|
Time for a UK SEAD/DEAD Capability?
I’ve just been reading about the new Typhoon ECR. “Eurofighter ECR will be able to provide passive emitter location as well as active jamming of threats, and will offer a variety of modular configurations for electronic attack (EA) and suppression/destruction of enemy air defence (SEAD/DEAD). Latest national escort jammer technology will ensure national control over features such as mission data and data analysis. The concept also features a new twin-seat cockpit configuration with a multi-function panoramic touch display and a dedicated mission cockpit for the rear-seat.”
Is it time for the UK to have a SEAD/DEAD capability like others now have? Especially, as potential adversaries invest in higher end SAM capabilities and the RAF has gone from Low Level to Med/High Level tactics? SDSR20 anyone? https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....6050f3a29.jpeg https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....7f5aa8926.jpeg https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....1ade2ca64.jpeg |
We are getting a SEAD/DEAD capability: F-35, when it eventually gets Spear 3. The Typhoon concept is for nations who aren't in the 5th gen club. Perhaps some additional stand-off jamming support would be useful in a large-scale op, but then that's what NATO burden sharing is for...
|
Maybe next time round - and without a GIB....
Alert 5 » Leonardo UK demonstrates new RWR technology for Tempest - Military Aviation News |
Easy Street said it - Typhoon ECR is an also ran prize for people who don't buy F-35.
an F-35 with a slack handful of SPEAR 3 and SPEAR 3/EW is going to be a far more capable SEAD/EW aircraft than any Typhoon ever built. personally i think we ought to go further and look at the lessons of ALARM vs HARM and develop a high speed, long range, but COST, SEAD missile - we already have a high speed missile body that will fit into the F-35B, lets put an Anti-Radiation seeker and guidence system on METEOR and Bob will be your Mums' gentleman caller... the USN are developing the Next Generation Jammer pod to go on the E/A-18G to support F-35C/B operations - the obvious question will be whether it could be operated on an F-35B.... |
Those two UK F-35 Lightning squadrons are really going to have to go some! Replacements for Tornado force, replacements for Sea Harrier and now a replacement for the Tornado EF3 capability...
|
Originally Posted by pr00ne
(Post 10644170)
Those two UK F-35 Lightning squadrons are really going to have to go some... ...and now a replacement for the Tornado EF3 capability...
-RP |
RP
Knowing Proone, I would hazard a guess that his EF3 reference may have been a slightly tongue in cheek suggestion. BV |
With the pitiful range/endurance of the F35B, I don’t think so. So we would need to buy F35A (and some boom tankers) to do the SEAD/DEAD role or the better, and more expensive, F35C (which at least can use a drogue tanker). But these assets are EXPENSIVE compared to Typhoon ECR or aircraft like EA-18G Growler. Note that the RAAF ordered their Growlers around the same time as their F35As and see them as “complementary” to the F35A mission?
Then there are many articles like this that suggest that F35 needs a SEAD/DEAD and EW aircraft to support it’s mission: https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-needs-electromagnetic-cover-from-growlers-2014-4?r=US&IR=T As for range of the F35B - any truth in the rumour that the aircraft that took off from the QE this week had to ‘gas and go’ at Brize to get to Marham? :E |
Originally Posted by Lima Juliet
(Post 10644388)
With the pitiful range/endurance of the F35B, I don’t think so. So we would need to buy F35A (and some boom tankers) to do the SEAD/DEAD role or the better, and more expensive, F35C (which at least can use a drogue tanker). But these assets are EXPENSIVE compared to Typhoon ECR or aircraft like EA-18G Growler. Note that the RAAF ordered their Growlers around the same time as their F35As and see them as “complementary” to the F35A mission?
Then there are many articles like this that suggest that F35 needs a SEAD/DEAD and EW aircraft to support it’s mission: https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-needs-electromagnetic-cover-from-growlers-2014-4?r=US&IR=T As for range of the F35B - any truth in the rumour that the aircraft that took off from the QE this week had to ‘gas and go’ at Brize to get to Marham? :E F-35A is surely the most sensible choice? 9G (as opposed to 7.5G), longer endurance, internal gun..... It's for the money and aeronautical geeks to decide if it's cheaper to modify the A with a refuelling probe, than it is to upgrade Voyager with a boom and train a cadre of boom operators. |
LJ Where was the boat if the extra distance from BZN to MAR was significant I wonder? BVRAAM I suspect that the greatest cost would be the change to the contract! |
BVRAAM
The range and endurance of the B model is most definitely NOT “almost identical” to the C model! https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....95b1d41a4.jpeg |
Apologies - I got the range and combat radius mixed up according to a table based on data provided by this publication:
https://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/D...R_Dec_2017.pdf Still, the A model makes the most sense if the refuelling issue can be worked out. It's also the better looking version. |
Originally Posted by Lima Juliet
(Post 10644388)
With the pitiful range/endurance of the F35B, I don’t think so. So we would need to buy F35A (and some boom tankers) to do the SEAD/DEAD role or the better, and more expensive, F35C (which at least can use a drogue tanker). But these assets are EXPENSIVE compared to Typhoon ECR or aircraft like EA-18G Growler. Note that the RAAF ordered their Growlers around the same time as their F35As and see them as “complementary” to the F35A mission?
Then there are many articles like this that suggest that F35 needs a SEAD/DEAD and EW aircraft to support it’s mission: https://www.businessinsider.com/f-35-needs-electromagnetic-cover-from-growlers-2014-4?r=US&IR=T Must admit, I’m sceptical about the whole concept of anti-radiation missiles these days. Modern SAM barely need to emit at all when fully networked. Location by ‘other means’ and targeting on coordinates, with active millimetric radar for terminal accuracy as per Spear 3 and AARGM, strikes me as a better concept. Then there is the question of why bother with SEAD when you can sneak in and destroy the targets which actually matter... or lob these in from a safe distance. And finally I think you’d be very surprised at the relative cost of Typhoon (at a time where each order for a handful of new aircraft means keeping production facilities open for longer) versus F-35 (where unit costs are falling as the committed order book grows). And finally finally... stand-off jamming, yes. But as I stated, we’ve got to leave some jobs for our NATO colleagues to do, and this is a good one to leave for the Germans given their reluctance to do anything too offensive. |
Back in the day at Nav School at Finningley, a somewhat gullible member of our course was spoofed into believing that a "Wild Weasel" two seat Jaguar was shortly to enter service with the RAF (this after a presentation about EW in the Vietnam War). Needless to say that when the "Dream Sheet" form, where you put down your preference for posting, appeared a few days later, his first choice was (in big capital letters to make it stand out - another suggestion from our course comic) the said Wild Weasel Jaguars. Inevitably, he disappeared from training shortly afterwards and was later discovered in Air Traffic Control.
|
I'm trying to think of a situation where the RAF would need a stand-alone SEAD/DEAD capability when there are only 5 squadrons of fighters in service - and a drizzle of F-35's slowly arriving.
Seems like we're still thinking of a "full service" air force when in fact the UK can't afford anything like that |
I think a lot of top specialist functions are too much for a single country to maintain.
I thought for a long time if the NATO AEW force was a good model to expand. Now we have a small scale but cross nation tanker force and a C-17 heavy lift capability - what else could go this way. P-8 ops? Even C-130s - You could imagine Netherlands/Belgium/Denmark/Norway pooling together- with much benefit. If each Typhoon country went for the SEAD version It would be a good idea to base them all at Leeming to use Spade but set up like TTTE at Cottesmore |
Originally Posted by Asturias56
(Post 10644599)
I'm trying to think of a situation where the RAF would need a stand-alone SEAD/DEAD capability when there are only 5 squadrons of fighters in service - and a drizzle of F-35's slowly arriving.
