US Navy offers E2 Hawkeyes (AWACS) to Pakistan

srirangan

Banned Member
http://www.defensenews.com

U.S. Offers Pakistan Radar Planes
Advanced U.S. System Could Elbow Out Swedish Erieye Bid

By BARBARA OPALL-ROME, TEL AVIV

The U.S. Navy has proposed selling eight airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft to Pakistan, reversing restrictions on selling advanced radar planes to Islamabad.

One proposal would send eight new Northrop Grumman E-2 Hawkeye 2000s plus support equipment for an estimated $1.6 billion; a second option costing about half as much would include used aircraft upgraded to the advanced configuration, Northrop officials said.

The U.S. Navy proposal  supported at the policy level by the U.S. State Department, Pentagon and other relevant government agencies  is yet another manifestation of Washington’s intensifying courtship of Pakistan, which is viewed by the Bush administration as a key ally in its global fight against terror.

On Nov. 16, the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified the U.S. Congress of a possible $970 million sale to Pakistan of eight P-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft. According to the notification, the proposed sale  not yet concluded with Pakistani authorities  “will contribute to the foreign policy and national security of the United States by helping to improve the security of a friendly country that has been and continues to be an important force for economic progress in South Asia and the global war on terrorism.�

Also proposed for sale to Pakistan, according to separate Nov. 16 congressional notifications, are 2,000 Tube-launched, Optically tracked, Wire-guided (TOW) 2A anti-armor guided missiles, valued at $82 million; and an estimated $155 million package of Phalanx close-in weapon systems.

If Pakistan agrees to these and other potential arms sales, the deals likely would be funded in part through a $3 billion, five-year military and economic aid package that the White House is trying to push through Congress as part of the 2005 Foreign Operations Appropriations Bill.

Northrop executives said they hoped the most recent proposal for the E-2 Hawkeye 2000  an advanced system they say will eventually allow Pakistan to link up to U.S. Navy network-centric operations  is compelling enough to persuade Islamabad to forsake advanced negotiations for a Swedish AEW&C system based on the Saab 2000 aircraft and the Erieye radar and sensor suite.

They said Pakistan requested the Hawkeyes in early 2003 to satisfy an urgent AEW&C requirement, but that U.S. government policy at the time had barred their export to Pakistan. So Pakistan launched discussions with Sweden; European industry sources said negotiations had moved into advanced stages.

“We’re keeping our fingers crossed that we did not end up coming into this program too late, since we believe the Hawkeye aircraft and the network-centric operational capability is something nobody else can offer,� said David Murray, Northrop Grumman’s director of international programs for AEW.

Working with the U.S. Navy, Northrop presented detailed proposals with price and programmatic data to Pakistani military officials in Islamabad last month, Murray said. The package is being presented as two different programs  each containing four aircraft  for the Pakistan Air Force and the Pakistan Navy, with the Air Force taking the lead in negotiations.

“We just responded to a [price and availability] request for a program involving both the Navy and the Air Force. We had our team in there last month doing a tactical brief for the Pakistan Air Force and now they have in front of them an offer from the U.S. government,� Murray said. “We think the reason they went down the Erieye path was because they were concerned about not being able to get the Hawkeye from the U.S. government. But now we’re hopeful that Hawkeye still represents the preferred path for the Pakistani services.�

Defense officials at the Pakistani Embassy in Washington declined to discuss the proposed deal or other potential arms packages. A public affairs official at the Pentagon’s Defense Security Cooperation Agency declined to comment on the proposed Hawkeye bid.

“We do not engage in discussions or speculation of potential sales of major defense items or services to friendly countries before formal Congressional notification,� the official said.

Restoring U.S.-Pakistani Trade

The Hawkeye offer, plus last month’s congressional notifications of up to $1.2 billion in proposed U.S. arms deals, puts meat on the bones of a process for restoring U.S.-Pakistani defense trade ties that started just 11 days after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States.

With Presidential Determination No. 2001-28, the White House waived three separate sanctions on the books imposed on Pakistan as a result of its development and testing, in 1998, of nuclear weapons. Key among the sanctions waived by Bush, the son, was the 1985 Pressler Amendment that former President George Bush, the father, triggered in 1990 when he could not assure Congress that Pakistan was not developing nuclear weapons.

