No it doesn't. track and data management at the system level is the enabler - the plane acts at the direction of every other enabler in the system until cleared to release in finals. The pilot ultimately gets cleared by the JTAC (or equiv) or by the mission planner with the 5000km screwdriver. Only at prosection to they dictate whether to release - and thats after considering that they aren't going to get into the crap with Berne/Hague conventions as what happened with the chinese embassy, and what has happened a few times in Afgh and Iraq
In case you haven't worked it out thye air chain is part of the purple chain - its not in isolation, and hasn't been for close to 20+ years
The e-crows (as you like to call them) are only there to ease and to help the final node to accomplish the mission . The e-crows are the staff behind the "champion" . Don 't turn things around .
make the effort to understand that the air chain is not the dominant chain in the prosecution process. you are talking about a service/platform process. air no longer works in isolation. it can't and doesn't. maybe it does in your world where the red team are loin cladded chanting spear throwers, but its not how they're planned for real. thanks for a definition of e-crows which doesn't exist. Don't make things up, it just digs you into a deeper hole
Each time an Airforce is using a new fighter , the entire Air chain is modified to accomodate the new capabilities provided by the new fighter . If the fighter is not that important , how do you explain that gf ?
You do realise that we actually fit the fighter into our force construct? we plan force structure 30 years out, we factor in that the plane cradle to grave has 20-25 years of full contribution, that means that the fighter contruct fits into force structure - which is no longer service specific. ie thats why they are system focused and why the rapid advances in distributed sensor capability across all services is changing how even the planes fight.
Seriously sport, stick to world of warcraft, because you know bugger all about how theatre events are planned and prosecuted. you know even less about the importance of ewarfare and how dependant air is on it in complex space.
The capability requirement has changed, the plane does not define the capability like it used to. The conops for the F-22 in 1982 barely relfects its conops today. but, be that as it may, at no point have I said that the fighter is not important, I suggest that you read whats said before auto-responding. force development is not platform centric, its capability centric. its a simple but significant construct. understand it before you come back with more drivel about how fighters fight.
air centric warfare no longer exists. its a purple event defined by the capability available to the planners. each platform contributes to the picture, be it air, sea, land, subsurface. its a capability emphasis, not a platform emphasis, and anything in the prosecution chain is but a node in the process, some will be better than others but it doesn't alter the fact of the change in emphasis