The U.S. 'Top Guns' in the Air Have a Big Weakness

[Windjammer]

In the 25 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Pentagon has more or less taken air superiority for granted; but that complacency is coming back to haunt the Department of Defense.

Neither Donald Rumsfeld nor Robert Gates took air power seriously, and as such, the U.S. Air Force is left with a tiny fleet of 186 Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptors instead of the minimum 381 it needs. If that wasn’t bad enough, those F-22s have not received the upgrades that would keep them at the top of their game. The Raptor doesn’t even have a helmet-mounted cueing system or the latest AIM-9X version of the Sidewinder missile integrated onboard yet. Perhaps more troubling is that while the Air Force is working on integrating the AIM-120D AMRAAM onboard the jet, even this newest version of the venerable active radar-guided air-to-air missile is already being challenged by enemy digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) jammers and will soon be outranged by new Russian and Chinese weapons.

In recent weeks, the Air Force has come out publicly about the need to develop a new long-range air-to-air missile. Service officials have been privately complaining about the problem for the last several years. The reason for that is China’s new PL-15 long-range air-to-air missile—which if the artist’s impressions are accurate—bears more than a passing resemblance to the European ramjet-powered MBDA Meteor missile. A ramjet-powered missile would have longer-range than a purely rocket-powered weapon and it would have exponentially better terminal phase performance. Indeed, the Chinese reportedly test fired the first PL-15 test article last month on Sept. 15. Meanwhile, Russia, too, has its own ultra long-range air-to-air missile named the K-37M—and possibly another weapon called the izdeliye 810—in development.

Air Combat Command commander Gen. Hawk Carlisle is well aware of the problem—he told reporters as such at the Air Force Association convention in National Habour, Md., last month. A new weapon that can outrange the PL-15 and operate in a DRFM jamming environment is an “exceedingly high priority” for the Air Force, he told reporters. “The PL-15 and the range of that missile, we’ve got to be able to out-stick that missile,” Carlisle said—as quoted by Flightglobal.
The problem is even more acute for the U.S. Navy, whose aircraft are not nearly as spritely as the Air Force’s F-15C Eagle—let alone the high-flying, supersonically cruising Raptor. “Carrier fighters need a long-range air-to-air missile (LRAAM), preferably with a hybrid seeker. The United States AIM-120C/D missiles are either comparable to or outranged by Chinese and Russian multi-seeker missiles, placing U.S. fighters at a disadvantage,” states a new Hudson Institute report titledSharpening the Spear: The Carrier, the Joint Force, and High-End Conflict, which is written by The National Interest contributors Seth Cropsey, Bryan McGrath and Timothy A. Walton. “This disadvantage is compounded by the aerodynamic inferiority of U.S. carrier aircraft compared to the best Chinese and Russian fighters, which grants enemy missiles a longer lofted range.”

Indeed, for the Navy, a new missile is critical, as the authors of the report note. “Overall, a situation exists in which enemy fighters are likely to have a qualitative advantage over many U.S. naval fighter aircraft,” the Hudson Institute report reads. “An LRAAM would work to offset that situation for both U.S. existing and projected fighter aircraft. Similarly, the introduction of aerial search Infra-Red Search and Tracking systems to F-18 aircraft could improve their performance by reducing their reliance on active sensor operation.”

The Navy and the Air Force are starting to equip the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and F-15 Eagle with infrared search and track systems because DRFM jammers wreak havoc on even active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars. The best option to counter DRFM jammers is to get out of using X-band radar—or to even ditch the radar in favor of infrared. “Getting out of X band is one option,” said one senior Air Force official. “Our fourth-gen AESAs aren't a big advantage. They're more to get us back in the game against jamming.”

While a new U.S. air-to-air missile may or may not have ramjet propulsion, it is a likely candidate, an Air Force official told me. The Pentagon is also likely to develop such a weapon with multiple sensor types onboard. Previous abortive efforts to develop a new missile included several sensor types to counter the jamming problem. As such, a new missile effort will likely feature some sort ofcombination of AESA radar and infrared guidance. But whatever the Pentagon decides to do, it needs to hurry up and do it—time is running out.

The U.S. Military's 'Top Guns' in the Air Have a Big Weakness | The National Interest Blog
@gambit @Oscar @Manticore @The Deterrent

 

[gambit]

DRFM again ? I explained the basics of that a long time ago. It is also next to useless against an AESA system of the first world class fighter.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

Nice article ; thanks for posting

Spells out the latest challenges and developments in a concise manner

 

[Indus Falcon]

DRFM again ? I explained the basics of that a long time ago. It is also next to useless against an AESA system of the first world class fighter.

Actually it's usefulness is reduced, but it's not next to "useless" as you put it.

As long as a radar is transmitting, DFRM is listening.

 

[Windjammer]

DRFM again ? I explained the basics of that a long time ago. It is also next to useless against an AESA system of the first world class fighter.

Sorry i have no read your in put on the subject, a bit unrelated but your comments will be highly appreciated.
TVC may have certain benefits and looks impressive in displays but fighters dancing in the sky, how do they fare in a shooting war.
@gambit .

 

[gambit]

This is a basic radar pulse...

The above would also be called a 'pulse train'. A very short one of only three pulses. Today, we have systems that can generate a pulse train of millions of pulses.

In the old days, as in WW II, radar systems were pretty much consistent in form, if not operating freq, meaning whatever the operating freq, if the system is a pulsed system, not continuous wave (CW), signal components would be quite uniform for as long as the signal exist.

- Amplitude would be the same from pulse to pulse.

- Every pulse has a starting point and an end point, aka leading and trailing edges, and they would be the same from pulse to pulse.

- The PRI would be the same from pulse to pulse.

- Even if the system if frequency agile, from one jump to the next, all the major components of the entire transmission would still be the same.

The more consistent the signal, the easier it is to remember by anyone.

This is what happens if the system is sophisticated enough to manipulate all those components of a pulse AND of a pulse train...

The problem for any memorization method lies in memory capacity.

Let us return to the pulse train, say 100 pulses, for example.

If we receive 100 returns, we can say with certainty that there is 'something' out there. If we receive 90 returns, we can say that there is a high confidence that there is 'something' out there. The less the returns, the lower that degree of confidence.

For any memorization method, which is DFRM, if there is consistency from train to train, then memory capacity is not an issue. In fact, consistency reduces the need to use all the available memory. The problem is when the incoming signal changes those components. The memorization method must at least have a sampling of that incoming signal in order to create a countermeasure. Out of 100 pulses, sample of 5 pulses is too little. That is the equivalent of receiving only 5 returns, too little to declare that there is 'something' out there.

Knowledge-based signal processing for radar ESM systems

ESM processors are required to sort input pulse data streams exceeding one million pulses per second and minimize the reporting latency of new emitters.

If the DRFM system samples only 5 out of 100 pulses and produce a countermeasure from that small sample, the seeking radar may dismiss that countermeasure as noise. After all, it received 50, 60, or even 80 returns. The DRFM system must sample as much as it is designed to do in order to produce a credible countermeasure signal. The higher the system memory capacity, the better the sample quantity.

But if the incoming radar signal is sophisticated enough in terms of agility of every components of the radar pulse, the DRFM system can be overwhelmed.

There are plenty of literature about the SPECTRA countermeasure system. Against 3rd or 2nd tier adversary, SPECTRA will work. Against the 1st tier adversary like the F-22 or F-35 ? Fuggetaboutit.

 

[shah1398]

I still didnt find the answer to motive behind culminating the production of state of the art operational F-22s and instead go for a new aircraft tender which gave birth to F-35 program. They could have easily upgraded F-22s to the status around that visioned for F-35.

 

[gambit]

I still didnt find the answer to motive behind culminating the production of state of the art operational F-22s and instead go for a new aircraft tender which gave birth to F-35 program. They could have easily upgraded F-22s to the status around that visioned for F-35.

The answer was budget. You may not like it, and neither do I. But that was given and I have no problems accepting it.

 

[shah1398]

The answer was budget. You may not like it, and neither do I. But that was given and I have no problems accepting it.

Sir F-35 is costing much more day by day. So was it a bad decision after all?

 

[Manindra]

In the 25 years since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Pentagon has more or less taken air superiority for granted; but that complacency is coming back to haunt the Department of Defense.

Neither Donald Rumsfeld nor Robert Gates took air power seriously, and as such, the U.S. Air Force is left with a tiny fleet of 186 Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptors instead of the minimum 381 it needs. If that wasn’t bad enough, those F-22s have not received the upgrades that would keep them at the top of their game. The Raptor doesn’t even have a helmet-mounted cueing system or the latest AIM-9X version of the Sidewinder missile integrated onboard yet. Perhaps more troubling is that while the Air Force is working on integrating the AIM-120D AMRAAM onboard the jet, even this newest version of the venerable active radar-guided air-to-air missile is already being challenged by enemy digital radio frequency memory (DRFM) jammers and will soon be outranged by new Russian and Chinese weapons.

In recent weeks, the Air Force has come out publicly about the need to develop a new long-range air-to-air missile. Service officials have been privately complaining about the problem for the last several years. The reason for that is China’s new PL-15 long-range air-to-air missile—which if the artist’s impressions are accurate—bears more than a passing resemblance to the European ramjet-powered MBDA Meteor missile. A ramjet-powered missile would have longer-range than a purely rocket-powered weapon and it would have exponentially better terminal phase performance. Indeed, the Chinese reportedly test fired the first PL-15 test article last month on Sept. 15. Meanwhile, Russia, too, has its own ultra long-range air-to-air missile named the K-37M—and possibly another weapon called the izdeliye 810—in development.

