USAF Electronic Attack - Why not buy some Growlers?

[fretburner]

Why isn't the USAF buying the F-18G?

Seems like an EA-35 is too far away and I haven't read anything about the B-52 "Standoff" Jammer in a while.

The USAF and USN EA "roles" can't be that different right? And usually, a USN fighter can "transition" to a USAF fighter relatively easily versus USAF to USN?

Thanks!

[simdude97]

Why isn't the USAF buying the F-18G?

Seems like an EA-35 is too far away and I haven't read anything about the B-52 "Standoff" Jammer in a while.

The USAF and USN EA "roles" can't be that different right? And usually, a USN fighter can "transition" to a USAF fighter relatively easily versus USAF to USN?

Thanks!

Hi fretburner, other than the navy flying off of carriers I do not think the EW roles are that different in fact the air force and navy is still currently using EA-6 Prowlers.

Believe it or not there are some in both congress and the air national guard who would like to see Super Hornets bought to replace F-16s.

http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cf...dcn=todaysnews

Personally I think it's a great idea if they can figure out how to buy them without starving the F-35 program of money.

[F35Owns]

Why isn't the USAF buying the F-18G?

Seems like an EA-35 is too far away and I haven't read anything about the B-52 "Standoff" Jammer in a while.

The USAF and USN EA "roles" can't be that different right? And usually, a USN fighter can "transition" to a USAF fighter relatively easily versus USAF to USN?

Thanks!

Why? Because their is a new EW kid on the block...the brand spanking new: P-8A. Sure they won't be in service until 2013, but this baby is hell in the sky. Mabye thats why the USN is getting 117 of these beasts. Oh, and she can re-fuel in the sky.

The real question is, why do we need the LCS?

[fretburner]

Why? Because their is a new EW kid on the block...the brand spanking new: P-8A. Sure they won't be in service until 2013, but this baby is hell in the sky. Mabye thats why the USN is getting 117 of these beasts. Oh, and she can re-fuel in the sky.

The real question is, why do we need the LCS?

I think you might have confused my question which was pointed at the USAF and not the USN?

Besides, I haven't read anywhere that the P-8A would be able to do EA. What I read recently was that it will be able to do ground surveillance as well...kinda like what the JSTARS is doing right now.

[gf0012-aust]

Why? Because their is a new EW kid on the block...the brand spanking new: P-8A. Sure they won't be in service until 2013, but this baby is hell in the sky. Mabye thats why the USN is getting 117 of these beasts. Oh, and she can re-fuel in the sky.

The real question is, why do we need the LCS?

Having been to some of the USAF and Boeing P8 briefings, I think you're being a tad optimistic about "hell in the sky".

the development curve is a bit of a way off - and nothing is concrete on what the final builds will be.

There is minimal correlation between what the P8 mission set and LCS mission set are, they are sympathetic assets in some mission sets - they're not designed to supplant or compete with each other.

[Tudor_T]

Why isn't the USAF buying the F-18G?

Seems like an EA-35 is too far away and I haven't read anything about the B-52 "Standoff" Jammer in a while.

The USAF and USN EA "roles" can't be that different right? And usually, a USN fighter can "transition" to a USAF fighter relatively easily versus USAF to USN?

Thanks!

The short answer is the USAF doubled-down on 5th gen TACAIR almost 20 years ago, and it has been obstinately resolute (or resolutely obstinate) about not investing in manned legacy (i.e., non-LO) fighters ever since, and especially not expensive, dedicated EW variants. The AF has been pretty ruthless about letting its F-16 and F-15C fleets age out to save TACAIR dollars for F-22/F-35, so it would be institutionally inconceivable to help the Navy keep the F-18 line going, especially given the AF-Navy-OSD frictions over TACAIR assessments in past QDRs.

The AF plan that emerged after a 1999 Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA) COEA was to piggyback on Navy Growlers for the escort jamming mission through 2012, supplement that with MALD-Js and develop the B-52 CCJ as the big-daddy stand-off element. The B-52 has since become a kind of zombie program--repeatedly dying on cost and then being resurrected. After 2012, F-22s and F-35s were envisioned as having a stealth/AESA jamming combination that would obviate the escort-jamming mission. However, I think it's acknowledged now that there will be a big gap in AEA coverage after 2012, especially because AF legacy fighters will be flying longer than anticipated with the F-22 program finished at 187 and F-35s entering service slower than originally planned.

If it really wanted an escort EW fighter in the vein of the old EF-111 or beloved F-4G, the AF would more likely attempt to integrate Growler subsystems into an F-15E or, as you say, wait to make an F-35 version. Interestingly, the AF in the early 90s had a program for an F-15C Wild Weasel. McDonnell Douglas in St. Louis had even integrated some mission equipment on a platform, I believe, before Gen McPeak killed the program. Some of that early development work fed into the F-18 Growler. The AF, in the meantime, went with the F-16 HTS as an "interim" solution--and it's been the principal HARM shooter ever since.

[mavericck]

Wouldn't it be easier to just build unmanned electronic warfare drones?

[fretburner]

The short answer is the USAF doubled-down on 5th gen TACAIR almost 20 years ago, and it has been obstinately resolute (or resolutely obstinate) about not investing in manned legacy (i.e., non-LO) fighters ever since, and especially not expensive, dedicated EW variants. The AF has been pretty ruthless about letting its F-16 and F-15C fleets age out to save TACAIR dollars for F-22/F-35, so it would be institutionally inconceivable to help the Navy keep the F-18 line going, especially given the AF-Navy-OSD frictions over TACAIR assessments in past QDRs.

The AF plan that emerged after a 1999 Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA) COEA was to piggyback on Navy Growlers for the escort jamming mission through 2012, supplement that with MALD-Js and develop the B-52 CCJ as the big-daddy stand-off element. The B-52 has since become a kind of zombie program--repeatedly dying on cost and then being resurrected. After 2012, F-22s and F-35s were envisioned as having a stealth/AESA jamming combination that would obviate the escort-jamming mission. However, I think it's acknowledged now that there will be a big gap in AEA coverage after 2012, especially because AF legacy fighters will be flying longer than anticipated with the F-22 program finished at 187 and F-35s entering service slower than originally planned.

So I guess they will continue to "piggy-back" on the USN Growler, and then re-negotiate after 2012 if the EA version of the F-35 is still not operational?

Is the USN supposed to retire their Growlers when the EA-35 is already operational?

Also, is the EA-35 supposed to carry those "jammers" internally? I wonder how many more missiles it can carry when it carries them internally.


If it really wanted an escort EW fighter in the vein of the old EF-111 or beloved F-4G, the AF would more likely attempt to integrate Growler subsystems into an F-15E or, as you say, wait to make an F-35 version. Interestingly, the AF in the early 90s had a program for an F-15C Wild Weasel. McDonnell Douglas in St. Louis had even integrated some mission equipment on a platform, I believe, before Gen McPeak killed the program. Some of that early development work fed into the F-18 Growler. The AF, in the meantime, went with the F-16 HTS as an "interim" solution--and it's been the principal HARM shooter ever since.

How about an EA F-15SE? Sounds like badass :)

Pardon my ignorance on being a "HARM shooter", but isn't this quite different from having AEA?

[Tudor_T]

The EA F-35 is just a drawing-board concept, I think, and I wouldn't wager on it becoming a real program for 10 years. The services will be struggling just to field enough F-35s at a good ramp rate to replace older fighters, so I'm sure the Growlers will see heavy demand for a full 25- to 30-year lifecycle.

As for EA-35 jammers, I don't know. There's been much discussion about the potential of the AESA to serve as a jammer.

F-15Es would be the logical USAF platform, but I suspect the AF has balked at the integration costs, as well as at the idea of removing any of these from the attack role.

Yeah, HARM is the reactive SEAD part of the equation. EA-6B and Growler both carry HARMs in addition to doing AEA. The F-16CJ is the AF's HARM shooter but the only AF jamming asset is the EC-130H.

