F-35 Cancelled, then what ?
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As soon as you start jamming, "stealth" becomes somewhat moot, right?
But you did read my mind.
But you did read my mind.
Sweetman use to know that, as per the article
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Which is the point.
The USN state that within 5 years the stealth capability of the F-35 will be insufficient to penetrate modern AD systems without EW support. It can't be internal, because that defeats the whole purpose/ effectiveness of the stealth - so they will use the F-18G with NGJ as a stand-off jammer pending a UCAV escort jammer.
The point being an cadjunct jammer platform will be required, ideally MADL compatible or linked through an ACN.
The RAAF will be OK if they operate in a similar manner. Other forces have to decide if they wish to go down the same path, either by finding the extra cash for the adjunct platform, or reducing their F-35 buy by enough to buy a mixed force. The issue being every jammer platform reduces the number of strike platforms which can be bought-
It raises the further issue that for a carrier force each jammer platform displaces a strike platform; and for the USMC and RN no Suitable STOVL platforms exist.
The USMC could operate with the USN jammers, though that again compromises their carrier strategy; what does the RN do?
I suppose the UK can accept they will have no Day 1 capability against a modern force, we'll never have the numbers or ability to fight one except in a US lead coalition anyway, and it should be good enough to fight against a 3rd world military such as The Argentine.
As long as the carrier can get within 100nm of the coast and the targets aren't more than 150nm inland. Because ignoring the lack of a suitable EW platform, that lack of organic AAR is a real capability killer.
The USN state that within 5 years the stealth capability of the F-35 will be insufficient to penetrate modern AD systems without EW support. It can't be internal, because that defeats the whole purpose/ effectiveness of the stealth - so they will use the F-18G with NGJ as a stand-off jammer pending a UCAV escort jammer.
The point being an cadjunct jammer platform will be required, ideally MADL compatible or linked through an ACN.
The RAAF will be OK if they operate in a similar manner. Other forces have to decide if they wish to go down the same path, either by finding the extra cash for the adjunct platform, or reducing their F-35 buy by enough to buy a mixed force. The issue being every jammer platform reduces the number of strike platforms which can be bought-
It raises the further issue that for a carrier force each jammer platform displaces a strike platform; and for the USMC and RN no Suitable STOVL platforms exist.
The USMC could operate with the USN jammers, though that again compromises their carrier strategy; what does the RN do?
I suppose the UK can accept they will have no Day 1 capability against a modern force, we'll never have the numbers or ability to fight one except in a US lead coalition anyway, and it should be good enough to fight against a 3rd world military such as The Argentine.
As long as the carrier can get within 100nm of the coast and the targets aren't more than 150nm inland. Because ignoring the lack of a suitable EW platform, that lack of organic AAR is a real capability killer.
Last edited by ORAC; 12th Feb 2013 at 09:21.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
first of all, I'll need a credably source for " The USN state that within 5 years the stealth capability of the F-35 will be insufficient to penetrate modern AD systems without EW support"
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Sussex
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ORAC's post just reinforces that, in both money terms and numbers, we're paying far too much for a stealth capability that is in any case compromised.
The main justification for F-35 as far as I can make out is Day One capability. Now it looks like we won't get that.
Madness.
The main justification for F-35 as far as I can make out is Day One capability. Now it looks like we won't get that.
Madness.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Next-Gen Jammer Key To F-35 Effectiveness
NAVAL AIR STATION PATUXENT RIVER, Md. — The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s mission is to penetrate the threat ring of the world’s best anti-aircraft defenses and survive, but its formula will work only if the right improvements and upgrades are in place, including the Next Generation Jammer (NGJ).
New integrated air defense networks — some of them fielding improved versions of the S-300 family like the NATO-dubbed SA-20 and SA-22 — are already on the way. The antidote for these long-range, high-altitude missiles is expected to be the NGJ, which is to be fielded in 2018.............
NAVAL AIR STATION PATUXENT RIVER, Md. — The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter’s mission is to penetrate the threat ring of the world’s best anti-aircraft defenses and survive, but its formula will work only if the right improvements and upgrades are in place, including the Next Generation Jammer (NGJ).
New integrated air defense networks — some of them fielding improved versions of the S-300 family like the NATO-dubbed SA-20 and SA-22 — are already on the way. The antidote for these long-range, high-altitude missiles is expected to be the NGJ, which is to be fielded in 2018.............
Last edited by ORAC; 12th Feb 2013 at 10:13.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sorry, David's opinion isn't a credable source, it's going to take a decent quote at least.
I gave a credable source that said the opposite of your claim
just so there is no misunderstanding, it is CONOPS for the growler to escort jam with the H and SH
I gave a credable source that said the opposite of your claim
just so there is no misunderstanding, it is CONOPS for the growler to escort jam with the H and SH
Last edited by JSFfan; 12th Feb 2013 at 11:11.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Home alone
Posts: 295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Care to explain why David's opinion isn't credible yet you seem to find Lockheed's official press corps the cold hard truth?
Last edited by Bastardeux; 12th Feb 2013 at 11:22.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
he's a Jurno, your claim is "The USN state that within 5 years the stealth capability of the F-35 will be insufficient to penetrate modern AD systems without EW support"
you're welcome to have it as your opinion, but not say it's a USN statement
you're welcome to have it as your opinion, but not say it's a USN statement
Last edited by JSFfan; 12th Feb 2013 at 11:28.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: England's green and pleasant land
Posts: 697
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Appreciate I'm 54 (boring) pages late to the debate here but why is there a sudden focus on the F-35's intrinsic EW capability - oh, and I really don't want to read through 15 or so different links from various dubiously-informed folk.
Certainly, if I were building a 5th-Generation platform and it was running late and over the cost baseline predicted, I wouldn't serve the public its capabilities on a plate. So, where exactly do you believe the detection and EA capabilities fall short on this platform?
LO?
Certainly, if I were building a 5th-Generation platform and it was running late and over the cost baseline predicted, I wouldn't serve the public its capabilities on a plate. So, where exactly do you believe the detection and EA capabilities fall short on this platform?
LO?
MSOCS:
The sales line of the JSF being low observable brings with it a reduced risk against being detected on the way to the target, and thus argues that some strikes don't need the attendant dedicated EW aircraft.
Me, I think that's a load of wishful thinking, but that seems to be some of the sales pitch.
What actual capability is resident ought to be still in the "Classified" drawer.
The sales line of the JSF being low observable brings with it a reduced risk against being detected on the way to the target, and thus argues that some strikes don't need the attendant dedicated EW aircraft.
Me, I think that's a load of wishful thinking, but that seems to be some of the sales pitch.
What actual capability is resident ought to be still in the "Classified" drawer.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Well Tom Burbage as the Lockheed Martin F-35 VP for one, as well as being the one saying that the F-18G would be obsolete within 5 years. He proclaimed the need for the NGJ and that the fact that it would be carried by the F-35.
I note LM was gone quiet on that front since F-35/NGJ integration was been indefinitely postponed. Unsurprisingly really, when you consider how it impacts the stealth signature.....
I note LM was gone quiet on that front since F-35/NGJ integration was been indefinitely postponed. Unsurprisingly really, when you consider how it impacts the stealth signature.....
IMO, Burbage is full of more crap than a Christmas Turkey, claiming the Growler to be obsolete in 5 years. It's the kit on the Growler, not the airframe, that makes it so very useful beyond the life of the airframe as a tactical aircraft.
See also EA-6B and EF-111.
See also EA-6B and EF-111.
MSOCS
I would think that the detection capabilities are quite good, because BAE Nashua (once Sanders) knows that stuff.
What is not clear is what there is in active jamming beyond that provided by the radar. Back when stealth was new, it was generally held that active jamming was no use on a stealth aircraft and could indeed be undesirable - what if the EW decided to jam a radar that hadn't even detected the aircraft yet? YOOHOO here I am! And you know I'm a stealth aircraft because your active can't see me...
One of the questions is whether that has changed, and how.
I would think that the detection capabilities are quite good, because BAE Nashua (once Sanders) knows that stuff.
What is not clear is what there is in active jamming beyond that provided by the radar. Back when stealth was new, it was generally held that active jamming was no use on a stealth aircraft and could indeed be undesirable - what if the EW decided to jam a radar that hadn't even detected the aircraft yet? YOOHOO here I am! And you know I'm a stealth aircraft because your active can't see me...
One of the questions is whether that has changed, and how.
If your aircraft had super-dooper LO capabilities that covered the entire RF threat spectrum then the need for a high tech DRFM jammer is not that great.
If you are limited by the laws of physics then an all-aspect DRFM jammer could be handy.
If you have any concerns that the mere existence of LO aircraft around the globe may drive threat system designers to use different bits of the RF spectrum sometime in the next few decades, then you need to have the next bit of the countermeasures cycle ready - and in your weight growth and signature budget.
If you are limited by the laws of physics then an all-aspect DRFM jammer could be handy.
If you have any concerns that the mere existence of LO aircraft around the globe may drive threat system designers to use different bits of the RF spectrum sometime in the next few decades, then you need to have the next bit of the countermeasures cycle ready - and in your weight growth and signature budget.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, New York, Paris, Moscow.
Posts: 3,632
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@JTO
Pretty good summation there.
Next they will be telling us they drag it along behind at a [classified] distance
Which of course brings it's own little nest of [3D networked] vipers....
Next they will be telling us they drag it along behind at a [classified] distance
Which of course brings it's own little nest of [3D networked] vipers....
If your aircraft had super-dooper LO capabilities that covered the entire RF threat spectrum then the need for a high tech DRFM jammer is not that great.
If you are limited by the laws of physics then an all-aspect DRFM jammer could be handy.
If you have any concerns that the mere existence of LO aircraft around the globe may drive threat system designers to use different bits of the RF spectrum sometime in the next few decades, then you need to have the next bit of the countermeasures cycle ready - and in your weight growth and signature budget.
If you are limited by the laws of physics then an all-aspect DRFM jammer could be handy.
If you have any concerns that the mere existence of LO aircraft around the globe may drive threat system designers to use different bits of the RF spectrum sometime in the next few decades, then you need to have the next bit of the countermeasures cycle ready - and in your weight growth and signature budget.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Australia
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
please stop dancing, you made a big claim repeatedly through this ""The USN state that within 5 years the stealth capability of the F-35 will be insufficient to penetrate modern AD systems without EW support"
now either show this USN statement or retract your claim
it's a running media theme of australia doesn't need growlers and the $1.5 billion will be wasted
I also think you may have a comprehension issue, Tom didn't say what you said he did [and he's not a top dog in USN],He didn't "proclaimed the need for the NGJ and that the fact that it would be carried by the F-35." there isn't a quote from Tom in the whole story.
in fact the reporter is making the claim that the 18g would be redundant in 2023 [2018 + 5 years] hence the title "Growler obsolete in 5 years" and then added, which seems to be paraphrased or misunderstood something Tom said whilst in Australia...the reporter said "the f-35 was one of the planes that would be able to carry the next generation jammer",,,as we both know that isn't in the planning
Mr Smith [our Minister of Defence]said.
''The purpose of the Growler, of course, is it provides a capacity to jam the communications system of an adversary … jam the communications system of a group of terrorists as well as a traditional adversary.''
now either show this USN statement or retract your claim
Well Tom Burbage as the Lockheed Martin F-35 VP for one, as well as being the one saying that the F-18G would be obsolete within 5 years. He proclaimed the need for the NGJ and that the fact that it would be carried by the F-35.
I note LM was gone quiet on that front since F-35/NGJ integration was been indefinitely postponed. Unsurprisingly really, when you consider how it impacts the stealth signature.....
I note LM was gone quiet on that front since F-35/NGJ integration was been indefinitely postponed. Unsurprisingly really, when you consider how it impacts the stealth signature.....
I also think you may have a comprehension issue, Tom didn't say what you said he did [and he's not a top dog in USN],He didn't "proclaimed the need for the NGJ and that the fact that it would be carried by the F-35." there isn't a quote from Tom in the whole story.
in fact the reporter is making the claim that the 18g would be redundant in 2023 [2018 + 5 years] hence the title "Growler obsolete in 5 years" and then added, which seems to be paraphrased or misunderstood something Tom said whilst in Australia...the reporter said "the f-35 was one of the planes that would be able to carry the next generation jammer",,,as we both know that isn't in the planning
Mr Smith [our Minister of Defence]said.
''The purpose of the Growler, of course, is it provides a capacity to jam the communications system of an adversary … jam the communications system of a group of terrorists as well as a traditional adversary.''
Last edited by JSFfan; 13th Feb 2013 at 06:41.