The Marine Corps continues the sun down of the EA6B ICAP III (Prowler) aircraft and disbandment of the four Marine tactical electronic warfare (VMAQ) squadrons. I challenge the Department of Defense and the Marine Corps headquarters (HQMC) to explain how shuttering the VMAQ community and sun downing of the Prowler will benefit the warfighting capabilities of the Marine air-ground task force (MAGTF) or the combatant commanders? Especially given there are no comparable electronic warfare (EW) weapon systems within the MAGTF or combatant commands to offset the loss of the Prowler’s EW capabilities. Further perplexing is the decision to disband the VMAQ community, the only aviation EW organization within the MAGTF designated to support and sustain the fifth function of Marine aviation, electronic warfare.
Strategically and tactically, the Marine composite reconnaissance squadron (VMCJ)/VMAQ community have been at the forefront of airborne EW for more than five decades. The insight and EW knowledge of a few Marine Corps aviators during the early 1960s were the catalyst for the development of the EA6A (Intruder). By the end of the Vietnam conflict, the Marine Corps’ VMCJ/EA6A “electric intruder” community was the premier airborne EW organization within the Department of Defense.
Approximately 20 years later, Desert Shield/Desert Storm would highlight the significance of airborne EW. Again, the Marine Corps VMAQ community with the EA6B ICAP aircraft would be front and center, along with Navy EA6B Prowlers and Air Force EF-111, demonstrating the tactical and strategic importance of airborne EW dominance in supporting and safeguarding assets on the battlefield. The VMAQ community would underscore their tactical value in day-to-day combat operations, receiving the Navy’s 1991 Prowler of the Year award. Lessons learned from that conflict resulted in the reorganization of the Marine Corps VMAQ community from one large squadron (18 aircraft) into three operational squadrons (six aircraft) and the activation of a fourth squadron (six aircraft) from the Marine Corps Reserve to better meet and support DoD and MAGTF commitments.
Twenty-six years later, we are disbanding the EA6B community, significantly shutting down all Marine Corps EW/electronic attack (EA) capabilities. This means the loss of 50 percent of the expeditionary EA capabilities within the Department of Defense with no replacement assets to fulfill operational plans and combatant command requirements. The strategic and tactical EW capabilities and the airborne EW community that has been at the forefront of airborne EW and a part of our national defense posture for more than five decades is being disbanded.
HQMC has shutdown two of the four EA6B squadrons, twelve EA6B ICAP III aircraft have been moth-balled to Davis Monthan or are now tethered on a pole next to an aviation museum or on board a Marine Corps/naval air station. Additionally, the manning of the VMAQ community has been reduced with little concern for maintaining EW expertise. By 2019, with the shutdown of the VMAQ community, the airborne EW expertise and knowledge cultivated and residing within the Q community will cease to exist! The one thing that is no occurring as the VMAQ community is deactivated is the effort to conserve and retain the organization responsible for executing the fifth function of Marine Corps aviation, Electronic Warfare. After VMAQ 2 encases the squadron’s colors for the last time, Marine Corps airborne electronic warfare support virtually will be nonexistent within the MAGTF.
Proponents of the shuttering of the VMAQ community justify this decision based on funding shortfalls and the belief that the Prowler was outdated and over the hill. Yes, the EA6B ICAP III is an older airframe, but wing fatigue life issues that existed several years ago were resolved with new center wings, extending the life expectance of the Prowler into the middle of the next decade. Even as we shut down the squadrons, the aircraft still could be flown for another five years. As for the EA6B ICAP III weapon system, the aircraft is state-of-the art technology with the same EW/EA weapon systems capabilities that currently reside in the EA-18 Growler aircraft. The Prowler continues to receive software and weapon system upgrades that parallel the EA-18G improvements and capabilities.
As for the F-35, technological and radar advances over the last 12 years have diminished the effectiveness of stealth, placing these aircraft also in jeopardy of radar detection on the battlefield. Additionally, the F-35 electronic attack capabilities (jamming) are self-protecting in nature and when forced into this protective EW mode will highlight the aircraft on the victim’s radar, further defeating the usefulness of the low observable, reduced radar cross section technology. As a replacement for the Prowler, the F-35’s capability to conduct escorts/standoff jamming in support of legacy aircraft is limited. The Navy’s procurement of additional EA-18G to support their carrier air wings, to include their F-35s, are an indication of this reality.
If the Prowler is obsolete and over the hill, what’s with the heavy operational demands being placed on the VMAQ squadrons and the EA6B ICAP III over the last two years? VMAQ-4 shut down on 3 June 2017. A year prior to shut down, Q-4 Prowlers were flying EW missions out of Incirlik, Turkey, in support of CENTCOM. On Q-4’s arrival back in the United States, six months prior to their scheduled shutdown, they deployed for a four-week Air Force red flag exercise, a one-week Air Force F-16 training exercise, and a four-week Marine Corps weapon tactic instructor exercise. After their ten-week deployment in the United States, they returned to Marine Corps Air Station Cherry Point in May 2017. A month later the squadron colors were retired.
Today, VMAQ-3 is deployed to Incirlik, Turkey flying EW mission in support of U.S./CENTCOM operations in the Middle East. Q-3 squadron’s colors will be encased in spring 2018 after their return from Incirlik and a similar U.S. exercise training cycle. The operational tempo of the VMAQ squadrons showcase the requirement for airborne EW. The Marine Corps decision to shutter the VMAQ community not only impacts their tactical EW capabilities but also the airborne resources of the Department of Defense and combatant commands.
Although the Department of the Navy has indicated that it will assume the expeditionary EW capabilities after the decommissioning to the VMAQ community, they will accept the electronic attack requirements without an increase in operational squadrons. The Navy’s four expeditionary squadrons currently are designated to support Air Force EW requirements. Right now, the decommissioning of the Marine Corps VMAQ community mean the loss of four expeditionary squadrons/two dozen EA6B ICAP aircraft, in conjunction with the loss of over one hundred and fifty aircrew. How does the DoN propose to meet this additional DoD EA commitments without the deployment support assets or an increase in the number of expeditionary EA-18G squadrons?
The Navy EA-18G expeditionary squadrons will be in extremely high demand after the EA6B sundown program is completed and challenged to meet the COCOM’s and Department of Defense electronic attack requirements. Will on-call EA-18G/EA capabilities be adequate enough to support Marine Corps and COCOM requirements? Current funding requirements to extend the Prowler after 2019 have been estimated at $100 million dollars a year; other NAVAIR sources indicate $25 million a year. However, does it really matter? Is the risk acceptable?
Extend the Prowler with its proven and unique EW capabilities for several years, while procuring the EA-18G to meet future MAGTF and DoD EW requirements. Marines train and operate differently than our sister service and always will. Marines supporting Marines has always been warfighting doctrine and should be retained.
The disbandment of the VMAQ community is a tactical and strategic mistake that should be reversed immediately. Have the combatant command’s operation plans for airborne EW/EA requirements been reviewed for potential impact and consequences of this decision?
