MILAVIA Forum - Military Aviation Discussion Forum

Author Topic: EA-6B Prowler  (Read 8403 times)

Offline God Bless USA

  • Flight Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 50
  • Country: us
EA-6B Prowler
« on: June 03, 2008, 10:39:29 PM »
The EA-6B Prowler and now F/A-18G "Growler" are Airborne Electronic Attack Aircraft.  Is there any other country that uses these aircraft?  Does any other country have there own Airborne Electronic Attack Aircraft?  Did the war in Iraq prove you need these type of aircraft?



Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: EA-6B Prowler
« Reply #1 on: June 19, 2008, 02:19:52 AM »
No, no other country operates the Prowler or Growler.

Yes, other countries use electronic warfare attack aircraft. Often not as dedicated a type as the Prowler though. Tornado ECR (Italy, Germany) and Su-24MP (USSR/Russia/Ukraine/Belarus) are the ones that come to my mind immediately, and the RAF did have some Tornado F.3 armed with ALARM because it already has a powerful Emitter Locator System. Active jamming by non-US countries is often reserved to some larger platforms or by slapping on some jammers on your usual suspects, and they do the limited amount of SEAD too. Having a dedicated platform that can do both EW and SEAD is unsustainable for most countries.
 
Yes, actually the two conflicts over Former Yugoslavia already proved that EW and SEAD capabilities of non-US participants was lacking, and the Tornado ECR was in high demand both in Bosnia as Kosovo campaigns. Although the EF-111 proved vital in providing EW cover for the F-111 in the first Gulf War, it was the high cost of the type that lead the USAF to retire it. The recent conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan proved even more demanding on these assets, esp. for the EA-6B, shared by the USAF and USN, as they are vital to jamming various signals including mobile to protect convoys from IED devices triggered by mobile phones. The SEAD capability has been largely expanded by having F-16s equipped with better radars and AGM-88s, but the suppression or destruction of enemy defenses was not neccessary to the same extent as in the earlier campaigns. But without them, the Iraqi's would have been far more likely to turn on their radars and try hitting some aircraft (Saddam promised the crews pretty good bonuses if they were to be succesful). So Iraq showed the neccessity of EW/Jamming platforms (also the bigger ones have been in high demand) and usefulness of the EA-6B, but the attack capability for SEAD/DEAD has been somewhat pushed to the background. In Afghanistan, same thing, and even more so for the SEAD/DEAD task as the only/most promiment threat in Afghanistan are IR-guided shoulder-launched air-to-air missiles, hence the focus on equipping everything with sophisticated threat sensors and flares. Should however in future (god forbid) the enemy be Iran, China, North Korea, Russia, Venezuela, or other countries equipped with more sophisticated air defences, then you can expect the focus to turn to these attackers again. However in the US, with stealth, don't expect huge investment, because the theory is all threats can be destroyed by undetected stealth platforms, so no need to jam or surpress them. But apparently, the US still sees need for a dedicated platform, the Growler, which is understandable if you see how long before the USN has their stealth aircraft. With enough Growlers and in the mean time the Prowlers being upgraded to ICAP-III, as well as having other more secretive platforms, the US is in pretty good shape. In other countries it really is a task that they either rely to US on to do, or is covered by having a handful of podded systems for the multi-role fighters. Technology ensured that for both Jamming and Detection, air forces can rely on these as opposed to dedicated platforms, and once everything has been integrated, finally gives them a robust EW/SEAD capability.

So, actually the answer is yes and no: yes, Iraq proved the neccessity of EW platforms, no it did not prove the need for these platform to carry out the attack as well. But the latter has already been proven previously.

Entire books have been devoted to these subjects, and a proper reply would maybe take 4-5 pages, but I think I gave an okay answer to your question.
« Last Edit: June 19, 2008, 02:29:41 AM by Webmaster »
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline God Bless USA

  • Flight Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 50
  • Country: us
Re: EA-6B Prowler
« Reply #2 on: June 19, 2008, 10:35:24 AM »
No you gave a great reply to my question!  You also answered why the USAF retired the EF-111 after the first Gulf War and left themself without a aircraft to replace it.  Thank you for all the information. 

