Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

cru wrote:

It seems that Eurofighter fanboys are convinced that DASS EW suites is comparable, if not better than later US made ones (for F 15 K, F 15 SG, F 16 E/F. Well, let's see.

A EW suite has two parts, a passive system and a jammer.

The pasive system is formed from a radar warning receiver (RWR) and an ESM.

The latest RWRs are digital. However only two countries US and Israel are known for building digital RWRs. Raytheon has the ALR 67 (V)4 (for SuperHornets) and ALR 69 (V)A (the first are being installed in USAF F 16 C), NorthropGrumman has Falcon Edge (for UAE F 16 E/F), the Israeli has the Elisra SPS-2110 (F 16 I, F 15 I).

The ESM offer geolocation (establishing the range, not only bearing of the emmiter like an RWR). Here the number of potential suppliers narrows: up to now, only two companies are known to offer such a thing: Northropgrumman (Falcon Edge for the F 16 E/F) and the same Elisra SPS 2110 (F 16I and F 15I. An interesting detail: all USAF F 16 CJ that have HTS (HARM Targeting System) have this capability ([url] http://www.raytheon.com/products/hts_e/[/url] ).

An up-to-date jammer must have: PowerPC based computers, MPM (microwave power transmiter, that reduce the transmiter volume with 80 %) and monolithic microwave integrated circuits (that's the equivalent for jammers of what AESA technology is for radars) that allow reactive jamming, instead pre-emptive jamming. Here, there are 4 systems that are known to offer this: the ALQ 135 M (for F 15 K, F 15 SG and possible upgrade for US F 15E), the Falcon Edge (the EW suite for F 16 blk. for UAE), the mentioned ELISRA SPS 2110 (F 15 I and F 16I), and the Spectra on the Rafale.

Here are some info: http://www.raytheon.com/products/stellent/groups/sas/documents/asset/cms01_058055.pdf http://www.raytheon.com/products/stellent/groups/sas/documents/asset/alr67.pdf http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/ASD/rf/nexgen.html http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/ASD/b ... LQ135M.pdf http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/ASD/rf/Falcon.html

So, we have:

- a few fighters that have digital RWRs: F 16 C (USAF) , F 16 I, F 15 I (Israel), F 15 K (from 2008 Singapore F 15 SG), F 16 E/F (UAE), F 18 E/F (US Navy);

- 3 fighters that have ESM and capable of geolocation: F 16 E/F, F 16I, F 15 I; also F 16 CJ have this capability pod in a attached pod.

- 5 fighters that have jammers capable of the so-called coherent jamming: F 15 K (from 2008 F 15 SG), F 15 I, F 16 I, F 16 E/F (UAE) and Rafale

The DASS is more comparable with older systems installed on present USAF F 15 C/E (ALR 56C and TEWS) and F 16C (ALR 56 and ALQ 184).

Can you provide some info proving the contrary?

Guess not. In EW, I'm afraid, Europe is a little beyound US...or Israel, for that matter...

Because you haven't done your home work before entering this dicussion doesn't mean that you are right. I suggest you to inform your self a little bit better about non US systems before you involve in such discussions and start to make unproven and unreasoned claims. Show me a single source that suggests that the RWRs of Rafale, Gripen or Eurofighter are not digital! It's you who allege this and it's therefore you who have to prove it not us!

F-16.net Sponsor

Maffa wrote:

Scorpion do you believe there will be a T3 at all? Who really wants it? The only chance of a T3 would be some big commercial hit like Japan, so that some Eurofighter consortium country can free of some of its own T1-T2 aircrafts and force the others to commit to T3 funding.

At present, though, no one is interested in a T3.

The situation is a little bit complicate, there are some funding problems for the UK and Italy. The contracts were negotiated well from the industriy's site. Workshare in the production is dependend on the numbers, and if not all partners agree to reject tranche 3 there will be problems. If only the UK for example cancels T3 they would have to pay penalties which might be similar high as the order itself. The UK is currently the only partner who insists to cancel tranche 3 at all. Italy want to cut numbers, but not entirely cancel the third tranche. That no one wants tranche 3 is wrong as well, Germany and Spain are fully commited to the third tranche and there is currently no indication that they will change their position. The Saudi deal provides a breathing break for the UK, as the Saudis will get british tranche 2 aircraft in the 2008-10 timeframe and they will have to pay for them. This frees up some funds for other purposes over the next years. Nonetheless the allocated UK aircraft, will have to be replaced at a later stage retaining the total number. All we can do is waiting, there might be cuts, but there mustn't be cuts.

