The Case for an E-37 AEW

-
Gulfstream G550 Conformal Airborne Early Warning (CAEW) aircraft

Much has been written on the Chinese A2/AD bubble.  It's clear from the literature that operating outside the first island chain is not as safe as it used to be.  There are a multitude of air, sea, subsurface and ballistic missile threats. 


The threats grow in number and variety the closer you get to the Chinese coast. ASBMs, surface-delivered AShMs, submarines, and air-delivered AShMs from long range bombers and fighters like the Su-30MKK all contribute to this dilemma.  

In addition, gaining and maintaining air superiority over Taiwan and other areas inside the first island chain will be increasingly difficult.  US and allied air forces in the region will likely be outnumbered at the beginning of a conflict, so maximizing effectiveness of every aircraft and every sortie will be paramount.  One key force multiplier in any air war is advance Airborne Early Warning (AEW).  The earlier you can detect enemy aircraft and missiles, the better your chance of defeating them.  

Currently, the US has two AEW aircraft in service, the USAF E-3C Sentry and the Navy E-2C/D Hawkeye.  Both are based on dated aircraft designs, with limited range and service ceilings.  Given that our close in bases along the first island chain (e.g. Kadena, Okinawa) will likely be subject to significant air and ballistic missile attacks, we will need to rely on carrier based AEW and aircraft flying from bases further out.  This will place more significant demands on our aerial refueling fleet.

What's needed is a land-based AEW aircraft with greater range, service ceiling, and speed to get from far away bases to their operating area faster.  

Recently both the USAF and US Navy bought variants of the Gulfstream G550 Conformal Airborne Early Warning (CAEW) aircraft to serve two different missions.  The USAF is using the G550 for its next generation Compass Call electronic warfare aircraft (EC-37B).  The Navy is using the G550 for its range monitoring aircraft (NC-37B).

Gulfstream G550 CAEW

The G550 CAEW was originally built for the Israelis to house their Phalcon L/S-band AEW radar system.  

Thai Military and Asian Region Blog

With 2,700 nmi more range than an E-3 Sentry, and much more economical airframe and engines, an E-37 AEW would place a far lower burden on the air refueling fleet.   An E-37 AEW could stay on station for 6 hours at 1,000nmi or 4 hours at 1,500 nmi without any air refueling.    While an E-3 Sentry carries 142,000lbs of fuel, an E-37 only requires 41,000lbs, or less than a third.  

The 707/320-based E-3 also requires longer and stronger 3,000m runways.  The E-37 only needs 1,800m to take off and 800m to land.  

If we established bases on the Australian Christmas Island and Palau, along with Guam, E-37 AEWs could cover most of the South China sea and Taiwan region with modest air refueling support to extend their mission endurance.  Exploiting Christmas Island also enables AEW and maritime surveillance over the Strait of Malacca and alternate shipping lanes in that region.  In the event of a conflict with China, cutting off these shipping routes to China may be critical.


Obviously using bases closer in would allow for greater endurance and even less air refueling, but these three islands are on the outskirts of the Chinese A2/AD zone, affording them some protection from attack.  Base hardening and air defenses are still prudent measures.

Land-based, Airborne Early Warning, without over-straining our tanker fleet, enables smaller surface task forces, such as CVL-based task forces in the IAFM, to operate independently without having to develop clunky and limited VTOL AEW aircraft.

Radar

The radar is the heart of any AEW aircraft.  Options include license building the already-integrated Israeli IAI EL/W-2085 Phalcon radar.  However, it probably makes more strategic sense for us to develop our own system.  Adapting the Northrop Grumman L-band MESA radar from the Australian Wedgetail program may make the most sense, as it's in service already.  

However, another option would be to develop a fully AESA variant of the E-2D's APY-9 UHF-band radar.  The current APY-9 is a hybrid mechanically- and electronically-scanned array.   The primary benefit of this option is the APY-9's stealth detecting properties.  UHF-band is difficult for fighter-sized stealth aircraft, such as the Chinese J-20 and J-31, to optimize against.  
Chinese J-31 Stealth Fighter
By wc - http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled-(AVIC)/Shenyang-J-31-(F60)/2542713/L/, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=36929304



Using the E-2D's combat systems brings along Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) via the E-2D's NIFC-CA data link system.  This allows surface combatants to use E-37 AEW's targeting data to fire long ranged surface to air missiles like the SM-6 from over-the-horizon.  

