Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning and F-22 'Raptor' : News & Discussion

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,583
1,527
Lol, then why would you need an F-15 in the first place? Just use another F-35 for the same purpose. It's naturally cheaper and better and more survivable.

"Portue explained that the Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System, or EPAWSS, on an F-15, for example, can benefit an F-35 by allowing them to get closer to the enemy without using their own radar or employing their own EA (electronic attack)."

Can't the F-35 do that on its own? I'm sure a squadron has more than 1 F-35.



Whatever you said there, we have been saying that for years about the Rafale. What the Rafale has been doing for over a decade, the USAF is testing it out only now.
Because it has a very large, powerful radar, which is very good for stand-off jamming and air-dominance without the F-35 becoming an emitter. The F-15EX can also carry a shed load of air-to-air and long range attack missiles.

It could to an extent, although the radar isn't as big or powerful and the F-15EX is a better weapons carrier. There are also other roles F-35s can be performing whilst the F-15EXs are attracting attention.

Ah yes, the Rafale, the Citroen of the skies, capable of performing the roles of an entire squadron of EA-18Gs, 6 F-22s, 6 F-35s and at least 24 F-15EX all on its own, so says wordpress. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
Yes, it uses the APG-82 radar linked to EPAWSS to attack enemy radars so that the F-35 can remain passive.

That doesn't mean it can't though. It also carries more weapons than the F-35 can carry internally.

And what exactly are the high gain countermeasure not coming from the radar?

Radar based EA is still WIP, it's not operational.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
No on-board fighter self-protection suite can conduct electronic attack

*yawn* What do you think Rafale does then? Been doing elecronic attack on SAM radars since more than a decade now. There are even NATO documents about Libya commenting on the same. The Americans are only catching up now with the EPAWSS.

There are three types of jamming: Standoff, standin and penetrative.

What you are referring to is standoff jamming, from far outside the detection range of SAMs, what the Growler does, and what the F-35 is expected to do using its radar far in the future. You need high-powered, high gain antennas for this task.

The F-15's EPAWSS and Rafale's SPECTRA perform standin jamming, which doesn't require large, high gain antennas. This type of jamming is done after the jets cross well into the SAM's detection ring. The F-35 is incapable of doing this by design. Of course the radar can be used in a limited form against X band threats at standin ranges, but that's about it.

Pentrative jamming is meant for drones and missiles. It's when the aircraft/missiles enter the most dangerous ring of a SAM, the engagement ring.

The F-35 avoids electronic attack using its own EW suite simply because it doesn't exist. It's a stealth aircraft and has been designed from the ground up to be EM silent. A standin EA capability goes entirely against its very design. Which is why the F-22s and F-35s took the assistance of the F-15's EPAWSS to do the same using the F-15's own standin EA capability, which is a signature trait of a 4th gen aircraft for survivability. Which is why the F-35 pilot stresses on the F-15 having "weapons" the F-35 lacks.

There is not a single material out there which specifically says the F-35 is capable of standin jamming using its own EW suite. All materials are either very, very vague, or sometimes are specific but only refer to the radar.
Hence... "high gain counter measures and high gain electronic attack through the radar." ... through the radar, not the EW suite, the radar.

Once again, no, the radar based EA still doesn't exist. You can talk about it maybe after 2025, when it's expected on the Block 4 F-35s. Maybe not even then.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Picdelamirand-oil

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
Look at how vague the advertisements are and compare it to the EPAWSS.

DEWS:
Designed to meet current and future threats, DEWS provides accurate and quick 360-degree aircraft protection and jamming across the frequency band, providing the aircrew with the latest situational awareness.

DEWS integrates its receiver, digital radio-frequency memory jamming, and countermeasures dispenser with the aircraft central computer and radar. DEWS simultaneous jamming and receiving, allows it to operate in the battlefield of tomorrow.

EPAWSS:
EPAWSS is equipped with advanced radio frequency (RF) electronic countermeasures (ECM), enabling deeper penetration against modern integrated air defense systems and providing rapid response capabilities designed to protect the aircrew.

