EA-18G vs ES-3

Nice tap dancing there John R.
It's all good, can we move on?

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 04:41:02 GMT, "John R Weiss"
wrote:

"Brian" wrote...

The Prowler's SIGINT capability is nil. There is almost no analysis
capabilty nor does there need to be. Sending info to a *ARM isn't the same
thing as ELINT/SIGINT. Even the shipboard system I worked wasn't considered
a full blown SIGINT/ELINT system without a few add on's and even then it
wasn't a preferred platform. To really do SIGINT/ELINT, you need receivers
that are very sensitive and can measure incredibly minute differences in
signals. The ALQ-99 and other EW platforms can pick out signals but they
don't need the razor accuracy of a ELINT receiver. Take a look at the
equipment that was in the ES-3 and look at the ALQ-99, they are completely
different systems. When the Navy gave up the ES-3, they gave up tactical
airborne ELINT.

I never claimed that the Prowler had a capability equivalent to the ES-3, EP-3,
or EA-3. I firmly believe that such dedicated ESM systems are needed. However,
your counterclaim that the Prowler's SIGINT/ELINT capability is "nil" shows you
do not know the system's full capability, and/or you do not appreciate the time
sensitivity of tactical ESM.

You don't always need a "full blown" system or a "preferred platform."
Sometimes you only need a capable platform with an operator that knows what he's
doing. I've worked with more than a few EA-6B ECMOs who knew how to wring a few
extra data points out of the ALQ-99...

Once in a while, you only had to have a capable system and a lucky operator...
We were flying around one day with an AWG-21 and a STARM on board, and picked up
a signal that shouldn't have been where it was. Turned out to be a Bear coming
from an unexpected direction, and we were the first ones to detect it. Other
sensors picked it up well after we reported back to the ship...