Those sanctions blocked delivery of 28 F-16 fighters that were already built and paid for by Pakistan, part of a 71-aircraft package that Islamabad concluded with the Pentagon in 1988 and 1989.

In October 2001, the White House waived the remaining prohibitions on military sales and economic assistance to Pakistan, which were imposed in 1999 after Gen. Pervez Musharraf, Pakistan’s top Army officer, grabbed the powers of the presidency.

Since then, the Bush administration has approved several arms agreements with Pakistan, including helicopters, cargo aircraft, night-vision equipment, radios and radar systems, according to Wade Boese, research director for the Washington-based Arms Control Association.

Boese noted that since June, when Pakistan was declared a major non-NATO ally, Islamabad has received even greater opportunities to acquire excess U.S. military equipment, including used U.S. Navy E-2Cs. And while the U.S. government has not yet approved Pakistan’s renewed requests for F-16s, Boese said he is concerned those planes could join the growing list of U.S. weaponry destined for Islamabad.

“Proliferators and others seeking to defy U.S. and international non-proliferation norms are sure to be encouraged by the U.S. embrace of Pakistan and Washington’s willingness to enter into advanced arms sales just a few short years after they’ve come out of the nuclear closet,� Boese said. “The message here is that the punishment for proliferators is short-lived, and that U.S. nonproliferation policies lack credibility.�

Boese urged the U.S. government to move slowly and cautiously in its defense-related dealings with Pakistan and India, to prevent a U.S.-fueled arms race on the precarious Asian subcontinent.

“Washington is trying to endear itself to both India and Pakistan, and we’re likely to arrive very quickly to a situation where the United States is trying to market weapons to both sides of a dangerous conflict,� he said.

Boese said he doubts that the Hawkeyes and the P-3s, built to fight the Soviet Navy, are ideally suited to tracking terrorists.

“And one must remember that the P-3s, the E-2Cs, the F-16s and other armaments likely to be proposed in the future will probably outlast the war on terror, just like our weapons to the mujahadeen outlasted the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan,� he said.
“So in the long term, you have to ask yourself what these weapons will be used for down the road, and who may inherit control of these weapon systems.� •
A pretty succesful Musharraf trip! I'm sure many on these boards will be happy! :)
 

srirangan

Banned Member
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #3
The E2 Hawkeyes were Pak's first preference and a request was made for them by Pak in early 2003. And these have some significant advantages over the Erieye's. What are the technical reasons umair that Pak shd go for the Eireye's instead?
 

umair

Peace Enforcer
1)Hawkeye analouge technology vs ERIEYE an AESA setup
2)Pesonal sources info indicates(contrary to the article) that the PAF preffers the ERIEYE in it's present guise over the Hawkeye.(remember that this version of the ERIEYE to be sold to Pakistan and probably Saudiarabia is the most advanced ERIEYE variant to date and offers more to the PAF than the Hawkeye.In what specific ways?,I don't know).
3)This ERIEYE version can also help the PAF in the ground stike and CAS sectors as it has a ground moving target indicator mode which works parallel to it's air search modes.Aloowing both air and ground targets to be sorted and dealt with at the same time.
note: most of this information is from personal sources.It's upto you the reader to take it at it's face value or reject it.Don't expect me to post links as there are none.
 

mysterious

New Member
Heck, I'd go for the Erieye as Hawkeye isn't what PAF or PN should be really interested in if thats what the US is offering them. E-3 Sentrys would've made it interested but unfortunately that is not the case. Once again, my money is on the Erieye. :smokingc:
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
At a technical level I would disagree with Eyrie being superior to a Hawkeye 2000.

The Hawkeye is a real AWAC's - autonomous of ground control, and also designed to be used at a landwarfare battlefield management level - again at an autonomous level. This has been demonstrated by the French in Op Herakles in Afghanistan, Singapore in various Op Singaroo exercises, US Customs with detecting of drug smugglers over land in both the US and Colombia and finally, by the use of earlier gen Hawkeyes from CVN's when they are used to battlefield assist the USMC. It's a well tested and demonstrated capability.

