Basel
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2013
- Messages
- 9,504
- Reaction score
- 2
- Country
- Location
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So what an EW system consist of if you don't mind.Depends on the PAF's scope of air combat doctrines. The EF-111 and its cousins were created because we did not want to fight a defensive air war. A dedicated jammer is best when used offensively -- taking the EW fight to the enemy. Prevent him from taking off in the first place by destroying his air force on the ground.
Electronic Warfare is about denying the enemy the ability to (re)direct and re(focus) his weapons. The analogy is blinding him or doing something to force him to close his eyes, not about blocking his punches and kicks. That means if you are going to develop a dedicated jammer, your air combat doctrines must contain provisions to preemptively attack an enemy's air force which necessitate the company of an aircraft whose sole mission is to blind the enemy while your other aircrafts attacks the enemy's means of waging war. Those means could be an ammo factory, ships at docks, or an air base.
Personally, I am a strong supporter of a powerful dedicated EW platform and the willingness to strike deep into enemy territory. No better time than peacetime to start developing that capability, even with just a limited initial quantity.
the term if you read already stands for electronic warfare system. which involves using the electromagnetic/ directed energy to blind the enemy defensive and offensive capabilities. in case of EW equipped aircraft, the targets will be SAM sites and radars etc.So what an EW system consist of if you don't mind.
Modern EW equipment is big, bulky and power hungry. Where will you put it on MirageIII/V?
It's time to let these aircraft go.
Would be better if PAF developed a dedicated JF-17 in Wild Weasel role. Since all the hard points are MIL-STD compatible, they can carry EW equipment on hard points, plus modifying internal JF-17 structure to house more equipment. Since PAC already knows the design inside out, it would make more sense to have a dedicated JF-17 SEAD role aircraft like the USN F-18 Growler, and perhaps have these JF-17 with the AESA combination.
The main limitation with self protection systems is user flexibility, meaning your system must cater to the lowest common denominator.@gambit
* How hard it is to have powerful EW equipment shaped into pods. Not talking about self protection pods?
* How is energy managment done?
I would use the American Super Hornet as guide. Wing tips location are ideal for wide area transmissions, as in initial blanket of the targeted area to cover the attacking force. The various understores can be used for dedicated threats, such as the may freqs used by many types of radars. Or even something less spectacular but equally life-saving...* If you were given charge to do this task what would you change in the JF-17 lets say to turn it into a dedicated EW plane for jamming enemy's poweful radars and electronics infrastructure?
But while the US already did all of the hard work in finding out what works best, the aircraft modifications will not be easy...In one of the world’s poorest countries, where there are virtually no enemy missiles or anti-aircraft radars, the EA-18G might be a bit overqualified. But it can jam a Taliban cell phone call, or a signal from an electric garage-door opener intended to set off a roadside bomb. Some reports on the ground say that EA-6B Prowlers can now do “courtesy burns,” pre-flying the route of a truck convoy, emitting electrons all along to trigger buried explosives. The Navy offers no comment on such a capability.
The E Super Hornet is single seat. The F version is two-seat. The EA-18 version with so much airframe modifications to it will never be anything other than an EWarrior.And compared to the two-seat F/A-18F Super Hornet, a fully loaded G is 1,400 pounds heavier, with 66 more antennas, an additional half-mile of wiring, and 1.5 million more lines of software code.
ROSE 1, 2, 3 will remain in service 2020 onwards due to upgrades undertaken, less airframe fatigue/ plenty of spares, rest of them will gradually be retired.
Naval PA2,3s maybe the first to go, replaced by jft blk 2 as depicted in recent 50th jft induction pics.
ROSE 1, 2, 3 will remain in service 2020 onwards due to upgrades undertaken, less airframe fatigue/ plenty of spares, rest of them will gradually be retired.
Naval PA2,3s maybe the first to go, replaced by jft blk 2 as depicted in recent 50th jft induction pics.