Offline MightyHunter

  • Flight Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
  • Country: gb
Re: EA-6B Prowler
« Reply #3 on: June 19, 2008, 03:34:52 PM »
Did the US also have the Wild Weasel Squadrons , was originally the F105s in Nam then the F4 Phantom then the F16 which im sure still exist , although not like the prowler and all that did they not have pods that made them a target then when a lock on was made they would switch off and hunt the and destroy the radar that locked them

Not sure if its the info you asked but Wild Weasel ops were very succesful , maybe some more info might be in order

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: EA-6B Prowler
« Reply #4 on: June 19, 2008, 06:32:54 PM »
Wild Weasel ops = USAF SEAD/DEAD

Yes, USAF F-16C Block 50/52 are used as SEAD platforms for the "Wild Weasel" mission, that's why they are also referred to as F-16CJ. They are fitted with better RWR and can carry the HARM targeting system (HTS) pod and AGM-88 or AGM-45. The capability of HARM missiles was also introduced in previous Blocks, but not with the HTS. The USAF's 50/52s 'specialise in SEAD', but some critics view it as less capable in doing SEAD compared to the F-4G, I suppose that's why it hasn't been nicknamed Wild Weasel like the F-105/F-4G. Probably also because it's not as dedicated to the task as previous aircraft, it can still do all the other F-16 roles.  During the years prior to the 2003 Iraq invasion, they were indeed busy with protecting themselves and other fighters guarding the no-fly zones, against Iraqi SAMs. However just locking them made them turn off their radar asap: the story goes for both the Iraqis and Serbs. But as far as I know, since the invasion/occupation started, they haven't been using their SEAD capabilities much. It's been a while since I've seen AGM-88/ALARM on the list of weapons deployed.

I don't know too much about this to into much more detail. But maybe I should add that the AGM-88 and ALARM have loiter capabilities. They are launched, they enter a pattern for a period of time, and then when the enemy radar is picked up by the sensor (may or may not be on the same aircraft as the shooter), the info is fed to the missile and it can destroy the target. So the task is to have some ARMs in the air when friendly aircraft are in the area, so the enemy can't turn their radar on. Hence suppression and not neccessarily destruction as well.



« Last Edit: June 19, 2008, 06:45:20 PM by Webmaster »
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

Offline tigershark

  • News Editor
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2025
Re: EA-6B Prowler
« Reply #5 on: June 21, 2008, 04:54:28 AM »
Quote
MightyHunter
Did the US also have the Wild Weasel Squadrons , was originally the F105s in Nam

I'm pretty sure the first Wild Weasel Squadrons were formed with F-100.
« Last Edit: June 25, 2008, 12:43:25 AM by nonpilot »

Offline God Bless USA

  • Flight Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 50
  • Country: us
Re: EA-6B Prowler
« Reply #6 on: June 21, 2008, 06:30:23 PM »
The USAF had the F-100, F-4G, F-16CJ/DJ Block 50D/52D and the EF-111A Raven.  Now they have to rely on USN for electronic warfare.  The USN does not have sufficient electronic warfare aircraft to suport both the USAF and the USN.    Don't you think it leaves the USAF vulnerable if a country with a good air defense system should start making trouble?  You said that high cost caused the EF-111A Raven to be retired and I can understand why.  But to retire it with no replace is insane!

Offline MightyHunter

  • Flight Leader
  • ***
  • Posts: 75
  • Country: gb
Re: EA-6B Prowler
« Reply #7 on: June 21, 2008, 08:30:26 PM »
Quote
God Bless USA
Did the US also have the Wild Weasel Squadrons , was originally the F105s in Nam

I'm pretty sure the first Wild Weasel Squadrons were formed with F-100.

You are probably right nonpilot I thought it was F105 or something similar along them lines

Offline Webmaster

  • MILAVIA Webmaster
  • Administrator
  • General of Flight
  • *******
  • Posts: 2842
  • Country: nl
Re: EA-6B Prowler
« Reply #8 on: June 27, 2008, 03:33:23 PM »
F-100F were the first yes, but soon replaced by the F-105F (as EF-105F) because the F-100F was too slow to protect the strike force of F-105s. Then came the F-105G conversion.
  • Interests: Su-15, Su-27, Tu-22, Tornado, RNLAF
Niels Hillebrand
MILAVIA Webmaster

 



AVIATION TOP 100 - www.avitop.com click to vote for MILAVIA