SEAD
-
Suppresion of Enemy Air Defences
"During the early days of the Vietnam War, the United States Air Force had almost full autonomy over the skies of Vietnam. However, once the Soviet Union and China began arming the North Vietnamese Army (NVA), with advanced Surface to Air missile (SAM) systems, the U.S. domination of the skies was abrubtly challenged. To deal with the new SAM threat, the U.S. Air Force decided to dedicate men and machine exclusively to the SAM’s. Thus a new breed of aviator and aircraft were born, the “Wild Weasels.”
The purpose of the “Weasels” was to seek out and engage NVA SAM sites, and if possible destroy them. Often times though, the only way the Weasel pilots could locate a SAM site was by getting the NVA to fire a SAM at them, thus revealing their position. Tantamount to a suicide mission, the Weasel missions were amongst the most dangerous sorties of the war. Losses in the Weasel squadrons were among the highest of the war. In the early stages of the Weasel development, the aircraft and its avionics were not ideally suited for this new and dangerous mission. However as the war progressed, the U.S. Air Force developed a dedicated Weasel aircraft, the Republic F-105G Thunderchief. The “Thud” as it is affectionately known to the pilots who flew it, is recognized as the workhorse of the Vietnam War. The men who flew the F-105 love the airplane and from all accounts the aircraft performed superbly throughout the war.
One such Wild Weasel is retired U.S. Air Force Colonel George Acree. Colonel Acree flew the F-105 both as a bomber and a Weasel aircraft. With over 200 missions over North Vietnam to his credit, Colonel Acree was one of a different breed of men. Colonel Acree and the other Weasel pilots flew the most dangerous missions of the war and did so with courage, honor and professionalism. Putting aside the nasty politics that governed the Vietnam War, the Weasel pilots accepted their mission and carried it out faithfully. The men who flew the Weasel missions in the Vietnam War did so to a varying degree of success, but they paved the way for the Wild Weasel program to become a major part of the modern day United States Air Force."
from http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/vietnam/airpower/wildweasel.aspx
more modern "wild weasels" kill SAMs using AGM-88 HARMs (high speed anti-radiation missiles), which are missiles that home in on the radar emissions of the SAM fire control radars.
just wondering, does the RSAF have any aircraft or squadrons that are specifically tasked for SEAD? and does the RSAF have any anti-radiation missiles in our inventory? -
Talking about being specific, our F-16Ds are for that type of mission. Not that other fighters cant perform the job, our F-16s are much more suitable. Anyway, there are other units within the SAF that can perform SEAD.Originally posted by sgFish:Suppresion of Enemy Air Defences
just wondering, does the RSAF have any aircraft or squadrons that are specifically tasked for SEAD?
About Anti-RaD missiles within our inventory, nope im sorry, we dont have any. -
i tot we do haf it??Originally posted by foxtrout8:Talking about being specific, our F-16Ds are for that type of mission. Not that other fighters cant perform the job, our F-16s are much more suitable. Anyway, there are other units within the SAF that can perform SEAD.
About Anti-RaD missiles within our inventory, nope im sorry, we dont have any. -
What u see in the Open House is what we have. For all i can remember, i didnt see any of those missiles. While of course, there may be speculations and speculations are speculations.Originally posted by Arena:i tot we do haf it?? -
We don't have HARMs, but got the one which the harm replaced, the AGM-45 Shrike.
-
*rolls eyes*Originally posted by foxtrout8:What u see in the Open House is what we have. For all i can remember, i didnt see any of those missiles. While of course, there may be speculations and speculations are speculations.
Yes, and concidentally, the first time AMX-13s showed up in a certain year's NDP was the first time they were shown to the public.
Add to that, the Artic, SSG-3000, MSG-90 and other such weapons were only disclosed to the public at this year's open house. There's another fine H&K rifle in use by our snipers, but i won't tell. It's right there in the Range Standing Order for Use of Sniper Rifles in training.
And of course, Mr Primus was exhibited to people in the know long before the public got a whiff of it. That does not include people who saw "A large, tarpaulin covered tank shape on a transporter on the highway".
Need i go on? -
*scratches head*Originally posted by foxtrout8:Talking about being specific, our F-16Ds are for that type of mission. Not that other fighters cant perform the job, our F-16s are much more suitable. Anyway, there are other units within the SAF that can perform SEAD.
About Anti-RaD missiles within our inventory, nope im sorry, we dont have any.
So the MIG-25 "Sead" Variant, the EA-6 family, ES-3 Viking, EF-111 Raven, all pale in comparison to an F-16D Multi-purpose fighter loaded with HARMs?
SEAD = Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=suppression
You don't need a aircraft to do SEAD. Artillery, especially long range MRLs, can do the job just as well. And in a pinch, lots of jammer aircraft will do to help shield your strike force.
And of course, let's not forget the Commandoes. A plastique charge or LAD beam (for the laser guided missile) on a SAM launcher will do the job just as well.