Very, very vague for the DEWS vs very, very accurate for the EPAWSS. What the DEWS does is pretty much what towed decoys do, basically simultanous jamming and receiving.

Even the datasheet for the DEWS is this...
System capabilities include all-aspect, broadband radar warning; emitter location; multispectral RF/IR countermeasures; and response management.

Multispectral RF/IR countermeasures
simply refer to the towed decoys and flares.

The very, very clear EPAWSS datasheet:
Offensive and defensive digital electronic warfare capabilities
Multi-spectral, radio frequency (RF) and infrared (IR) countermeasures
(clear separation from off and def EW capabilities)

This is what towed decoys do.
Since then, little buddies have morphed from decoy target to advanced electronic warfare-enabled extensions of the plane's own self-protection suite. The ALE-55 that is reeled out from the center of the Super Hornet's belly is capable of jamming enemy emitters in an effort to keeping them from locking onto the aircraft, or directly executing electronic attacks on an emitter that has already locked on, or goading a missile into attacking it instead of the aircraft if an attack is already underway.

This is how the F-35 performs electronic attack using the EW suite. It doesn't have dedicated jamming capability from inside its own airframe, except the radar. The towed decoy reels out, performs electronic attack from a very safe distance from the F-35. Which is why the DEWS clearly separates itself from the EPAWSS's "Offensive and defensive EW" terminology. And unlike the ALE-55, the ALE-70 on the F-35 actually uses the techniques generator from onboard the F-35's EW suite instead of having one inbuilt. So it's a much more advanced capability than what's on the ALE-55.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
The ALE-70 is a towed radio frequency countermeasure designed for deployment from the F-35 aircraft and is comprised of electronic and mechanical sub-assemblies to accomplish the intended purpose. The ALE-70 consists of three major components: the reel/launcher assembly, the tow line, and the T-1687 countermeasure transmitter. Upon deployment from the aircraft, the countermeasure transmitter is reeled out to a prescribed distance, held in tow behind the jet by the tow line and emits waveforms in response to commands from the countermeasure controller located in the jet. The waveforms are utilized to confuse or decoy adversary radars or radar guided weapons. Designed and produced by BAE Systems of Nashua, New Hampshire, the ALE-70 employs amplifiers based on Gallium Nitride (GaN) technology to meet stringent output requirements.

Neither the countermeasure transmitter nor the reel/launcher assembly contains stored information or software representing critical program information. As the ALE-70 contains no software or stored waveforms/techniques, Anti-Tampering security measures are not required.
 

Picdelamirand-oil

Senior member
Nov 30, 2017
2,176
2,660
72
France
transition.wifeo.com
There is not a single material out there which specifically says the F-35 is capable of standin jamming using its own EW suite. All materials are either very, very vague, or sometimes are specific but only refer to the radar.
Hence... "high gain counter measures and high gain electronic attack through the radar." ... through the radar, not the EW suite, the radar.

Once again, no, the radar based EA still doesn't exist. You can talk about it maybe after 2025, when it's expected on the Block 4 F-35s. Maybe not even then.

The UK has long resisted pressure to join the existing Typhoon AESA program, insisting that it needed a more advanced radar, with electronic attack (EA) and electronic warfare (EW) capabilities, in order to operate autonomously in the most challenging contested environments or to add value to a 4th/5th generation force mix.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,583
1,527
*yawn* What do you think Rafale does then? Been doing elecronic attack on SAM radars since more than a decade now. There are even NATO documents about Libya commenting on the same. The Americans are only catching up now with the EPAWSS.

There are three types of jamming: Standoff, standin and penetrative.

What you are referring to is standoff jamming, from far outside the detection range of SAMs, what the Growler does, and what the F-35 is expected to do using its radar far in the future. You need high-powered, high gain antennas for this task.

The F-15's EPAWSS and Rafale's SPECTRA perform standin jamming, which doesn't require large, high gain antennas. This type of jamming is done after the jets cross well into the SAM's detection ring. The F-35 is incapable of doing this by design. Of course the radar can be used in a limited form against X band threats at standin ranges, but that's about it.

Pentrative jamming is meant for drones and missiles. It's when the aircraft/missiles enter the most dangerous ring of a SAM, the engagement ring.

The F-35 avoids electronic attack using its own EW suite simply because it doesn't exist. It's a stealth aircraft and has been designed from the ground up to be EM silent. A standin EA capability goes entirely against its very design. Which is why the F-22s and F-35s took the assistance of the F-15's EPAWSS to do the same using the F-15's own standin EA capability, which is a signature trait of a 4th gen aircraft for survivability. Which is why the F-35 pilot stresses on the F-15 having "weapons" the F-35 lacks.

There is not a single material out there which specifically says the F-35 is capable of standin jamming using its own EW suite. All materials are either very, very vague, or sometimes are specific but only refer to the radar.
Hence... "high gain counter measures and high gain electronic attack through the radar." ... through the radar, not the EW suite, the radar.

Once again, no, the radar based EA still doesn't exist. You can talk about it maybe after 2025, when it's expected on the Block 4 F-35s. Maybe not even then.
Yes yes, on-board systems can perform electronic attack, it's a wonder they invested a fortune developing NGJ and EA-18G.

EPAWSS (minus APG-82), SPECTRA - defensive jamming, stops enemy radar gaining a lock on them or tracking them.

Electronic attack - shutting the radar down altogether, protects other aircraft too.

Actually all the resources out there state that ASQ-239 can perform jamming, you just choose to attribute it to the radar in every case. So think about this, how can you be proven wrong here, if you attribute every possible proof as being due to the radar?
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,583
1,527
The ALE-70 is a towed radio frequency countermeasure designed for deployment from the F-35 aircraft and is comprised of electronic and mechanical sub-assemblies to accomplish the intended purpose. The ALE-70 consists of three major components: the reel/launcher assembly, the tow line, and the T-1687 countermeasure transmitter. Upon deployment from the aircraft, the countermeasure transmitter is reeled out to a prescribed distance, held in tow behind the jet by the tow line and emits waveforms in response to commands from the countermeasure controller located in the jet. The waveforms are utilized to confuse or decoy adversary radars or radar guided weapons. Designed and produced by BAE Systems of Nashua, New Hampshire, the ALE-70 employs amplifiers based on Gallium Nitride (GaN) technology to meet stringent output requirements.

Neither the countermeasure transmitter nor the reel/launcher assembly contains stored information or software representing critical program information. As the ALE-70 contains no software or stored waveforms/techniques, Anti-Tampering security measures are not required.
What does this prove? The Typhoon has both on-board on-board jamming and DRFM TRD. The advantage of a TRD is simply having an emitter that isn't the aircraft.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,583
1,527
Look at how vague the advertisements are and compare it to the EPAWSS.

DEWS:
Designed to meet current and future threats, DEWS provides accurate and quick 360-degree aircraft protection and jamming across the frequency band, providing the aircrew with the latest situational awareness.

DEWS integrates its receiver, digital radio-frequency memory jamming, and countermeasures dispenser with the aircraft central computer and radar. DEWS simultaneous jamming and receiving, allows it to operate in the battlefield of tomorrow.

EPAWSS:
EPAWSS is equipped with advanced radio frequency (RF) electronic countermeasures (ECM), enabling deeper penetration against modern integrated air defense systems and providing rapid response capabilities designed to protect the aircrew.

Very, very vague for the DEWS vs very, very accurate for the EPAWSS. What the DEWS does is pretty much what towed decoys do, basically simultanous jamming and receiving.

Even the datasheet for the DEWS is this...
System capabilities include all-aspect, broadband radar warning; emitter location; multispectral RF/IR countermeasures; and response management.

Multispectral RF/IR countermeasures
simply refer to the towed decoys and flares.

The very, very clear EPAWSS datasheet:
Offensive and defensive digital electronic warfare capabilities
Multi-spectral, radio frequency (RF) and infrared (IR) countermeasures
(clear separation from off and def EW capabilities)

This is what towed decoys do.
Since then, little buddies have morphed from decoy target to advanced electronic warfare-enabled extensions of the plane's own self-protection suite. The ALE-55 that is reeled out from the center of the Super Hornet's belly is capable of jamming enemy emitters in an effort to keeping them from locking onto the aircraft, or directly executing electronic attacks on an emitter that has already locked on, or goading a missile into attacking it instead of the aircraft if an attack is already underway.

This is how the F-35 performs electronic attack using the EW suite. It doesn't have dedicated jamming capability from inside its own airframe, except the radar. The towed decoy reels out, performs electronic attack from a very safe distance from the F-35. Which is why the DEWS clearly separates itself from the EPAWSS's "Offensive and defensive EW" terminology. And unlike the ALE-55, the ALE-70 on the F-35 actually uses the techniques generator from onboard the F-35's EW suite instead of having one inbuilt. So it's a much more advanced capability than what's on the ALE-55.
You think 'deeper penetration against modern integrated air defence' is being precise? You're reading stuff into things that aren't there.

There's just some bad use of language by articles, 'electronic attacks on an emitter that has already locked on' is neither electronic attack nor offensive jamming, it's clearly defensive, if you weren't so wrapped up in being right you'd realise that.
 
Last edited:

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,583
1,527
The maths here is simple, an F-15EX is not stealthy, it will be seen easily by any radar under normal circumstances, so there is no point in it remaining passive, hence it used its APG-82 to attack enemy radars, leaving the VLO F-35 passive but still able to use ASQ-239 to geolocate the enemy transmitters. Radar 2 can perform the same role. The F-15EX and Rafale are both great value 4th gen planes but using EPAWSS on its own or SPECTRA to aid 5th gen penetration would just be like having a really expensive, manned TRD.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
Actually all the resources out there state that ASQ-239 can perform jamming, you just choose to attribute it to the radar in every case. So think about this, how can you be proven wrong here, if you attribute every possible proof as being due to the radar?

Nope. I said radar and towed decoy.

Standoff EA = radar
ECM + standin EA = towed decoy

What does this prove? The Typhoon has both on-board on-board jamming and DRFM TRD. The advantage of a TRD is simply having an emitter that isn't the aircraft.

Just pointing out that the F-35's electronic attack emitters are not located inside the aircraft, but in the towed decoy, with the only exception being the radar.

The radar provides X band jamming. And the towed decoy probably provides jamming in the entire high band, the actual frequencies are not known yet. So that's about it. It's primarily a defensive capability.

You think 'deeper penetration against modern integrated air defence' is being precise? You're reading stuff into things that aren't there.

Uh, yes... It's precise. For penetration, you need EA capability over multiple frequency bands.

There's just some bad use of language by articles, 'electronic attacks on an emitter that has already locked on' is neither electronic attack nor offensive jamming, it's clearly defensive, if you weren't so wrapped up in being right you'd realise that.

You missed the line just before that, so you should read it again. Plus those statements are only attributed to the SH's ALE-55, whereas the F-35's ALE-70 is much more advanced, and is fully integrated with the F-35's EW suite, whereas the ALE-55 is a standalone system hence limited in capabilities.

The ALE-55 prevents enemy locks as well as employ track breakers upon lock, and the ALE-70 is capable of much more than that.

It goes back to my original point, the EW suite and all its antennas located in the F-35's airframe are all receivers only. The only system capable of transmission is the towed decoy, which is dragged far behind the aircraft and keeps the aircraft safe from attacks, thereby maintaining stealth. You see, the minute you employ jamming, you will get detected, so why on earth will the F-35 give away its position like that? All this happens within standin ranges, so the enemy radars and receivers see only the towed decoy, which they can confuse to be a drone. Definitely keeps the aircraft safe.

And the radar is used for standoff jamming, far outside the detection range of the SAM. Which is where the F-35 gets all its primary EA capability from. Obvously limited to the X band.

The F-15 otoh should be able to perform EA from standin ranges in the C and S band as well, perhaps even in the L band, which provides added advantage to the F-35 in preventing its detection in frequencies it's not prepared to go against using active means. Hence the advertisement for complementary 4th and 5th gen capabilities. But if the F-35 was also capable of jamming in the C, L and S bands, then nobody would have bothered talking up the EPAWSS. Also, if the EPAWSS is only capable of defending itself, as you claim it does, then it would be completely useless to the F-35, then nobody would have talked about it being complementary either.
The maths here is simple, an F-15EX is not stealthy, it will be seen easily by any radar under normal circumstances, so there is no point in it remaining passive, hence it used its APG-82 to attack enemy radars, leaving the VLO F-35 passive but still able to use ASQ-239 to geolocate the enemy transmitters. Radar 2 can perform the same role. The F-15EX and Rafale are both great value 4th gen planes but using EPAWSS on its own or SPECTRA to aid 5th gen penetration would just be like having a really expensive, manned TRD.

*facepalm*

Radar based EA is still WIP, it doesn't exist. They don't use prototype tech in exercises like that.
 
Last edited:

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
Found this in a different thread.

IMG_20210524_145126.jpg


Although there's no proof it was actually implemented on the F-35.
 
Last edited:

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,583
1,527
Nope. I said radar and towed decoy.

Standoff EA = radar
ECM + standin EA = towed decoy
That6 has literally nothing to do with the text you quoted, or anything I've said.


Just pointing out that the F-35's electronic attack emitters are not located inside the aircraft, but in the towed decoy, with the only exception being the radar.

The radar provides X band jamming. And the towed decoy probably provides jamming in the entire high band, the actual frequencies are not known yet. So that's about it. It's primarily a defensive capability.
Based on what exactly, you have exact specs do you?


Uh, yes... It's precise. For penetration, you need EA capability over multiple frequency bands.
Depends on the air defence system and/or enemy air cover.

You missed the line just before that, so you should read it again. Plus those statements are only attributed to the SH's ALE-55, whereas the F-35's ALE-70 is much more advanced, and is fully integrated with the F-35's EW suite, whereas the ALE-55 is a standalone system hence limited in capabilities.

The ALE-55 prevents enemy locks as well as employ track breakers upon lock, and the ALE-70 is capable of much more than that.

It goes back to my original point, the EW suite and all its antennas located in the F-35's airframe are all receivers only. The only system capable of transmission is the towed decoy, which is dragged far behind the aircraft and keeps the aircraft safe from attacks, thereby maintaining stealth. You see, the minute you employ jamming, you will get detected, so why on earth will the F-35 give away its position like that? All this happens within standin ranges, so the enemy radars and receivers see only the towed decoy, which they can confuse to be a drone. Definitely keeps the aircraft safe.

And the radar is used for standoff jamming, far outside the detection range of the SAM. Which is where the F-35 gets all its primary EA capability from. Obvously limited to the X band.

The F-15 otoh should be able to perform EA from standin ranges in the C and S band as well, perhaps even in the L band, which provides added advantage to the F-35 in preventing its detection in frequencies it's not prepared to go against using active means. Hence the advertisement for complementary 4th and 5th gen capabilities. But if the F-35 was also capable of jamming in the C, L and S bands, then nobody would have bothered talking up the EPAWSS. Also, if the EPAWSS is only capable of defending itself, as you claim it does, then it would be completely useless to the F-35, then nobody would have talked about it being complementary either.
None of which means the F-35 doesn't have onboard, all-aspect jamming. Remember the part about the two techniques generators, now look at this. Is Radar 2 receive only?

The ECRS Mk 2 radar does share a common interface with the platform and weapons system, via the German-supplied attack computer, and uses the same power generation and cooling, but from the power supply forward the new radar uses completely new hardware. ECRS Mk 2 has a new processor, a new receiver, a dedicated EW receiver and techniques generator, and a different repositioner that uses a single rotating joint rather than the double swashplate arrangement of Captor-E. The aircraft will feature a new radome to support the wider bandwidth that comes with ECRS Mk 2.

You're still not understanding the difference between defensive jamming and EA. Partly because of sh1t articles that don't understand that when you start jamming after lock, that is strictly defensive not attack.

*facepalm*
Exactly.

Radar based EA is still WIP, it doesn't exist. They don't use prototype tech in exercises like that.
If you say so old girl.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
That6 has literally nothing to do with the text you quoted, or anything I've said.

Not at all. Has everything to do with what you said. Would recommend reading from the very first post we started from.

Based on what exactly, you have exact specs do you?

Public information. Common sense. USAF's design philosophy for stealth stating no unnecessary EM transmission, aka jamming.

Depends on the air defence system and/or enemy air cover.

L, C/S at the minimum. That's where most search radars are.

None of which means the F-35 doesn't have onboard, all-aspect jamming. Remember the part about the two techniques generators, now look at this. Is Radar 2 receive only?

The two technique generators are needed to create jamming functions for both the radar and towed decoy. It doesn't mean anything much beyond that. Since these are AESA systems, you can choreograph multiple jamming signals.

You're still not understanding the difference between defensive jamming and EA.

*yawn* EA is a very broad term, under it you can have offensive jamming and defensive jamming.

EW is divided into three components: electronic support (ES), electronic attack (EA), and electronic protection (EP). The purpose of ES is to intercept, identify, and locate radar systems. The purpose of EA is to “attack”radar systems to negatively affect their performance and/or capability. The purpose of EP is to protect radar systems from ES or EA. Traditionally, ES has been known as electronic support measures (ESM), EA has been known as electronic countermeasures (ECM), and EP has been known as electronic countercountermeasures (ECCM).

Chapter Contents:

  • 8 Electronic Warfare Overview
  • 8.1 Electronic Support: Electronic Support Measures
  • 8.2 Electronic Attack: Electronic Countermeasures
  • 8.3 Electronic Protection: Electronic Counter-Countermeasures
  • 8.4 Summary
  • 8.5 References

Now, in the F-35 context, EA means attacking the adversary's systems in an offensive manner and ECM means protecting yourself from enemy attacks in a defensive manner. All I'm doing is using the same terms that the F-35 people use to differentiate between EA and ECM, although both are one and the same. The X band radar performs EA and the towed decoy performs ECM. But the towed decoy can also perform EA in some limited ways. That's about it.

For whatever reason, the Americans like to call offensive jamming as EA and defensive jamming as ECM.

PS: As far as the Americans are concerned, even launching a HARM against an enemy radar is part of EA. So the definition is so broad that it literally means anything. Which is why the way they advertise the EPAWSS is completely different from how the DEWS is advertised.

Partly because of sh1t articles that don't understand that when you start jamming after lock, that is strictly defensive not attack.

You failed to read:
The ALE-55 that is reeled out from the center of the Super Hornet's belly is capable of jamming enemy emitters in an effort to keeping them from locking onto the aircraft,

This is what I understand by the statement "keeping them from..."

keep sb/sth from sth

to prevent someone or something from doing something

So how did that become "after lock"?

Little child, all problems can be solved if you just try and read first.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,583
1,527
Not at all. Has everything to do with what you said. Would recommend reading from the very first post we started from.



Public information. Common sense. USAF's design philosophy for stealth stating no unnecessary EM transmission, aka jamming.



L, C/S at the minimum. That's where most search radars are.



The two technique generators are needed to create jamming functions for both the radar and towed decoy. It doesn't mean anything much beyond that. Since these are AESA systems, you can choreograph multiple jamming signals.



*yawn* EA is a very broad term, under it you can have offensive jamming and defensive jamming.

EW is divided into three components: electronic support (ES), electronic attack (EA), and electronic protection (EP). The purpose of ES is to intercept, identify, and locate radar systems. The purpose of EA is to “attack”radar systems to negatively affect their performance and/or capability. The purpose of EP is to protect radar systems from ES or EA. Traditionally, ES has been known as electronic support measures (ESM), EA has been known as electronic countermeasures (ECM), and EP has been known as electronic countercountermeasures (ECCM).

Chapter Contents:


  • 8 Electronic Warfare Overview
  • 8.1 Electronic Support: Electronic Support Measures
  • 8.2 Electronic Attack: Electronic Countermeasures
  • 8.3 Electronic Protection: Electronic Counter-Countermeasures
  • 8.4 Summary
  • 8.5 References

Now, in the F-35 context, EA means attacking the adversary's systems in an offensive manner and ECM means protecting yourself from enemy attacks in a defensive manner. All I'm doing is using the same terms that the F-35 people use to differentiate between EA and ECM, although both are one and the same. The X band radar performs EA and the towed decoy performs ECM. But the towed decoy can also perform EA in some limited ways. That's about it.

For whatever reason, the Americans like to call offensive jamming as EA and defensive jamming as ECM.

PS: As far as the Americans are concerned, even launching a HARM against an enemy radar is part of EA. So the definition is so broad that it literally means anything. Which is why the way they advertise the EPAWSS is completely different from how the DEWS is advertised.



You failed to read:
The ALE-55 that is reeled out from the center of the Super Hornet's belly is capable of jamming enemy emitters in an effort to keeping them from locking onto the aircraft,

This is what I understand by the statement "keeping them from..."

keep sb/sth from sth

to prevent someone or something from doing something

So how did that become "after lock"?

Little child, all problems can be solved if you just try and read first.
Nope, wasted enough time already thanks.

That's a flawed statement since even you have stated that its radar and TRDs can jam. So congratulations on contradicting your own argument.

The search radars are not what allow missiles to hit you.

Based only on your own assumptions, zero evidence to back that up, absolutely zero.

Sure you can but offensive jamming is merely a proactive form of defensive jamming. Electronic attack tends to be associated with planes that have an 'EA' in their nomenclature, however now we have radars that can do it as well. It is where very high power jamming is used to effectively make a radar completely useless across its entire bandwidth, not just to prevent it tracking or locking an individual plane.

I'm afraid your source is inaccurate, and I'm saying that as an FIET. ECM can include chaff or inert decoys and that sure as hell is not electronic attack by any stretch of the imagination.

Launching a HARM is DEAD and I don't see the adverts as that different apart from the fact the F-15EX interfaces EPAWSS to the APG-82.

Yep, that's simply having the option of off-board jamming to prevent HOJ or geolocation. But TRDs are finite, so foolish to rely on entirely.

Your original quote:

electronic attacks on an emitter that has already locked on

That's defence.

So far you've prevented absolutely zero evidence that the F-35's onboard system has no all-aspect jamming, none, yet still you continue, even dragging up shit from quora and contradicting your own arguments.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
Nope, wasted enough time already thanks.

That's a flawed statement since even you have stated that its radar and TRDs can jam. So congratulations on contradicting your own argument.

The search radars are not what allow missiles to hit you.

Based only on your own assumptions, zero evidence to back that up, absolutely zero.

Sure you can but offensive jamming is merely a proactive form of defensive jamming. Electronic attack tends to be associated with planes that have an 'EA' in their nomenclature, however now we have radars that can do it as well. It is where very high power jamming is used to effectively make a radar completely useless across its entire bandwidth, not just to prevent it tracking or locking an individual plane.

I'm afraid your source is inaccurate, and I'm saying that as an FIET. ECM can include chaff or inert decoys and that sure as hell is not electronic attack by any stretch of the imagination.

Launching a HARM is DEAD and I don't see the adverts as that different apart from the fact the F-15EX interfaces EPAWSS to the APG-82.

Yep, that's simply having the option of off-board jamming to prevent HOJ or geolocation. But TRDs are finite, so foolish to rely on entirely.

Your original quote:



That's defence.

So far you've prevented absolutely zero evidence that the F-35's onboard system has no all-aspect jamming, none, yet still you continue, even dragging up shit from quora and contradicting your own arguments.

Post 926:
Those "countermeasures" refer to CMDS and of course the towed decoy. The F-35 doesn't have electronic attack. And the one that comes with the radar is still in development.

Post 937:
Well, the way I see it, the EW suite identifies enemy signal, creates a response and transmits the response using the radar, towed decoy etc. But the EW suite's antennas themselves are not duplex.

Nah, matey, haven't changed my story one bit. You, otoh, are all over the place.

Boeing is right. The F-35 pilot is right. You are not.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,583
1,527
Post 926:
Those "countermeasures" refer to CMDS and of course the towed decoy. The F-35 doesn't have electronic attack. And the one that comes with the radar is still in development.

Post 937:
Well, the way I see it, the EW suite identifies enemy signal, creates a response and transmits the response using the radar, towed decoy etc. But the EW suite's antennas themselves are not duplex.

Nah, matey, haven't changed my story one bit. You, otoh, are all over the place.

Boeing is right. The F-35 pilot is right. You are not.
Post 926 disagrees with post 937 the way I see it. Since then you've gone on to define electronic attack as merely ECM, and offence as defence, so I'll just wait here until you provide me with a definite source saying that ASQ-239 does not have jamming without using the radar and TRDs. You've made a 100 post long waste of space, itself serving as a form of jamming on genuine F-22/F-35 news without providing a scrap so far. Kind of like a diarrhetic asre really, never produces anything but sh!t and refuses to stop.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
Post 926 disagrees with post 937 the way I see it.

Lol. You gotta learn to read.

Since then you've gone on to define electronic attack as merely ECM, and offence as defence, so I'll just wait here until you provide me with a definite source saying that ASQ-239 does not have jamming without using the radar and TRDs.

The opposite. The F-35 crowd need to prove something exists, no one can prove something that doesn't exist.

BAE needs to start advertising the DEWS exactly like the EPAWSS for it to be put on equal footing. If it was the case, they would have put it in there.

And F-35 pilots shouldn't go around saying the EPAWSS has capabilities the DEWS doesn't. They shouldn't be revealing too much of the truth after all.

And you need to prove that the F-35 can transmit jamming signals without using the radar and towed decoy.
 

BMD

Senior member
Dec 4, 2017
6,583
1,527
Lol. You gotta learn to read.



The opposite. The F-35 crowd need to prove something exists, no one can prove something that doesn't exist.

BAE needs to start advertising the DEWS exactly like the EPAWSS for it to be put on equal footing. If it was the case, they would have put it in there.

And F-35 pilots shouldn't go around saying the EPAWSS has capabilities the DEWS doesn't. They shouldn't be revealing too much of the truth after all.

And you need to prove that the F-35 can transmit jamming signals without using the radar and towed decoy.
What's to learn? "The F-35 does have electronic attack", no wait it actually does via the radar and TRD. But wait the radar doesn't have EA yet, so why is BAE advertising that the ASQ-239 does then? Dime bar, dime bar.

Any resource saying the ASQ-239 has jamming you put down to the radar and TRD, so how can anyone get past that? You need to find a statement saying that the ASQ-239 does not have jamming.
 

randomradio

Senior Member
Nov 30, 2017
10,600
8,032
India
What's to learn? "The F-35 does have electronic attack", no wait it actually does via the radar and TRD. But wait the radar doesn't have EA yet, so why is BAE advertising that the ASQ-239 does then? Dime bar, dime bar.

Any resource saying the ASQ-239 has jamming you put down to the radar and TRD, so how can anyone get past that? You need to find a statement saying that the ASQ-239 does not have jamming.

Should be like this:
EPAWSS is equipped with advanced radio frequency (RF) electronic countermeasures (ECM), enabling deeper penetration against modern integrated air defense systems and providing rapid response capabilities designed to protect the aircrew.