Forum: General F-35 Forum

The F-35 has a robust EW/EA capability -- ASQ-239 and the APG-81 -- arguably the most capable ever put on a multirole role aircraft ever. It will do some things that Prowler/Growler cannot and will not be able to do, it will be better at some things that those jets already do, but it will also lack some features of both. As such, in the near term it is not a substitute for the entire range of capabilities those jets provide. However, in EA, it's combination of proximity and power-out has already watered people's eyes, witness Northern Edge.

F-16.net Sponsor

quicksilver wrote:

The F-35 has a robust EW/EA capability -- ASQ-239 and the APG-81 -- arguably the most capable ever put on a multirole role aircraft ever. It will do some things that Prowler/Growler cannot and will not be able to do, it will be better at some things that those jets already do, but it will also lack some features of both. As such, in the near term it is not a substitute for the entire range of capabilities those jets provide. However, in EA, it's combination of proximity and power-out has already watered people's eyes, witness Northern Edge.

The AN/ASQ-239 is a passive system. An Advanced, but its still passive. The APG-81 has the mid-band & high-band EA capability. A big part of reason for the NGJ is to complement the AESA radar's EA capability. The F-35 without the NGJ lacks the low-band jamming that disrupts ground radar and AWACS/AEW&C airborne radar, and possibly some of the larger Russian fighter radars.

Saying the Growler "will not" is presumptuous. The EA-18 will most likely receive a radar upgrade during its service life. This may include APG-81 type mid-band/high-band EA capabilities. This would push it closer to the integrated EA capabilities of the F-35. The Signal processing and AN/ALQ-218 EW system is quite advanced.

The F-35 is an advanced and capable aircraft, no question, but it will need the NGJ to make it an effective EA platform.

spazsinbad wrote:

Interesting quote then on the 2nd page of above wherein the benefits of 'miniaturisation' may be relevant to not only UAVs but F-35s etc.

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... ml&p=2
(snip)
The Growler, although the newest aircraft in the fleet, will have a limited service life of 15-17 years left by the time it starts carrying NGJ pods. Service planners say they must have an AEA system that can be “transportable” from platform to platform in order to support an advanced electronic attack capability.

“There is the potential to combine radar, electronic warfare and other capabilities for use in smaller aircraft,” says Green. “It could very well be a UAV because the Growler has a limited lifespan.”..."

The limitations for using a UCAV is that the missions systems compute power would be limited or excessively expensive to develop after the main F-35/EA-18 programs. The ALQ-99 replacement pods probably won't do well on a small UCAV due to size/weight/drag. A UCAV with upgraded electrical generators and a modular F-35 or EA-18 compatible mission computer would stand a better chance of making it into service.

I remember reading that the EA-18 and X-47D share some compatibility in avionics hardware. There are newer generation PowerPC avionics boards that are half the size,and 4 times the processing capability that have significant software compatibility with the existing EA-18 and F-35 avionics. This compatibility would definitely fast-track a UCAV based on existing EA software systems. The earlier F-22 blocks used completely different avionics processor technology than the F-35 uses, which complicated software transfer between development programs.

Just out of curiosity, where would the NGJ be placed on the F-35? Internally? Wing pylon? Does the F-35A have a centerline hardpoint?

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Just out of curiosity, where would the NGJ be placed on the F-35? Internally? Wing pylon? Does the F-35A have a centerline hardpoint?

I would guess that operating through the skin of the F-35 would not work. The center-line position is there on the F-35A and presumably could do it assuming the weight of the thing is less than the rating of the attachment points and that it was able to get the LOS and the ram-air needed from that semi-recessed position. I have no idea what ALQ-99 or NGJ weigh though.

A single and three pod layout is what I have seen so far for F-35/NGJ layouts.

Here is some interesting tech coming online: A software driven, tunable (multi-freq) & steerable conformal antenna with some real potential for a jamming pod (imagine one pod that covers all frequencies).

http://chesapeakebayaoc.org/documents/A ... 9_2012.pdf

SpudmanWP wrote:

A single and three pod layout is what I have seen so far for F-35/NGJ layouts.

