NEW: Follow the Editorial Staff on
StrategyPage Twitter Link


GROUND COMBAT +

AIR COMBAT +

NAVAL OPERATIONS +

SPECIAL OPERATIONS +

HUMAN FACTORS +

SPECIAL WEAPONS +

WARFARE BY THE NUMBERS +

LOGISTICS +

TOOLS +


Visit StrategyPage's US Cavalry Store



Electronic Weapons Article Index : Current 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics

EB-52 Shot Down Again

October 28, 2009: The U.S. Air Force has backed away from developing a new electronic warfare aircraft. Now it will rely on UAVs equipped with jammers, and electronic jamming pods on non-specialized (as jamming aircraft) warplanes. This was not the preferred approach. Last year, the air force revived a program to convert some of its B-52 heavy bombers into radar jamming aircraft. This would be done by equipping the bombers with jamming pods (that are similar in appearance to large bombs). The air force planned to buy 24 sets of pods, for a force of 34 B-52s. Each pair of pods would cost about $100 million (including development.) There would be some modification to the B-52s, so members of the crew could operate the jammers. But this effort was cancelled earlier this year, largely for the same reason a more ambitious EB-52 was canceled in 2005 (when projected cost soared from one billion to seven billion dollars, since work began in 2002.)

Back in the 1980s and 90s, a version of the F-111 carried out this electronic warfare  function, and did it very well. But the air force retired the EF-111 a decade ago, and agreed to split the cost, and share the use, of U.S. Navy jamming aircraft. The navy is now introducing the EA-18G jamming aircraft (based on the F-18) to replace the 40 year old EA-6B jamming aircraft.

The air force believes the navy won't buy enough EA-18Gs to meet navy and air force needs. So the air force wants to have something of their own to help out. The navy plans to buy about fifty EA-18Gs, for about $73 million each. It would have taken at least five years to get the EB-52 into service. The air force believes it will only take three years to get the new, less ambitious, program into service.

 

submit to reddit
Send Link to a Friend
Next Article RUSSIA: Rebuilding The Soviet Union


Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Slim Pickinz       10/28/2009 10:31:09 AM
If the Raven was performing the electronic warfare mission so well, then why was it retired?
 
Quote    Reply

Dave_in_Pa       10/28/2009 11:40:07 AM
Excellent question, Slim.
 
There's a very informative Wiki article on the EF-111s. news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20091028/wl_afp/unpakistanafghanistanusmissilerights The article quotes the cost of each Raven as $11 million for each bird, plus $25 million for the ECM systems.  Even assuming another $25 million to update the ECM systems, that would seem like a helluva lot cheaper way to achieve the desired result, rather than buying new EF-18s at $73 million each. 
 
Of course, that wouldn't provide cash flow for McDonnell Douglas/Boeing (MEANING PORK).
 
Quote    Reply

Dave_in_Pa       10/28/2009 11:41:05 AM
Link here for the Wiki article on the EF-111s link
 
Quote    Reply

Dave_in_Pa       10/28/2009 11:42:11 AM
THIRD attempt to insert link.
 
Quote    Reply

WarNerd       10/28/2009 12:30:04 PM

If the Raven was performing the electronic warfare mission so well, then why was it retired?

Air frames probably needed to be rebuilt due to age.  At the time the EF-111's were the last of the F-111 still operating, which was an unique design.  All the unique components were on the replacement list for the rebuild, and their combined startup costs spread over the small number of aircraft resulted in a ridiculously high per aircraft cost.
The EA-18G looked like a cheaper alternative (especially for ranking member of the congressional committees who's states would benefit from their production).
 
Quote    Reply

kirby1       10/28/2009 6:03:48 PM
The smart solution would be for the AF to buy thier own EA-18 growlers, resulting in cheaper costs for both the AF and the Navy. But when was the last time any one at the DOD had brains?
 
Quote    Reply

LB    Complete Rubbish   10/28/2009 8:15:29 PM
Exactly what jamming pod is going to be hung from what airframes for what missions?  Exactly what jamming pod is going to be hung or carried internally by what UAV for what missions? 
 
Exactly what evidence supports the articles statement that the USAF thinks it can get this "less ambitious, program into service"?
 
The EF-111 was retired in favor of the EA-6B because the Prowler was more capable and performed some missions the Raven did not.  Today the EA-6B is flown by the USN, USMC, and also in 4 joint USAF/USN sqdn's with some 125 aircraft.  The USMC will not be replacing it's EA-6B and the 50 new EA-18G's are not going to leave any to flesh out any joint sqdn's. 
 
If the USAF will not buy any EA-18G's or help fund new joint sqdn's fine but it needs to present a better plan that the stated we'll somehow just make do.  The need for EW aircraft has not magically gone away just because the USAF thinks it can't afford it; moreover, turning the only new aircraft the USAF is buying is the single engine, single generator, single pilot F-35 which is never going to be turned into an actual EW aircraft for myriad reasons and stuffing one NGJ in the weapons bay is not an EW aircraft.  
 
UAV's doing tactical jamming in the escort role is a giant fantasy even mid term.  One could see a UAV doing stand off jamming but the electrical power generation requirements are considerable and this requires the UAV to have certain capabilities one does not see right now.
 
Leaving aside the small matter that dedicated EW aircraft can and do perform many other missions besides just jamming.
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

SpudmanWP       10/28/2009 8:38:29 PM
Three little words... Next Generation Jammer.
 
AESA based modular jamming pods for which the F-35 is already wired. 
 
The EA-18Gs can be upgraded for more advanced EW capability.
 
Quote    Reply

warpig       10/28/2009 9:20:32 PM

Three little words... Next Generation Jammer.

AESA based modular jamming pods for which the F-35 is already wired. 

The EA-18Gs can be upgraded for more advanced EW capability.

 
Pssst... don't remind BW and FS about this possibility that several of us have mentioned many times already.  If/when it happens, it'll break their hearts to find out that "LO" + ECM isn't the equal of "VLO" + ECM, and that once again the F-35 will undisputedly have an effective overall RCS a couple orders of magnitude smaller than Rafale.  (Yes, yes, I know that no one else besides them disputes it even now, but then even they won't be able to.)
 
Of course, I certainly do tend to believe LB that putting a pod on an F-35 is not the same thing as having dedicated EW aircraft--or at least it would not have been with any previous generation of fighters--in particular at least specifically with regard to some of the other capabilities the EA-6B has beyond working against threat radars.
 
 
Quote    Reply

AA Cunningham       10/30/2009 3:22:13 PM

If the Raven was performing the electronic warfare mission so well, then why was it retired?


Because to the fighter mafia that runs the Air Force, EW isn't sexy. Following Desert Storm as the "peace dividend" began to be spent, programs and platforms were being slashed and eliminated without a lot of thought by DoD with plenty of complicity by the service secretaries. EW in general; and ECM specifically, is viewed ignorantly by some, as a luxury, not a necessity. Can't begin to tell you the number of times I've heard that "stealth" renders ECM impotent despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
 
Quote    Reply





New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 

StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy