Forum: General F-35 Forum

Isn't the whole reason a EA-18G goes into combat is to jam the radar, and reduce the threat level posed by an Air Defense Network? How many coalition aircraft were shot down over Libya in 2011? One MQ-8 unconfirmed shot down.

A clean EA-18 airframe is quite LO compared to earlier aircraft. It is quite likely that NAVAIR are working on an internal LO jammer package in addition to the NGJ pod. The F-16E/F system is known as Falcon Edge;
http://www.es.northropgrumman.com/solutions/falconedge/index.html

PS. Apparently several projects are running under the umbrella of NGJ, not a single system.

F-16.net Sponsor

NGJ ,is going to occupy significant volume and will most likely require multiple pods. I don't see available space,within the SH to accommodate NGJ kit. Remember that they had to incorporate the IRST sensor in the front half of the centerline fuel tank,instead of in the fuselage where it makes more sense. So if the SH is in a situation requiring it to drop the tank, you throw away the IRST as well.

I could say the same think about a F-16F Desert Eagle. It has internal IRST as well. I would think its more ease and cost of upgrade. The F/A-18F was not "wired" to have IRST internally in the nose and the sensor has cooling requirements which would have to be met. Putting it in a fuel tank, is a much simpler upgrade.

The EA-18G does not have internal gun, which gives extra room for avionics, and has room to spare.

Isn't the jamming capability built into F-35's AESA radar?

neurotech wrote:

I could say the same think about a F-16F Desert Eagle. It has internal IRST as well. I would think its more ease and cost of upgrade. The F/A-18F was not "wired" to have IRST internally in the nose and the sensor has cooling requirements which would have to be met. Putting it in a fuel tank, is a much simpler upgrade.

The EA-18G does not have internal gun, which gives extra room for avionics, and has room to spare.

If cooling requirements necessitate putting the IRST in the external,fuel tank, just imagine the much greater heat output the NGJ will create.. now imagine the probemsthis would create if the NGJ were mounted inside the fuselage. Pods make more,sense and don't require modifications to the airframe.

batu731 wrote:

Isn't the jamming capability built into F-35's AESA radar?

I've heard something to that effect, but keep in mind that the AESA only covers a forward angle (120 degrees?).

batu731 wrote:

Isn't the jamming capability built into F-35's AESA radar?

NGJ appears to be much more,expansive in terms of its airborne electronic attack capabilities.

Last edited by maus92 on May 13, 2012 - 05:53 PM; edited 1 time in total

popcorn wrote:

NGJ ,is going to occupy significant volume and will most likely require multiple pods. I don't see available space,within the SH to accommodate NGJ kit. Remember that they had to incorporate the IRST sensor in the front half of the centerline fuel tank,instead of in the fuselage where it makes more sense. So if the SH is in a situation requiring it to drop the tank, you throw away the IRST as well.

The centerline tank is essentially a permanent store on the Rhino. The proposed IR version of the SH has the IRST installed on the airframe, with the displaced fuel held in conformal tanks. The Navy does not seem to be interested in the IR version at this point, but that could change if the F-35C is further delayed, remains too expensive to buy in the numbers required, or is cancelled.

batu731 wrote:

Isn't the jamming capability built into F-35's AESA radar?

Yes, it is a potential capability, but it not a primary function of the APG-81 radar. A purpose-built AESA jammer system with T/R modules optimized for electronic attack would be a better solution. The Growler's APG-79 AESA can also be used to interfere with targets of interest in various ways, and is integrated with the rest of the jet's electronic warfare suite.

popcorn wrote:

NGJ ,is going to occupy significant volume and will most likely require multiple pods. I don't see available space,within the SH to accommodate NGJ kit. Remember that they had to incorporate the IRST sensor in the front half of the centerline fuel tank,instead of in the fuselage where it makes more sense. So if the SH is in a situation requiring it to drop the tank, you throw away the IRST as well.

The SH (Growler) will be the initial platform for the NGJ, and it will be a hybrid system of internal components, conformal antennae, and external pods.

Part of the tech maturation phase was developing shrouded RATs (aka HiRAT). The NGJ pods are slated to generate their own power, not siphon power from the host aircraft.

http://www.virtualacquisitionshowcase.c ... 7/briefing
http://www.sbir.gov/sbirsearch/detail/2903

Does the NGJ include a towed array?

No towed array as part of NGJ. They serve two different functions (one is to jam and the other is a decoy).

Last edited by neptune on May 13, 2012 - 09:48 PM; edited 1 time in total

Today (May 2012), deployed aboard the "Linc" are the squadrons; 1- 18E, 1- 18F, 2- 18C and 1- 6B, The "Sea" is only replacing the 2- 18C squadrons. The "Sea" total replacements are only 180 planes. The NGJ (sub-sonic, two pod (360 degree), mid-band system) is being developed for the -6b and replacement -18G squadrons. BAE and Northrup Gruman are bidding for NGJ but are also building the F-35's AN/ASQ-239 (Barracuda) Electronic Warfare systems. No doubt, that as code is continued to be developed for the "Barracuda", the future development of NGJ will not be far from the minds of both the developers and their bosses. Very Happy

One can only hope. Personally, I am looking forward to seeing what Blk5's "Cooperative EW" can really do Smile

Forum: General F-35 Forum

Next Generation Jammer Deferred for F-35 Indefinitely