Template talk:US EW aircraft

This template is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.

United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States

Aviation: Aircraft

	Aviation portal This template is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation
	This template is supported by the aircraft project.

Military history: Aviation / North America / United States

This template is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	Military aviation task force
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force

E-7

The Bushranger What's your source for this edit? I don't see any news articles about the USAF receiving E-7s, or that the RAAF designation has been carried over to the Tri-Service system. - ZLEA _T\^C 14:50, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ZLEA: A direct Air Force source: Air Force identifies Boeing E-7 as solution to replace the E-3 capability. And mentioning the designation as part of the contract: The service is using the rapid prototyping acquisition pathway to acquire the first two E-7As ahead of a planned production decision in fiscal 2025. AW&ST. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 20:00, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not entirely convinced, but I have no good argument against inclusion at this time. I guess I'm just holding out hope that the US Air Force will assign a sequential designation for once. - ZLEA _T\^C 20:21, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, it should be E-12 - but even if they don't, it's still better than EA-37B and OA-1K! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 21:06, 25 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely better than those two, and E-130J also. And I concur with adding it here as part of the sequence, per the sources. I'm fairly certain they're not going to redesignate it at this point, but we can always change it if they do. The original E-7 wasn't used permanently, and there is precedent with the C-10/KC-10 and a few others. BilCat (talk) 01:52, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am holding out hope that Pete Hegseth or the next SecAF is a bit OC(D) about designations not following the rules! Beyond that, I don't see anything changing in the future. BilCat (talk) 01:57, 26 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]