HARM in USAF and USN
- Thread starter Totoro
- Start date
Now, it's a bit more complicated than that. With current aircraft -
Basic Integration:
Basic Integration:
- F-16 Block 30/32 and Block 40/42
- F-15
- F-22
- F-16 Block 50/52
- F/A-18C/D Hornet
- F/A-18E/F Super Hornet*
- EA-6B Prowler
- EA-18G Growler
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #4
Would that mean that planes without HTS or TAS would need additional assets (which have those) flying with them, so they can use the harms they carry?
Also, when you say f-15s have basic integration, do you mean all the f15s in usaf or just D models, just E models or something else?
Also, when you say f-15s have basic integration, do you mean all the f15s in usaf or just D models, just E models or something else?
HTS is basically an Emitter Locating System hooked up to a targeting computer that is interfaced with the aircraft. Without HTS - or a similar system - the aircraft has to rely on either its own radar warning receiver (for HARM SP mode) or for HARM's seeker to pick up a target itself - which is of course far shorter than a dedicated ELS could pick it up at.
Basically, they can still fire HARM without HTS, but only at shorter range or in pre-briefed mode against a known target (area). For pre-briefed mode, they pretty much need a ELINT/ELS aircraft such as a RC-135 Rivet Joint (or a USN EP-3E) in the area to pick up a target at long range for them, and supply them with a target area to fire the HARM into. Rivet Joint is NOT accurate at range though, hence why a rangefinding ELS such as HTS makes the system far more accurate. HARM carriers without HTS will also be far less accurate even in SP or TOO mode.
When firing without HTS, the launching aircraft basically only has a bearing (provided by onboard RWR or by Rivet Joint) towards which the HARM is fired. HARM then flies into that direction and hopes to pick up the hostile radar on its own seeker.
Afaik, all F-15 in current USAF inventory have been given the necessary software upgrades to carry HARM, but HTS has never been integrated on the system. Supposedly the USAF currently has around 550 HTS pods for its 1300 F-16, with 200 pods being of the latest generation (R6/R7).
TAS provides a similar capability to HTS for Navy aircraft, but is not a podded system - but embedded in two underwing pylons (on all F/A-18C/D and iirc EA-6B and EA-18G). HTS and TAS themselves can track less targets in less field-of-view than the old APR-38 of the F-4G Wild Weasel, but are faster and more accurate due to software improvements. There has been a somewhat similar system tested with the F-15, intended for a (cancelled) dedicated SEAD variant (F-15/HARM or F-15/PDF).
Basically, they can still fire HARM without HTS, but only at shorter range or in pre-briefed mode against a known target (area). For pre-briefed mode, they pretty much need a ELINT/ELS aircraft such as a RC-135 Rivet Joint (or a USN EP-3E) in the area to pick up a target at long range for them, and supply them with a target area to fire the HARM into. Rivet Joint is NOT accurate at range though, hence why a rangefinding ELS such as HTS makes the system far more accurate. HARM carriers without HTS will also be far less accurate even in SP or TOO mode.
When firing without HTS, the launching aircraft basically only has a bearing (provided by onboard RWR or by Rivet Joint) towards which the HARM is fired. HARM then flies into that direction and hopes to pick up the hostile radar on its own seeker.
Afaik, all F-15 in current USAF inventory have been given the necessary software upgrades to carry HARM, but HTS has never been integrated on the system. Supposedly the USAF currently has around 550 HTS pods for its 1300 F-16, with 200 pods being of the latest generation (R6/R7).
TAS provides a similar capability to HTS for Navy aircraft, but is not a podded system - but embedded in two underwing pylons (on all F/A-18C/D and iirc EA-6B and EA-18G). HTS and TAS themselves can track less targets in less field-of-view than the old APR-38 of the F-4G Wild Weasel, but are faster and more accurate due to software improvements. There has been a somewhat similar system tested with the F-15, intended for a (cancelled) dedicated SEAD variant (F-15/HARM or F-15/PDF).
Lockheed-Martin Targeting Avionics System, a modified SUU-63 pylon carrying a builtin ELS with 240-degree FOV.
I'm not sure to what extent this is actually introduced, and whether it's in the original form. I think on EA-6B this might have been introduced with VEP, if not ICAP-2 Block 89.
Edit: Curiously, i can't even find it in Jane's - it was tested in 1996 to '98. Jane's mentions that AN/ASQ-213 (HTS) itself was fully classified ('black') until 1993, but considering you can find pictures of TAS on the internet, i doubt it's a situation like that.
I'm not sure to what extent this is actually introduced, and whether it's in the original form. I think on EA-6B this might have been introduced with VEP, if not ICAP-2 Block 89.
Edit: Curiously, i can't even find it in Jane's - it was tested in 1996 to '98. Jane's mentions that AN/ASQ-213 (HTS) itself was fully classified ('black') until 1993, but considering you can find pictures of TAS on the internet, i doubt it's a situation like that.
Are you sure the program didn't actually suffer a budget cut and died a quiet death? Could you direct me to some links of pics of the TAS please? There is a mention of it in Friedman's Guide to Naval Weaps 97/98 edition, but no mention of it in the 05 edition. I presume it is most likely to have gotten nowhere. In which case the Hornets would have to rely on the Prowler ICAP III or Growler to send the targeting coordinates via Link 16.
Alarm?
Why has no other country bought the ALARM missile from the British? It showed itself to be a much better anti SAM radar missile when the operators are turning off the RADAR when they are under attack in the Kosovo air war.
I can't find the book to hand but it took about 50+ unsuccessful attempts by the USAF and other European air forces using the HARM to shut down one Serb SAM site until the RAF were called in and did the job with one ALARM in loiter mode.
I guess once the Serbs had become used to the missiles loiter modes and its time constraints then they would have been able to counter act that too.
The stand off range looks about the same.The weight is about the same and the cost is not far off.
Any bad points of the ALARM I'm missing?
(The book is call British Secret Projects: Hypersonics, Ramjets and Missiles . Not worth the high price I paid for it as most of it is from the 60s-70s)
Why has no other country bought the ALARM missile from the British? It showed itself to be a much better anti SAM radar missile when the operators are turning off the RADAR when they are under attack in the Kosovo air war.
I can't find the book to hand but it took about 50+ unsuccessful attempts by the USAF and other European air forces using the HARM to shut down one Serb SAM site until the RAF were called in and did the job with one ALARM in loiter mode.
I guess once the Serbs had become used to the missiles loiter modes and its time constraints then they would have been able to counter act that too.
The stand off range looks about the same.The weight is about the same and the cost is not far off.
Any bad points of the ALARM I'm missing?
(The book is call British Secret Projects: Hypersonics, Ramjets and Missiles . Not worth the high price I paid for it as most of it is from the 60s-70s)