Mustang and Ford Performance Forums banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Guys please take the time to take action and send the pre-written email to the President and the Federal and State Leaders who represent us. I'm a Aerospace Design Engineer working on this project and will be harshly affected if funding isn't restored! This aircraft is extremely vital to our defense system.
Please click link below to Take Action!!!!
http://www.northropgrumman.com/protectthehawkeye/

The future of the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye, built by Northrop Grumman and supported by 275 U.S. suppliers, is uncertain today and thousands of American jobs are at risk. While this award-winning and solidly performing system design and demonstration program is on schedule and is meeting all key performance milestones, its success alone is not enough to protect it.
The advanced procurement funding for this state-of-the-art airborne early warning and battle management command and control weapons system has been cut by $200 million. With this funding, there are significant economies of scale and American taxpayers, and our troops, benefit greatly. Without it, jobs are at major risk and our carrier air wings will not be able to fully realize the power and protection provided by this "digital quarterback." We need your help today to restore this funding so we can keep this program on cost, on schedule, on performance, and employing thousands of Americans.
Make your voice heard right now by sending an email message to your federal and state elected officials. Share this site with your friends, family and community. And, most importantly thank you for your support!



 

·
Registered
Joined
·
328 Posts
I feel you man, I was in the town that got funding cut for the Crusader Howitzer, and it kind of died. I'm also connected to Northrup Grumman, I'm contracted out through General Dynamics and PM FBCB2 to go on the road and teach Northrop Grumman's system, Force XXI Battle Command Brigade and Below, Blue Force Tracking. So you've got my support.
 

·
I am the Stig
Joined
·
2,329 Posts
So then why is the Navy currently trying to outfit the F-18E/F to do the exact job of the E-2. Its an old bird. Its no wonder they are cutting funding for it. Sounds like NG made a gamble for government contract and is going to loose. Try to see if the Germans or Chinese will buy the system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Josh P, I don't know where you get your info from maybe you should take the time to visit the site and understand the capabilties of the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye before you make a blunt uneducated statement like that.
There is no way all the capabilities can be fit into a F-18 E/F This will not only affect NGC but almost 300 US suppliers

So then why is the Navy currently trying to outfit the F-18E/F to do the exact job of the E-2. Its an old bird. Its no wonder they are cutting funding for it. Sounds like NG made a gamble for government contract and is going to loose. Try to see if the Germans or Chinese will buy the system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
BETHPAGE, N.Y., Feb. 6, 2009 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Calling a $200-plus million cut to production procurement for the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye a "high risk" move that will put U.S. jobs and global security at risk, Northrop Grumman Corporation (NYSE:NOC) and its 280-member supplier team is calling on Congressional leaders to restore the funding. The reduction in funding jeopardizes the building of production aircraft initially planned in fiscal years 2009 and 2010.

"We've just completed a very successful Operational Assessment with our two E-2D Advanced Hawkeye System Development & Demonstration (SD&D) aircraft and we are on schedule with our three pilot production aircraft. There is a great sense of urgency today to restore production procurement dollars into the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye budget-otherwise hundreds of U.S. jobs will be lost and taxpayers will not derive the benefit of economies of scale," said Tom Vice, sector vice president for Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems sector. "We have the manufacturing capacity now to accommodate up to ten E-2D's a year, which certainly supports the Navy's plan to contract for 70 more aircraft. More importantly, these budget cuts may delay Initial Operating Capability beyond the Navy's current program of record."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
304 Posts
Hard to believe the Pentagon will cancel a program without a viable option to replace it. And you should post facts that what Josh p stated was not true instead of dismissing it out of hand.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
E2 != F18

E2's are pretty much a mini-AWACS command/control aircraft

F18's are multirole fighters and could never do the job of an E2.

Has anyone here even served in the Navy? If you had you'd know the difference.

Save the E2 program? it all depends on what they have in mind for a replacement.

When I got to my first squadron in 1990, we still had F4 phantoms on the flightline with F14's and a small group of F18's and when I left we had 2 superhornets.

Why throw out what works really well??

I think they should update the package but the airframe stays viable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 · (Edited)
E2 != F18

E2's are pretty much a mini-AWACS command/control aircraft

F18's are multirole fighters and could never do the job of an E2.

Has anyone here even served in the Navy? If you had you'd know the difference.

Save the E2 program? it all depends on what they have in mind for a replacement.

When I got to my first squadron in 1990, we still had F4 phantoms on the flightline with F14's and a small group of F18's and when I left we had 2 superhornets.

Why throw out what works really well??

I think they should update the package but the airframe stays viable.
WELL SAID!!!! That's exactly what we're doing same E-2C airframe with updated state of the art electronics. it also has Machined Bulkhead's and structure for the extra weight.

The contract was already awarded and in process since 03, but with the new legislation there threatening on cutting the already awarded funding

The replacement is the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye
Capabilites can be found here: http://www.is.northropgrumman.com/systems/e2dhawkeye2.htmlhttp://www.is.northropgrumman.com/sy...dhawkeye2.html
__________________
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,466 Posts
I feel your pain. Im in the F22 program, talks of funding cuts and plane production are running rampid, hopefully it doesnt come to that.
 

·
I am the Stig
Joined
·
2,329 Posts
See, here is where I am coming from. I just got out of the Navy in 2007. When I was in, they were working on turning the Superhornet into a refueler to replace the S-3. You should have seen contracters at Oceana trying to install the refueling tank on the bottom. The Navy has been trying to see what they can turn the F-18 into. We all know its cheaper to run 1 bird then 5 different types. you only have to stock parts for one bird and know how to fix one bird. I served on the USS GEORGE WASHINGTON as an Aviation Structural Mechanic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
285 Posts
WELL SAID!!!! That's exactly what we're doing same E-2C airframe with updated state of the art electronics. it also has Machined Bulkhead's and structure for the extra weight.

The contract was already awarded and in process since 03, but with the new legislation there threatening on cutting the already awarded funding

The replacement is the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye
Capabilites can be found here: http://www.is.northropgrumman.com/systems/e2dhawkeye2.html
__________________
+1 I have been working on E-2's for the last 14 years both in the military and as a civilain and the is NO WAY F-18's or (any other aircraft) can do the same job!!! The high time for an E-2 airframe is exremly high. Like Wit performance says the capibiltys of the E-2D are unmatched at this point it time. E-2D FTMFW!!!!!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
See, here is where I am coming from. I just got out of the Navy in 2007. When I was in, they were working on turning the Superhornet into a refueler to replace the S-3. You should have seen contracters at Oceana trying to install the refueling tank on the bottom. The Navy has been trying to see what they can turn the F-18 into. We all know its cheaper to run 1 bird then 5 different types. you only have to stock parts for one bird and know how to fix one bird. I served on the USS GEORGE WASHINGTON as an Aviation Structural Mechanic.
Anything with enough drop tanks on it can sub as a refuelling aircraft.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
I hear you guys. Aint no way the F18 can sub for the E2C. Every since that bird came online in the Navy back in 1988, and CVN-69 was the first Airwing to deploy with, they have been trying to make that bird do everything. I just shake my head. It couldn't sub for the F14-D, or even the F14A as an intercepter platform at that, and same for the A6 Intruder. Where does this train of thought come from? Some f*$king lobbist for MD I bet. I use to maintain these aircraft when I was in the NAVY. I could say more but don't want to lose my clearance. The AIMD in Oceana I hear is slowly eliminating uniform personnel for contractors.

Anyway...I'm just down here in New Orleans trying to keep this project (LPD17 Amphip class ship) afloat. We keep getting budget cuts every year. This year it will be worse with the Obama train to cut DOD. I heard today he want's to cut 40 billion in contracts stating, programs/contracts with blank check books with no accountability. I feel he will be 10 times worse than Jimmy Carter in regard to budget cuts to the DOD. Maybe the Joint tacticle fighter will pickup the duty, probably not capable. The E2C carries alot of EW stuff that is why they have a crew of more than 3.

It appears we're f#$ked.

Anyone got a shovel and a pair of gloves for the road crew projects?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
929 Posts
Anything with enough drop tanks on it can sub as a refuelling aircraft.
Problem with the F18 is that its a fuel hog. The Aero package is not suited for that type of duty.They have gotten better but still need refueling after launching from carrier. The A6 had a hell of aloat more capability in that respect. That bird could carry one hell of a payload.
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top