In the evolving landscape of aerial warfare, information dominance and networked sensor fusion often outweigh brute force. The Ghost Net engagement, conducted by a Swedish Air Force four-ship Gripen E formation in coordination with NATO assets, exemplifies how carefully integrated avionics, stealthy emission tactics, and cooperative engagement can achieve decisive results against technologically advanced adversaries. In this mission, “Ghost Flight” intercepted and neutralized a Russian Su-35S patrol over the northern approaches to the Baltic, employing Radar-Samverkan — a coordinated radar and electronic warfare doctrine — to full effect. The engagement demonstrates not only the capability of the Gripen E’s avionics and weapons systems, but also the strategic advantage of information sharing and disciplined EMCON (Emission Control) in Beyond Visual Range (BVR) combat.
1. Scramble Order
A. F 21 Wing, Luleå — Swedish Perspective
The icy wind off the Gulf of Bothnia curled around hardened shelters as klaxons echoed. In Ghost Flight’s ready room, Major Karin “Frost” Edman slid the Mission Data Cartridge (MDC) into her Gripen E’s forward avionics bay. The cartridge instantly began transferring its payload — waypoints, Electronic Order of Battle (EOB), threat library, ROE parameters, and pre-loaded Meteor missile engagement zones — into the aircraft’s dual Mission Computers (MCs) over the MIL-STD-1553B data bus and ARINC 429 avionics interface.
Inside the Wide Area Display (WAD), the symbology bloomed into life: ownship icon, AWACS Link 16 tracks, fuel state bars for Ghost 32, 33, and 34, plus data from the NATO E-3 Sentry loitering south of Tromsø. Karin’s PS-05/A Mk4 radar sat in standby; Skyward-G IRST was already passively scanning ahead.
B. Khotilovo Air Base — Russian Perspective
At the same time, two Su-35S Flanker-E fighters of the 790th Fighter Aviation Regiment received a vector from A-50U Mainstay AWACS: unidentified contacts inbound from Swedish airspace, 320 km west. Major Dmitry “Barin” Korolyov ran a quick radar BIT check on his Irbis-E PESA, the 20-kilowatt beam in low-search mode, while Captain Sergey “Rook” Antonov powered up the OLS-35 IRST for a silent long-range search. Their L-150 Pastel RWR sat ready, silently waiting for the telltale sweep of NATO radar.
2. Takeoff and Climb
A. Swedish/NATO
Karin eased the RM16 turbofan to full military thrust, rolling smoothly down Runway 14. Ghost 32 and 33 followed in pairs, Ghost 34 last to lift, the four jets climbing in combat spread. The Tactical Information Data Link System (TIDLS) established a constant, encrypted exchange — each jet’s IRST, ESM, and radar data merged into a composite trackfile within every cockpit. This meant Ghost 34, still entirely radar silent, saw exactly what Karin’s radar did, without emitting a single watt.
B. Russian
Barin’s Su-35S roared into the winter sky, AL-41F1S afterburners punching the jet upward. The Mainstay relayed updated contact positions every 20 seconds. He ordered Rook into line-abreast formation, 15 km spacing, to widen their radar coverage arc. Both pilots kept radar power low, sweeping only intermittently to avoid providing a stable lock to enemy ESM receivers.
3. First Detection
A. Swedish/NATO
At 160 km out, the E-3 Sentry’s APY-2 radar picked up the Su-35s and datalinked the track to Ghost flight. Karin selected LPI (Low Probability of Intercept) mode, her Mk4 radar emitting a narrow, frequency-agile 2-second burst before shutting down. Ghost 33 mirrored the technique, alternating so no single aircraft had continuous emissions. Ghost 32 and 34 stayed completely passive, their ESM receivers triangulating the Su-35’s occasional Irbis-E sweeps.
B. Russian
Barin’s RWR barely whispered a faint tick — inconsistent, direction-shifting. They’re pinging us in LPI… sneaky Gripens, he thought. The Irbis-E in track-while-scan (TWS) painted fleeting blips, but their range-rate data was erratic. Rook’s OLS-35 got intermittent thermal spikes, but the cold northern sky and the Gripen’s reduced IR signature made it difficult to get a firm lock.
