another claim from Patch - US intel and military have immense concern for Chinese EW and J-16D. Cool story ... is this true at all? Many of us suspect so anyway. :O
The PLA expansion in electronic warfare capabilities is significant and I think he is correct in that claim, in terms of volume and overall dynamic capability, China will have a larger fleet of EW dedicated aircraft than the US, making a very simple comparison. , as China commissions dedicated aircraft now (Y-9G) and in the future as well as develops dedicated jets (J-16D - PLAAF)/J-15D - PLANAF) and drones (FH-95), the balance will weigh more towards the PLA side. The US is currently proposing through the US Navy to disable five electronic attack squadrons (VAQs) that operate the Boeing EA-18G Growler electronic attack jet, about a third of the DoD's tactical jet electronic attack force. I doubt they will, but the initiative is being taken.
Dedicated EW has lost relevance in the US given the ability of enemy IADS to be targeted by a kinetic attack at the same distances at which electronic attack is possible. Before, there was no way to hit the enemy IADS from long distances and this required a strong action trying to neutralize, even if temporarily, the enemy's ability to detect, track and engage the attacking force so that it could reach the weapons launch distance. . Today, an F-15EX or even an F-16 can locate and attack the IADS (including launchers, radars, command centers, etc.) at the same distance as an EA-18G electronically attacks it. Likewise, an F-35 can approach and attack it at a much shorter distance. Synthetic aperture radar, GPS-guided weapons and terminal seeker missiles against ground targets and ATA (automatic target acquisition) capabilities make the anti-aircraft system extremely vulnerable today. One weapon that represents a game changer in the “attack planes vs IADS” fight is the AARGM-ER missile, which is expected to come into service next year. In addition, the US is very attentive to what happens in current conflicts, and is certainly moving towards the use of drones to complement the SEAD task. The beginning of a change in the way in which drone-manned aviation works is a present reality.
In short, these 5 squadrons are not useful for the US Navy, they do not work together with naval units, they only support local or allied units. The US Navy doesn't want to pay for something it probably believes should be USAF role, as the USAF operates a squadron of Growlers with the USN, the 390 ECS and the unit's planes are US Navy, however they are used jointly. for USAF personnel to gain experience on the job. But I seriously doubt they'll turn it off. It is an easier task to increase resources for the US Navy than for the JCS to lose that capability until they eventually have viable replacements planned. The proposal to cut five squadrons of E/A-18G Growlers and send these aircraft to AMARG I believe should not go ahead, even more considering the missions that these platforms perform. The E/A-18G is of great importance not only for the US but within NATO as well because there is a lack of aircraft with similar capabilities within the organization, which makes me think further. The big countries like the idea of drones in place and that could happen one day but at the moment there is nothing available with such capabilities and so I hope that the Boeing platform will be maintained even without the five planned squadrons but keeping the aircraft operating.
The USAF has recently incorporated the EPAWSS system into the F-15EX which has "some" electronic attack capability, but is hardly a replacement platform in EW attack capability dedicated 1 for one of the EF111. It also adopts the MALD-J missile capable of long-range interference. And the various AESA radars available on USAF fighter jets provide some interference capability in the higher bands, it is worth noting that even with the current GaA AESA radar, the F-15EX has the longest range radar ever mounted on a fighter, which combined with the EPAWSS electronic defense suite already gives you a highly positive RCS vs radar range ratio that likely makes it superior to every 4/4.5 generation fighter with RCS less than 1 m². If he loses in that relationship it's probably just for the 5th generation.
Still with the USAF, they have the EC-130H Compass Call as a dedicated EA mission so far, but they are already being phased out of service and a variant of the Gulfstream G550(EC-37B) business jet is being developed to take on this role, last month they released images of this new copy. The EC-37B's superior lift capacity and reliability means that just 10 EC-37B aircraft provide EW capacity equivalent to the original fleet of 14 high-demand EC-130H aircraft.
A SEAD attack would include swarms of MALD-J decoy/jamming missiles, electronic attack aircraft (EC-37B), supersonic anti-radar missiles launched below the radar horizon, stand-off stealth munitions (JSOW, SDB, Storm Breaker...), stealth cruise missiles (JASSM, CALCM, JASSM-ER), rapid response ammunition against tactical targets (AARGM-ER), jamming pods (NGJ) among others. If you look at it broadly, US dedicated EW multi-platforms are losing relevance in the same way that aircraft SEAD capabilities are considerably shifting to legacy systems of multi-functional planes. I think what Patch meant was that, but didn't elaborate, but since he dedicated the post to platforms and not platform-inherent systems, my opinion is that he really meant it.
