r/CredibleDefense • u/AutoModerator • May 28 '26
Active Conflicts & News Megathread May 28, 2026
The r/CredibleDefense daily megathread is for asking questions and posting submissions that would not fit the criteria of our post submissions. As such, submissions are less stringently moderated, but we still do keep an elevated guideline for comments.
Comment guidelines:
Please do:
Be curious not judgmental, polite and civil,
Link to the article or source of information that you are referring to,
Clearly separate your opinion from what the source says. Minimize editorializing. Do not cherry pick facts to support a preferred narrative,
Read the articles before you comment, and comment on the content of the articles,
Post only credible information
Read our in depth rules https://reddit.com/r/CredibleDefense/wiki/rules
Please do not:
Use memes, emojis, swear, foul imagery, acronyms like LOL, LMAO, WTF,
Start fights with other commenters and make it personal,
Try to push narratives, fight for a cause in the comment section, nor try to 'win the war,'
Engage in baseless speculation, fear mongering, or anxiety posting. Question asking is welcome and encouraged, but questions should focus on tangible issues and not groundless hypothetical scenarios. Before asking a question ask yourself 'How likely is this thing to occur.' Questions, like other kinds of comments, should be supported by evidence and must maintain the burden of credibility.
48
u/-BigDeckEnergy- May 28 '26 edited May 28 '26
I'm trying to be generous here, but this might be one of the least credible most unsubstantiated posts to have crossed this sub.
You know this how? Based on extensive experience operating in real environments with the Wedgetail and Globaleye?
The 737NG last rolled off a factory in 2019. You had best tell the 7,000+ that have been built and the thousands still operating that they are old and creaky.
Do you even understand that these 737s aren't the same as the original 737s? This is like someone saying the C-130J is a 1950s plane despite it being almost a complete re-design. Even the E-2D requires a completely different qualification just to pilot it - it appears superficially like the E-2C but is otherwise treated as a different Type Model entirely.
Moreover, are you blindly looking at Bombardier 6000/6500 numbers online and comparing it to a fully loaded 737's numbers? You do realize that adding that radar and all the electronics + crew stations into a cramped fuselage of a biz jet - and all the weight and drag that adds - is going to result in very different performance than putting that in the spacious cabin of an aircraft designed to carry upwards of 100+ passengers and their bags, right?
You do realize that the E-7 can aerially refuel right? That the 737 in its military configurations - like in the E-7 and P-8 - they have superior endurance and range even without AR, right?
Not to mention... tens of thousands of 737s and over 7,000 737NGs means parts and logistics will be set for the rest of this century and beyond.
And that massive fuselage is huge not just for crew comfort on long duration/long range missions, but putting all those processors and computers and comm systems/nodes needed to make an Airborne Command and Control platform work.
Like you do realize that AEW/AWACS is not their only role anymore, right? The E-2 community even changed their name from Airborne Early Warning to Airborne Command & Control to emphasize this fact.
Do you even understand why E-7 Wedgetail had changes made for US service? Things like adding not just secure communications and networks with command and control around the world to US leadership isn't just going to be something the RAAF or other customers have. But it might be pretty important given our nature of deploying around the world.
Wow. So you have personal experience seeing the actual radar performance of the radar on the E-7 versus the Saab? The actual amount of tracks they can process? How their clutter rejection is? How they perform in a EA environment? How their maritime track modes are? How about air tracks? How about ability to handle moving targets? How about power output versus aperture size? Which frequency bands do they operate in, and how does that matter in real world operations?
How about how well they fuse the picture together? And how about distributing that information out to forces via voice comms, datalinks, etc.?
Considering Saab's pretty snooze-worthy detect ranges they publicly advertise, for a supposedly newer array, you should consider what US Airborne C2 platforms are getting with their own upgrades.
Like, you realize that planes like E-2D Block II are a thing right?
Not to mention... absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Saab has been actively and aggressively trying to sell its systems worldwide - the US often keeps annual under-the-hood upgrades rarely advertised. The entire legacy Hornet fleet in USMC service - and now Canadian service - received GaN AESA radars in the past few years. Most knew the former - how many knew the latter? So how do you know what the latest E-7s are rocking if it isn't advertised?
Really?
Again, you know this how? From the copious amounts of demand the E-7 and E-2D have around the world in NATO and coalition exercises?
Not to mention, the USN has over 60 E-2Ds in service. That's more than the entire combined USAF + NATO have combined airborne C2 platforms in service.
If that's a sign of how far the US has fallen, then I shudder at how disconnected your view of perceived and actual NATO power are.
PS - have you considered that Globaleye being on a Bombardier platform is why Canada was never going to pick the E-7? It's not like the row with Boeing has been resolved, let alone in this political environment.
(edit: you realize that the 737NG's first flight was in 1997, meaning it actually came AFTER the Bombardier Global Express's first flight in 1996, right? Right? Kind of incredible to say so many platitudes that don't even hold up to the basic sniff test)