An AWACS can detect a low-flying (terrain- or sea-hugging) Tomahawk, but it usually cannot do so “easily.” Detection is possible but the detection window is often short and depends on several variables (altitude of both platforms, missile RCS, background clutter, ECM, sensor processing and networking).
Why it’s hard (quick bullets)
- Radar-horizon / geometry. An AWACS at altitude has a much larger line-of-sight than a ground radar, so it can see low targets earlier than surface radars — but a missile hugging terrain still dramatically reduces how far away it appears. That shrinks the warning time.
- Low altitude + terrain/sea clutter. Flying close to the ground or sea creates huge radar clutter that hides small, slow targets — extracting the missile return from background requires powerful look-down signal processing. Sea-skimming is particularly meant to exploit this.
- Small radar cross section (RCS) and subsonic speed. Tomahawks are relatively small, designed for low RCS and to cruise subsonically; those traits reduce radar detection range and make discrimination from clutter harder.
- Countermeasures and terrain masking. Modern cruise missiles use terrain-contour matching, low-altitude routing and sometimes ECM or GPS denial to complicate detection and tracking.
Why an AWACS still helps
- Altitude advantage + advanced waveforms. Because AWACS fly high and carry powerful pulse-Doppler/track-while-scan radars (e.g., APY-1/2 family), they increase the probability of detection compared with many ground radars and provide better tracking and cueing to shooters. Improved processing (modern waveforms, clutter suppression, MTI/Doppler) helps spotting small, low targets.
- Sensor fusion & networks. In practice AWACS are less valuable alone than as part of a sensor network (ships, ground radars, E-7/E-3, satellites, fighters, cues from intelligence). Fusion increases detection and response time.
Practical effect (what that means operationally)
- Detection is possible but typically gives a shorter reaction/engagement window than for high-flying targets. How short? It varies — from many minutes (if the missile happens to climb or has higher RCS / launches far away) down to only a few minutes or less when the Tomahawk is sea-skimming and launched close in. Exact ranges depend on AWACS altitude, missile altitude, RCS and background — so there’s no single number.
Bottom line
- AWACS make detecting cruise missiles more likely than relying only on low-altitude ground radars, but they do not magically eliminate the problem. Terrain-hugging Tomahawks are deliberately designed to reduce detection time; defeating them normally requires layered sensors, good signal processing, and active defenses (fighters, ship-based radars/CIWS, integrated C2).
