F-35 Bits & Bobs XMAS Reading PDF 12.5Mb

Cockpit, radar, helmet-mounted display, and other avionics
  • Author
  • Message
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 25101
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post22 Dec 2013, 08:54

One example of info - other examples posted elsewhere on forum....

[F-35] ELECTRONIC WARFARE SYSTEM David Isby
"A fighter aircraft intended to enable control of both the air and of the electromagnetic spectrum, the F-35 Lightning II was designed from the outset with its own electronic warfare (EW) system. With BAE Systems at Nashua, New Hampshire as the team lead, but including the participation of leading EW specialists worldwide, including Northrop Grumman, the F-35’s EW system is part of the basic design, alongside its avionics, communications, navigation and intelligence; and sensor systems.

While all the aircraft types that the F-35 will replace use EW systems, some highly capable against current threats, the F-35’s EW system enables its effective integration with all the other onboard systems. Each of the F-35’s systems is able to inform and operate with components of each other. This F-35 network can also link to larger multi-unit networks, other aircraft or terrestrial platforms via its built-in MADL (Multifunction Airborne Data Link), which allows the EW system to be networked either in attack or defence.

The internally mounted AN/ASQ-239 Barracuda EW system built by BAE Systems completed its fl ight testing in 2005 and was soon in low-rate initial production, with a unit cost estimated at $1.7 million. Weighing some 200lb (90kg), it was developed from the BAE Systems AN/ALR-94 EW suite fitted to the F-22 Raptor, using emerging technologies to produce greater capabilities with a goal of achieving twice the reliability at a quarter the cost.

The F-35 EW system provides radar warning (enhanced to provide analysis, identification and tracing of emitting radars) and multispectral countermeasures for selfdefence against both radar and infrared guided threats. In addition to these capabilities, it is also capable of electronic surveillance, including geo-location of radars. This allows the F-35 to evade, jam, or attack them, either autonomously or as part of a networked effort. The enhanced capabilities of the ASQ-239 (and integration with the F-35’s other systems) allow it to perform SIGINT (signals intelligence) electronic collection. The aircraft’s stealth capabilities make it possible for an F-35 to undertake passive detection and SIGINT while operating closer to an emitter with less vulnerability. For the use of active deception jamming, the F-35’s stealth design also allows false target generation and range-gate stealing with less use of power.

The EW system also sends and receives data and status and warning information from other onboard systems through the MADL data link.

The ASQ-239 has ten dedicated apertures, six on the wing leading edge, two on the trailing edge, and two on the horizontal stabilizer trailing edge. The system also has the potential to use the F-35’s other apertures, most notably that associated with its APG-81 AESA (active electronically scanned array) radar. In addition to functioning with the radar, this array, transmitting only at high-power, could function as a stand-off jammer.

When used in receive only mode, the APG-81 provides enhanced SIGINT capability. The radar could also be used, following future upgrades, as an electronic attack weapon, burning out emitters with pure power or injecting hostile radars or command and control systems with computer inputs that would provide false targets, misleading information, or shut down an air defence system.

Combining these capabilities and data links will give F-35s the potential to do more than defend themselves and jam or attack enemy emitters they locate.

Groups of F-35s could collect SIGINT from multiple directions, and then use the information gathered and analyzed to fire missiles, start jamming, or launch an electronic attack. Data links mean that F-35s can provide this information to other platforms in near real-time and have their actions coordinated ‘off-board’, where there will be more access to fused intelligence, greater situational awareness, and less chance of lethal information overload, than in the cockpit of an F-35.

The 513th Electronic Warfare Squadron part of the 53rd Electronic Warfare Group, formed in 2010 at Eglin AFB, Florida, is tasked with introducing the F-35’s EW capabilities at an operational level. A joint squadron with personnel from all US services, the 513th is co-located with the 33rd Fighter Wing, the F-35 school house for pilot and crew chiefs.

Tactics, techniques and procedures (TTPs) to be used by the F-35 in electronic combat are being developed by the 513th. The unit will also provide and update the threat libraries and systems programming that will keep the F-35’s systems responsive to changing threats. To do this, the 513th will operate a new $300 million reprogramming laboratory at Eglin, scheduled to open in mid-2011."

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j ... 3336,d.aGc (PDF 12.5Mb)
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: 7724
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post22 Dec 2013, 17:03

Awesome synergy of systems internal and external to the F-35... highlighting the ascendancy of advanced avionics enabling network-centric warfare. Maybe Skynet isn't so far-fetched after all.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

hb_pencil

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 878
  • Joined: 18 Aug 2011, 21:50

Unread post23 Dec 2013, 00:29

I'm not sure, but there are a bunch of weird or incorrect statements. This one caught my eye.


To fund development, the US Department of Defense offered foreign nations involvement in the programme at different levels, depending on their financial contributions. Those at Level 1, funding 10% of the costs, and Level 2 (around 5%), could directly receive contracts related to the F-35, while Level 3 (1 to 2%) could look forward to contracts from Level 1/2 nations.


I really don't know what to make of this statement... except to suggest it is some sort of weird wording intended to justify tier one partnership, when no such distinction exists.

According to all of the documentation, there are only two primary contractors: LM and PW (GE/Rolls Royce was a third when they had a second engine... but I don't even know if RR was listed, i'd have to look at pre-2008 SARs). LM's partners are BAE and NG, but that isn't a direct USG contract for their contributions, and there certainly wasn't one for any italian contribution. I can't see where there would be side contracts with an Single point of accountability model. Instead everybody gets their subcontract from LM or PW.

I don't have time to go through the rest of the study right now... maybe later.
Offline
User avatar

spazsinbad

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 25101
  • Joined: 05 May 2009, 21:31
  • Location: ɐıןɐɹʇsn∀¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  • Warnings: -2

Unread post24 Dec 2013, 03:39

FROM: http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/i ... ter_lg.gif F-35 Eglin AFB Reprogramming Center
Attachments
F-35eglinReprogramCentre.gif
A4G Skyhawk: www.faaaa.asn.au/spazsinbad-a4g/ & www.youtube.com/channel/UCwqC_s6gcCVvG7NOge3qfAQ/videos?view_as=subscriber
Offline

gtx

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 658
  • Joined: 26 Oct 2012, 21:52
  • Location: Brisbane, Australia

Unread post24 Dec 2013, 20:54

hb_pencil wrote:I'm not sure, but there are a bunch of weird or incorrect statements. This one caught my eye.

I really don't know what to make of this statement... except to suggest it is some sort of weird wording intended to justify tier one partnership, when no such distinction exists.


And it doesn't seem to match with reality...
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3310
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post27 Dec 2013, 10:09

But, but, I though ASQ-239 was not a jammer... :wink:

Great find! I think F-35 really has capabilities that are way above low powered self-protection jamming and is approaching stand-off jammers in some capabilities. Along with stealth, that means that it'll be really, really tough to detect, track and engage F-35.

I'm getting suspicious that operational APG-81 will actually have Gallium-Nitride T/R modules as this would allow for much wider frequency range to be covered for both radar and jammer operations (along with numerous other benefits) and Northrop Grumman already has the capability to produce such modules for high frequency radar systems: http://www.janes.com/article/27099/northrop-grumman-to-add-gan-radar-modules-to-g-ator

How about having a combined radar and very powerful EW antenna working in C-X-Ku-bands or even wider frequency range with way better performance than any current radar system. Maybe APG-77 will be upgraded to v2 standard before the end of this decade?
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7724
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post27 Dec 2013, 11:28

The internally mounted AN/ASQ-239 Barracuda EW system built by BAE Systems completed its fl ight testing in 2005 and was soon in low-rate initial production, with a unit cost estimated at $1.7 million. Weighing some 200lb (90kg), it was developed from the BAE Systems AN/ALR-94 EW suite fitted to the F-22 Raptor, using emerging technologies to produce greater capabilities with a goal of achieving twice the reliability at a quarter the cost.

Moore's Law in,action. :)
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh

Return to F-35 Avionics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests