Here's a pleasant thought: the core of the US military's airborne electronic attack weapons are useless against Russian S-400 integrated air defense systems currently for sale on the export market.
In unusually blunt language for an unclassified source, a US Navy document soliciting sources for a next generation jammer (NGJ) dismisses the current system as out-classed.
"The aging ALQ-99 [tactical jamming system] lacks the capability to match today's complex integrated air defense, communication, data link and non-traditional radio frequency (RF) threats," says the document, dated 15 September.
That assessment goes one giant step farther than the statement I got in February last year. I had asked NGJ program manager Capt Steven Kochman to explain how NGJ was suddenly making progress after years of inaction. Kochman replied that a classified briefing to then-deputy secretary of defense Gordon England served to reverse the program's fortunes. The contents of the briefing are not public knowledge, but Kochman only allowed that the power of new surface to air radars stretch the limits of the ALQ-99's transmit range. Kochman didn't say that the ALQ-99 is already out-matched by the radars that can alert surface to air missiles, such as the SA-22, to the presence of incoming warplanes.
(Photo: US Navy)
on September 18, 2009 5:53 AM | Reply
The Navy has known this since around 2002-3.
on September 18, 2009 8:46 AM | Reply
Not all that surprising, as Information Age technologies go the ALQ-99 is fairly ancient. Unfortunately, the previous Administration and Congress didn't see fit to move forward with anew jammer DURING EA-18 development, so now ALQ-99 is still all we have. Hope we have plenty of ALE-50s in the meantime.
on September 18, 2009 7:07 PM | Reply
btw, the F-35 is already wired for the NGJ.. 2Gb dedicated data lines to each A2G station, including the centerline station.
on September 18, 2009 7:24 PM | Reply
I thought the wiring wasn't installed or ready until the Block IV aircraft, with the actual kit not arriving to the Block V? Maybe I'm wrong.
One of the big questions in the AEA is whether the USN can afford to develop NGJ into inconformal arrays to preserve the F-35's LO signature. Of course, considering it's a jamming pod, maybe LO isn't so important?
on September 18, 2009 7:36 PM | Reply
Each A2G station has a dedicated 2Gb Fiber databus.
They might not plan to do all the software integration and ICP upgrades til Blk 4/5, but the databus is in place.
on September 18, 2009 7:38 PM | Reply
Great data! Thanks.
on September 18, 2009 8:12 PM | Reply
I don't think it's any surprise that older equipment will be outclassed by newer equipment. But procurement is all about picking what needs to be replaced first, so last year the system was good enough for now. They must think money is available now, so now we enter the "all our equipment is useless now" phase of the procurement dance.
Also, doesn't it seem unlikely that the single-seat F-35 can be used for the jamming mission?
on September 18, 2009 8:43 PM | Reply
Look at the progression of Naval Jamming. E-6 was a 4 seater and Growler is a two seater.
As technology progresses and automation increases, the level of necessary human interaction decreases.
btw, the ALQ-99 system is under constant development and can be upgraded in the field as the need arises.
on September 18, 2009 11:30 PM | Reply
I have some swamp land to sell you in Florida if you believe that.
http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/991.jpg
http://i231.photobucket.com/albums/ee54/warpigelp/992.jpg
on September 18, 2009 11:50 PM | Reply
The Navy has realized that the NGJ is a while off and they need to plan on further upgrades to the ALQ-99.
See page 20 of this Sept 2008 presentation.
http://www.navair.navy.mil/doing_business/open_solicitations/uploads/N00019-08-R-0101/NGJ_BAA_Industry_Day_-_Final.pdf
btw, I think they need the NGJ and should not neglect it's development. There is just too much benefit to an AESA based jammer.
on September 19, 2009 3:53 AM | Reply
There isn't much to "upgrade" on the 99. No matter what, it still won't keep up with the threat. Not to mention no matter what you put on this slow, draggy, short range escort jammer it's utility is going to be limited. But hey, appearance over substance.
on September 19, 2009 8:51 PM | Reply
There are currently studies related to the ALQ-99 and NGJ where upgrades to the 99 are a factor.
http://www.fbodaily.com/archive/2009/01-January/17-Jan-2009/FBO-01733191.htm
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/systems/an-alq-99.htmThere is a lot to upgrade on the ALQ-99 and it was designed from the ground up to be field reconfigurable.
on September 19, 2009 10:54 PM | Reply
Yet we have multiple sources stating it isn't relevant to emerging threats.
on September 20, 2009 12:26 AM | Reply
Yet we have multiple sources stating it isn't relevant to emerging threats.
on September 20, 2009 2:04 AM | Reply
I agree with Elp that the EA-18G "Growler" is draggy and short ranged (never been fond of the Hornet airframe as a whole), but what else does the USA have? The EF-111A's have long been scrapped, and like SpudmanWP notes the jamming suite is upgradable (should be it's been on the EF-111 and EA-6 Prowlers for years). Unless there's a black program in the wings no one knows about, or if they come up with an unmanned version (put a jammer suite on a MQ-9 Reaper maybe, or or Northrup-Grummans new X-47B) the EA-18 Growler is the only jammer available.
on September 20, 2009 3:04 AM | Reply
Yes, I know that they will have problems with emerging threats... that's why they are studying upgrades to them.
on September 20, 2009 6:03 PM | Reply
The NGJ and the F-35 are a long way from being operational anytime soon. There are actually three separate issues to be discussed here:
1. The USN has put all its eggs in one with basket the F-18E/F which is inferior in performance to its competitors (Rafale, SU-30/33/35,Eurofighter, etc). Design compromises like canting the under wing hardpoints outward have made a slow fighter even slower when flying with ordinance.
2. The use of the ALQ-99 in the Growler is part of the same thought process that created the Super Hornet, use design compromises to field a functional system in the shortest time and worry about catching up later. The Growler is even slower then the standard Super Hornet the ALQ-99 pods installed.
3. The F-35 is years behind schedule, and billions of dollars over budget. LM has yet to fly a fully operational JSF with the millions of lines of code running, and all its avionics and sensors working. Talking about integrating the NJG and the F-35C at this point is putting the cart before the horse.
on September 26, 2009 5:56 PM | Reply
With all do respect to Spudman, to think an ALQ-99 is upgradeable and relevant in today's environment is at best rediculous. There is no "architecture" in the an ALQ-99 system beyond an artist's block diagram, and the physical limitations (power, transmitter feedhorns, processing) can never be overcome. The Navy knew about the short-comings of the system way back to the mid-90's, studies exist to bear this out. This problem has been kept under under the rug for a very long time. For political expediency, the Navy only argued sustainment issues to "sell" the F/A-18 as the replacement. Once that was accomplished, then the sky began falling about the problems with the ALQ-99. The EA-6B community is so narrowly focused that they cannot see solutions other than in their own context. Their biggest fallacy is the idea of retaining this capability in a manned platform. If there ever was a case for unmanned systems, the EW mission (ES, SIGINT, EA) is a perfect fit. Also, the problem must be solved in a System of Systems, a layered approach in delivery systems, coupled with frequency domain partitioning. Bottom line - there are many far cheaper, more effective solutions available.
on November 4, 2009 3:08 PM | Reply
Band 5/6 Replacement Amplifier for the AN/ALQ-99(V) Tactical Jamming System
Awarded Sep 30, 2009
https://www.fbo.gov/index?s=opportunity&mode=form&id=1684e7653c95628c52669985a601142e&tab=core&_cview=1