F-35A versus Saab Gripen NG

The F-35 compared with other modern jets.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 382
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post09 Jun 2020, 15:31

wil59 wrote:
notam123 wrote:
Like I said, learn how to use google instead of being a lazy a$$. The Rafale only operated in areas with no air defense until the Growlers arrived. This took me 1 minute to find. Good luck next time but it doesn’t seem like you have enough skill to be successful


afaik, Rafale never acted WITH Growlers (compatibility issues), show me ONE example of coordinated action?

You are right !. The problem with the previous comments is that they don't take what they say seriously, I asked for a link explaining if a growler had escorted a Rafale ?!. The only answer they give me is that I don't use Google, ok, I don't even want to answer them, it's incapable!


Here we go with the goal post moving. First it was the Rafale didn’t need US help and now it’s show me where US escorted them. I’m sure you are well aware that jamming is an area of effect and the growlers don’t personally escort aircraft in, so what you’re asking for makes no sense.

Also, no idea what you’re talking about with “compatibility” issues since that’s just deconfliction of usable bands. But you sound really knowledgeable so I’m just repeating stuff you already knew.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2687
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post09 Jun 2020, 15:35

wil59 wrote:
notam123 wrote:afaik, Rafale never acted WITH Growlers (compatibility issues), show me ONE example of coordinated action?

You are right !. The problem with the previous comments is that they don't take what they say seriously, I asked for a link explaining if a growler had escorted a Rafale ?!. The only answer they give me is that I don't use Google, ok, I don't even want to answer them, it's incapable!


Sometimes one needs to search in more than one place/source and crosscheck the available information in order to reach the closest possible thing to an actual fact.

Anyway, Opération Harmattan which was the French side of the operation in Libya:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op%C3%A9r ... :_20_March

As you can see above on the 20th of March you can read the following:
Eleven sorties were carried out by French aircraft over Libya.


Operation_Odyssey_Dawn which was the US side of the operation in Libya:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation ... n#20_March

And also on the 20th of March you can read the following:
Sustained anti-aircraft fire erupted in Tripoli at around 02:33 EET.[70] Three B-2 Spirit bombers targeted 45 hardened aircraft shelters at a Libyan airfield near Sirte.[57] At the same time, U.S. Air Force fighter jets conducted missions searching for Libyan ground forces to attack. U.S. Navy EA-18G Growlers jammed Libyan radar and communications.[71][72] No U.S. aircraft were lost during the missions.[73] The warplanes included Marine Corps AV-8B Harrier IIs (attacking pro-Gaddafi's ground forces),[74] Air Force B-2 Spirit stealth bombers, and F-15E Strike Eagle and F-16C Fighting Falcon fighter jets.[75] Admiral Mike Mullen, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, states that there would be continuous allied air cover over Benghazi, and that the no-fly zone "is effectively in place".[76] An EC-130J was recorded warning Libyan shipping "If you attempt to leave port, you will be attacked and destroyed immediately" in Arabic, French and English.[77] Four Royal Danish Air Force F-16 flew their first mission over Libya


So as you can see above and crosschecking the info (two sources) above, yes the EA-18G Growlers provided support to a myriad of aircraft including French aircraft in which the Rafale was certainly included.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

notam123

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 15 Jan 2020, 12:59

Unread post09 Jun 2020, 17:33

Also, no idea what you’re talking about with “compatibility” issues since that’s just deconfliction of usable bands. But you sound really knowledgeable so I’m just repeating stuff you already knew.


It is indeed a deconfliction problem. Rafale has to types of RWR : one (sensitive) for Xband and a large band one (less sensitive). The functioning of large band one is affected by Growler's jammers and is a pain in the a$$ for Rafale self protection suite. That's why you usually do not see them cooperating. If at all.

Tripoli area was out of french scope, which concentrated on Benghazi area at the time.
Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 382
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post09 Jun 2020, 23:39

notam123 wrote:
Also, no idea what you’re talking about with “compatibility” issues since that’s just deconfliction of usable bands. But you sound really knowledgeable so I’m just repeating stuff you already knew.


It is indeed a deconfliction problem. Rafale has to types of RWR : one (sensitive) for Xband and a large band one (less sensitive). The functioning of large band one is affected by Growler's jammers and is a pain in the a$$ for Rafale self protection suite. That's why you usually do not see them cooperating. If at all.

Tripoli area was out of french scope, which concentrated on Benghazi area at the time.


As I explained to you, that's what "deconfliction" means. Meaning, the Growler wouldn't jam the band that would affect the Rafales. But as you just demonstrated, you already knew that.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2687
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post09 Jun 2020, 23:54

kimjongnumbaun wrote:
notam123 wrote:
Also, no idea what you’re talking about with “compatibility” issues since that’s just deconfliction of usable bands. But you sound really knowledgeable so I’m just repeating stuff you already knew.


It is indeed a deconfliction problem. Rafale has to types of RWR : one (sensitive) for Xband and a large band one (less sensitive). The functioning of large band one is affected by Growler's jammers and is a pain in the a$$ for Rafale self protection suite. That's why you usually do not see them cooperating. If at all.

Tripoli area was out of french scope, which concentrated on Benghazi area at the time.


As I explained to you, that's what "deconfliction" means. Meaning, the Growler wouldn't jam the band that would affect the Rafales. But as you just demonstrated, you already knew that.


Moreover (and this is more of a question) when a Growler is jamming an enemy radar source, it usually does it in a directional way, doesn't it?
And if this is the case then directional jamming means that the chances of jamming an allied asset is very slim/minimal.
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6392
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post10 Jun 2020, 00:26

wil59 wrote:
notam123 wrote:
Like I said, learn how to use google instead of being a lazy a$$. The Rafale only operated in areas with no air defense until the Growlers arrived. This took me 1 minute to find. Good luck next time but it doesn’t seem like you have enough skill to be successful


afaik, Rafale never acted WITH Growlers (compatibility issues), show me ONE example of coordinated action?

You are right !. The problem with the previous comments is that they don't take what they say seriously, I asked for a link explaining if a growler had escorted a Rafale ?!. The only answer they give me is that I don't use Google, ok, I don't even want to answer them, it's incapable!



You changed your criteria, and were also wrong about "the Rafales were alone." even when simply looking at the initial french attack this is easily disproved. Rafales were never alone.

Why do you persist in such obvious lies?

This is the thread where people lie about the Gripen NG. Theres already a separate thread for Rafale lying.
Choose Crews
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2260
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post10 Jun 2020, 02:49

Offline

kimjongnumbaun

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 382
  • Joined: 08 Dec 2016, 21:41

Unread post10 Jun 2020, 03:30

ricnunes wrote:Moreover (and this is more of a question) when a Growler is jamming an enemy radar source, it usually does it in a directional way, doesn't it?
And if this is the case then directional jamming means that the chances of jamming an allied asset is very slim/minimal.


We're getting into things we shouldn't talk about in a public forum.
Offline
User avatar

ricnunes

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2687
  • Joined: 02 Mar 2017, 14:29

Unread post11 Jun 2020, 22:23

kimjongnumbaun wrote:
ricnunes wrote:Moreover (and this is more of a question) when a Growler is jamming an enemy radar source, it usually does it in a directional way, doesn't it?
And if this is the case then directional jamming means that the chances of jamming an allied asset is very slim/minimal.


We're getting into things we shouldn't talk about in a public forum.


I don't think that we're talking about something whose very basic functionality is 'top secret'.

You can see such jamming basic or '101' in Smithsonian's Air Warrior series, more precisely in the Growler episode which you can partially watch below:


Namely by watching from minute 0:35 to minute 1:30, it seems that jamming is directional (or at least it can be directional).
“Active stealth” is what the ignorant nay sayers call ECM and pretend like it’s new.
Offline

weasel1962

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2260
  • Joined: 07 Jun 2012, 02:41
  • Location: Singapore
  • Warnings: 1

Unread post12 Jun 2020, 01:50

It makes sense. Omni directional can dissipate jamming power vis a focused directional beam. It won't be just directional but I'm guessing also at specific frequencies. Today's digital signal management (and threat library data) is a lot better than 30 years ago. Multiple frequency jamming can be equated to carpet bombing.
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 959
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post12 Jun 2020, 07:34

The discussion about need for Growler support for 4-4.5 gen fighters is an interesting one.

