Thanks to Superrhinoceront for the link....
via FlightGlobal
What they're really talking about is the ability to conduct electronic warfare across the entire Super Hornet fleet. Not to the same capability as the Growler but certainly on par with the F-35.
All in a cheaper package.
The Navy is going to bolt this program and Boeing is holding the door open with some factory fresh Super Hornets waiting on the flight line.
Don't believe me? Remember one word.
Sequestration.
It ain't going away.
via FlightGlobal
Boeing is formulating a concept for a hybrid variant of the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet equipped with the electronic signal detection capabilities of the EA-18G Growler as it seeks to attract orders for new aircraft and upgrades to older models.Stick another fork in a supposed F-35 advantage.
The resulting aircraft would resemble an E/A-18G that lacks ALQ-99 jamming pods for electronic attack, preserves the ALQ-218 electronic receiver and adds weapons now only carried by the F/A-18E/F, says Boeing vice-president Mike Gibbons.
“That hybrid just starts with the simple notion of take the sensor suite of the Growler and move it to a basically strike platform and then you grow that platform to take advantage of the fact that you can now see anybody that’s emitting,” Gibbons says.
The growth capabilities would be the addition of a long-range infrared search and track sensor and new air-to-air tracking modes for airborne systems.
What they're really talking about is the ability to conduct electronic warfare across the entire Super Hornet fleet. Not to the same capability as the Growler but certainly on par with the F-35.
All in a cheaper package.
The Navy is going to bolt this program and Boeing is holding the door open with some factory fresh Super Hornets waiting on the flight line.
Don't believe me? Remember one word.
Sequestration.
It ain't going away.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYour are well come Sol.
ReplyDeleteThat's the end of the Stealth era.
Those Low observable Super Growlers will detect any electronic emission from any stealth airplane, triangulating the information to use their IRST-E/O sensors to locate and engage them with Radar or IR missiles.
Long time ago I mentioned that the 6th gen lighter waa here already as a combined fleet od Super Hornets and Growlers but this is alrwady a new beast. A truly 6th Generation fighter by itself.
ReplyDeletethe thing that has me spinning is the fact that Boeing has effectively negated the "sensor" fusion advantage that the F-35 supposedly has. i want more details but this seems like a really big deal.
DeleteSuper Hornet already has a level of "sensor fusion," that will only improve once MSI II is integrated by 2016. Slap in an updated cockpit display, you'll have 95% of what the F-35 brings to the table - except that the Super Hornet costs less than half that of a F-35C.
DeleteThe F-35 does not currently have a sensor fusion capability.
DeleteFrank Kendall, Pentagon acquisition chief
The biggest challenge with [Block]3F is the “fusion” of data, Frank Kendall, DoD undersecretary for acquisition, said.
“It's merging of information from different sensor systems on the aircraft and off the aircraft, information that comes from other airplanes that's transmitted to the F-35 and then merged with its own information,” he said.
“That's a difficult processing problem, it's a difficult computational problem,” Kendall continued. “And just going through all the tests and getting the different aircraft that might need to be in a test together so that you can pull all the test off is challenging. And that's where the scheduling backup comes in.”
Data fusion doesn't work but Lockheed was just awarded a contract for $76m for 252 helmet mounted display systems. That's $301K per helmet.
Delete2400 planes at two helmets per plane at $300K each = $1.4B for helmets
BTW, the Chinese and Russians are doing the same, but nobody in Congress is aware of that for the nice story about how fomidable and invisible is the F-35.
ReplyDeletehttp://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a5/Chinese_Su-27.JPG
I wouldn't say that stealth is dead just yet. The age of air to air stealth is now over rated until truly passive sensors can come up to speed to allow a stealth fighter the ability to target another aircraft with a stealth missile. For air to ground, truly "radio silence" missions are easy as the targets don't move for pre-planned missions.
ReplyDeleteOr you could have a fleet of stealth aircraft running radio silence (receiving information updates only from some active emitter, could be surface, air, or space platforms in combination) which uses external targeting data to fire munitions.