4. Tactical Execution — The Ghost Net
A. Swedish/NATO
By 90 km, Ghost flight’s Extended Tactical Spread was in place — 80 km lateral separation between Ghost 31/33 and Ghost 32/34, each pair offset in altitude. This geometry forced the Su-35s to divide sensor focus and made closure rate estimation unreliable. Karin illuminated the lead Su-35 for 2 seconds; the data flowed via TIDLS to Ghost 34, who initiated a silent Meteor launch from 68 km. The missile received mid-course guidance updates over TIDLS without Ghost 34’s radar ever going active.
B. Russian
Barin caught a sharp RWR spike — vertical polarization, then gone. Cross-polarization emissions meant jamming effectiveness would be cut. His SAP-518 ECM pod began noise-barrage in the suspected frequency bands, but the bursty, frequency-agile signals were hard to blanket. The Pastel didn’t show any missile warning — yet. Rook called out, “Possible uplink traffic — they’re guiding something in the dark.”
5. Engagement
A. Swedish/NATO
The Meteor stayed in mid-course datalink mode until 18 km, then switched to active seeker (“pitbull”). Karin’s WAD showed the solid track line blink into the kill box. The missile closed at Mach 4+, its throttleable ducted rocket maintaining endgame energy. Impact came seconds later — lead Flanker disintegrating into debris cloud.
B. Russian
Barin never saw it until his MAWS (Missile Approach Warning System) screamed — too late. He yanked hard left, dumping flares, but the Meteor’s high closing speed left no escape window. His Su-35 broke apart under the warhead’s blast-frag pattern. Rook, seeing the explosion, rolled into full afterburner, diving east to extend range.
6. Disengagement & Return
A. Swedish/NATO
With one Flanker destroyed and the second retreating, Ghost flight rejoined in cruise formation. Karin’s WAD displayed green track status across the board, all weapons and fuel states accounted for. The mission computer auto-archived every radar emission, IRST track, and missile telemetry for later debrief.
B. Russian
Rook throttled back after crossing into Russian ADIZ, switching radar to standby. The A-50U Mainstay demanded a contact report; all he could say was that the enemy’s networked tactics made them look like ghosts — only visible when they wanted to be, and deadly when they struck.
7. Post-Mission Debrief
A. NATO Debrief — Luleå
The After Action Report (AAR) concluded with an overall rating of Track Continuity at 96%, Missile Employment as flawless, and Survivability assessed as high. The coordinated use of Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) burst radar sequencing, combined with Infrared Search and Track (IRST) and Electronic Support Measures (ESM) data fusion over the Tactical Information Data Link System (TIDLS), successfully denied the enemy a reliable intercept vector. The Meteor missile’s engagement inside its No Escape Zone (NEZ) at long range proved decisive in destroying the target. Major Karin Edman emphasized that no Radar Warning Receiver (RWR) alerts were triggered on the opposing side until the terminal phase of missile flight, confirming that Emission Control (EMCON) discipline was executed perfectly.
B. Russian Debrief — Khotilovo
Rook reported intermittent, near-undetectable radar sweeps and an unseen BVR launch. The regiment’s analysis noted that the Gripen’s use of distributed passive sensors and bursty, cross-polarized LPI radar prevented effective jamming. Recommendation: deploy wingman mutual support radar illumination earlier, employ R-37M long-range missiles preemptively when AWACS detects LPI activity, and request Su-57 support for future northern intercepts.
8.Conclusion
The Ghost Net mission was more than a tactical victory; it was a validation of the Swedish Air Force’s and NATO’s doctrine for network-centric air combat in contested environments. By combining low-observable emission techniques, multi-platform sensor integration, and precision BVR weaponry, Ghost Flight demonstrated that survivability and lethality in modern aerial warfare hinge on information management as much as on raw aircraft performance. In the era of advanced radars, long-range missiles, and electronic warfare, the Ghost Net stands as a case study in how to turn the battlespace itself into a weapon — one in which the opponent never truly sees the threat until it is too late.
Note: This story is entirely fictional and does not reflect any real-life events, military operations, or policies. It is a work of creative imagination, crafted solely for the purpose of entertainment engagement. All details and events depicted in this narrative are based on fictional scenarios and have been inspired by open-source, publicly available media. This content is not intended to represent any actual occurrences and is not meant to cause harm or disruption.
Comments
Post a Comment