Developing an S-band AESA radar for the nose and tail cones of the CAEW rounds out 360 degree detection, and potentially allows handoff of UHF band detections to S-band higher-resolution tracks.  

Both radars can also detect and track surface ships and sea skimming missiles.

Flying at a normal operating altitude of 41,000 ft, the E-37 AEW's radar horizon is 50-60 nmi further than an E-2D flying at 25,000 ft.

Conclusion

Robust Airborne Early Warning is vital to the prosecution of any conflict.  Small, Distributed Lethality task forces lack organic AEW. This is also an often-leveled critique of light STOVL carriers.   A long-range, land-based AEW aircraft operating from regional bases can offset this limitation, reducing the impact on our always-strained air refueling fleet and enable Distributed Lethality task forces.  The Gulfstream G550 has already been adapted for use as an AEW and electronic warfare aircraft and variants are in use by the US military.  Either the Navy or USAF could develop an AEW variant, and fly them from bases at the fringe of the Chinese A2/AD zone.  



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

IAFM - Fleet Architecture (Battle Force 2045 Edition)

-
Image
Table of Contents Introduction Fleet Architecture Key Concepts Bimodal Presence and Maneuver Forces New Task Force Types Ship Types Aviation CV55 CVL-150 Subsurface Combatant SSK Large Combatants SC-150 FPD-150 FMG-150 Small Combatants LCK Logistics &Auxiliary This version of the IAFM is sized to correspond to the Navy's Battle Force 2045 and "355" fleet designs.  As such, it is more expensive than our existing fleet design, or the recent Hudson fleet design. The IAFM is broken down into categories of ships: Aviation, Subsurface Combatants, Large Combatants, Small Combatants, and Logistics & Auxiliaries.  Each section lists the steady-state count of each ship type, a notional "First In Class" cost, a discounted unit cost that applies a learn factor and build rate discount to generate an average cost, a service life of each ship in the class, and the resulting build rate.  I also include a notes column that describes roughly what each type of ship is.   A...
Read more

IAFM - Ship Types - Frigate Platform Dock (FPD-150)

-
Image
Introduction The Frigate Platform Dock (FPD-150) is the most flexible ship in the IAFM.  It came about when I was mulling over how to provide enough escorts for SAGCOMs and CVCOMs, while still supporting forward deployed Marine forces.   The existing US Navy force model splits amphibious vessels (LPD, LSD, LHD/A) and escorts into distinct pools. However you still have to provide escorts for ESGs as well as CVBGs.  But if you look at a modern amphibious ship, like the LPD-17, the systems aboard aren't that far off from those on a frigate.  It has an air defense radar, short-range SAM systems and C4ISR.   So my thought was, why not smash together the capabilities of a guided-missile frigate and a modest-sized LPD and make a self-escorting "Frigate Platform Dock"?  This way, every ESG is always self-escorting.  Also, an ability to perform strike with VLS-based munitions, and Naval Surface Fire Support (NSFS) with Multiple Launched Rocket System ...
Read more

Pimp My S/IBCT - Round 2 - Bring Back the Independent Tank Battalion

-
Image
M1A2 SEPv3 In the previous Pimp My IBCT, I suggested using a combination of refurbished M-ATVs to achieve full vehicular mobility for some IBCTs.  This would give them a degree of tactical and operational mobility near that of the Stryker BCTs.   They would suffer off-road, in comparison to the SBCT, but would be at least as mobile on roads, with lower logistics overhead. However both SBCTs and mounted IBCTs are still severely hamstrung if used offensively.  The Stryker ICV is protected against 14.5mm HMGs organically, and partially protected against RPG-7s with slat armor.   It is not protected against heavier RPGs (e.g. RPG-29) or any ATGMs. M-ATV is protected against 7.62mm rounds only.  So even this guy would ruin its day. Source: Wikipedia Aggressive, offensive use of either BCT type against foes with anti-armor systems, or in built-up areas, would likely result in heavy casualties.  Both BCT types will be stuck either dis...
Read more