Think out of the box. -
Mig25 is totally not suitable. As it is design to be a high attiude interceptor. Viking is anti-sub !Originally posted by Johnston:*scratches head*
So the MIG-25 "Sead" Variant, the EA-6 family, ES-3 Viking, EF-111 Raven, all pale in comparison to an F-16D Multi-purpose fighter loaded with HARMs?
SEAD = Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=suppression
You don't need a aircraft to do SEAD. Artillery, especially long range MRLs, can do the job just as well. And in a pinch, lots of jammer aircraft will do to help shield your strike force.
And of course, let's not forget the Commandoes. A plastique charge or LAD beam (for the laser guided missile) on a SAM launcher will do the job just as well.
Think out of the box.
f-111 does the job but is outdated and retired.
Ea-6 is getting to end the life.
Now aday SEAD is of more modern figther like F-16, F-18 or F-15 which can fight its way in and out without support fighters. But nowadays, the SEAD role is changing to UAVs.
You don't send artillery or commandos to do it, because it be hard to find it.
The reason is enemy don't turn on their batteries till aircraft is sighted, so you will not know where they are.
The standard is 2 planes work as a pair, 1 fly ahead and draw the enemy radars and fire, the 2nd pair ,will home in on the turn on radar and destory it. It is faster to destory it that way then send people on the ground search. -
Brother, the coincidence in which these weapons are shown with a choosen date have a reason. Respect that reason and nothing else.Originally posted by Johnston:*rolls eyes*
Yes, and concidentally, the first time AMX-13s showed up in a certain year's NDP was the first time they were shown to the public.
Add to that, the Artic, SSG-3000, MSG-90 and other such weapons were only disclosed to the public at this year's open house. There's another fine H&K rifle in use by our snipers, but i won't tell. It's right there in the Range Standing Order for Use of Sniper Rifles in training.
And of course, Mr Primus was exhibited to people in the know long before the public got a whiff of it. That does not include people who saw "A large, tarpaulin covered tank shape on a transporter on the highway".
Need i go on? -
http://www.fas.org/irp/program/collect/es-3_shadow.htmOriginally posted by storywolf:Mig25 is totally not suitable. As it is design to be a high attiude interceptor. Viking is anti-sub !
f-111 does the job but is outdated and retired.
Ea-6 is getting to end the life.
You don't send artillery or commandos to do it, because it be hard to find it.
The reason is enemy don't turn on their batteries till aircraft is sighted, so you will not know where they are.
The standard is 2 planes work as a pair, 1 fly ahead and draw the enemy radars and fire, the 2nd pair ,will home in on the turn on radar and destory it. It is faster to destory it that way then send people on the ground search.
Ok. my bad.
Just because a fighter was originally built to be a high-altitude interceptor means it cant be a SEAD fighter too?
Hmm.
The P-3 Orion was originally built to be an ASW aircraft.
So what was the example that crashed with an PLAF aircraft doing? ASW work?
No, it was the EP-3 Orion ELINT aircraft.
So..... your telling me that Artillery with a maximum range of 50 or so klicks is not suited for taking out SHORAD and V-SHORAD assets? hmm. You'd rather risk a few multi-million dollar aircraft to take out those AA guns and Short-range SAMs?
I remind you now that a commando team, armed with the right equipment, can do as much damage as a flight of dedicated SEAD aircraft. For example, they could laser designate LGB strikes, missiles, so on, so forth. Artillery strikes? Naval gun fire? A couple shots of .50 through the radar battery?
And of course let's not forget a enemy rifleman firing his rifle into the air is also air defence.
Which Air Force's standards are you talking about now? The last i remember was RAF and USAF practice different SEAD tactics. -
Yes. Ours not to reason why.Originally posted by foxtrout8:Brother, the coincidence in which these weapons are shown with a choosen date have a reason. Respect that reason and nothing else.
I just don't like people who say "What's open source is all we have."
Hmm.... so the T-34 was open source? And the Wehrmatcht went into the Soviet Union knowing about them?
The Tiger? The Yamato class BBs?
Oh yeah, the Wehrmatcht and IJN told the world everything about them.
There's so much more that the public doesn't know. -
Please understand that when i say 'other aircrafts' i meant the other aircrafts within the RSAF, can you dun be so sensitive?Originally posted by Johnston:*scratches head*
So the MIG-25 "Sead" Variant, the EA-6 family, ES-3 Viking, EF-111 Raven, all pale in comparison to an F-16D Multi-purpose fighter loaded with HARMs?
Anyway, the EF-111 Raven is not a delicated SEAD aircraft. It is a EW support aircraft which support another aircraft which will then perform the SEAD or any other mission. -
there also PSG-1, a clone of MSG-90 but with a much hefty price. crosshair should know.Originally posted by Johnston:*rolls eyes*
Yes, and concidentally, the first time AMX-13s showed up in a certain year's NDP was the first time they were shown to the public.
Add to that, the Artic, SSG-3000, MSG-90 and other such weapons were only disclosed to the public at this year's open house. There's another fine H&K rifle in use by our snipers, but i won't tell. It's right there in the Range Standing Order for Use of Sniper Rifles in training.
