CV-16 Liaoning (001 carrier) Thread II ...News, Views and operations

[asif iqbal]

Hawkeye's are not for AWACS. They are missioned to do AEW ,Airborne Early Warning. There is a difference.



Without proper AEW a carrier's aircraft must rely on other methods to perform their duties.

AWACS is the general synonym associated with airborne early warning systems both interchangeable

 

[Iron Man]

LOL just to nitpick:
your "the E-3 Sentry" doesn't have to be involved:
Boeing 767 AWACS Airborne Warning and Control Aircraft

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Boeing awarded further Japanese E-767 AWACS upgrade contract
04 April 2018

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Come on, you should dig further than that. E-3 IS AWACS. The only reason the "E-767" designation is used is because the Boeing 707 is no longer produced, so the avionics suite of the E-3 was ported over to a Boeing 767, hence "E-767". The plane is different, the electronics is exactly the same.

AWACS is the general synonym associated with airborne early warning systems both interchangeable

No, AWACS is not a "general synonym". It may be USED as a general synonym by military enthusiasts who don't care about proper nomenclature, just like you use "Aegis" as a general synonym to refer to any warship with a large-looking AESA MFR, but AWACS technically refers only to the E-3 (and the E-767 if you want to nitpick).

 

[asif iqbal]

I do not agree

Both are airborne warning systems

Falls under AWACS, many defence journals refer to them as “Carrier AWACS” even in Warship monthly

 

[Hyperwarp]

I do not agree

Both are airborne warning systems

Falls under AWACS, many defence journals refer to them as “Carrier AWACS” even in Warship monthly

I thinks it is the other way around. E-3 IS AWACS. It is an AEW&C. KJ-2000 is an AEW&C. Same with Phalcon, Wedgetail and many others.

 

[Iron Man]

I do not agree

Both are airborne warning systems

Falls under AWACS, many defence journals refer to them as “Carrier AWACS” even in Warship monthly

You don't have to agree, and you can continue using AWACS synonymously with AEW&C if you like, just like you can continue using Aegis to refer to ships like 052D and 055 if you like. Everybody knows what you mean. But you'd still be wrong in both instances.

 

[asif iqbal]

But you'd still be wrong in both instances.

That is ignorance and you won’t get far in life with that attitude, you even contradict yourself

Im calling it AWACS you don’t know more than editors of warship magazine

 

[Jura The idiot]

oh you

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

wrote the sentence

"AWACS" is a brand name specific to the E-3 Sentry, meanwhile AEW&C is a general term for what planes like the E-3 do.

which I called out Yesterday at 9:19 AM

LOL just to nitpick:
your "the E-3 Sentry" doesn't have to be involved:
Boeing 767 AWACS Airborne Warning and Control Aircraft

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Boeing awarded further Japanese E-767 AWACS upgrade contract
04 April 2018

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

and your reaction is Today at 12:27 PM
:

Come on, you should dig further than that. E-3 IS AWACS. The only reason the "E-767" designation is used is because the Boeing 707 is no longer produced, so the avionics suite of the E-3 was ported over to a Boeing 767, hence "E-767". The plane is different, the electronics is exactly the same.


...

LOL Iron, quote,

"AWACS" is a brand name specific to the E-3 Sentry, unquote,

is what you claimed Yesterday at 3:51 AM, and you may tell us if it's true

 

[Deino]

Guys ... can we come back to the topic??

 

[gelgoog]

I wasn't aware it was a trademark of a specific model. I've seen seen it widely used around. But ok, I guess I'll switch to AEW&C. It's just that it's harder to type the '&'.

 

[gelgoog]

Anyone has an idea of how long the Liaoning refits will take? Is the radar going to be replaced, since they are changing the island so much?