@aniemyer
I think there is space to refit an E-2D (which have large enough crews with the clearances for the mission) to add SIGINT capability, although that would require taking certain other boxes out so it would probably be a 1-2 planes per squadron mod.
@devil_n_details
TBH, I have long thought the basic E-2 airframe is potentially an excellent hull to adapt to the mission. Still being built, supportable, with lots of empty space into which to cram aircrew and...stuff.
@YN_Nope
There’s been a gap since the disestablishment of VQ-5 & 6. Land-based, be it UAV or crewed, has significant limits. Organic assets provide flexibility & enhanced major force multiple.
@aniemyer
The EA18G arguably adds a EW/ISR capability that no other service can match. Airforce doesn't have a fixed fighter with organic EW package like the EA18G. What navy needs is unmanned stealth for deep strike/peneration of contested space.
@hadadoxin
I concur in part, and demur in part. I would posit that fused integration for strike, especially deep strike, is a much more robust concept of operations than any “all in” on either singular solution. I’ve seen too many fads come and go.
@aniemyer
The Navy should just buy the RQ-180. It can stay up for days and won’t take up deck space. It will also provide targeting and serve as a network node.
@Blain_Shinno
Flight deck space isn’t an issue right now,our CVWs are numerically smaller. Long-term dwell has issues and advantages all its own. BACNs are nice, but the point is primarily tactical and organic collection and dissemination.
@GalushaMJ
They did the mission for over 30 years; the ES-3A followed up and had a lot of airframe and systems life left in them when the Beancounters’ knives were plunged into the program.