Eyrie, for all its capability, is not an autonomous AWACs, it's a battlefield system that is still ground control dependant over various operational essentials. Eyrie also has not been tested in combat - that doesn't mean that it should be excluded, but the "runs on the board" are worth more than the "runs" talked about before the game starts.

In addition, the Hawkeye has a full 360deg coverage capability, it doesn't suffer from Eyries 3-4 degree frontal and rear slot blindness - sure you can work around it, but with the Hawkeye you don't have to play "ducks and drakes" to maintain full "vision".

There's also less of a management integration issue with the F-16's and Mirages - sure you can do it with Eyrie, but its still not a "natural port".
 

SABRE

Super Moderator
Verified Defense Pro
Whats the date of the post. I mean what date was thiis reported on.
 

ajay_ijn

New Member
I think gf is right.
At technical level Hawkeye is similar to erieye.
Hawkeye also has a passive detection system,it has a poweful processor.
I read that Hawkeye can track 600 targets simlutaneously and can control
Interception of 40 fighters.
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ac/e-2.htm
High-wing, all-weather, carrier-based airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft that patrols task force defense perimeters
Provides early warning of approaching enemy aircraft and vectors interceptors into attack position
In addition to its primary AEW function, can also provide strike and traffic control, area surveillance, search and rescue guidance, navigational assistance, communications relay, and drug interdiction.
Group II upgrade to E-2C+ is the biggest advance in AEW technology in two decades.
AN/APS-145 radar provides fully automatic overland detection and tracking and significantly extends the radar detection limits. The radar capable of detecting targets anywhere within a three-million-cubic-mile surveillance envelope while simultaneously monitoring maritime traffic.
An Enhanced High-Speed Processor, which expands the active track file by 400% over previous versions, is incorporated into the mission computer. Each E-2C can maintain all-weather patrols, track, automatically and simultaneously,more than 600 targets, and control more than 40 airborne intercepts.Enhanced Main Display Units provide operators with improved visual representation.
Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS) incorporates several anti-jam features to allow uninterrupted voice and data communications, thereby enhancing interoperability.
I have one question
How many targets can Erieye can track simultaneaously and how many fighters it can guide simultaneaously?
 

SABRE

Super Moderator
Verified Defense Pro
the question here is not of a choice but of a trust. Can we trust US on such big deals again?
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
SABRE said:
the question here is not of a choice but of a trust. Can we trust US on such big deals again?
One would assume that General Musharraf as a military man, and as your political leader has weighed up the pros and cons - after all, he's a survivor and knows far more about risk management than most people. ;)
 

P.A.F

New Member
well as far as i know the most advanced AEW&C system is the Boeing 737-700 AEW&C aircraft which can track multiple air and sea targets simultaneously. maybe pakistan should go for these.
 

adsH

New Member
i think there's more then meets the Eye here, Anyone notice soon as the news about Pak SAUDI deal on the Swedish AEW&C came out this news Flashed out. i think Boeing is now affraid that it would loose Saudi RSAF a Rich Air-force as one of its customers. RSAF have been treated like pieces of Crap by Boeing (Downgraded versionos of E3C upgrades and Downgraded Radars for the F-15) and now they want to part ways with them, to do this they require PAF's help and so PAF for the first time has the Power to-potentially affect Boeing's Economics (which is probably unsettling for Boeing)
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
P.A.F said:
well as far as i know the most advanced AEW&C system is the Boeing 737-700 AEW&C aircraft which can track multiple air and sea targets simultaneously. maybe pakistan should go for these.
Technically the most advanced AWAC's/AEW&C platform is considered to be the MESA arrayed 737.

Concurrent air and land battlefield battle management is pretty well a standard requirement now. Even the latest Orions and Il-38's have a limited capability to do this.
 

XEROX

New Member
gf0012, a poster on various Indian defence forums known as Denil (Israeli working on defence projects in India) says.....

"The Phalcon India is getting is as advanced as any US AWACS system and more advanced in some very specific area's"


and then goes on further by saying......


"i am sure the codes for the Phalcon are to be given to India too" :)
 

adsH

New Member
That may be true since the USAF has not deployed its next gen AWACS, and the US still believes in a more modularized strategy rather then a ( single point of failure) all in one package. the US is working on its global C&C and surveillance tech where correct me if i 'm wrong E3 would be useless to USAF, i think the only more usefull systems left to them would the E2 2000, there strategy is to deploy Sat based surveillance and Battle feild management system, for which the US has the funds and political clearance. So better luck next time teh USAF will always be way ahead of anyone.
 

gf0012-aust

Grumpy Old Man
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
PJ-10 BrahMos said:
gf0012, a poster on various Indian defence forums known as Denil (Israeli working on defence projects in India) says.....

"The Phalcon India is getting is as advanced as any US AWACS system and more advanced in some very specific area's"


and then goes on further by saying......


"i am sure the codes for the Phalcon are to be given to India too" :)
Yes, I know Denil. and if you've read the history of responses between he and I over the last 18 months in DI and PR you'll note that he wonders how I know about some information which he thought was "privileged".

He is clearly wrong here, there are 2 programmes in play where the US has their replacement AWACs mules in test - and it reduces the need they have had for 4 different specialist airborne solutions (Sentry, Rivets, Joint and Compass roles) into one platform. The reason why the US has fielded multiple platforms for different roles in the past is because they were unable to achieve it all on a single platform. As Denil should know - Phalcon is heavily based on one of the "Joint X" platforms that the USAF developed 12 years ago (the Israelis were part of that prog in happier days) - it's old technology. The US is at least a generation ahead of the Israelis. What Denil might not have said is that in the last 2 years the Americans have progressively and quietly cut back on their joint programmes with Israel in EW areas as they are a bit unhappy about the technology being onsold (even in reduced form) by Israel to China. The fact that Phalcon is almost a mirrored copy of the original US mule sent initial alarm bells ringing. Since then there has been a gradual but subtle pulling away by the USAF/USN from involving the Israelis. I would think that this is almost common knowledge within defence circles - even though the surface relationships are still strong.

You are however, not going to get any info in the public domain about what they (US EW community) are doing - but some of it is appearing in internal publications etc....

Also, with the greatest of respect to Denil, he is the only Israeli "contracter" I know who goes on a public forum to make "announcements". I have worked with 3 different Israelis over the last 5 years - and all of them are loathe to tell you their surnames let alone talk about what projects are in play. That makes him an "oddity". I'm not doubting a lot of what he says, as he obviously has some inside knowledge, but it is highly unusual for any Israeli I have ever worked with to talk as "freely".

One should always keep their admiration in check for what people say until there is proof of their accuracy - over a period of time and then timeline their comments against release notes. If they don't meet basic criteria like that, then they're just "talkers". The value of their role is then determined by the quality of what they have "predicted".

It's a subtlety that is missed by more than a few enthusiasts.

In closing, I would argue that the Israelis rate highly in EW - close to the UK in airborne solutions. In some areas they are clearly 2nd in the food chain. I would question his enthusiasm for Phalcon being superior to US solutions based on what I know of current developments.
 

mysterious

New Member
So now, which one has Pakistan opted for? Erieye or the Hawkeye? There seems to be much silence surrounding this issue in the Pakistani circles. Any one come across any recent credible info on this issue? :roll
 

SABRE

Super Moderator
Verified Defense Pro
mysterious said:
So now, which one has Pakistan opted for? Erieye or the Hawkeye? There seems to be much silence surrounding this issue in the Pakistani circles. Any one come across any recent credible info on this issue? :roll
I think it should Depend upon which fighter platform Platform we opy for. If we r going to get Gripens than Erieye may be the first choice, if only F-16s than Hawkeye is better choice. Not that it is going to have any big impact like this but better stick to all equipments from the same country.
 

Salman78

New Member
SABRE said:
the question here is not of a choice but of a trust. Can we trust US on such big deals again?
Exactly...
It all comes down to this.
Integration with Platforms like F-16 and Mirages isnt any issue. Greece and Brazil are already operating the radar.
Erieye offers better range, faster processing and secure datalink (swedes being the pioneers and experts in developing and using datalink)
I also read in one aviation book that Erieye's radar signals are much more difficult to jam then any other AEW&C platform flying today. Don't remember the exact details but it had somthing to do with its narrow bandwith...
My chips for the Erieye :)
 
Top