.com

Northrop, Lockheed, Raytheon team up on Navy’s E-XX ‘doomsday’ plane

The airplane would be built from a stretched version of the C-130J and allow the president to communicate with nuclear-armed submarines in case of war.
www.defensenews.com www.defensenews.com
Click to expand...
www.twz.com

Everything We Learned About The Next Doomsday Planes For The Air Force

The Sierra Nevada Corporation says the first 747-8i destined to become a Survivable Airborne Operations Center jet will be delivered soon.
www.twz.com www.twz.com
 
Notice:
But there will be other players involved too, including the company’s “big six” teammates revealed last week: Collins Aerospace, FSI Defense, GE Aerospace, Greenpoint Technologies, Lockheed Martin Skunk Works, and Rolls-Royce.

“We very deliberately partnered with some like-minded and domain experts across the defense industry to help fill in where we perhaps didn’t have the knowledge or depth that some of these companies did,” Hauboldt said, adding that the teammates have been involved for more than three years.
Click to expand...
 
BlackBat242 said:
Also, the B747 is now out of production, as the last B747 of any type (a 747-8F) was delivered to its customer on 13 January 2023.
Click to expand...
I dare say that the USAF will be very last operator of the 747-8 in a surprisingly short period of time as well. Unless there is a very proactive program of buying airframes as they come on the market for scrap, spare parts availability will eventually end the operational lives of these used 747-8s before flight hours will.

I can’t help but think that the 777 would have been the way to go. Or even fitting out some P-8s so you’d be able to piggyback on an existing fleet.
 
TinWing said:
I dare say that the USAF will be very last operator of the 747-8 in a surprisingly short period of time as well. Unless there is a very proactive program of buying airframes as they come on the market for scrap, spare parts availability will eventually end the operational lives of these used 747-8s before flight hours will.

I can’t help but think that the 777 would have been the way to go. Or even fitting out some P-8s so you’d be able to piggyback on an existing fleet.
Click to expand...

The P-8 is way too small for the SAOC mission. And the Air Force is insistent on 4 engines. There was some speculation about P-8 for TACAMO, but the Navy opted to move the TACAMO mission to C-130s and lose the secondary Looking Glass role that the E-6B Mercurys had. Which is probably why SAOC is rumored to be 8-10 aircraft overall replacing 4 E-4Bs

While the 747-8i passenger planes are going away fairly quickly, I don't think there's a similar trend in the 747- 8F freighters. There more than 100 of those, which should support a market for spare parts.
 
NMaude said:
That's the first time I've heard of this, Scott, do please tell all of the juicy details.
Click to expand...
Looks like @Foo Fighter beat me to a reference.

The result was that they had to do intensive investigations around the entire area of the plane where those bottles were found, make sure everything was assembled correctly. Added a couple of months and several million dollars to the contract cost.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom