Navy: F-35C Will Be Eyes and Ears of the Fleet

Variants for different customers or mission profiles
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24277
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post31 Mar 2014, 10:30

Please be AWARE of the DISclaimer/DISclosure in this online article... Best to read it all at the URL.
Air Combat: Five Reasons Fifth-Gen Fighters Don't Need Help From Jammer Planes 28 Mar 2014 Loren Thompson

"...The question is whether the F-35 is so good that it can be self-sufficient in combat, not requiring the support of electronic-warfare aircraft designed to jam enemy radars.

The Air Force and Marine Corps apparently think it is. They have no plans to buy new jamming aircraft as the F-35 is fielded. The Navy isn’t so sure; it plans to buy 138 EA-18G jamming aircraft, popularly known as Growlers, to support its carrier-based strike aircraft, and now it has told Congress it would like to have 22 more. Navy leaders haven’t spelled out precisely why they need the additional jamming aircraft, but it appears they plan to use their Growlers to support both existing strike aircraft and the F-35 when it becomes operational. That would be consistent with a longstanding Navy preference for using a mix of technologies and tactics in countering enemy defenses, rather than relying heavily on one feature such as stealth.

(Disclosure: My think tank receives money from F-35 prime contractor Lockheed Martin and EA-18G prime contractor Boeing; other companies contributing to both planes also have given the think tank money; some of these companies are consulting clients.)...

...[FIVE POINTS:]
...Low-observable technology....
...On-board electronic defenses....
...Other on-board systems....
...Limits of fourth-gen jammers....

...Dangers of fourth-gen support. There isn’t much doubt that parts of the joint force will need support from the Growler for decades to come, because legacy planes have sizable radar cross-sections that make them vulnerable. However, using non-stealthy jamming aircraft to support stealthy fifth-generation strike planes could prove counter-productive since the presence of the legacy planes might tip off adversaries as to the attack vectors of the strikers. For instance, Chinese radars typically would not be able to track carrier-based F-35 fighters operating around Taiwan due to their combination of low observables and on-board electronic-warfare capabilities, but if Growlers were loitering in the vicinity that could simplify the task of figuring out where the stealthy planes were operating. Once a military service transitions to relying on fifth-generation technology to maintain its fighting edge, it needs to carefully think through how to exploit that technology for maximum tactical effect; mixing fourth- and fifth-generation planes in the same strike package could easily backfire.

It is not easy to discuss these topics in a public setting because the capabilities of the F-35 and the war plans that it would help execute are largely secret. You can’t learn much about the electronic-warfare suite on the F-35, or the functional limitations of its Northrop Grumman radar, or the network-attack techniques built into its on-board software, unless you have a raft of security clearances. You also aren’t likely to get much insight into the warfighting scenarios that have shaped the plane’s performance requirements. So any public debate about the plane’s warfighting potential is going to be a one-sided affair, with critics doing most of the talking. But there’s a reason why the Air Force and Marine Corps don’t feel the need to buy new jamming aircraft, and as the Navy begins operating carrier-based F-35s, its views on what capabilities are needed for the future could change too."

SOURCE: http://www.forbes.com/sites/lorenthomps ... er-planes/
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

southernphantom

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1085
  • Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 17:18
  • Location: Nuevo Mexico

Unread post31 Mar 2014, 18:42

This is speculation and not backed up by evidence, but I think that there is a very fair chance of 'stand-in' jamming being provided by UCLASS. It will have the VLO and loiter capability that would be necessary for operating within an IADS for a useful time period.
I'm a mining engineer. How the hell did I wind up here?
Offline

castlebravo

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 231
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2011, 19:10

Unread post31 Mar 2014, 19:59

Could the Navy's desire to acquiremore Growers be due to a need to provide EW support for the fleet rather than the air wing? Even if the F-35 is perfectly capable of protecting itself (which I think it is), the warships may not be.
Offline
User avatar

archeman

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 714
  • Joined: 28 Dec 2011, 05:37
  • Location: CA

Unread post01 Apr 2014, 02:10

the presence of the legacy planes might tip off adversaries as to the attack vectors of the strikers. For instance, Chinese radars typically would not be able to track carrier-based F-35 fighters operating around Taiwan due to their combination of low observables and on-board electronic-warfare capabilities, but if Growlers were loitering in the vicinity that could simplify the task of figuring out where the stealthy planes were operating. Once a military service transitions to relying on fifth-generation technology to maintain its fighting edge, it needs to carefully think through how to exploit that technology for maximum tactical effect; mixing fourth- and fifth-generation planes in the same strike package could easily backfire.


The above premise is only true IF the mixed 4th gen and 5th gen aircraft in the strike package maintained a traditional (all 4th gen) defensive formation into the target area. This misuse of resources seems like an unlikely choice however. The 4th gen jammer aircraft could just as easily draw attention AWAY from the actual route of the primary 5th gen strike group.

One of the reasons that the jammers (4th gen) continue to be such a low quantity/high demand resource is that they demonstrate versatility in their mission application, and greatly complicate the task for defensive system planning.
Daddy why do we have to hide? Because we use VI son, and they use windows.
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7719
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post01 Apr 2014, 03:05

southernphantom wrote:This is speculation and not backed up by evidence, but I think that there is a very fair chance of 'stand-in' jamming being provided by UCLASS. It will have the VLO and loiter capability that would be necessary for operating within an IADS for a useful time period.


One of the approaches taken to ensure affordability of the LRS-B at around $500M a copy is not to load it with all the bells and whistles that would significantly raise it's cost. Mention has been made of a stealthy lon-range UAV that could accompany the new bomber on it's missions, providing EW support. This matches up with what has been revealed about the RQ-180 recently.,It's also consistent with an account I read somewhere of. a NG exhibit display sighted which depict a large UAV under the legend "stand-in airborne electronic atfack". So IMO the truth is out there.. :D
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24277
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post03 Apr 2014, 00:46

Because of budget constraints UCLASS may be limited - probably best to wait until Friday? when more info may be known - otherwise this post canvasses the issues: engine/weight/cost/stealth/payload/size etc....

Cost Will Drive UCLASS Designs 02 Apr 2014 Dave Majumdar

"...Industry sources told USNI News that there are positive indications that the Navy has finally settled on specifications for the UCLASS.

One industry source indicated that Sean Stackley, assistant secretary of the Navy for research, development and acquisition (RDA) was “OK with the draft RFP as it is,” but some additional reviews still need to be completed.

“The Navy is trying hard to make that happen,” the source said.

The service is operating within severe cost constraints and both industry and Navy officials say that the requirement for the UCLASS to deliver an intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) orbit at “tactically significant ranges” for $150 million will not change.

Theoretically, two aircraft can cover one orbit if that aircraft is capable of flying for 14 hours, which means the maximum price point for a UCLASS air vehicle is about $75 million, according to industry sources...."

SOURCE: http://news.usni.org/2014/04/02/cost-wi ... ss-designs
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24277
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post07 Apr 2014, 23:43

Growlers Become MORE Aggressive - who knew? :devil: Promoters of GROWLERS get more aggressive - NATCH! :doh:
Navy Preparing for More Aggressive Growler Operations 07 Apr 2014 Dave Majumdar

"The U.S. Navy is shifting its airborne electronic attack (AEA) focus from disrupting the enemy’s targeting and tracking of allied aircraft to actively helping friendly forces find and eliminate enemy air defenses, service officials said at the Navy League’s Sea-Air-Space Exposition 2014 at National Harbor, Md. on Monday....

...Morley [Capt. Francis Morley, Naval Air Systems Command’s F/A-18 and EA-18G program manager] said that the Navy had demonstrated some of the new techniques at the Trident Warrior Fleet Exercises 2013 (Flex 2013).

These included cooperative passive geo-location of enemy emitters using the Rockwell Collins-developed Tactical Targeting Network Technology waveform and a technique called Emitter Time Distance of Arrival (TDOA) to feed data into the Common Operating Picture (COP). The COP in turn is a critical part of the Navy’s Naval Integrated Fire Control- Counter-Air (NIFC-CA) construct.

To make the best use of the new tactics, the Navy will need to integrate Raytheon’s Next Generation Jammers (NGJ) onto the Growler and increase the AEA squadron size to eight—up from five. However, the Navy has settled on increasing the unit composition to seven aircraft—that is if it can convince the Congress to fund additional Growlers....

...A Navy source said that while it is true the Growler is an excellent battle manager and targeting platform, the service would likely use the jet to pass that data to shooters like the Super Hornet under the NIFC-CA construct.

Though he could not share any details, Morley said that the first increment of NIFC-CA has been released early to the first F/A1-8 squadron that will deploy with the capability."

SOURCE: http://news.usni.org/2014/04/07/navy-pr ... operations

Conceptual loadouts for EA-18G Growler electronic attack aircraft. Boeing Image
Attachments
Screen-Shot-2014-04-07-at-3_24_39-PM.png
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7719
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post08 Apr 2014, 01:35

spazsinbad wrote:Growlers Become MORE Aggressive - who knew? :devil: Promoters of GROWLERS get more aggressive - NATCH! :doh:


Just doing their best to push their request for those 22 additional Growlers in the unfunded items wish list. I'm betting X'mas comes early for Boeing. :D
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline
User avatar

neptune

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2896
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2008, 00:03
  • Location: Houston

Unread post08 Apr 2014, 05:16

popcorn wrote:[..Just doing their best to push their request for those 22 additional Growlers in the unfunded items wish list. I'm betting X'mas comes early for Boeing. :D


Yeah!, I still think that those "new" Growlers should go to the Corp to replace the last 20 EA-6Bs! Since the Corp is in line to test the NGJ with the EA-6B, maybe they can better evolve the NGJ with the extra Growlers, ....yeah!


....maybe a NGJ in a stealth pod on a stealth a/c with a great Mission System...hmmmmn... :lol: :lol: :applause:
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post08 Apr 2014, 05:59

With Politics anything is possible. Yet, I doubt we will see anymore Growlers (Super Hornets) as the funds just aren't there.......As a matter of fact the Congress will be lucky to find the resources for the George Washington Refit. Let alone more Growlers! :doh:
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24277
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post08 Apr 2014, 09:40

Get Yur Advanced Growler Nutrition Here (ONLY with added NGJ & ASH mind)...

http://www.aviationweek.com/Portals/AWe ... 202014.pdf (1.8Mb PDF)
Attachments
AdvancedGrowlerBOINGbriefApr2014.gif
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6366
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post08 Apr 2014, 14:50

neptune wrote:
popcorn wrote:[..Just doing their best to push their request for those 22 additional Growlers in the unfunded items wish list. I'm betting X'mas comes early for Boeing. :D


Yeah!, I still think that those "new" Growlers should go to the Corp to replace the last 20 EA-6Bs! Since the Corp is in line to test the NGJ with the EA-6B, maybe they can better evolve the NGJ with the extra Growlers, ....yeah!


....maybe a NGJ in a stealth pod on a stealth a/c with a great Mission System...hmmmmn... :lol: :lol: :applause:


To the Marines, the Super Hornet has the all the appeal of a root canal without anesthetic. :x
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 24277
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post08 Apr 2014, 20:31

UCLASSy - UBETCHa... :devil:
Classified UCLASS Draft Request for Proposal Due at End of Month 08 Apr 2014 Dave Majumdar

"...The final RFP is expected to be released this summer—likely June or July [2014], Winter said. The program will go into, “source selection over the Christmas holidays.”

The Navy will pick a contractor in the middle of Fiscal Year 2015, Winter said. The Navy still hopes to get an operational UCLASS on the carrier flight deck within five years of a contract award.

“2020 is the expected, what we call, early operational capability of the UCLASS system,” Winter said.

While Winter would not share specific details about the what kind of design specifications the Navy is looking for in the UCLASS, he laid out the broad capabilities that the service is looking for — he emphasized — which have been stable since last April.

Those requirements call for the UCLASS to provide two intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) orbits 24 hours a day, seven days a week, while also providing a light strike capability inside permissive airspace.

It will also be “provisioned” for receiving fuel in the air and could act as a tanker, he said.


However, the Navy leadership has mandated that the UCLASS will be designed with a “technically feasible” path for growth so that the service does not need to spend “hundreds of millions of dollars later” to do major modifications as the service learns more about unmanned aircraft operations.

As such, the entire UCLASS system will be designed with completely open architectures and government-owned interfaces.

“As we go downrange, we don’t even know how we’re going to use UCLASS,” Winter said.

“We don’t know exactly how we’re going to operate it because we’ve never had a such a capability in our carrier environment.”

SOURCE: http://news.usni.org/2014/04/08/classif ... -end-month
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7719
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post09 Apr 2014, 00:46

Hopefully a sobering development for those yearning for UCLASS to supplant the F-35C. UCLASS will be very useful in various supporting roles in the CAW.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

Corsair1963

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6571
  • Joined: 19 Dec 2005, 04:14

Unread post09 Apr 2014, 08:27

popcorn wrote:Hopefully a sobering development for those yearning for UCLASS to supplant the F-35C. UCLASS will be very useful in various supporting roles in the CAW.



My guess is after 2020 we will see the Super Hornets used more and more in a supporting role. Mainly as "Tankers", FAC (A), and EW. (i.e. Growler)
PreviousNext

Return to F-35 Variants and Missions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests