Towed Decoys

F-35 Armament, fuel tanks, internal and external hardpoints, loadouts, and other stores.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3185
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post29 Mar 2019, 14:57

Not sure how I missed this, but an interesting article here about towed decoys..

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... althy-skin

I see its present on all sorts of fighters, bombers etc.. My question is, does Russia have such decoys that can be deployed from its Flankers, etc?? I'm assuming the Chinese do...
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22815
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post29 Mar 2019, 17:11

https://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foun ... adadvv.jpg

Image
"The towed decoy deployment door is located just aft of the dual flip-open infrared countermeasures dispenser door" https://imagesvc.timeincapp.com/v3/foun ... adadac.jpg

Image
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8285
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post29 Mar 2019, 18:49

Behind the IR Dispenser door
Attachments
KppxXz7.jpg
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

blain

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 97
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2017, 22:52

Unread post29 Mar 2019, 20:38

I find the interplay of active ECM and decoys on the F-35 as interesting. At least in the short term I think F-35 will not need to employ decoys or jamming against targeting radars.

I do wonder how much tactics will change with search radars. Typically, stand off jammers have been used to support strikes by stealth fighters by masking the ingress and egress of strike packages. I am not sure if it is wise to have the F-35s to perform this function. It would require the F-35 to fly relatively closer to the emitter to generate enough power to temporarily blind the radar. Relying on another platform for jamming support enables the F-35 to better mask its route. You could task F-35s to serve as stand off jammers, but why would you want to do that when you have EA assets?
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 946
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post30 Mar 2019, 01:27

Like what's on the fa-18ef. Calling it a towed decoy is really selling it short. There is no reason not to have it as a receive and transmit antenna, to play a larger role in the EW system. It's like a towed array sonar and all that that indicates.
Aussie fanboy
Offline
User avatar

geforcerfx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 843
  • Joined: 10 Feb 2014, 02:46

Unread post30 Mar 2019, 08:34

Seems like it will be more useful in the SEAD role, allows a couple F-35's to become juicy targets with the ability to just wind the array back in and go stealth again if the environment get's to hot. While there fully stealthed buddies are hunting down anything searching for the fake targets. Basically a on-demand MALD that's reusable (or at least the article implies they are reusable).
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3185
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post30 Mar 2019, 13:49

Fascinating stuff.

Does the SU-35 make use of such things? I googled SU-35 towed decoy, and didn't see where they had a similar system - at least built into the jet. Pods yes. Internal, no.
Offline

hythelday

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 522
  • Joined: 25 Jul 2016, 12:43
  • Location: Estonia

Unread post30 Mar 2019, 17:58

"Khibiny" system does not use towed decoys, as far as I can tell.

"Khibiny" is an umbrella term for two components: SIGINT (internal) and jammer (podded). The jammer uses vaunted "active stealth" approach to either hide the target or create enough false targets through DRFM - mirroring illuminating signal. There are several versions of "Khibiny" system, which are mounted on Su-34 (original gangster, "Khibiny-V"), Su-35S ("Khibiny-M") and Su-30SM ("Khibiny-U"), the latter supposedly being the most advanced version. Russian sources say that active jammer component of Khibiny-U, the "SAP-518 Regata" (SAP = stancija aktivnyh pomeh/active jammer) will be upgraded as a result of "Syrian experience" to the new SAP-518SM standard. The upgraded version for Fullback also supposedly has "collective defense" functionality, meant to protect entire flight of four(?) Fullbacks.

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... c-802.html

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... -regata%2F

https://translate.google.com/translate? ... -hibiny%2F

For all the bravado Russians write about the "Khibiny" keep in mind that this is yet another system they wanted to field in the 90s but didn't, due to collapse of the empire. After 20 odd years they picked it up again. Surely it makes killing Flankers harder for legacy fighters, but this is nothing out of ordinary on modern battlefield.
Offline

bring_it_on

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 929
  • Joined: 30 Apr 2014, 14:32

Unread post30 Mar 2019, 19:33

Leonardo has also been working on a new form factor BriteCloud DRFM solution to better fit other fighters so I wonder if they'll position the product as a potential solution for future F-35 needs down the road.

Image
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 22815
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post30 Mar 2019, 21:34

Interesting comment about DFRM jamming pods for fourth GEN F-15 aircraft against F-22s from AVM Brown RAAF: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=21808&p=268446&hilit=britecloud#p268446 'popcorn' says for the quote below: "...testimony of Air Vice Marshal Geoffrey Brown before Australian Parliament last May 16 [2013] as to the ability of 5Gen aircraft to defeat his F-15 in Red Flag exercises. In his words:"
"...But getting back to the situational awareness, the ability to actually have that data fusion that the aeroplane has makes an incredible difference to how you perform in combat. I saw it first hand on a Red Flag mission in an F15D against a series of fifth-generation F22s. We were actually in the red air. In five engagements we never knew who had hit us and we never even saw the other aeroplane at any one particular time. That is in a current fourth-generation aeroplane. The data fusion and the stealth makes such a difference to your overall situational awareness it is quite incredible. After that particular mission I went back and had a look at the tapes on the F22, and the difference in the situational awareness in our two cockpits was just so fundamentally different. That is the key to fifth-generation... In that engagement I talked about at Nellis, in Red Flag, the ability to be in a cockpit with a God's-eye view of what is going on in the world was such an advantage over a fourth-generation fighter—and arguably one of the best fourth-generation fighters in existence, the F15. But even with a DRFM jamming pod, we still had no chance in those particular engagements. And at no time did any of the performance characteristics [of an aircraft] that you are talking about have any relevance to those five engagements.…"

In this forum quote first from 'mangler-muldoon' here: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=24148&p=253879&hilit=brown#p253879 from: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the ... rsy-05089/ quote from 'Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade_2013_05_16_1947.pdf' somewhere also in this forum PERHAPS?.... Meanwhile another 'popcorn' Brown quote:
'popcorn' said: "From recent Parliamentary hearing Down Under, an indication that DRFM jamming may not be effective against the latest AESA radars?"
"Air Marshal Brown: They are going down that road, but let me tell you I do not think they have the level of stealth that is available in US fifth-generation aeroplanes—and it is by a significant factor that they are still not there. So I still think there are significant advantages with an F35. You have got to remember that PAK-FA, J20 and J31 are possibly where we were in excess of 10 to 12 years ago in their development time frames at the moment—so all those aeroplanes have still got a long way to go. I am not sure they will have the degree of sensor fusion that is available with the JSF. To me that is key: it is not only stealth; it is the combination of the EOS and the radar to be able to build a comprehensive picture. In that engagement I talked about at Nellis, in Red Flag, the ability to be in a cockpit with a God's-eye view of what is going on in the world was such an advantage over a fourth-generation fighter—and arguably one of the best fourth-generation fighters in existence, the F15. But even with a DRFM jamming pipe, we still had no chance in those particular engagements. And at no time did any of the performance characteristics that you are talking about have any relevance to those five engagements." viewtopic.php?f=62&t=23680&p=252547&hilit=Parliamentary+brown#p252547

The F-35 bits from AVM Brown in 245Kb PDF download here: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-17588.html

F-35A part only Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade_2013_05_16_1947.pdf pp9

Last page PAGE 9 has the last quote. Earlier 18 page PDF: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-17587.html

Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade_2013_05_16_1947.pdf pp18 283Kb
RAN FAA A4G Skyhawk 1970s: https://www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ AND https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/
Offline

firebase99

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 66
  • Joined: 03 May 2017, 21:47

Unread post31 Mar 2019, 00:19

spazsinbad wrote:Interesting comment about DFRM jamming pods for fourth GEN F-15 aircraft against F-22s from AVM Brown RAAF: viewtopic.php?f=55&t=21808&p=268446&hilit=britecloud#p268446 'popcorn' says for the quote below: "...testimony of Air Vice Marshal Geoffrey Brown before Australian Parliament last May 16 [2013] as to the ability of 5Gen aircraft to defeat his F-15 in Red Flag exercises. In his words:"
"...But getting back to the situational awareness, the ability to actually have that data fusion that the aeroplane has makes an incredible difference to how you perform in combat. I saw it first hand on a Red Flag mission in an F15D against a series of fifth-generation F22s. We were actually in the red air. In five engagements we never knew who had hit us and we never even saw the other aeroplane at any one particular time. That is in a current fourth-generation aeroplane. The data fusion and the stealth makes such a difference to your overall situational awareness it is quite incredible. After that particular mission I went back and had a look at the tapes on the F22, and the difference in the situational awareness in our two cockpits was just so fundamentally different. That is the key to fifth-generation... In that engagement I talked about at Nellis, in Red Flag, the ability to be in a cockpit with a God's-eye view of what is going on in the world was such an advantage over a fourth-generation fighter—and arguably one of the best fourth-generation fighters in existence, the F15. But even with a DRFM jamming pod, we still had no chance in those particular engagements. And at no time did any of the performance characteristics [of an aircraft] that you are talking about have any relevance to those five engagements.…"

In this forum quote first from 'mangler-muldoon' here: viewtopic.php?f=22&t=24148&p=253879&hilit=brown#p253879 from: http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/the ... rsy-05089/ quote from 'Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade_2013_05_16_1947.pdf' somewhere also in this forum PERHAPS?.... Meanwhile another 'popcorn' Brown quote:
'popcorn' said: "From recent Parliamentary hearing Down Under, an indication that DRFM jamming may not be effective against the latest AESA radars?"
"Air Marshal Brown: They are going down that road, but let me tell you I do not think they have the level of stealth that is available in US fifth-generation aeroplanes—and it is by a significant factor that they are still not there. So I still think there are significant advantages with an F35. You have got to remember that PAK-FA, J20 and J31 are possibly where we were in excess of 10 to 12 years ago in their development time frames at the moment—so all those aeroplanes have still got a long way to go. I am not sure they will have the degree of sensor fusion that is available with the JSF. To me that is key: it is not only stealth; it is the combination of the EOS and the radar to be able to build a comprehensive picture. In that engagement I talked about at Nellis, in Red Flag, the ability to be in a cockpit with a God's-eye view of what is going on in the world was such an advantage over a fourth-generation fighter—and arguably one of the best fourth-generation fighters in existence, the F15. But even with a DRFM jamming pipe, we still had no chance in those particular engagements. And at no time did any of the performance characteristics that you are talking about have any relevance to those five engagements." viewtopic.php?f=62&t=23680&p=252547&hilit=Parliamentary+brown#p252547

The F-35 bits from AVM Brown in 245Kb PDF download here: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-17588.html

F-35A part only Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade_2013_05_16_1947.pdf pp9

Last page PAGE 9 has the last quote. Earlier 18 page PDF: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_download-id-17587.html

Parliamentary Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade_2013_05_16_1947.pdf pp18 283Kb


Its the last part that catches me the most..." And at no time did any of the performance characteristics that you are talking about have any relevance to those five engagements." I wonder how the development of the PCA takes shape in regards to this?
Offline

michaelemouse

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 62
  • Joined: 12 Sep 2017, 10:29

Unread post09 Jun 2019, 18:43

blain wrote:I do wonder how much tactics will change with search radars. Typically, stand off jammers have been used to support strikes by stealth fighters by masking the ingress and egress of strike packages. I am not sure if it is wise to have the F-35s to perform this function. It would require the F-35 to fly relatively closer to the emitter to generate enough power to temporarily blind the radar. Relying on another platform for jamming support enables the F-35 to better mask its route. You could task F-35s to serve as stand off jammers, but why would you want to do that when you have EA assets?


