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...

See, here is what currently happens there, I'm sure you knew this but
are forgetting Thomas?

The tanker does not fly with the strike package. The S-3's launch
first then go to a designated rendevouz point All the talk about
tanker speed is irrelevant. Then "most" of the time the airforce
tankers are at their designated hookup points on the way in to the
box right before the push, then on the way out. On the way home, the
S-3's are waiting to give a last drink if needed before and during
recovery ops.

Which A/C in the package launch last? The Prowlers! They have the most
fuel onboard. S-3's, then the E-2's, then Hornets ( the F-18's head
straight for the tanker), then Tomcats and last, Prowlers. Of course
planeguard is already out there, and maybe if in range, the COD will
launch.

Of course this will change slightly with the Rhino's, I haven't done a
cruise with the E/F's onboard yet, but I will be making Lincoln's next
cruise.

Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:14:00 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

Thomas Schoene wrote:
Charlie Wolf wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 04:50:21 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

R. David Steele wrote:
snipped...
The S-3 is even slower than the EA-6. That's why they weren't able
to use the S-3 as a mission tanker for strike fighters like the
F/A-18.
Where did you get that from? S-3's have been tanking Lawn Darts
since the RAG stood up at Cecil Field in the early 90's. S-3 has a
dash speed of 450 kts. It can easily do 400 kts straight and level.
That is way above tanking speed.

Right. That's why I said *mission* tanker.



And reading the rest of the thread, I think I was probably confusing my
terms. I think "escort tanker" is what I should have been saying here.

ACS will be replacing the EP-3's by 2015.

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:17:31 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

Brian wrote:
"R. David Steele" wrote in message
...
How is the EA-18G being used, or at least planned for?

It's planned to be a EA-6B replacement, that is, stand off jamming.

Also more stand-in escort jamming and SEAD/strike, though not as much as
originally planned, it looks like.

What amazes me is they plan to stick on the same ALQ-99 system that
is in dire need of replacement.

It's not all the same, by any means. AIUI, big chunks will be replaced; it
may be ALQ-99 in name only when they're done with it.

I wonder if the V-22,
should it ever become operational, will be able to function well
as a refueling platform and in the SIGINT/ELINT (tactical)
mission?

I doubt it, the V-22 doesn't strike me as a very efficient platform
for SIGINT.

Indeed. The SIGINT collection task looks to go to UAVs. (the Navy has
swong back and fromth on the MR-UAV and UCAV-N, with the difference being
the degree of loitering reconaisance the platform can do, as opposed to
out-and-back bomb dropping)

A KV-22 tanker is interesting. Depending on the numbers you look at, it may
have rather less gas to pass than a Super Hornet.

Look at ACS David, it is replacing both guardrail and the ARL for the
Army, and the EP-3 for the Navy.

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 02:22:22 GMT, R. David Steele
wrote:


| How is the EA-18G being used, or at least planned for?
|
|It's planned to be a EA-6B replacement, that is, stand off jamming. What
|amazes me is they plan to stick on the same ALQ-99 system that is in dire
|need of replacement.
|
| the P-3 ASW and the EP-3 SIGINT/ELINT platforms are still our
| best lines of "defense", it is jut that they are not tactical
| platforms that can go with the fleet. I wonder if the V-22,
| should it ever become operational, will be able to function well
| as a refueling platform and in the SIGINT/ELINT (tactical)
| mission?
|
|I doubt it, the V-22 doesn't strike me as a very efficient platform for
|SIGINT.

Actually it would do well for the Army and Marines. The Army
uses the EH-60A with the Quik-Fix (AN/ALQ-151) system. It is
their main SIGINT system and does countermeasures.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...aft/eh-60a.htm
also the advanced version
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...aft/eh-60l.htm

The RC-12 Guardrail is another platform based on the Beechcraft
Super King Air (C-12). It is a SIGINT, ELINT and COMINT
platform.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell.../guardrail.htm

Thus I do feel that the V-22 could do either the Quickfix or
Guardrail missions for the Army.

Thank you - you put it much better than I could have...
Regards,

On Thu, 26 Feb 2004 17:11:25 GMT, fudog50 wrote:

See, here is what currently happens there, I'm sure you knew this but
are forgetting Thomas?

The tanker does not fly with the strike package. The S-3's launch
first then go to a designated rendevouz point All the talk about
tanker speed is irrelevant. Then "most" of the time the airforce
tankers are at their designated hookup points on the way in to the
box right before the push, then on the way out. On the way home, the
S-3's are waiting to give a last drink if needed before and during
recovery ops.

Which A/C in the package launch last? The Prowlers! They have the most
fuel onboard. S-3's, then the E-2's, then Hornets ( the F-18's head
straight for the tanker), then Tomcats and last, Prowlers. Of course
planeguard is already out there, and maybe if in range, the COD will
launch.

Of course this will change slightly with the Rhino's, I haven't done a
cruise with the E/F's onboard yet, but I will be making Lincoln's next
cruise.

Thu, 26 Feb 2004 00:14:00 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

Thomas Schoene wrote:
Charlie Wolf wrote:
On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 04:50:21 GMT, "Thomas Schoene"
wrote:

R. David Steele wrote:
snipped...
The S-3 is even slower than the EA-6. That's why they weren't able
to use the S-3 as a mission tanker for strike fighters like the
F/A-18.
Where did you get that from? S-3's have been tanking Lawn Darts
since the RAG stood up at Cecil Field in the early 90's. S-3 has a
dash speed of 450 kts. It can easily do 400 kts straight and level.
That is way above tanking speed.

Right. That's why I said *mission* tanker.



And reading the rest of the thread, I think I was probably confusing my
terms. I think "escort tanker" is what I should have been saying here.

R. David Steele wrote:
Look at ACS David, it is replacing both guardrail and the ARL for the
Army, and the EP-3 for the Navy.

Do you mean the Common Support Aircraft (CSA)?

No, this is a ground-based aircraft, not a carrier plane like CSA.


This is a nice platform that should replace the C-2, C-12, and
S-3. Has it been announced who will make it?
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...rcraft/csa.htm

CSA is dead (yor several years). They may not have formally terminated it,
but there's no movement on it, and it does not appear in the Navy's future
aircraft procurement plans.

Also The KC-X or KC-767 program makes sense. Likewise use the
767 (E-767) to replace the E-3 AWACS. There was talk of having a
P-7 which would be based on the 737 (which is being made into a
cheaper AWACS the E-737.

P-7 was actually a P-3 development, not a 737. It was shelved sometime in
the 1990s.

The Navy is now looking at a program called the MAritime Multi-Mission
Aircraft. A 737 deriviative is a candidate for that, competing against a
modernized P-3.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

P-7 was actually a P-3 development, not a 737. It was shelved sometime in
the 1990s.


Wasnt that the P-6?


Ron
Tanker 65, C-54E (DC-4)

Ron wrote:
P-7 was actually a P-3 development, not a 737. It was shelved
sometime in the 1990s.


Wasnt that the P-6?

No.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...rcraft/p-7.htm

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

Wasnt that the P-6?

No.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...rcraft/p-7.htm

I think you are right. I thought I remembered P-6, but I cant find anything
online about it


Ron
Tanker 65, C-54E (DC-4)

"Ron" wrote in message
...
Wasnt that the P-6?

No.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...rcraft/p-7.htm

I think you are right. I thought I remembered P-6, but I cant find
anything
online about it

The P-6 was the P-3 replacement called something like LRAACA. It was going
to be the killer ASW/ASuW platform but was cancelled around 1991.