Wso/rio

[JimNtexas]

One of my friends flew the Spark Vark (RIP), and he was an IP in at Mountain Home. In order to teach the new EWOs, the pilots that were also ewo instructors had to know the ewo course there, in order to teach/evaluate in the aircraft. I think he wrote much of the syllabus and tactics that were in use at Mountain Home until the retirement

We had a few pilots who were interested enough in the mission to take the time to learn the rudiments of what the ALQ-99 did. A handful actually learned enough electronic warfare to really grock what the airplane was for. Your friend was certainly one of those.

It certainly wasn't required that EF-111 pilots, plain or instructor, really have much understanding of what the airplane actually did.

That's sad, because if there were more pilots who understood the Sparkvark it would have stayed in the inventory another ten years, as it should have done. Certainly it could blow the doors off of any EA-6 when it came to speed or radar jamming capability. To be fair, the EA-6 had HARMs and some other EW tricks we didn't have, but when it came to speed, range, or power there was no comparison.

We had a number of pilots placed into the EF-111 who were sent to us as punishment for various crimes they had comitted in their former assignment. These were some of our best. Give me a good criminal pilot any day.

 

[Bjammin]

Certainly it could blow the doors off of any EA-6 when it came to speed or radar jamming capability.

We could carry 5 pods with you only carrying 2 and we could use the HARM seeker for other wiss/bang stuff. Plus we could divide our duties between 3 ECMOs. Beating EA-6's in radar jamming capibility?

I just want to defend the Navy EA community. :beer:

I'll be interested to see how all forces use the EA-18G. It will be a HUGE asset to the tactical community.

Of course you had the speed and power. I love the -111 and was sorry to see it go.

 

[JimNtexas]

We could carry 5 pods with you only carrying 2 and we could use the HARM seeker for other wiss/bang stuff. Plus we could divide our duties between 3 ECMOs. Beating EA-6's in radar jamming capibility?

We didn't carry pods in the EF-111. We always flew with 10 internal jammers, each of which operated at a significantly higher power level than those in the EA-6 pods. The EA-6 usually flew with only 2 pods (four transmitters) if it wanted to leave the pattern.

We could carry these 10 transmitters with a full fuel load of ~32000 pounds, IIRC.

And of course in range and speed the F-111 is a whole order of magnitude more powerful. You'll note the pointy end of an F-111 faces forward. There are no propellers on an EF-111.

In any kind of package the EA-6 will be the slowest and shortest range airplane unless there are helicopters. The EF-111 was always the fastest and longest range airplane in any strike package except those with F-111F's.

It's true that it takes 3 Navy EWOs to do what I did by myself, but out of modesty I didn't point that out.

I acknowledged the HARM and other cool capabilities of the EA-6, it's a good airplane. Thank goodness we still have it.

But the EF-111 was a far more powerful radar jammer in every parameter that matters.

 

[pkober]

Additionally, it's the pilot's ass in the sling when when something extraordinarily BAD happens . . . . .ie. pushing the wrong throttle up in an engine out C5. . .




Those loadmasters remain anonymous too. . .

Well said. It's a team effort in most respects in a C-130 however there are many times when individual crew members are doing there own thing. I don't take credit when we do a 5 minute turn at Salerno LZ. I don't take credit when the FE removes and pads a generator. I don't take the credit when we hit the DZ within 1 second of our TOT and get a PI, that goes to the Nav (unless he sucked and I had to aviate and navigate :beer.

 

[NavyGuy]

We didn't carry pods in the EF-111. We always flew with 10 internal jammers, each of which operated at a significantly higher power level than those in the EA-6 pods. The EA-6 usually flew with only 2 pods (four transmitters) if it wanted to leave the pattern.

We could carry these 10 transmitters with a full fuel load of ~32000 pounds, IIRC.

And of course in range and speed the F-111 is a whole order of magnitude more powerful. You'll note the pointy end of an F-111 faces forward. There are no propellers on an EF-111.

In any kind of package the EA-6 will be the slowest and shortest range airplane unless there are helicopters. The EF-111 was always the fastest and longest range airplane in any strike package except those with F-111F's.

It's true that it takes 3 Navy EWOs to do what I did by myself, but out of modesty I didn't point that out.

I acknowledged the HARM and other cool capabilities of the EA-6, it's a good airplane. Thank goodness we still have it.

But the EF-111 was a far more powerful radar jammer in every parameter that matters.

You're right. The EF-111 was an awesome platform. No wonder the AF got rid of them 10 years ago.
Just kidding Jim. I loved the -111. I think the AF underutilized them because they were'nt sexy enough and therefore were expendable and sadly retired. As far as tactics and how the aircraft were used to execute the mission I think the EA-6's were thrown a little further into the mix to include escort as well as stand-off jamming which seemed to be your bread and butter. And as you alluded to we could shoot back as well(for the life of me I don't know why they never strapped HARMs on you guys). But as everyone knows when it comes to raw power and beauty the Prowler ain't got nothing on the Spark Vark. And by the way it doesn't actually require three NFO's just two. So I guess that makes you twice the man.

 

[Bjammin]

Jim,

I can now see this is going to be a gentle pissing contest.:uzi: .

Having been a SEAD stike commander in Iraq and having AF E/F-111 guys on my crew I will have to correct some of your misconceptions.

Slowest and shortest range? While we were hanging out over the AOR it was the Viper guys that always needed to go back for more gas well before us, and it was not because they were turning and burning.

We also could sustain 520KIAS on the deck longer then any other jet.

We usually carried 3 pods and the little "propellers" produced WAY more power then your internal generators. That was one of our biggest advantages over the -111.

Being able to adapt our load for the conditions was key. We could have a jet carry 4 pods and the another be a HARM truck. We could switch out pods for tanks for longer range.

We had the same ALQ-99 system so I don't see how you think having 3 guys running the system is less optimum then your 1 guy. We could divide between defense and offence while the other guy ran the HARM.

Our systems were being upgraded constantly after the -111 went away so I don't think you could be totally familure with the capibilities.

Keep it coming.imp:

 

[Deuce130]

As a bored observer with no dog in the fight, I'd like to weigh in! First of all, stop arguing with an old Aardvark driver. The EA-6B is still flying, the EF-111 isn't. That's like arguing that Mike Singletary should still be the MLB for the Bears when Urlacher has got the job locked up. I also read in a book once that flying the EF-111 was like riding a scooter - fun to do but you didn't want to brag about it at the bar. I know, I know, just like flying the Herc. Lastly, I'd like to say that the Navy electronic warfare weapons officers were some of the smartest, coolest guys I worked with, but, like my brother says, "If you want a drive by shooting, call the EA-6B, if you want a sniper shot from the school book depository, call a F16-CJ."

 

[Mud Eagle]

We also could sustain 520KIAS on the deck longer then any other jet.

Any other jet?

 

[414Flyer]

I got an VERY informative email from my friend that flew the Spark Varks. I am asking him for permission before reposting it. Touches on HARMS, ALQ-99, etc. I will post it as soon as I get a Yes, which I am sure he will.

 

[SIG600]

double post

 

[SIG600]

I got an VERY informative email from my friend that flew the Spark Varks. I am asking him for permission before reposting it. Touches on HARMS, ALQ-99, etc. I will post it as soon as I get a Yes, which I am sure he will.

I would advise against it. Regardless of the classification level there are some things that just shouldn't be shared on the internet. Or made easier to find.

Loved the pointy end joke, it took me a second but then made for a good laugh.

 

[JimNtexas]

I would advise against it. Regardless of the classification level there are some things that just shouldn't be shared on the internet. Or made easier to find.

Loved the pointy end joke, it took me a second but then made for a good laugh.

I had to stop the comparisons with the EA-6.

Even thought the EF is gone, the ALQ-99 lives on. I was on the brink of throwing some db's and antenna patterns around, but I'm glad I thought better of it.

I will say that only about one out of five EF-111 pilots had much of clue how the airplane interacted with its targets. And the only pilot with real SA clue was General Corder.

 

[Bjammin]

Jim,

Did you know Zog or Bondo? One was an F-4 WSO the other an EF-111 WSO. Both great guys and flew with us for a while.

 

[JimNtexas]

Jim,

Did you know Zog or Bondo? One was an F-4 WSO the other an EF-111 WSO. Both great guys and flew with us for a while.

No, if they were in the EA-6 they were probably a little after my time.

 

[bssthound]

Don't know what level of classification USA Today is:



ABOARD THE USS NIMITZ IN THE GULF (AP) — A secret aircraft that debuted in Vietnam and usually protects U.S. fighter jets is getting a new type of task over Iraq — trying to stop the scourge of roadside bombs by jamming ground signals from mobile phones and garage door openers.
The EA-6B Prowler is thought to be one of the most effective U.S. weapons against the bombs, the biggest killer of American service members in Iraq. But no one can be sure: Even supporters say its effectiveness is hard to measure.
The aircraft debuted at the tail end of Vietnam and was used in Kosovo and the 1991 Gulf War, escorting U.S. attack jets while jamming hostile radars, air defense batteries and military radios aimed at them.
These days the Prowler focuses its jammers on smaller signals: those of mobile phones and garage door openers that are used to trigger roadside bombs in Iraq, said U.S. Navy Capt. David Woods, 49, of Ogden, Utah.
Often, it's hard to prove that a roadside bomb failed to explode because of Prowler jamming signals, Woods said. Still, he's confident the plane is making a difference against the bombs, which the military calls improvised explosive devices.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: Iraq | Navy | Gulf | Carrier | EA | USS Nimitz | David Woods
"When it's flying we have greater success and fewer IEDs going off," Woods said. "It's kind of an insurance policy."
Woods, the commander of Carrier Air Wing Eleven and one of the Navy's most experienced Prowler pilots, says few people understand the EA-6B's mission, which is to control the electromagnetic spectrum so allies can use it — but not enemies.
The Prowler and its electronic warfare system is so valuable it has never been exported — even to close allies. Details about the training of crewmembers are secret.
The Prowler is a homely plane, hung with torpedo-shaped pods and covered in tumor-like bumps packed with a bewildering array of computers, transmitters, antennae and receivers that can analyze and block ground transmissions. A sinister-looking prong protruding from its nose is a refueling nozzle.
The EA-6B's bulbous nose cradles a crew of four: a pilot and three electronic countermeasures officers who operate the jamming gear.
Outside experts say the Prowler remains the world's most effective electronic warfare aircraft, but the aging U.S. fleet of about 120 aircraft is overworked.
Still, the Pentagon considers the Prowler critical enough to ensure no U.S. aircraft carrier heads to battle without four or five. There are two squadrons now at sea in Mideast waters: one aboard the carrier USS John C. Stennis, the other aboard the Nimitz.
Another two land-based Prowler squadrons are in Iraq, Woods said.
In 1999, Serb air defenses shot down an Air Force F-117 stealth fighter probably because it strayed too far from the jamming beam of its Prowler escort, said Loren Thompson, a military analyst with the Washington-based Lexington Institute.
On the Nimitz, which operated inside the Persian Gulf in recent days, Prowlers could be seen screaming off the deck along with packs of F/A-18 Hornet fighters, heading to Iraqi airspace.
Over Iraq, the fighters fly patterns above U.S. ground operations, waiting to be called to drop 500-pound bombs, if needed.
The Prowlers fly between 20,000 and 30,000 feet, Woods said, steering invisible waves of electromagnetic signals over areas where insurgent bombs may be waiting for U.S. convoys.
According to outside experts, receivers inside the Prowler's tail collect radio signals from the ground, which are analyzed by an on-board computer. As threats are identified, the plane's crew floods the area with electromagnetic energy that blocks the signal.
The plane's computer is loaded with a "threat library" of hostile signals, which are used to match those on the ground. The jammers can block transmissions across wide range of frequencies, everything from TV and radio signals to mobile phones and the Internet.
But its jamming gear has no effect on bombs that are hard-wired to their triggers, Woods said.
The Pentagon is spending US $9 billion to replace the Prowler with 90 Boeing F/A-18 fighters outfitted with electronic warfare gear. The first two, known as the EA-18G Growler, are already being tested.
The first Growlers are supposed to begin service by 2009 and replace the carrier-based Prowler squadrons by 2013. The job is expected to eventually be taken over by unmanned planes.
Woods is among a rare breed with more than 1,000 aircraft carrier landings — nearly all with the Prowler. He says he'll miss the plane he's been flying since 1984.
"It's like an old girlfriend or your first car," he said, pointing to a photo of the plane on the wall of his quarters on the Nimitz. "There are things about it you just can't replace."