Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnews!cbnews!military
From: sysmgr@KING.ENG.UMD.EDU (Doug Mohney)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: why F-4's as Wild Weasels?
Message-ID: <1991Feb6.033838.23303@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 6 Feb 91 03:38:38 GMT
References: <1991Feb4.072034.23521@cbnews.att.com>,<1991Feb5.044528.7098@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: The U. of MD, CP, CAD lab
Lines: 33
Approved: military@att.att.com

In article <1991Feb5.044528.7098@cbnews.att.com>, deichman@cod.nosc.mil (Shane D. Deichman) writes:
>
>>(2) "The F-117 ___________________ (would, would not) make a
>>    good Wild Weasel platform."   (If not, why not?)
>>
>
>It would NOT.  Part of the mission of the Wild Weasel is to make
>the enemy aware of its presence, getting the SAM to light up the
>acquisition radars, then send in HARMs to kill the site.  With a
>low-observable platform like the F-117a, you'd have to send out a
>radar signal yourself to get the SAM's ESM detectors going 

You don't have to. Have someone launch in a couple of RPVs or target drones
with big fat radar signatures and you find yourself in happy-land.

>-- but
>then you'd be vulnerable to the same type of missiles you're sending
>to the SAM site.  Also, I believe Wild Weasels rely on jamming pods
>(which also give off a sizable electromagnetic signal), so a Stealth
>fighter would be revealing its position to more people than necessary....

You don't need to jam with stealth. You just play invisible (electronically). 
HARM needs a radar to dive on, but is *not* a radar emitter. 

>There's also the topic of "cost effectiveness," too....

Huh? The F-117 is about $63 million a pop. Not a bad price for a one-of-a-kind
airplane.


 Doug Mohney, Operations Manager, CAD Lab/ME, Univ. of Maryland College Park
	        *       Ray Kaplan for DECUS president     *
                          SYSMGR@CADLAB.ENG.UMD.EDU