Very well then. I didnt know Germany and Spain wanted T3 so badly, and on the contrary i knew JSF project countries (Italy and UK) wanted to stop on T2 (despite UK Typhoons are actually testing AG abilities. Italian military and inustry publicly says they'd like a reduction, but as a matter of fact would enjoy suppression of T3 altogether: Af chief repeatedly said EFA are meant to air superiority, while F-35(B, sigh) are meant for AG roles, and that's all. No need for EFAs to have any AG role, nor JSFs to make any AA role but to save their own six's.

Have Germany and Spain any alternatives for T3 to cover AG roles?

Maffa wrote:

Have Germany and Spain any alternatives for T3 to cover AG roles?

Spain is interested in the F-35 as a replacement of their F-18s. Fact is the F-35 won't be available for non participitants for quite some time, some nations need an earlier replacement. Germany is entirely focusing on Typhoon to replace its F-4F and parts of the Tornado IDS fleet. In the future there is more interest in unmanned systems. Hence the Typhoon might be the last manned combat aircraft for the Luftwaffe. But the future is unpredictable and we don't know how fast and well development of UCAVs will go ahead.

Quote:

Spain is interested in the F-35 as a replacement of their F-18s. Fact is the F-35 won't be available for non participitants for quite some time, some nations need an earlier replacement.

i dont have a clear picture in my mind but i always considered T3 and JSF as competitors even in availability, i mean i thought they both should pop out in the market more or less at the same time. If Spain looks forward for JSF AND T3 i guess the first should be Navy's ad the latter Ed'A, arent they? Or are they looking for two different lines of fully multirole airplanes? In any case, if Germany and Spain has no real alternative, there will T3 or money from penalties to buy off-the-shelves Italian made F-35s (had a nasty thought, but i will keep it for myself...)

Scorpion, thanks for your responses.
I am feeling charitable so I will help CRU out a little;

Radar Warning Receiver (RWR)

One of the fundamental sensors available to a modern fighter is its radar. However the use of such a system also puts an aircraft at risk since, as an active system it emits electromagnetic radiation. The DASS is equipped with Radar Warning Receivers (RWRs) designed to detect such emissions. The particular units used are Super Heterodyne (SuperHet) based wide-band receivers and are located in the port side pod (both front and rear) and within the aircraft's fuselage giving full 360° coverage in azimuth (elevation coverage is currently unknown).

These units are combined with on-board processing systems enabling not only a bearing to be determined but also the likely type of radar (and thus the platform it is deployed on). This is achieved using a stored database of radar signatures forming part of the ESM, Electronic Support Measures suite. Through the use of high speed digital signal processing the ESM will attempt to map the detected emission to its database. One of the weaknesses of current (and more so older) RWR systems is a difficulty in countering Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) enabled emissions. These use various techniques to try and hide the emitted signal. Although it is unclear whether the DASS RWRs possess a capability to detect and classify such emissions it is known the Marconi (now BAE Systems) have been working hard in this area for some time.

http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk/Eu ... ences.html

I urge you to read that linked page.

Next you are going to tell us this is all marketing hype and the only components of the DASS are a rubber band, a lollipop stick and a kids marble, right?

I have no doubt that the F-15 has an excellent avionics package, but so does the Typhoon, these systems get quietly updated when and if required, for both aircraft.

Quote:

I am feeling charitable so I will help CRU out a little;

Radar Warning Receiver (RWR)

One of the fundamental sensors available to a modern fighter is its radar. However the use of such a system also puts an aircraft at risk since, as an active system it emits electromagnetic radiation. The DASS is equipped with Radar Warning Receivers (RWRs) designed to detect such emissions. The particular units used are Super Heterodyne (SuperHet) based wide-band receivers and are located in the port side pod (both front and rear) and within the aircraft's fuselage giving full 360° coverage in azimuth (elevation coverage is currently unknown).

These units are combined with on-board processing systems enabling not only a bearing to be determined but also the likely type of radar (and thus the platform it is deployed on). This is achieved using a stored database of radar signatures forming part of the ESM, Electronic Support Measures suite. Through the use of high speed digital signal processing the ESM will attempt to map the detected emission to its database. One of the weaknesses of current (and more so older) RWR systems is a difficulty in countering Low Probability of Intercept (LPI) enabled emissions. These use various techniques to try and hide the emitted signal. Although it is unclear whether the DASS RWRs possess a capability to detect and classify such emissions it is known the Marconi (now BAE Systems) have been working hard in this area for some time.

http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk/Eu ... ences.html

I urge you to read that linked page.

Next you are going to tell us this is all marketing hype and the only components of the DASS are a rubber band, a lollipop stick and a kids marble, right?

I have no doubt that the F-15 has an excellent avionics package, but so does the Typhoon, these systems get quietly updated when and if required, for both aircraft.

For a Eurofraud fanboy, it's strange that you don't know that the site you mention is not the official site, but an unoficial one, gathering other fanboys. The offifcal one is http://www.eurofighter.com/ (not that this one would excel in correct informations LMAO

)

Now, on a more serious note, the fact that some RWRs are using digital technology, does not make them comparable with the full daigitally chanellized RWR I mentioned. The main difference is the crystal video receiver (the first step in detecting the incoming signals). Up to now, all the RWRs (including those that use digital technology) have analog crystal video receivers. The few mentioned ones has digital video receivers (DCVR).

Quote:

Because you haven't done your home work before entering this dicussiondoesn't mean that you are right. I suggest you to inform your self a little bit better about non US systems before you involve in such discussions and start to make unproven and unreasoned claims. Show me a single source that suggests that the RWRs of Rafale, Gripen or Eurofighter are not digital! It's you who allege this and it's therefore you who have to prove it not us!

Really? Then show me a single source that suggest that the those RWRs are fully digital...As for Spectra, I already mention that this is the best non-US or non Israeli system

cru wrote:

For a Eurofraud fanboy, it's strange that you don't know that the site you mention is not the official site, but an unoficial one, gathering other fanboys. The offifcal one is http://www.eurofighter.com/ (not that this one would excel in correct informations LMAO

)

Had he said that it is an official source? No he haven't. But that's it is not an official site doesn't mean all is wrong their. Sources are given at the end every section. Do you think that all the people pull all this things out of their a$$?

Quote:

Really? Then show me a single source that suggest that the those RWRs are fully digital...As for Spectra, I already mention that this is the best non-US or non Israeli system

Show me a single source which proves the opposite! I have requested you to do so before and it's you who started with such a claim and it is therefore you who must back it up before.

CRU, I chose that site randomly and I know it isn`t an official site. If I took the official site you would call it hype. Official or not I don`t think it would make any difference to you.

I too could post BAE brochures as freely as you post Raytheon ones but is there any point?

Your "points".

1. Typhoon RWR uses digital processors when you claimed it didn`t. You claim that digital logarithmic transfer (which is what a DCVR does) provides an advantage over the Typhoon system but don`t tell us why, other than that these systems are newer.

As far as I have read, a Digital CVR makes a RWR system more reliable, calibration free and cheaper than a conventional system, can you tell us how this makes a Superhet based system with digital processors less able in a fight? It`s all in the processors you know, that`s where all the money goes.....

2. You somehow know that the Typhoon cannot geolocate but provide nothing to support that, then claim it as an advantage for other fighters.

Geolocation is achieved using multi-ship datalinks that share data to get a very precise threat location. Typhoon can do this. Show me I am incorrect, I can admit I am wrong, enlighten me.

3. You trumpet jamming techniques for other fighters but don`t realise that Typhoon already has these capabilities, like reactive countermeasures.

If BAE avionics are good enough for the F-22 and F-35, I`ll take them for the Typhoon. In the end, the ALR-94 is made by the same company that helps produce the DASS remember, which by the way is being kept current and up to date. The DASS employs coherant and non coherant jamming that you trumpet for other fighters, just to make you feel better, I will post one PDF to prove it from SELEX.
http://www.selex-sas.com/EN/Common/file ... A_DASS.pdf

If you want people to provide any sources, provide some that state the Typhoon doesn`t have these capabilities that you claim.

You can dislike the Typhoon, which is ok, but get real.

Here is what I mean... I am posting a list that may be of interest, which shows you how far "behind" Europe is in EW, note how many non-European fighters are equipped with Euro` EW systems. We can`t be that bad after all, can we?

http://www.aviationnow.com/media/pdf/sp ... ar_sys.pdf

Quote:

If BAE avionics are good enough for the F-22 and F-35, I`ll take them for the Typhoon. In the end, the ALR-94 is made by the same company that helps produce the DASS remember, which by the way is being kept current and up to date. The DASS employs coherant and non coherant jamming that you trumpet for other fighters, just to make you feel better, I will post one PDF to prove it from SELEX.

Wait just a minute. I have been trying to keep out of this but your statement above is ignorant at best and disingenuous at worst.

Just a small sample.

United Defense Land Systems
http://www.na.baesystems.com/releasesDetail.cfm?a=322

National Sensor Systems
http://www.roboticstrends.com/displayar ... c898c1e8f9

“Last year, BAE made headlines when it spent $4.1 billion to purchase United Defense Industries, makers of the Bradley armored vehicle used in Iraq. This was the largest takeover of a U.S. military company by a foreign one.

But even before that, BAE was moving at a steady clip, acquiring more than a dozen American companies in the last six years.

BAE vaulted into the American market in a bold way with the acquisition of Lockheed Martins' Sanders subsidiary in 2000, which does top-secret, highly classified electronics work for the Pentagon. Once that barrier was broken, other acquisitions came more easily.”

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/08/02/business/bae.php

Make note, especially of Sanders. A lot of that “European EW” is in fact American. You have got to love Selex!

Thumper, by all means don`t refrain from posting in the thread!

I couldn`t open two of your links and I don`t understand your reference to SELEX? I hope you are not going to tell us that the Typhoon DASS is actually a US system.

BAE made US acquisitions, I hope you don`t really believe that BAE in the UK has ZERO access to advances made by BAE US? That would be naive.
Anyway, I picked a comment from the last, year old article you posted from the Tribune..

"In the same speech in May in Washington, Turner went out of his way to stress BAE's dedication to keeping national security secrets: "I really want to reiterate that our record of keeping U.S. secrets is immaculate."

Yeah ok Mike. you will KEEP U.S. secrets safe and out of the hands of foreign powers but I bet you will lobby for a few yourself right? You ever heard of technology sharing Thumper. As an example BAE gave the Pentagon the BROACH warhead which was a classified MOD/BAE project, but you think BAE gets nothing in return, ya ok!

They scratch each others back`s Thumper. BAE was making EW systems for decades before it`s US acquisitions anyway. In a chat I had with an RAF airman, he stressed that U.S. avionics were usually better than everyone else's when he was "in" with the exception of UK EW kit which was it`s equal and sometimes better in his opinion.

Carry on living the dream mate....In this part of the thread I challenged CRU to tell us why the Typhoon EW suite was a heap of junk compared to other fighters, other than telling us the aircraft lacked certain capabilities where he was clearly mistaken, he added nothing.
Other than telling us that a couple of new systems used microwave transmitters which just make installation more compact and move the transmitters closer to the antennae, in addition to the use of one extra digital component with CVR`s, he didn`t say squat and tell us why these are an advantage in combat.

I think the DASS is comparable to any other system out there today. It is about how effective the system is in practise and what it can actually do rather than talk of individual components being newer than the other guys.

In conclusion, we each utilize each others technology, US to Europe and vice versa. There are probably plenty of US components on board Typhoon, thanks for that. There are also a lot of Euro` components and systems being used right now by US forces. That`s what allies and big business do.

There is a huge technological lead held by the US in all sorts of defence fields, your overwhelming R&D advantage dictates this but some people from your part of the world will never accept that in some areas, other people have at least the capacity to equal or surpass you in some areas, now that is arrogance.

I think we can agree on the fact that the "RWR" is not fully digital as it is using super heterodyne receiver antennas. Interestingly the manufacturer never speaks about RWR, but ESM which are known to provide ranging capabilities. According an article by Bill Sweetman from 2002 ranging is achieved by amplitude measurement and triangulation. Of course it is possible to gain additional or more precious range data using other sensors through sensor fusion or by exchanging ESM data with other Typhoons using MIDS. Nonetheless Typhoon's ESM isn't dependent on other sensors or data exchange to range radar emitters.
And just for info the DASS is controlled by 5 Radstone Technologies developed PowerPC processors which form the DAC (Defensive Aids Computer).
Another factor which has to be considered is the fact that the DASS is a joint effort between Selex, Eletronica, Indra and EADS Defence Electronics. The system is built with the expertise of 4 nations.

As the topic was to compare the F-15's with the Typhoon's EWS how about providing information about the latest ALR-56C (V1) which is used by the F-15K and probably F-15SG as well. I know this system is smaller, lighter and more reliable than the ALR-56C/M, but does it have ranging capabilities? How accurate is it and are there any range data known?

I have still not seen any sources which suggest that any F-15 is equipped with MAW, LWR and TRD.

Edit:
AN/AAR-57 IR based MAWS is said to be available for the F-15E. Any details known if it is integrated into the K and SG as well and how much USAF F-15E are equipped with it or is it just an option not yet selected?

Scorpion, manufacturers don`t talk RWR because of the particular sensitivity of this technology, generally. Digital or superhet receivers, what does this mean in practise? How would this difference make one system more capable than another? I ask because I do not know, nobody has provided an answer thus far.

Amplitude measurement and triangulation are achieved by analysing the frequencies and their differences detected by the widely spaced antennae on an aircraft. This is done with smart algoritmic routines and fast processors. A much more accurate picture can be gleaned using linked platforms data sharing and doing this automatically, displaying the data on the pilots MFD`s I would think.

Selex is a partnership between BAE UK and Finmeccanica in Italy-a company I have worked closely with. Selex UK is the branch being used for EURODASS.

CRU, I have posted this for you in particular, it shows a contract signed a year ago for BAEs to continue supply of Microwave modules for the Typhoon. Whatever that is worth to you, but it seems the Tiffie does indeed use these components.
http://www.deagel.com/news/BAE-Systems- ... 01167.aspx

Scorpion, I will do some digging to Ferret out those F-15 MAWS systems.

snypa777 wrote:

Scorpion, manufacturers don`t talk RWR because of the particular sensitivity of this technology, generally.

I know. My point is that Typhoon's DASS features ESM and not just simple RWR as Cru has suggested before.

Quote:

Digital or superhet receivers, what does this mean in practise? How would this difference make one system more capable than another? I ask because I do not know, nobody has provided an answer thus far.

I can't help you on that for the moment as I don't know it either.

Quote:

Amplitude measurement and triangulation are achieved by analysing the frequencies and their differences detected by the widely spaced antennae on an aircraft. This is done with smart algoritmic routines and fast processors. A much more accurate picture can be gleaned using linked platforms data sharing and doing this automatically, displaying the data on the pilots MFD`s I would think.

Basically the same what I said, with some additional details. The Germans had good experience with the Tornado ECR's ELS which is essentially a kind of ESM.

Quote:

Selex is a partnership between BAE UK and Finmeccanica in Italy-a company I have worked closely with. Selex UK is the branch being used for EURODASS.

Many people tend to believe that the Typhoon is a pure british product, but that is wrong. Typhoon incorporates the combined knowledge and experience of 4 european nations.

Scorpion wrote:

Edit:
AN/AAR-57 IR based MAWS is said to be available for the F-15E. Any details known if it is integrated into the K and SG as well and how much USAF F-15E are equipped with it or is it just an option not yet selected?

It`s hard to find good info but from what I have seen, the AAR-57 CMAWS was bought by the airforce and US Army in large numbers last year, according to BAE US, the aircraft fitted with it include the F-15E, Apache UK, ASTOR UK, mostly rotary wing and slow movers like Transport aircraft. Also included were the Nimrod UK, F18 E/F USN, although I thought the SHornet used it`s own system called the Advanced CMAWS.

I suspect Singapore would go for Israeli kit, which is rumoured, but it could also use a mix of US and Israeli gear in a mix and match, in much the same way as the Indian AF do business. A toss up between affordability and capability. A different Northrop Grumman system, the AAR-65 was evaluated by Norway for their F-16s a few years ago...

This is the weakness I see in the Typhoon MAW, it is an active system using RF energy output, which I suppose can be detected, while the CMAWS is a passive system. PIMAWS for Typhoon would fix that but I don`t know the status of that German system presently.

Scorpion wrote:

Many people tend to believe that the Typhoon is a pure british product, but that is wrong. Typhoon incorporates the combined knowledge and experience of 4 european nations.

Really? I have not seen that personally. Doesn`t everbody know it`s a Pan-Euro` affair? The name Eurofighter should give this away!!!!
The basic design was taken from the original BAE concept though and tweaked, maybe that is where the confusion comes from...It could be plain ego though, Europeans can be just as arrogant and ignorant as everybody else on the planet sometimes. Fallible man.

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

F-15 Eagle vs Eurofighter Typhoon