AFAIK Israel does not have access to Growlers. Still they very successfully conducted many raids above Syria before they got the F-35. How did they do that without Growlers? AFAIK only one F-16 was hit, and in that instance they concluded this could have been avoided if the F-16 pilot had not done some errors during that mission.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3094
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post12 Jun 2020, 08:53

From what I've read, it seems that AN/ALQ-99 can do directional jamming using the HBT (High Band Transmitter). When using the LBT (Low Band Transmitter), it can do omnidirectioal, bidirectional or sector jamming. That makes sense as directional low band antenna would be far too large to fit inside the pod. Of course those antennas in AN/ALQ-99 are mechanically scanned ones and each could serve one radar at a time. So as each Growler can carry 5 AN/ALQ-99s, it can jam maximum of 10 high frequency radars at once. I think that is pretty amazing for a jammer pod first designed 50 years ago! Of course that's rather limiting nowadays and NGJ having AESA will increase the number of radars served simultaneously significantly. No need to rotate the antenna towards each radar but just do it electronically within microseconds.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3094
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post12 Jun 2020, 10:20

loke wrote:The discussion about need for Growler support for 4-4.5 gen fighters is an interesting one.

AFAIK Israel does not have access to Growlers. Still they very successfully conducted many raids above Syria before they got the F-35. How did they do that without Growlers? AFAIK only one F-16 was hit, and in that instance they concluded this could have been avoided if the F-16 pilot had not done some errors during that mission.


Israel has a lot of EW systems, both aerial and ground based ones. Here are some systems from Israel:
https://www.rafael.co.il/worlds/air-and ... c-warfare/
https://www.iai.co.il/defense/air/airbo ... warfare-ew
https://www.iai.co.il/defense/land/grou ... warfare-ew

So they have a lot of very advanced jamming systems (including support jamming) to be carried by F-16s and F-15s. Besides their F-16s and F-15s have some of the most comprehensive and advanced EW suites found on 4th gen fighters. Like F-16Is with their large dorsal compartments for electronics systems. I can see some similarities with the Gripen E there with Arexis pods etc. But naturally Israel has had those systems in service decades ago and now have F-35s.

From IDF: https://www.iaf.org.il/9072-50867-en/IAF.aspx

It seems that they have also helicopters fitted with EW systems. I think they haven't went with Growlers as they are mostly operating relatively close to Israel. Of course they also have very extensive amount of stand-off weapons and a lot of ISR and ELINT assets (aircraft, helos, UAVs and ground based ones). They don't have HARM missiles, but they use loitering munitions like Harpy and Harop.
Offline

notam123

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 20
  • Joined: 15 Jan 2020, 12:59

Unread post12 Jun 2020, 10:37

Just to add alittle info (it is not a secret), Gripen E aswell as RAfale F4 will be able to use "cooperative jamming" (don't ask me exact details, those are classified therefore not accessible to me)
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3094
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post12 Jun 2020, 11:53

notam123 wrote:Just to add alittle info (it is not a secret), Gripen E aswell as RAfale F4 will be able to use "cooperative jamming" (don't ask me exact details, those are classified therefore not accessible to me)


Cooperative jamming can mean many things. Usually it means that a group of jammers share information between each other and can alter their operation accordingly. For example a flight of fighters could cooperatively detect, geolocate and identify a threat emitter on the ground. Then they could for example switch between active jammers in random fashion to confuse the radar. Another method would be to have each jammer doing different kind of jamming at the same time to make it more difficult for the radar to counter the jamming. Of course a number of jammers could determine cooperatively which jammer is used against certain radars. This could be done for example based on geography or frequency range of the radar. All this requires data linking to share the required information.

Of course details about how some system does this and what capabilities and limitations they have is a very well guarded secret. But basic principles are easy to understand.
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 versus XYZ

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests