The E-3 Sentry AWACS (airborne warning and control system) was more than a Boeing 707 converted into a flying radar station and command post. AWACS has become a meme, and its dome-shaped rotating antenna was the symbol of an eye in the sky that kept ceaseless vigil from 30,000 feet high.
Now, though, the AWACS may be going the way of the dodo, as the US military appears ready to discard big, expensive aerial early warning (AEW) aircraft in favor of a mixture of cheaper Cold War-era radar planes and cutting-edge space sensors. For the US military, this may just be a change in doctrine. For NATO, which has relied for years on the AWACS and planned to buy the now-cancelled E-7 Wedgetail, this could lead to a scramble to find a European-built replacement.
AEW aircraft have become the nerve centers for advanced air forces. The concept of flying radar stations dates back to the end of World War II, such as the US Navy’s Project Cadillac. An aerial platform offers longer range than ground-based radars, can detect low-flying aircraft, and enjoys the mobility to bring radar coverage to where it is needed.
By the 1960s, US Air Force EC-121 and carrier-based US Navy E-2 Hawkeyes (still in service today) were proving invaluable in the Vietnam War. Today, several nations have developed AEW aircraft, mostly derived from airliners, military cargo planes, or business-class jets. These include Russia’s A-50, China’s KJ-2000, Israel’s Oron and Sweden’s GlobalEye. Other nations — including Australia, India, Korea and Turkey — have rigged up their own AEW aircraft by mix-and-matching various aircraft with radars such as Israel’s Phalcon.
But the E-3 has special significance for NATO, both as an aircraft and a symbol of alliance unity. NATO currently operates 14 E-3s manned by multinational crews flying out of Geilenkirchen, Germany. In addition, France also has four E-3s, while Britain only recently retired its planes. It’s hard to imagine either the US or NATO conducting any significant air campaign without these aircraft playing a key role as airborne sensors and command posts.
The E-3’s retirement was inevitable: the airframe and electronics are aging, maintenance is difficult, and spare parts are expensive and difficult to procure. It was also logical to assume that the E-3’s successor would be broadly similar to the original. AWACS 2.0 arrived in the form of the E-7, another converted Boeing 737 airliner, with a Multi-role Electronically Scanned Array (MESA) radar that electronically aims multiple beams rather than the rotating antenna. Comparing the E-3 to an E-7 feels like comparing a 1970s TV set to a modern LED computer monitor.
The Wedgetail was appealing enough that Australia, Britain, South Korea, and Turkey each bought three to six aircraft. But what really boosted the E-7’s prospects was the 2022 announcement that the USAF would purchase 26 Wedgetails by 2032. Not surprisingly, NATO soon followed with a plan to acquire six E-7s that would be operational by 2031.
Thus, the shock when the Pentagon dropped a bombshell last month: the E-7 program was being canceled. The official reason was that the price tag had soared from $588m per aircraft to $724m, as well as survivability concerns. The new plan is for the Air Force to procure cheaper E-2D Hawkeyes that the Navy already operates. Even more significantly, the Air Force would also lean on space-based sensors that the US will need for the planned Golden Dome homeland missile defense system.
“We [already] have to do a large investment in space-based sensing, which also supports Golden Dome,” a Pentagon official told reporters. “It covers homeland defense, it covers the Indo-Pacific, which is our priority theater, and also services the globe.”
Experts quickly warned that the Hawkeye is less capable than the Wedgetail, and that relying on space-based systems was complex and uncertain. Still, there is a grim logic to the E-7’s demise. As demonstrated in Ukraine and in recent air battles between India and Pakistan, air combat is increasingly becoming a duel between aircraft firing long-range air-to-air missiles that can hit planes more than 100 miles away. In that environment, a $700 million airliner-sized AEW plane can become an expensive, lumbering target.
But just because America decides to replace AWACS with satellites doesn’t mean Europe can do the same; and just because the Pacific might not be the best place for an AWACS, doesn’t necessarily mean the same applies to Europe. Although the EU plans to boost Europe’s military space capabilities as part of the continent’s $1 trillion-plus rearmament programs, the prospect of building, launching, and maintaining a space-based radar and battle management system is daunting at best.
Europe does have a local manned AEW option in the form of Saab’s GlobalEye, a converted Bombardier Global 6000 business jet that costs about half the price of an E-7, though its radar is probably less capable. Sweden already operates them, France plans to buy them, and Denmark may do the same.
What happens next is unclear, not least because pressure from American politicians and Boeing may induce the Pentagon to restart the E-7 program. European nations could choose to buy the GlobalEye, and NATO could acquire some as alliance-controlled aircraft. Ironically, NATO could also continue its plan to purchase Wedgetails even if the US didn’t (the UK is doing just this), which means Europe would be flying a more capable AEW plane than America.
But none of this is good news for the US or Europe. If the Western bloc could benefit from sharing any platform, it would be an AEW aircraft.
Regardless, the US seems determined to change its doctrine to favor space-based sensors. The old AWACS and its instantly recognizable mushroom will soon be gone. Quite what replaces it is anyone’s guess.
Michael Peck is a defense writer whose work has appeared in Business Insider, Forbes, Defense News, Foreign Policy magazine, and other publications. He holds an MA in political science from Rutgers University. Follow him on Twitter and LinkedIn.
Europe’s Edge is CEPA’s online journal covering critical topics on the foreign policy docket across Europe and North America. All opinions expressed on Europe’s Edge are those of the author alone and may not represent those of the institutions they represent or the Center for European Policy Analysis. CEPA maintains a strict intellectual independence policy across all its projects and publications.
War Without End
Russia’s Shadow Warfare
CEPA Forum 2025
Explore CEPA’s flagship event.