And of course, Mr Primus was exhibited to people in the know long before the public got a whiff of it. That does not include people who saw "A large, tarpaulin covered tank shape on a transporter on the highway".
Need i go on?
SSG3K i have posted the pict, but it was abt a few yrs bk and its not during openhouse. Think SAF will go the AI way...its the best among all. -
Ignorance doesnt mean u are stupid.Originally posted by Johnston:Yes. Ours not to reason why.
I just don't like people who say "What's open source is all we have."
Hmm.... so the T-34 was open source? And the Wehrmatcht went into the Soviet Union knowing about them?
The Tiger? The Yamato class BBs?
Oh yeah, the Wehrmatcht and IJN told the world everything about them.
There's so much more that the public doesn't know. -
There are many ways to skin a cat, no one say there is one.Originally posted by Johnston:Think out of the box. -
I should think i know my H&K history.Originally posted by chunyong:there also PSG-1, a clone of MSG-90 but with a much hefty price. crosshair should know. SSG3K i have posted the pict, but it was abt a few yrs bk and its not during openhouse. Think SAF will go the AI way...its the best among all.
It's the MSG-90 that is the clone of the PSG-1.
The chain goes like this.
PSG-1 released.
MSG-3 released.
MSG-90 released. (One year after MSG 3)
COST! COST! COST!
I don't know how to shoot the darn thing but damn right i know the stats. -
Suppression = the act of suppressing something.Originally posted by foxtrout8:Please understand that when i say 'other aircrafts' i meant the other aircrafts within the RSAF, can you dun be so sensitive?
Anyway, the EF-111 Raven is not a delicated SEAD aircraft. It is a EW support aircraft which support another aircraft which will then perform the SEAD or any other mission.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=suppress
To put an end to forcibly; subdue.
To curtail or prohibit the activities of.
So if i subdue your radar with lots of jamming, am i suppressing it? -
Yes, but the poster did not believe, or rather, disbelieved that artillery and/or SpecOps teams could do the job also.Originally posted by foxtrout8:There are many ways to skin a cat, no one say there is one. -
The meaning of SEAD is not literally onli and totally about suppressing but also about destroying. And yes the EF-111 is a SEAD aircraft but not a delicated one. The EA-6 which have the capability to discrupt and destroy is IMO a delicated SEAD plane.Originally posted by Johnston:Suppression = the act of suppressing something.
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=suppress
To put an end to forcibly; subdue.
To curtail or prohibit the activities of.
So if i subdue your radar with lots of jamming, am i suppressing it?
Back to my point on 'other fighters', it mean other fighters of the RSAF. -
I can suppress your SAM battery just fine if i use a couple B-52s or B-1s or B-2s to plaster the area with munitions.Originally posted by foxtrout8:The meaning of SEAD is not literally onli about suppressing but also about destroying.
Back to my point on 'other fighters', it mean other fighters of the RSAF.
I'm gonna have to read up on the stats of A4-SU and F-5, et al.
It's too long since i've touched those.
Here's a snippet.
Is there or is there not a EF/A-18 Hornet?
Think carefully.
Is there such plans in the pipeline? -
I dun need u to test me.Originally posted by Johnston:Here's a snippet.
Is there or is there not a EF/A-18 Hornet?
Think carefully.
Is there such plans in the pipeline? -
All ground attack aircraft can destroy AD pieces and some aircraft have capabilities to discrupt such systems but the fact is, not all aircraft are delicated SEAD (wild weasel) fighters which can detect, discrupt and engage this pieces.Originally posted by Johnston:I can suppress your SAM battery just fine if i use a couple B-52s or B-1s or B-2s to plaster the area with munitions.
Those are my opinions, you can disagree and im ok with it. -
Yes you do need me to test you, considering that you did not know of the ES-3 Shadow, which is now standard issue on USN Carrier Air Wings.Originally posted by foxtrout8:I dun need u to test me.
Were you aware of the EP-3 Orion before i jogged your memory?
Quick, you haven't answered the question.
Is there, or is there not, EF/A-18s in the pipeline? -
if i'm not wrong, it should be EF/A-18 Superhornet. This variant is suppose to be the EW fighter of the F/A-18 Superhornet family. It will replace the EA-6 that's in US naval aviation service now. That was what i read years ago, but i do believe the situation is unchanged. It was envisioned that the naval air arms will be operating only 3 or 4 platforms when most of the 70s era aircrafts are retired.Originally posted by Johnston:I can suppress your SAM battery just fine if i use a couple B-52s or B-1s or B-2s to plaster the area with munitions.
I'm gonna have to read up on the stats of A4-SU and F-5, et al.
It's too long since i've touched those.
Here's a snippet.
Is there or is there not a EF/A-18 Hornet?
Think carefully.
Is there such plans in the pipeline?
and i don't quite agree with using bombers for SEAD. we should be using precision strike instead of indiscriminate area suppression.
and if i'm not wrong, f5 is still in the interception role and a4 the strike/CAS role. f16c/d, i think, were bought with an eye toward deep interdiction/SEAD capacity. let me know if i'm wrong -
By the way, you invented "delicated" and "discruptive" aircraft?