Seems like we're still thinking of a "full service" air force when in fact the UK can't afford anything like that Typhoon 1 Sqn 2 Sqn 3 Sqn 6 Sqn 9 Sqn 11 Sqn 12 Sqn Plus 29 Sqn (biggest number of jets), plus 41 Sqn (effectively the OEU with a small number of jets) So that is 7x FL Sqns and at least a further in reserve as the OCU/OEU. Lightning 617 Sqn Plus 207 Sqn (the OCU), plus 17 Sqn (the OEU) Plus 809 Sqn for the Royal Navy If I recall correctly, there is an intent to buy 138 F35 in total, which will mean more RAF and RN sqns are to come? |
Sorry - I was talking fighter squadrons - my mistake
Delivery of the final Tranche 3 aircraft brings to an end a production run of 160 Typhoons for the RAF that began in 2003. The RAF fields eight Typhoon units with 1 (Fighter), 2 (Army Cooperation), 6, and 9 (Bomber) squadrons based at RAF Lossiemouth in Scotland; and 3 (Fighter), 11 (Fighter), and 12 (Bomber) squadrons based at RAF Coningsby in England. There is also a permanent detachment (1435 Flight) located on the Falkland Island With the F-35 only 617 is stood up and in action and it has about 6 -8 aircraft - a pretty small squadron IMHO and the rate of new deliveries is ... "measured" |
Ok so a total fleet of 298 Combat Air FJs (discounting T1a and T2), so why not a small fleet of Typhoon ECR (say 24) to provide a 24/7 pairs capability for high-end warfighting? Especially as the F35 is years away from having the full envisaged capability (and hence the RAAF bought Growlers along with their F35s). It makes no sense to buy Growlers for the UK as we have a Typhoon-based Combat Air fleet like the Australians are Hornet-based. As for the GIB, this mission is best done with two, unless you just want a F16CJ reactive shoot at SAMs capability (which we don’t these days as the early SAMs go out of service and are replaced by more sophisticated systems) also the ability to selectively jam various EW locally to assist the F35 mission should not be discounted (which is what the US and Australians use it for in support of F35 LO missions).
Surely, it should have at least made our shopping list? |
Originally Posted by pr00ne
(Post 10644170)
Those two UK F-35 Lightning squadrons are really going to have to go some! Replacements for Tornado force, replacements for Sea Harrier and now a replacement for the Tornado EF3 capability...
|
Originally Posted by weemonkey
(Post 10645596)
Have they cured the lack of range considering it's the stumpy lift fan version of the family [or do the initials USMC become a cure all?]
|
Originally Posted by Lima Juliet
(Post 10645618)
Nope. I haven’t seen a UK one with external tanks either, so maybe we haven’t bought that option yet? Then again, if you fit tanks then you lose LO qualities and then you need some sort of stand-off jammer with a SEAD/DEAD capability - circular argument about the requirement? :cool:
|
Originally Posted by weemonkey
(Post 10645634)
Stealth aircraft with a jammer. Uhuh, just what are we paying for? ;)
|
Or a TRD, as on Tiff
|
Originally Posted by Lima Juliet
(Post 10644802)
Has Ms Abbott lent you her abacus?
Typhoon 1 Sqn 2 Sqn 3 Sqn 6 Sqn 9 Sqn 11 Sqn 12 Sqn Plus 29 Sqn (biggest number of jets), plus 41 Sqn (effectively the OEU with a small number of jets) So that is 7x FL Sqns and at least a further in reserve as the OCU/OEU. Lightning 617 Sqn Plus 207 Sqn (the OCU), plus 17 Sqn (the OEU) Plus 809 Sqn for the Royal Navy If I recall correctly, there is an intent to buy 138 F35 in total, which will mean more RAF and RN sqns are to come? Of course, I don't believe for a minute that the UK will actually buy 138 F-35's. Being realistic, and given our economic uncertainty at the moment, it will be closer to 100 I suspect. |
BVRAAM, I think that over the service lifetime we’ll likely end up with 150+ F35 tail numbers. However, I agree that the average in-service fleet will be nearer 100. The remaining tails will be attrition and later Blocks that enable advanced capability more cheaply than upgrading older Blocks. Inevitably, there will be a blend of As and Bs..... 57mm, Not just a TRD, but the Britecloud EAD as well.... |
Evalu8ter, thanks, omission on my part due to brain fart.
