INDUSTRY NEWS: Air Force To Establish Electronic Warfare Capability Team In November
Print this Article | Send to Colleague
The Air Force’s plan to launch an electronic warfare developmental planning program in November while proposing to retire half of its best airborne electronic attack aircraft in fiscal year 2016 neglects near-term priorities in exchange for investment in new capabilities possibly five to seven years down the road, according to some electronic warfare experts. Service officials contend that savings from the retirement of seven EC-130H Compass Call electronic attack aircraft would support longer-term investments in that mission area.
Slides presented by Air Force Assistant Secretary for Acquisition William LaPlante at the Air Force’s Air Warfare Symposium in February show the service will launch a new "capability collaboration team" focused on the electronic warfare mission later this year, similar to the recently established Air Superiority 2030 and Strategic Deterrence teams. The group would be comprised of operational, scientific and technical experts from across the service and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Its aim would be to look holistically across the Air Force’s EW portfolio and present recommendations on long term planning and resourcing decisions.
"The idea of a developmental planning effort focused on electronic warfare is so that we look larger than that one program and look longer than the next budget cycle," Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh told reporters at the conference February 13. "Electronic warfare is absolutely essential to that high-end fight I was talking about. When we go to full-spectrum warfare, electronic warfare becomes critically important to us."
The Defense Department’s current electronic attack assets use sophisticated jammers and directed energy weapons to disrupt enemy communications networks and integrated air defense systems in support of ground and air combat forces. Welsh said the Air Force must make tradeoffs to fit future modernization programs into the budget top line. "What’s important is the effect we’re creating, not the platform we’re flying it on," he said.
Some, though, think the developmental planning program could be just another study shortchanging nearer-term capability gaps.
"I’m never encouraged to see electronic warfare relegated to being third on the list of things to do sometime in the future, while cutting the force today," Joe Hulsey, Northrop Grumman’s former EA-18G Growler weapon system program director and a senior member of the Association of Old Crows, said in a March 3 email to Inside the Air Force. "When budgets are cut, services tend to rally around what they see as their core missions. I think it is safe to say the U.S. Air Force does not consider EW a core mission. We will look at it after we determine what fighter we need in 2030. With the [program objective memorandum] cycle being what it is, a new program could start five to seven years from now with an [initial operational capability date] many years after that."
Hulsey said electronic warfare is already a low-density, high-demand business and reducing force structure now exacerbates that problem and reduces the level of expertise across the force. Diluting the number of EW professionals hurts in the near term, he said, and causes a "ripple forward" effect that impacts the development of future capabilities. Lynn Berg, a former EC-130H crewmember and Joint Electronic Warfare Center staffer, is cautiously optimistic about the service’s focused look at the electronic warfare mission, so long as it impacts future strategic budget decisions.
"The concern is that they are executing another long-term study to the possible detriment of near-term requirements," Berg wrote in a March 4 email to ITAF. "Identifying the state of technology in 2030 is murky, meanwhile the combatant commands are aware of electromagnetic challenges in their theaters now and for the next 10 years that demand a service solution. There are jamming aircraft conducting airborne missions against [the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant] probably as we conduct this interview."
Berg said the Defense Science Board recently completed a classified study on future electronic warfare technologies, gaps and trends, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense and Joint Electronic Warfare Center have already identified numerous shortfalls in the department’s electronic attack capabilities -- many of which have been presented in open forums. The Navy is making a significant investment in its E/A-18G Growlers for tactical airborne electronic jamming and countermeasures and the Army and Marine Corps are fielding other advanced jammers.
Asked whether the Air Force is trying to take back the EW mission, Welsh said: "This isn’t a possessive thing." "All the services have got to be proficient in the electronic warfare arena," he told reporters. "Assuming that every service will be able to provide one magic solution that meets everybody’s needs [is] naive."
Hulsey offered this suggestion: "By design or accident, the Air Force is the Defense Department leader in communications countermeasures. In my opinion, they should have a focus there."
According to an Air Force document, reducing the EC-130H Compass Call fleet from 14 operational aircraft to eight would save $300 million over the next four years. Those aircraft are based at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona. – James Drew
Article courtesy Inside Defense.
http://insidedefense.com/inside-air-force/air-force-establish-electronic-warfare-capability-team-november
Slides presented by Air Force Assistant Secretary for Acquisition William LaPlante at the Air Force’s Air Warfare Symposium in February show the service will launch a new "capability collaboration team" focused on the electronic warfare mission later this year, similar to the recently established Air Superiority 2030 and Strategic Deterrence teams. The group would be comprised of operational, scientific and technical experts from across the service and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Its aim would be to look holistically across the Air Force’s EW portfolio and present recommendations on long term planning and resourcing decisions.
"The idea of a developmental planning effort focused on electronic warfare is so that we look larger than that one program and look longer than the next budget cycle," Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh told reporters at the conference February 13. "Electronic warfare is absolutely essential to that high-end fight I was talking about. When we go to full-spectrum warfare, electronic warfare becomes critically important to us."
The Defense Department’s current electronic attack assets use sophisticated jammers and directed energy weapons to disrupt enemy communications networks and integrated air defense systems in support of ground and air combat forces. Welsh said the Air Force must make tradeoffs to fit future modernization programs into the budget top line. "What’s important is the effect we’re creating, not the platform we’re flying it on," he said.
Some, though, think the developmental planning program could be just another study shortchanging nearer-term capability gaps.
"I’m never encouraged to see electronic warfare relegated to being third on the list of things to do sometime in the future, while cutting the force today," Joe Hulsey, Northrop Grumman’s former EA-18G Growler weapon system program director and a senior member of the Association of Old Crows, said in a March 3 email to Inside the Air Force. "When budgets are cut, services tend to rally around what they see as their core missions. I think it is safe to say the U.S. Air Force does not consider EW a core mission. We will look at it after we determine what fighter we need in 2030. With the [program objective memorandum] cycle being what it is, a new program could start five to seven years from now with an [initial operational capability date] many years after that."
Hulsey said electronic warfare is already a low-density, high-demand business and reducing force structure now exacerbates that problem and reduces the level of expertise across the force. Diluting the number of EW professionals hurts in the near term, he said, and causes a "ripple forward" effect that impacts the development of future capabilities. Lynn Berg, a former EC-130H crewmember and Joint Electronic Warfare Center staffer, is cautiously optimistic about the service’s focused look at the electronic warfare mission, so long as it impacts future strategic budget decisions.
"The concern is that they are executing another long-term study to the possible detriment of near-term requirements," Berg wrote in a March 4 email to ITAF. "Identifying the state of technology in 2030 is murky, meanwhile the combatant commands are aware of electromagnetic challenges in their theaters now and for the next 10 years that demand a service solution. There are jamming aircraft conducting airborne missions against [the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant] probably as we conduct this interview."
Berg said the Defense Science Board recently completed a classified study on future electronic warfare technologies, gaps and trends, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense and Joint Electronic Warfare Center have already identified numerous shortfalls in the department’s electronic attack capabilities -- many of which have been presented in open forums. The Navy is making a significant investment in its E/A-18G Growlers for tactical airborne electronic jamming and countermeasures and the Army and Marine Corps are fielding other advanced jammers.
Asked whether the Air Force is trying to take back the EW mission, Welsh said: "This isn’t a possessive thing." "All the services have got to be proficient in the electronic warfare arena," he told reporters. "Assuming that every service will be able to provide one magic solution that meets everybody’s needs [is] naive."
Hulsey offered this suggestion: "By design or accident, the Air Force is the Defense Department leader in communications countermeasures. In my opinion, they should have a focus there."
According to an Air Force document, reducing the EC-130H Compass Call fleet from 14 operational aircraft to eight would save $300 million over the next four years. Those aircraft are based at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base in Arizona. – James Drew
Article courtesy Inside Defense.
http://insidedefense.com/inside-air-force/air-force-establish-electronic-warfare-capability-team-november