[GI-Gizmo]

I think for EW roles the Air Force will be going with unmanned assets in the near-term future. One can imagine a UCAV being very well suited for the
EW role sometime within the next 5 to 15 years. I'm not worried about any other nation even coming close to the dominance the US has in controlling the electromagnetic spectrum. Everybody is looking for a specific dedicated airframe as proof that the AF can engage in EW missions, in the 21st Century I believe it is different. The Air Force is currently in the process of making electronic warfare more standardized and for the different EW systems to be able to communicate and work together. In June 08' the AF
had 56 different EW systems that used 34 computer languages, in the future all systems will be able to work in an orchestrated and advanced way to maintain dominance in controlling the electromagnetic spectrum to deny or attack enemies. The AESA radars on the F-22 and F-35 are EW weapons and can be used to do amazing things. The EC-130 variants, B-1B lancer, F-16CJ and all the pods and other assets, along with the Navy assets, are enough to take on any enemy nowadays. The electronic warfare life cycle management group, started in 2008~, is the bggest AF effort in 30 years. There are also alot of secret 'black' programs involving electronic warfare systems and tactics that will yield incredible results for the US mil.

[fretburner]

It would be cool to see EA UCAVs being flown by like a WSO of a two-seater strike fighter on the first day of war :)

I think Boeing has already tested on an Apache taking control of an unmanned Little Bird?

But then again, when are those F-15E's and F-18Fs supposed to retire? I don't think there's a two-seater F-22 or F-35?

[JonMusser]

I do not see a the USAF ever receiving a new EA system unless either on a F15 and the only new f15 are Silent Eagles which would be cool or on board a unmanned Aircraft.
i am personally upset with the short run of the F22 because the air force did away with the Raven because in 10 years they said it would be obsolete now the Legacy aircraft are expected to continue service well into the future and there is no EA aircraft to escort them.
and i think the navy gets the short straw here it has to pay and develop the tech while in combat they have to share there exclusive EA assist with a branch that could have assist of there own but decided to ground them all.
to sum it up the air force needs to make up their mind and then move forward accordingly whether it be to cut legacy air craft or keep a diverse fleet well in the future which makes me nervous because many of the legacy fleets airframes are old and are ready to retire

[fretburner]

I got to see some History Channel documentary at liveleak about Desert Storm dogfights, and found out that an EF-111 actually led a "swarm" of F-15Es to hit those SAMs and radars, with F-15Cs escorting tankers and AWACS. That was pretty impressive.

Do EA aircrafts do this all the time? Even the F-15Es had escorts in the F-15Cs, but the EF-111 never had an escort and was unarmed! The pilot and the crew have to be the bravest of pilots to do that! And must have had total trust in their aircraft! Simply amazing!

[StingrayOZ]

Do EA aircrafts do this all the time? Even the F-15Es had escorts in the F-15Cs, but the EF-111 never had an escort and was unarmed! The pilot and the crew have to be the bravest of pilots to do that! And must have had total trust in their aircraft! Simply amazing!

EF-111 would have had speed and range on its side, plus I would assume it would be more knowleadgeable about the situation than any fighter. I suppose it depends on the situation. They were lovely aircraft.

Im glad Australia got some of its 24 x F-18 SH wired for Growler capability. Given the increasing rareity of this type of aircraft it will make them much more valuable. After we get the F-35 the SH will still be highly useful. Adding capabilities the F-35 won't offer anyway (two seater, twin engine, buddy refuel, USN cross deck possibilities/sellback).

[Duffy]

@ fretburner All pilots of most nations are brave, But they also have a lot of confidence in there equipment. The pilots of the EF-111 are no different. EW aircraft are typically tied to a strike package so there not alone .Very few aircraft operate alone.
The USAF will piggy back on the USN like Tudor_T has stated above. The navy has no problem with this arrangement because it will keep them in the fight. :)
The USAFs dependence on SEAD aircraft has changed. With more reliable means of locating and destroying SAMs and early warning radars there doctrine has changed accordingly. If you cant destroy something, the next logical choice is to suppress it. The problem with counting on EW aircraft so much is that number of aircraft will govern your sortie rate. If you were to loose enough It would create a bottle neck which could be devastating depending on the over all plan. Don't get me wrong there not phasing out EW aircraft any time soon just cutting back on there dependence.
@ stingrayOZ I do like that cross deck possibility the USN carriers have the room.:D

[fretburner]

The USAFs dependence on SEAD aircraft has changed. With more reliable means of locating and destroying SAMs and early warning radars there doctrine has changed accordingly. If you cant destroy something, the next logical choice is to suppress it.

Not sure if it's top secret or something, but how else will the USAF deal with SAMs and Radars without the EA aircraft? Rely on the F-22?

Just asking. :)

[Duffy]

Not sure if it's top secret or something, but how else will the USAF deal with SAMs and Radars without the EA aircraft? Rely on the F-22?

Just asking. :)


Remember I said curb there reliance on them not eliminate them. The push on intelligence is one way. To find and target SAMs and radars before going in is one way. Digital mapping has come along way since Kosovo. Being digital you can use a computer to look for anomaly's. Then take a second look to determine if its a target or not. If you have a location destruction is possible. Using EW aircraft to bait radars is not a thing of the past but the USAF is trying to make it that way.
ROE will also dictate how important EW aircraft are to any given conflict. The F-35 should be a great addition to the DEAD abilities of the air force (I say should because until its in service and and tactics are developed who knows). The F-22 is for air superiority and with the reduced numbers we have should stay that way.;)
What I was trying to say was the number of EW platforms needed has been reduced,Or that is the goal it seems. UAVs are the logical choice but have a ways to go yet.

I maybe completely wrong just my two cents. :D

[fretburner]

^ Piggy-backing it is.

If and when the EF-35 becomes operational, can jamming pods be carried internally? Or maybe mounted externally but make the pods itself "stealthy"? Just thinking out loud here :)

[Duffy]

^ Piggy-backing it is.

If and when the EF-35 becomes operational, can jamming pods be carried internally? Or maybe mounted externally but make the pods itself "stealthy"? Just thinking out loud here :)

If the AN/APG-81 AESA radar is all what its made out to be I don't think we will see dedicated EW platforms. Most likely we'll see jamming pods developed to compliment the capability's of the radar. I don't see any advantage of them being internal. But that depends on use ES internal maybe better EA I don't think it would matter. All of this of course will be governed by the capability's of the radar and very few people know what that is .Thats not going to change any time soon. :D

[fretburner]

If the AN/APG-81 AESA radar is all what its made out to be I don't think we will see dedicated EW platforms. Most likely we'll see jamming pods developed to compliment the capability's of the radar. I don't see any advantage of them being internal. But that depends on use ES internal maybe better EA I don't think it would matter. All of this of course will be governed by the capability's of the radar and very few people know what that is .Thats not going to change any time soon. :D

Can these AESA Radars really do that many tasks simultaneously? Scanning for air and ground threats simultaneously seems to need so much processing power already.

[Duffy]

Can these AESA Radars really do that many tasks simultaneously? Scanning for air and ground threats simultaneously seems to need so much processing power already.


I would have to say yes since there already fielding AN/APG-79 AESA radar in the F-18 E/F that can simultaneously use air-to-air and air-to-ground modes .

[Duffy]

Can these AESA Radars really do that many tasks simultaneously? Scanning for air and ground threats simultaneously seems to need so much processing power already.

fretburner
As for processing power. You have to look back at the F-117, It was completely unstable and was for the most part flown by the computer with pilot input.(The pilot used the stick to tell the plane what he would like to do but the computer decided the best way to do it). Remember that plane first flew almost 30 years ago before laptops and PCs as we know them. The retail market has driven the development micro processor's to a point were other technology's have to catch up.

[fretburner]

^ I'm sure the processing power is there, if we're talking like teraflops or whatever... but translating that into "functions" the aircraft or pilots can use, I think is a different matter. I'm just guessing by the way. I don't have any idea how complex these things are - Jamming + Scanning + Identification +... - but, if we're looking at, for example, Honda's ASIMO, it seems like they have the mechanical stuffs nailed, but the processing power, albeit in a much smaller frame than an aircraft, is NOT there. It can't calculate the robot's center of gravity like a human brain can.

[SpudmanWP]

The F-35 is already wired for the NGJ (Next Genneration Jammer) which will be a faceted, AESA based multiband jammer pod system.

The plan is to fly 2-4 hig-band pods on the wing stations and 1 low-band pod on the centerline station. Space has already been saved in teh CIP to handle integration issues.

[fretburner]

The plan is to fly 2-4 hig-band pods on the wing stations and 1 low-band pod on the centerline station. Space has already been saved in teh CIP to handle integration issues.



How is this going to affect the "stealthiness" of the F-35?

[Duffy]

^ I'm sure the processing power is there, if we're talking like teraflops or whatever... but translating that into "functions" the aircraft or pilots can use, I think is a different matter. I'm just guessing by the way. I don't have any idea how complex these things are - Jamming + Scanning + Identification +... - but, if we're looking at, for example, Honda's ASIMO, it seems like they have the mechanical stuffs nailed, but the processing power, albeit in a much smaller frame than an aircraft, is NOT there. It can't calculate the robot's center of gravity like a human brain can.

Comparing ASIMO to AESA radar is Apples to Oranges. The limitations in ASIMO are not due to computing in any way. A gyroscope will keep balance or center of gravity with no problem, But when the human body moves its center of gravity is constantly changing.When you walk your mass is constantly out of balance, when you stop you tend to bend your knees to stop the momentum. Then theres going up and down hills which changes everything. Placement of your feet on uneven ground and so on and so on. These are all things that we feel we don't have to watch where our feet are going. Interpreting how we interact with the environment and writing that into code is very difficult.To write code for every variable would be a daunting task.The real goal is to write code that would allow the robot to learn just like a child.
Writing code for weapons,aircraft and radars are much more specific in there task.The basic premise behind radar for instance is the same as it was for England during WWII .One difference is how the return is interpreted, Over the years with computing power radar is now able to make a very accurate digital picture. Since its digital the computer can also interpret it further and target objects that match a digital picture of that object stored in its memory. From there the computer can priorities the targets based on predetermined values programed in to the software.Among a hundred other things. But there is very few variables .

[Duffy]

How is this going to affect the "stealthiness" of the F-35?

When the pods are emitting , The "stealth" designed into the plane is out the window anyway. There will be dedicated platforms for this type of
equipment. With pilots trained for the equipment and the tactics to deploy them properly.

[SpudmanWP]

The stealthy nature of the F-35 and the NGJ will allow it to provide jamming when and where it wants.

The AESA based antennas will ensure the only systems that can detect the jamming are the targets of the jamming (low side lobes).

[Duffy]

The stealthy nature of the F-35 and the NGJ will allow it to provide jamming when and where it wants.

The AESA based antennas will ensure the only systems that can detect the jamming are the targets of the jamming (low side lobes).

Spudman do you have any links for this. Its not that I doubt you but it sounds like some interesting reading. Software designers are going to have a field day with this system if its half as capable as they say.:)

[SpudmanWP]

Here are a few sources:

http://www.dtic.mil/dticasd/sbir/sbir043/n239a.ppt
http://www.navair.navy.mil/doing_business/open_solicitations/uploads/N00019-08-R-0101/NGJ_BAA_Industry_Day_-_Final.pdf

Somewhere I have seen a comp simulation of a F-35 with the pods attached but I cannot find it now :(

[Duffy]

Here are a few sources:

http://www.dtic.mil/dticasd/sbir/sbir043/n239a.ppt
http://www.navair.navy.mil/doing_business/open_solicitations/uploads/N00019-08-R-0101/NGJ_BAA_Industry_Day_-_Final.pdf

Somewhere I have seen a comp simulation of a F-35 with the pods attached but I cannot find it now :(


Thank You
I think I've seen that also but thought it was someones wishful thinking. I must say it looked good.:)

[nero]

i hear that the F/A-18G growler is being offered to india is it true ??????????????

[Duffy]

i hear that the F/A-18G growler is being offered to india is it true ??????????????


No. There is talk of Boeing selling a Growler Lite with enhanced battle space management capabilities.Unlike the Growler, a Growler Lite will not carry ITT ALQ-99 radar jamming pods and interference cancellation system. It will only be equipped with sensors like Northrop Grumman's ALQ-218(V)2 radio frequency receiver and Raytheon's ALQ-227 communication countermeasures set for electronic surveillance. The DoD has not approved this.