|
Originally Posted by Evalu8ter
(Post 10647067)
BVRAAM, I think that over the service lifetime we’ll likely end up with 150+ F35 tail numbers. However, I agree that the average in-service fleet will be nearer 100. The remaining tails will be attrition and later Blocks that enable advanced capability more cheaply than upgrading older Blocks. Inevitably, there will be a blend of As and Bs..... Remember, the UK ordered 250 Typhoons in a time when we had several hundred Tornado GR's and F3's, a bunch of Jags and both types of Harrier. We no longer have all of those jets and we only have just under 160 Typhoons - that's bad. Maybe we can expect an additional Typhoon Squadron from SDSR20? |
Interesting to note that London's social security budget, and I use that term loosely, is greater than that for the MoD....
|
Originally Posted by weemonkey
(Post 10647523)
Interesting to note that London's social security budget, and I use that term loosely, is greater than that for the MoD....
Worth pointing out that income tax, corporation tax and NI from london pretty much supports the rest of the UK... |
Originally Posted by weemonkey
(Post 10647523)
Interesting to note that London's social security budget, and I use that term loosely, is greater than that for the MoD....
Originally Posted by Lima Juliet
(Post 10644388)
With the pitiful range/endurance of the F35B, I don’t think so. S
|
Typically how many cabs in a UK fighter squadron?
|
TBM,
The guff around TyTAN (the IOS for Typhoon) noted that the extra Sqns were being generated through efficiencies enabling the rest of the Sqns to be 'around 12 jets'. Not sure if this is still the case… “We will be extending the life of our multirole Typhoon for 10 extra years through to 2040, meaning we will be able to create 2 additional squadrons. This will give us a total of 7 frontline squadrons, consisting of around 12 aircraft per squadron.” |
Originally Posted by peter we
(Post 10647608)
Its about the same as the Growler isn't it?
F18E/F (the F model is very similar to the G as an airframe): Combat Range: 1,275 nautical miles (2,346 kilometers), clean plus two AIM-9s From the graphic above the F35B has a combat range of ~450nm! The Super Hornets have about 1/3rd more fuel than the older bog-standard Hornets that you may be thinking of. |
Originally Posted by TBM-Legend
(Post 10647974)
Typically how many cabs in a UK fighter squadron?
|
Originally Posted by Lima Juliet
(Post 10648062)
Nope, from the following USN website: https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_d...&tid=1200&ct=1
F18E/F (the F model is very similar to the G as an airframe): Combat Range: 1,275 nautical miles (2,346 kilometers), clean plus two AIM-9s From the graphic above the F35B has a combat range of ~450nm! The Super Hornets have about 1/3rd more fuel than the older bog-standard Hornets that you may be thinking of. |
Harley, I was going to suggest that equating perennially bullet-dodging air defenders with proper combat aircraft was something of a compliment actually.....;-) |
Originally Posted by flighthappens
(Post 10648294)
just make sure you aren’t comparing range and radius... |
Originally Posted by Evalu8ter
(Post 10648334)
Harley, I was going to suggest that equating perennially bullet-dodging air defenders with proper combat aircraft was something of a compliment actually.....;-) |
Originally Posted by Lima Juliet
(Post 10648461)
Thanks for that mate. Even when range is converted to radius then the Growler is far better than F35B by roughly 200nm. Oddly enough the last short range fighter we had was called Lightning too...
You are comparing the Super Hornet, clean, of which the single seat version has more fuel, and possibly different assumptions regarding stores expenditure, certainly drag index. This USN website has a 850+NM range for the EA-18G when combat loaded. If you halve that you end up 425NM. ALQ99 and AGM88 are heavy and draggy, particularly when not aligned with the airflow on outward canted pylons. https://www.navy.mil/navydata/fact_d...0&tid=950&ct=1 |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:38. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.