But, until there is a stealth platform that can operate in "receive only" mode in large enough numbers to matter, this is pretty much the end of any air to air advantage stealth would offer. Expect that enemy AWAC systems to become the number one target in future air to air fights to force "stealth" aircraft to emit.
In the end, it is all back to COL Boyd's OODA loop, instead of fighting "observation" portion of the cycle with stealth it will be fighting the "orient/decide" portions where logic and coordination are executed.
Stealth, like any other aspect of a system's performance, must be tested and evaluated. Otherwise it's simply idle speculation.
DeleteDon, I don't disagree with your statement, but I'll point out the operational histories of the F-117 and B2 as proving the utility of stealth against ground targets. The reports from the F-22 have convinced me of the utility of stealth in an air to air role as well.
DeleteHowever, that doesn't mean I am fan of stealth for the sake of stealth. Once you can get a stealthy platform to emit (such as by jamming up their passive sensors to screw with the "Observe" part of the OODA loop) and then spoof their active emissions with DRFM jamming to disrupt the "Orient" portion of the OODA loop, then it falls down to whether or not which system works better as a whole.
Like anything else in the military, there are no "silver bullet" solutions. Having the right mix of capabilities is better than any single "super weapon" ever considered.
Or you just use a different sensor type to see them.
Deletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infra-red_search_and_track#mediaviewer/File:Su-27UB_cockpit.jpg
That bulb in front of the cockpit is an advanced IRST (Infra-Red Search & Track) sensor. There's a reason that they're appearing on all new Russian aircraft.
I believe that stealth is overemphasized and its usefulness overexaggerated to be honest.
DeleteThe future lies in more efficient and "meaner" ECM technology, alongside surface to air devises (like the railgun, which im conceptually opposed to, with the exception of anti-air or anti-missile roles), and sensors to detect aircraft.
And the reason for the flat directional nozzles on the F-22 is a reduced IR signature, stealth is always "relative" to something else. Back in WWII we had acoustic listening stations as well as RADAR. Now no one cares about acoustic but RADAR and IR. And all of that is pointless if the airplane has to emit (although you could make the argument that sufficient frequency hopping could make emissions indistinguishable from background noise). The real question isn't whether stealth is useful, it is, but whether or not it is worth all the pain we are experiencing with the F-35, which I say it clearly is not.
DeleteAny word on whether issues with the canted and draggy pylons will be addressed with future upgrades?
ReplyDeletefrom what i can tell, and i'm far from an aviation guy is that pylons are a thing of the past. they're going big on pods that carry bombs and missiles.
ReplyDeleteStealth is technilogy from the 80' before Mac and Windows.
ReplyDeleteWe are in the era of Drones, Stand off weapons, cooperative engagements, Aesa E/O IRST, Sat-Coms, Jammers etc.
The Swedish are very clever people and they were pioneers in that aerea and they still one step ahead. Just imagine what big numbers of Gripens and Super Growlers could do for the buck.
http://m.aviationweek.com/awin/gripen-sensors-claim-counter-stealth-performance
Drones in USAF started in the 70's... and was forgotten. 30 years after it was rediscover, at very higher prices...
DeleteHardware was never the issue. Computer processing power was.
Deletewww.youtube.com/watch?v=t0C6OfKKQy0&feature=youtube_gdata_player
ReplyDeletewww.youtube.com/watch?v=gQUdbw__g_Q&feature=youtube_gdata_player
It just makes sense as it's continued evolution of a reliable aircraft. Now picture some X-47B's working with hybrid ASH F-18's.
ReplyDeleteThe Super Growner
ReplyDeletehttp://www.slrlounge.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/USN-Gopro-f18-hornet-f14-tomcat-ea18-growler-4.jpg
http://www.slrlounge.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/USN-Gopro-f18-hornet-f14-tomcat-ea18-growler-1.jpg
I think you are right solomon
ReplyDeleteIts looking more and more likely that the navy will jump ship from the sinking F35 titanic onto the "super hornet" tug boat.
Honestly, at this point, ill be surprised if anybody, the US or NATO, adopts it in large numbers and replaces existing air frames with it. The million dollar question is: what will the air force do?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UldoGIMRsSY
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a3K1PzmH-2Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Ne_kAGC_d0