Air Combat Command commander Gen. Hawk Carlisle is well aware of the problem—he told reporters as such at the Air Force Association convention in National Habour, Md., last month. A new weapon that can outrange the PL-15 and operate in a DRFM jamming environment is an “exceedingly high priority” for the Air Force, he told reporters. “The PL-15 and the range of that missile, we’ve got to be able to out-stick that missile,” Carlisle said—as quoted by Flightglobal.
The problem is even more acute for the U.S. Navy, whose aircraft are not nearly as spritely as the Air Force’s F-15C Eagle—let alone the high-flying, supersonically cruising Raptor. “Carrier fighters need a long-range air-to-air missile (LRAAM), preferably with a hybrid seeker. The United States AIM-120C/D missiles are either comparable to or outranged by Chinese and Russian multi-seeker missiles, placing U.S. fighters at a disadvantage,” states a new Hudson Institute report titledSharpening the Spear: The Carrier, the Joint Force, and High-End Conflict, which is written by The National Interest contributors Seth Cropsey, Bryan McGrath and Timothy A. Walton. “This disadvantage is compounded by the aerodynamic inferiority of U.S. carrier aircraft compared to the best Chinese and Russian fighters, which grants enemy missiles a longer lofted range.”

Indeed, for the Navy, a new missile is critical, as the authors of the report note. “Overall, a situation exists in which enemy fighters are likely to have a qualitative advantage over many U.S. naval fighter aircraft,” the Hudson Institute report reads. “An LRAAM would work to offset that situation for both U.S. existing and projected fighter aircraft. Similarly, the introduction of aerial search Infra-Red Search and Tracking systems to F-18 aircraft could improve their performance by reducing their reliance on active sensor operation.”

The Navy and the Air Force are starting to equip the Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet and F-15 Eagle with infrared search and track systems because DRFM jammers wreak havoc on even active electronically scanned array (AESA) radars. The best option to counter DRFM jammers is to get out of using X-band radar—or to even ditch the radar in favor of infrared. “Getting out of X band is one option,” said one senior Air Force official. “Our fourth-gen AESAs aren't a big advantage. They're more to get us back in the game against jamming.”

While a new U.S. air-to-air missile may or may not have ramjet propulsion, it is a likely candidate, an Air Force official told me. The Pentagon is also likely to develop such a weapon with multiple sensor types onboard. Previous abortive efforts to develop a new missile included several sensor types to counter the jamming problem. As such, a new missile effort will likely feature some sort ofcombination of AESA radar and infrared guidance. But whatever the Pentagon decides to do, it needs to hurry up and do it—time is running out.

The U.S. Military's 'Top Guns' in the Air Have a Big Weakness | The National Interest Blog
@gambit @Oscar @Manticore @The Deterrent

F-22 notches first guided AIM-9X Sidewinder firing - IHS Jane's 360
Air Force Tests F-22 Helmet-Mounted Cueing System | Defense Tech

 

[SrNair]

But that 'tiny' 186 of F 22 fleet can take any other major AF in the world including China .Perhaps Russia can resist for a short time .F 22 is a state of art fighter .All they want is a optimum utilization of that resource

 

[anon45]

Sir F-35 is costing much more day by day. So was it a bad decision after all?

Its actually costing less...Ten Signs The F-35 Fighter Program Is Becoming A Smashing Success

Also F-35 is the only Aircraft that has no crashes in testing... pretty amazing.

If you understandably don't see Forbes as a reliable source for aircraft info, just go to f-16.net.

It's actually a fairly reliable forum with enthusiasts and pilots, even of the f-35 itself! Don't expect classified info though.

 

[shah1398]

Its actually costing less...Ten Signs The F-35 Fighter Program Is Becoming A Smashing Success

Also F-35 is the only Aircraft that has no crashes in testing... pretty amazing.

If you understandably don't see Forbes as a reliable source for aircraft info, just go to f-16.net.

It's actually a fairly reliable forum with enthusiasts and pilots, even of the f-35 itself! Don't expect classified info though.

What i think is that Lockheed Martin has actually used F-22 as Basic Technology demonstrator for F-35 and that is why we have not seen any crashes and by this it had saved lots of money too. So Lockheed was actually already a step ahead when it started working on F-35 and that was one of main reason it won the contract of F-35 quite easily by outclassing Boeing. Had F-22 been sold to multiple allies and its production not stopped plus not kept in secret from them then i am sure its costs would have come down to a great extent.

 

[C130]

more fear mongering to get more money spend on the DoD

a major war involving the USA,Russia, and China is practically nil

if you want to put $$ into the machine build more ballistic missile subs that's your deterrent.

wars of the 21st century will be against terrorists rats not nuclear powers.

 

[anon45]

What i think is that Lockheed Martin has actually used F-22 as Basic Technology demonstrator for F-35 and that is why we have not seen any crashes and by this it had saved lots of money too. So Lockheed was actually already a step ahead when it started working on F-35 and that was one of main reason it won the contract of F-35 quite easily by outclassing Boeing. Had F-22 been sold to multiple allies and its production not stopped plus not kept in secret from them then i am sure its costs would have come down to a great extent.

Well from the looks of it the F-22 being exported was a non-starter.
as for domestic production, budget realities.