Stealth pod is also a possibility, which could accomodate NGJ without significantly affecting the overall RCS

Thanks for antennae info SWP. Soon not only will we have 'wearable computers' but also 'wearable antennae' (not of the bug variety I hope). Couple these items with Virtual Displays in eye-glasses and we are good to go. Very Happy

[quote="neurotech"]

quicksilver wrote:

0e F-35 is an advanced and capable aircraft, no question, but it will need the NGJ to make it an effective EA platform.

BS

[quote="quicksilver"]

neurotech wrote:

quicksilver wrote:

0e F-35 is an advanced and capable aircraft, no question, but it will need the NGJ to make it an effective EA platform.

BS

The APG-81 doesn't have low-band capability. That is a major gap for an EA platform.

Last edited by count_to_10 on Aug 29, 2012 - 12:18 AM; edited 1 time in total

neurotech wrote:

quicksilver wrote:

neurotech wrote:

quicksilver wrote:

0e F-35 is an advanced and capable aircraft, no question, but it will need the NGJ to make it an effective EA platform.

BS

The APG-81 doesn't have low-band capability. That is a major gap for an EA platform.

What threats are in that gap? Is it SAMs in general, search radar, or something more specialized?

:: Message removed by moderator. Please, no personal attacks! ::

count_to_10 wrote:

neurotech wrote:

The APG-81 doesn't have low-band capability. That is a major gap for an EA platform.

What threats are in that gap? Is it SAMs in general, search radar, or something more specialized?

The Russian's have been known to use low-band radar in AEW&C aircraft. Russian & notably the formerly Serbian ground systems uses low-band as well.

I enjoy how worked up quicksilver got about that jamming capability. The F-35 is missing an entire wavelength band, thus it cannot be a good EA platform. CSBA has repeatedly said that the threat environment is going to low wavelength radars. If the F-35 / F-22 is optimized for the high wavelengths and less (not unstealthy, just less stealthy) in the low wavelengths, then it makes sense for someone to try their luck around there.

Heck, even if the threats were only in the mid to high wavelength range, the F-35 won't have nearly as much radar power as the NGJ could provide. I remember one of the discussion points was whether or not an AESA array in a pod could put out enough power to be a good jammer.

Neurotech, I agree with you on the NGAD airframe. If that goes into production as a 5.5 gen fighter, it is the logical replacement for the Growler.

As for those who mentioned the Compass Call. I said "Strike jamming." I don't know if the USAF really plans to bring the Compass Call into effective range against a Chinese IADS.

SpudmanWP wrote:

A single and three pod layout is what I have seen so far for F-35/NGJ layouts...

Sorry for being out of an interesting exchange (day job! Sad

)

Spud has a good reference as usual!

The F-35 with the AN/APG-81 is more capable than the EA-18G with the AN/APG- 79 if for no other reason than the F-35 Mission Computer. This is being recognized in other areas; (N00019-09-C-0019) to continue development of the new Advanced Mission Computer (AMC) Type 4 System for the F/A-18E/F and EA-18G aircraft (15-Sep-11).
Yes their are "gaps" in the EW technology for the F-35 but not omissions. EW technology evolves with the electronics technology and the tactics evolve even faster. To get an EW system off the table and into the box, designing has to stop for F-35 manufacturing. Fortunately EW development doesn't stop with the F-35 or the EA-18G or the Compass Call, etc.
NGJ is the next tool to add to the "tool pouch" for each of these platforms and each will use it in a very intimate manner. The F-35 will use the a/c mission system's EW "smarts" to control the pods (configurable transmitters and antennas) and save the pod power of processors. Until the Growler get's a "bigger brain" the NGJ pods will have processing power, as well.
The Compass Call has airborne power in it's four engines and can haul a couple of shipping containers full of EW folks and computers plus two wings full of NGJ pods. It did an unsung masterful job in Libya and it's technology and tactics will continue to add to this "Witches Brew" of EW....and yes "I" would very much like to have this powerful player somewhere near the front of a strike package.
Does one size fit all "NO and HExx NO!" but we work with what we got!, and each of these have good tools for today. Tomorrow we have to expand to cover the new developing threats. Sorry for the preaching but I "Like" this topic. Embarassed

Forum: General F-35 Forum

NGJ Carried by F-35 Early Next Decade (Oz Growler Equip Buy)