01-17-2024, 10:00 AM
https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/gods-...17189.html
This article, although in many respects a "fluff" piece, gives some idea what visibility an aircraft like an E-3 can provide. The Russian A-50 can do essentially the same thing for Russia, although it's technical capabilities are possibly (OK, probably) not as good. Both aircraft supply the ability to bring a powerful high resolution radar to 30K feet. The altitude creates the geometry for both cases. That allows a very wide field of view. It allows these aircraft to "look down" on aircraft moving at or below the platform's altitude, which means these contacts can't "sneak up" on friendly forces. It also allows the AWACS (the "control" part of the operation) to vector friendly fighters to intercept "important" hostile targets without these friendly fighters having to search for them.
For the AWACS to be fully useful, there must be adequate communications directly from the AWACS to the formations and assets that are possibly soon to be attacked by the hostile contacts. This communication network is hard to build. The US has one that is imperfect. Russia has one that is pretty bad and often does not even attempt to function. The US also incorporates other assets, like the former JSTARS aircraft, the electronic intelligence aircraft (Rivet Joint for example), and real-time intelligence from drones. These capabilities mean our air forces (and NATO air forces) are not ever "blind" to the threats and ground forces can often anticipate their arrival. This also allows ground based missile and gun systems to acquire the threats much more rapidly and engage them sooner.
Russia could, in theory, do the same type of things from their Mainstays, but the "vertical organization" of their military makes it difficult to impossible for them to pass information from the Mainstays to the affected aircraft and ground based targets under threat. It also needs to be remembered that Russia is not using IFF over their own territory, and they also don't in general coordinate air operations with the Mainstay. The airborne operators have to figure out who is who, which is not easy. What Russia has done in Syria is assign flights of fighters to "work" with the Mainstays. In some cases this is done as a protective measure and the fighters are tasked with detecting the Mainstay. Obviously in the Syrian example, these planes have little to do. It is also common to have strike aircraft assigned to Mainstays with the idea the mainstay will control these aircraft and use them effectively. The number of aircraft so assigned is usually "small", like less than 8 or so. These fighters are not permanently "assigned" to this mode of operation. Therefore there is often a bit of a learning curve for both the Mainstay and the fighters. Russia can do this however, so the capability can't be ignored.
Ukraine will need something similar to use their relatively few F-16s effectively. Flying a combat air patrol relying only on the F-16s sensors is like searching for a parking space looking through a straw. You will succeed sometimes, but in most cases you will not. Ukraine is a big country and the line of contact is long. While the current state of the conflict may prioritize one area over another, Ukraine won't have enough aircraft to provide aircraft everywhere all the time. Yes, you can fight without an AWACS, but you really don't want to :-). This is why Russia places such a high priority on destroying them.
Ukraine isn't going to get any E-3s. We don't have enough as is, and our Wedgetails won't be available for a while. Perhaps the US or one of the others users can spare some E-2s. Not as good in some ways (particularly if one is using an older model :-) but MUCH better than nothing. As I have pointed out before, Sweden has some similar aircraft that perhaps they can "donate". Ukraine needs this capability to also "see" inbound cruise missiles that fly at low altitudes. For ground based air defense the engagement window is short. Knowing when and where the target will be when it enters the engagement envelope is a very big plus.
This article, although in many respects a "fluff" piece, gives some idea what visibility an aircraft like an E-3 can provide. The Russian A-50 can do essentially the same thing for Russia, although it's technical capabilities are possibly (OK, probably) not as good. Both aircraft supply the ability to bring a powerful high resolution radar to 30K feet. The altitude creates the geometry for both cases. That allows a very wide field of view. It allows these aircraft to "look down" on aircraft moving at or below the platform's altitude, which means these contacts can't "sneak up" on friendly forces. It also allows the AWACS (the "control" part of the operation) to vector friendly fighters to intercept "important" hostile targets without these friendly fighters having to search for them.
For the AWACS to be fully useful, there must be adequate communications directly from the AWACS to the formations and assets that are possibly soon to be attacked by the hostile contacts. This communication network is hard to build. The US has one that is imperfect. Russia has one that is pretty bad and often does not even attempt to function. The US also incorporates other assets, like the former JSTARS aircraft, the electronic intelligence aircraft (Rivet Joint for example), and real-time intelligence from drones. These capabilities mean our air forces (and NATO air forces) are not ever "blind" to the threats and ground forces can often anticipate their arrival. This also allows ground based missile and gun systems to acquire the threats much more rapidly and engage them sooner.
Russia could, in theory, do the same type of things from their Mainstays, but the "vertical organization" of their military makes it difficult to impossible for them to pass information from the Mainstays to the affected aircraft and ground based targets under threat. It also needs to be remembered that Russia is not using IFF over their own territory, and they also don't in general coordinate air operations with the Mainstay. The airborne operators have to figure out who is who, which is not easy. What Russia has done in Syria is assign flights of fighters to "work" with the Mainstays. In some cases this is done as a protective measure and the fighters are tasked with detecting the Mainstay. Obviously in the Syrian example, these planes have little to do. It is also common to have strike aircraft assigned to Mainstays with the idea the mainstay will control these aircraft and use them effectively. The number of aircraft so assigned is usually "small", like less than 8 or so. These fighters are not permanently "assigned" to this mode of operation. Therefore there is often a bit of a learning curve for both the Mainstay and the fighters. Russia can do this however, so the capability can't be ignored.
Ukraine will need something similar to use their relatively few F-16s effectively. Flying a combat air patrol relying only on the F-16s sensors is like searching for a parking space looking through a straw. You will succeed sometimes, but in most cases you will not. Ukraine is a big country and the line of contact is long. While the current state of the conflict may prioritize one area over another, Ukraine won't have enough aircraft to provide aircraft everywhere all the time. Yes, you can fight without an AWACS, but you really don't want to :-). This is why Russia places such a high priority on destroying them.
Ukraine isn't going to get any E-3s. We don't have enough as is, and our Wedgetails won't be available for a while. Perhaps the US or one of the others users can spare some E-2s. Not as good in some ways (particularly if one is using an older model :-) but MUCH better than nothing. As I have pointed out before, Sweden has some similar aircraft that perhaps they can "donate". Ukraine needs this capability to also "see" inbound cruise missiles that fly at low altitudes. For ground based air defense the engagement window is short. Knowing when and where the target will be when it enters the engagement envelope is a very big plus.