You could play missile whack-a-mole: Whenever one F-35 is fired at, his first buddy could use his towed decoy to seduce the missile. Then he goes quiet and another buddy uses his towed decoy to seduce the missile in another direction then goes quiet. That makes the missile lose energy or ends up going between two seducers. Being stealthy would be useful here because you could turn off the towed decoy and disappear from the opponent's radar, move to another location then turn it on then turn it off and disappear again, something which an EA-18 might find difficult to do.


optimist wrote:Like what's on the fa-18ef. Calling it a towed decoy is really selling it short. There is no reason not to have it as a receive and transmit antenna, to play a larger role in the EW system. It's like a towed array sonar and all that that indicates.


I thought about that too but then I wondered: You can have a lot of transceivers on a towed sonar array without much problem because you're moving slowly thru water. I wonder how fragile a long, heavy-ish (with those transceivers) towed array would be. One of the main advantages of towed sonar arrays is that you can make them very long. Can that be done here too?

I agree that radar arrays are promising. I mean, an AESA is a radar array. If you network a flight of 4 5th gen fighters and 2 dozen auxiliary drones and spread them out, you could have something pretty interesting. Real-time SAR from the fused data coming from dozens of sensors might be possible.


I don't know how representative it is but at $22 000/decoy, especially if it's reusable and is protecting a $100M plane and considering how small/light it seems, I'd bring plenty. As missiles get more sophisticated, they get more expensive and getting the enemy to waste a $1M missile on a $20K decoy seems like a great trade and one that might cause the enemy to be more hesitant to shoot. I expect we're going to see even more decoys although I'm quite curious to know what form they might take.

How would an opponent discriminate between a towed decoy carried by the F-35 and the F-35?
Offline

marauder2048

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 689
  • Joined: 14 Mar 2012, 06:46

Unread post10 Jun 2019, 01:25

michaelemouse wrote:How would an opponent discriminate between a towed decoy carried by the F-35 and the F-35?


1. Multi-mode seekers (it's why SM-2 Block IIIb has that side-looking infrared seeker)
2. MMW seekers for improved angular and range resolution to distinguish between the decoy and the aircraft
3. Improved signal processing. Example: the aircraft and towed decoy have slightly different velocities
*if* your doppler processing is sufficiently sensitive you might be able to distinguish between them

or

A huge warhead so that it doesn't matter
Offline

wrightwing

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3154
  • Joined: 23 Oct 2008, 15:22

Unread post10 Jun 2019, 04:45

marauder2048 wrote:
michaelemouse wrote:How would an opponent discriminate between a towed decoy carried by the F-35 and the F-35?


1. Multi-mode seekers (it's why SM-2 Block IIIb has that side-looking infrared seeker)
2. MMW seekers for improved angular and range resolution to distinguish between the decoy and the aircraft
3. Improved signal processing. Example: the aircraft and towed decoy have slightly different velocities
*if* your doppler processing is sufficiently sensitive you might be able to distinguish between them

or

A huge warhead so that it doesn't matter

Towed decoys are far enough away, that a large warhead isn't going to be a threat. The decoys are generating EA waveforms, to keep seekers spoofed. Lastly, by the time the missile realizes that it's a decoy, it's geometries are not going to be close to ideal, to re-engage the aircraft.
Offline

taog

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 59
  • Joined: 12 Dec 2013, 17:36

Unread post10 Jun 2019, 05:09

mixelflick wrote:Not sure how I missed this, but an interesting article here about towed decoys..

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... althy-skin

I see its present on all sorts of fighters, bombers etc.. My question is, does Russia have such decoys that can be deployed from its Flankers, etc?? I'm assuming the Chinese do...


This article claims that the F-35 doesn't have chaff, but i remember it does.

And if F-35 truly doesn't have chaff, where will the advanced chaff (block 4 upgrade) be placed? Integrated and shared the room with IR dispenser?
Next

Return to F-35 Armament, Stores and Tactics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: eloise and 9 guests