It's the same thing actually, what can be done with business jets. The only difference being the jammers will be carried internally.
The Growler with NGJ is expected to achieve IOC in 2022. EC-37B will do the same in 2023. So they are both more or less ready at the same time.
Growler provides only a 2-3 hour endurance, I don't know how useful it can be when the IAF will want 24/7 support. Otoh, the navy's airbase keeps moving on water hence doesn't need 24/7 support, only requires presence during a mission, which is actually why even a carrier as large as the Nimitz carries only 4-6 Growlers at a time. There is a significant mismatch between capability and expectations.
A business jet, although with advantages of its own, would be much much more vulnerable in modern battlespace in comparison to growlers. Hence I think we should go for growlers.
Won't that be a logistical nightmare?? Also is it logical to have a two different fleets of hundreds of jets of same category??
Isn't growler like an escort jammer? So it will go in once a supposed invasion starts. A 2-3 hour endurance pretty decent for a limited operation since the fighters itself won't have endurace for more than 2-3 hours plus we can use the a2a refuellers...
Literally no difference. The Growler is carrying all that extra load, it actually makes it equally vulnerable. Also the Gulfstream is a bit more faster compared to the Growler.
Also, potentially bigger sensors allows it to detect earlier, hence a quicker escape. Also if you notice, even the USAF prefers business jets compared to the USN, and it's the USAF that's tasked with SEAD/DEAD, with the USN playing only a secondary role, when both are on the field together. So you can bet the USAF knows what they are doing.
He's referring to the Rafales for the IAF and SH for the IN.
I agree that bigger sensors would allow buissness jets to detect targets from longer ranges but a business jet will also operate from much deeper in our own airspace due to its vulnerability from long range AAMs. Whereas growlers could operate from frontline. Their lower rcs will prevent them from being detected and targeted from long ranges. Additionally they are much more maneuverable hence can dodge an AAM which a buissness jet can't.
F18 was made only for Navy that is why USAF doesn't have it. Anyways when it comes to taking side I would always go for what navy chooses as navies world over have less budget compared to their other counterparts hence their decisions are always wiser. As for tasking USAF for SEAD/DEAD mission, it is quite understandable as it is the duty of Airforce to provide air superiority not Navy's.
I understand he mentioned in his earlier posts that we will go for additional Rafales + F18 in MRFA.
When comes to Growler,This is what i used tell since long. Currently there is no other fighter sized aircraft as capable as Growler when comes to EW arena, these so called rafale fan base is advertising its EW capabilities better than that of Growler is simply a bluffing.
I dont think that F18 will bring any additional capability than Rafale when comes to china. F15EX may be a different story.
Yep, but F15ex won't provide us a decisive BVR edge against PLAAF which in my opinion is the most important thing we are looking for in MRFA.
Growler is an escort jammer and moves with the strike forces. It is an ideal SEAD/DEAD platform. Business jets at best can provide standoff jamming close to international borders but in a contested airspace they will not survive. Growler can go deep with the strike forces. Rafale Spectra is an excellent system but it is more of a self protection jammer and has very limited capability to provide jamming for other strike elements.
What a2a missile do Chinese have,which out perform AIM120D or up coming AIM260? F15 is having a potent EW suit,which is most important in modern warfare than fancy BVR missile. The advantage of f15EX is it's perfect balance of its range,EE suit, it's highly capable mission computer and the superior choices of weapons.
I think Rafale will be in back seat when comes to weapon of choice and range of the aircraft . We don't nead an aircraft with much long reached againt pakistan but against Chinese it's a must.
Last edited:
My emphasis was on bigger RCS and less maneuverablilty of F15s. J20, Su35 and J11Ds would have a significant advantage in BVR combat over F15s due to their lower RCS.
If F15 was offered at the time of Su 30 selection, we could have bought.
Now we are already high in heavy fighters.
I hope we reduce the number of types of aircraft in service.
Lower RCS of an aircraft is the biggest scam in fighter aircraft market. Yeas if yoh are using a stealth aircraft like f22,35 or j20,it does matters.
You are not sending an aircraft with only its cannon. The moment you hang weapons in its belly, the aircraft's RCS will increase and any RCS above 1.5 is useless in modern warfare, you will be detected much ahead of your current BVR missile range. So high rcs of f15 is not concern.
And maneuver abilities,I don't think it does matters much in BVR engagement.
And lastly,a country who failed to reduce the RCS of a custom designed stealth aircraft will not reduce RCS of Su30 cousin with simila size and similar reflective surface to 1.5,it's a logical reasoning.
Regarding j20,if F15 cannot deal j20,none of the mmrca2 too will not be able to deal with j20.
If F15 were offered in 1996,we won't even consider to buy it. On what basis you stated that.
And don't think that,heavy light medium aircraft in Chinese front. A heavy aircraft is more suitable to target deep inside Tibet,look at Chinese how many heavy aircraft they do operate?if we didn't match with them,we will be like what pakistan to India in aerial warfare,jut a defensive airforce without offensive punch. And the current MKI will not bring us any edge over Chinese flankers.
If we want to reduce number of types of aircraft,then logical choice will be we to cancell lca and go for mig35 & su35. But here we are looking for capabilities.
It's a standoff jammer, will operate no different than an AWACS. For escort, the fighter jet going in will carry SPJ or use its internal EW suite.
The IAF needs jamming capability that's available 24/7. Which is why all air forces base their jamming capabilities on large aircraft.
F/A-18 was made for the USAF. It's the jet that lost to the F-16. Then the navy which was operating the super expensive F-14 chose the F/A-18 and modified it for carriers.
EW business jets and Growler operate from pretty much the same range. from the target. Both work outside SAM rings. Only the SEAD/DEAD fighter jet goes inside the SAM ring.
Growler is not an escort jammer.
Navy's Next Gen Jammer Is Three Pods, Not One, And Competition For One Of Them Just Heated Up
With Raytheon out of the running for one pod, Northrop Grumman and L3 are vying to be a major part of the Navy's future electronic warfare ecosystem.
www.thedrive.com
It's basically a standoff jammer.
Growler is also not expected to operate inside contested airspace, which is the main criticism against it.
Anyway, penetrating and standin jamming functions will move on to drones connected to the EW aircraft with a modern datalink, so the Growler is going to be useless since other technologies have caught up and even exceeded it.
It's an EW attack platform for carrier base operations, business jet based EW cannot operate from an AC.
Also it can be used for IAF too,since it can go inside enemy airspace just like any other fighter,it can carry its own BVR missiles.
And,pls don't forget the fact that Growler is the only aircraft that mad an F22 kill in BVR ranges in a simulated air exercise. No other aircraft achieved it so far.
RCS of Rafale is 0.1. Whereas RCS of F15 is 25 which Boeing has managed to reduce to 3-4 in ex version AFAIK. That is why Rafales give us decisive BVR edge against PLAAF.
And yes Rafales can deal with J20s as there RCS is lower than J20.