Boeing F-15EX / F-15QA and related variants

[Triton]

Why would Raytheon need to dust off anything when they already tested the T3 for DARPA? Why look back?

You wrote on f-16.net that the program is completed and a final test report was delivered. You further wrote:

The program is jointly funded with, and will transition to the Air Force.

The DARPA phase is over and they accomplished in 2013 what they set out to do i.e. test out the Raytheon VFDR missile, and the Boeing dual pulse missile. Now its up to the USAF to spin this into either a further testing program or use it to come up with requirements. I think they'll sit on it for a while, because you really have a dual-need to not only fund a clean sheet AMRAAM replacement, but also a SACM class missile.

Source:
http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=289951#p289951

 

[bring_it_on]

Yes and if the plan is to considerably upgrade the BVR capability through a new weapon then you already have a program that has demonstrated what is possible given current technology. All you need to do is roll that into a program and spend money to get this capability by 2025. There is no indication that the Raytheon weapon was the enhanced AMRAAM derivative that had been presented earlier. If one looks at the capability requirement from the T-3 it would make sense to completely replace some of the systems to get that dual use capability and If i were to guess I would guess that the missile plan for raytheon with that program was significantly different from the AMRAAM in both seeker technology, and propulsion technology. Lockheed has a multi-pulse missile proposal as well since it did not win contract awards for the T-3. I also doubt that Raytheon would be rigid when it comes to the propulsion concept, they did consider a dual pulse motor as well for the AMRAAM at one point of time. It would all come down to the range and other performance requirements for a future missile that will largely drive the choices in propulsion.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-seeks-interim-champ-longer-range-air-to-air-416828/

 

[DrRansom]

Bring-it-on linked the article I was about to post, but here are two highlights

On topic:

In terms of air superiority weapons, Carlisle says the development of next-generation air-to-air missiles is also “an exceptionally high priority”.

Raytheon’s AMRAAM is the current go-to Western weapon for beyond-visual-range air combat, but new long-range missiles being fielded by Russia and China are a significant concern to the Pentagon.

Carlisle says outmatching the Chinese PL-15 air-to-air missile in particular is an “exceedingly high priority”.

“The PL-15 and the range of that missile, we’ve got to be able to out-stick that missile,” he says.

LowObservable will find this funny, but it looks like the USAF is going the way of Europe and the Rafale. USAF is now investing in advanced IRSTs and is looking at a long-range missile program. This mirrors European investments into IRST a decade ago and the Meteor missile. Amusing observation here.


*************************************

Off-topic

“[Global Strike commander Gen Robin Rand] and I are talking about how to transition some number, an interim capability that’s on the current [CALCM] system and then how do we move to even an improved capability into the next generation air-to-surface cruise missiles we’re producing today.”

- Sounds like CHAMP is /about/ to be deployable, albeit in small numbers

 

[bobbymike]

What would be the maximum range of a AIM-120D launched at 50,000 feet at Mach 2 (or whatever the highest speed they could be launched at) from an F-15?

 

[Triton]

"F-15 SLEP Coming"
—John A. Tirpak9/16/2015

Source:
http://www.airforcemag.com/DRArchive/Pages/2015/September%202015/September%2016%202015/F-15-SLEP-Coming.aspx

The F-15C and E fleets will need a Service Life Extension Program that will cost “billions,” Air Combat Command chief Gen. Hawk Carlisle told reporters at ASC​15. “If you look at the stress tests we’re doing on the F-15C and the F-16 and F-15E, there are issues” requiring attention, Carlisle said. Wing spars and skins, and longerons are just some of the things that have to be replaced, he said, adding that if he “could find a way” to afford some capability upgrades, he would add them to the list of things installed when the jets are down for refurbishment. These include radars, passive detection systems, link architecture, radios, communications, and navigation equipment, he said. While the F-15Es fly a different mission than the C models, they both endure “a lot of weight on the wings” and so will need similar attention. “Those airplanes are going to be in the inventory for a long time to come,” he said, and “we have to get them as capable as we can.” The SLEP isn’t something that will happen “in the next one or two years” because stress data is still being collected, but “we have to start building (that) into the program.”

 

[Triton]

YMMV, but I thought that this observation was interesting concerning US military use of IRST.

"Airborne IRST properties and performance"
Posted by picard578 on June 16, 2015

Source:
https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/airborne-irst-properties-and-performance/comment-page-1/

While US Department of Defense has a very long history of being “late to the party” when it comes to introducing simple, yet effective (even transformative) systems*, US military is currently taking baby steps to rectifying its lag in development and application of airborne IR sensors. This can be clearly seen from the F-35s inbuilt IRST (though that decision was only made on insistence of US Navy, which was also the first service to introduce the Legion pod, and generally has better understanding of passive IR systems than USAF**), and procurement of IR pods for the F-15C, F-16 and F-18 fleets. Legion pod procured is capable of generating weapons track. US Navy is also the service that initiated development of AIM-9X Block III, which is basically a BVR missile, with a range of 42 km.

One of reasons why United States have not put funds into developing IRST, and are even now using almost exclusively systems geared for air-to-ground performance that happen to have air-to-air option, is that IRST was seen as a threat to the AWACS program, and later on also to stealth fighters. Both of these were high-budget programs that USAF could not allow to disappear. With average price of 1 million USD per unit, it would take only 3,2 billion USD to equip the entire US inventory of tactical aircraft with modern IRST systems. Allowing it to threaten the multi-billion AWACS or stealth aircraft programmes was simply unacceptable.*** For this reason, USAF is still acting as if IR sensors have not advanced past Vietnam-era sensors with their range, weather and targeting limitations. Same reason is also likely behind the decision to retire the IRST-equipped F-14 just before the F-22 started entering service (F-14s were retired in mid-2006, while the F-22 started entering service in 2007).

This might be changing as USAF agressors are starting to use IR sensors during Red Flag exercises.

* Examples are assault rifles, carrier catapults, IR sensors, helmet mounted sights, HOBS IR missiles.

** US Navy was also the first service to deploy IR Sidewinder missile in 1956. US Air Force deployed a Falcon missile the same year, but it had both IR and RF variant, and unlike Sidewinder, it was primarily intended for bomber self-defense and not for usage on fighters. Even though it was later deployed on fighter aircraft as well, USN Sidewinder proved superior and became preeminent US IR air-to-air missile.

*** E-3 Sentry program cost is 26,73 billion USD, F-22 program cost is 79,48 billion USD and F-35 program cost is estimated at 323 billion USD, though it is likely to be higher.

 

[bobbymike]

YMMV, but I thought that this observation was interesting concerning US military use of IRST.

"Airborne IRST properties and performance"
Posted by picard578 on June 16, 2015

Source:
https://defenseissues.wordpress.com/2015/06/16/airborne-irst-properties-and-performance/comment-page-1/

While US Department of Defense has a very long history of being “late to the party” when it comes to introducing simple, yet effective (even transformative) systems*, US military is currently taking baby steps to rectifying its lag in development and application of airborne IR sensors. This can be clearly seen from the F-35s inbuilt IRST (though that decision was only made on insistence of US Navy, which was also the first service to introduce the Legion pod, and generally has better understanding of passive IR systems than USAF**), and procurement of IR pods for the F-15C, F-16 and F-18 fleets. Legion pod procured is capable of generating weapons track. US Navy is also the service that initiated development of AIM-9X Block III, which is basically a BVR missile, with a range of 42 km.

One of reasons why United States have not put funds into developing IRST, and are even now using almost exclusively systems geared for air-to-ground performance that happen to have air-to-air option, is that IRST was seen as a threat to the AWACS program, and later on also to stealth fighters. Both of these were high-budget programs that USAF could not allow to disappear. With average price of 1 million USD per unit, it would take only 3,2 billion USD to equip the entire US inventory of tactical aircraft with modern IRST systems. Allowing it to threaten the multi-billion AWACS or stealth aircraft programmes was simply unacceptable.*** For this reason, USAF is still acting as if IR sensors have not advanced past Vietnam-era sensors with their range, weather and targeting limitations. Same reason is also likely behind the decision to retire the IRST-equipped F-14 just before the F-22 started entering service (F-14s were retired in mid-2006, while the F-22 started entering service in 2007).

This might be changing as USAF agressors are starting to use IR sensors during Red Flag exercises.

* Examples are assault rifles, carrier catapults, IR sensors, helmet mounted sights, HOBS IR missiles.

** US Navy was also the first service to deploy IR Sidewinder missile in 1956. US Air Force deployed a Falcon missile the same year, but it had both IR and RF variant, and unlike Sidewinder, it was primarily intended for bomber self-defense and not for usage on fighters. Even though it was later deployed on fighter aircraft as well, USN Sidewinder proved superior and became preeminent US IR air-to-air missile.

*** E-3 Sentry program cost is 26,73 billion USD, F-22 program cost is 79,48 billion USD and F-35 program cost is estimated at 323 billion USD, though it is likely to be higher.

Has there not been Typhoons, MiGs and Rafael's at Red Flag for years?

 

[bring_it_on]

Bring-it-on linked the article I was about to post, but here are two highlights

On topic:

In terms of air superiority weapons, Carlisle says the development of next-generation air-to-air missiles is also “an exceptionally high priority”.

Raytheon’s AMRAAM is the current go-to Western weapon for beyond-visual-range air combat, but new long-range missiles being fielded by Russia and China are a significant concern to the Pentagon.

Carlisle says outmatching the Chinese PL-15 air-to-air missile in particular is an “exceedingly high priority”.

“The PL-15 and the range of that missile, we’ve got to be able to out-stick that missile,” he says.

LowObservable will find this funny, but it looks like the USAF is going the way of Europe and the Rafale. USAF is now investing in advanced IRSTs and is looking at a long-range missile program. This mirrors European investments into IRST a decade ago and the Meteor missile. Amusing observation here.


*************************************

Off-topic

“[Global Strike commander Gen Robin Rand] and I are talking about how to transition some number, an interim capability that’s on the current [CALCM] system and then how do we move to even an improved capability into the next generation air-to-surface cruise missiles we’re producing today.”

- Sounds like CHAMP is /about/ to be deployable, albeit in small numbers

I think the reference was to this -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bgooB13PJIg

 

[Triton]

"Fighter Gap Forces Questions On USAF F-15C Plans"
Sep 17, 2015 Amy Butler | Aviation Week & Space Technology

Source:
http://aviationweek.com/defense/fighter-gap-forces-questions-usaf-f-15c-plans

The lack of an official retirement date for the U.S. Air Force’s F-15C is perhaps the strongest indication of a bright future for the platform.

This is not lost on the fighter’s manufacturer, Boeing, which is recasting its efforts to offer an upgrade plan for the air superiority aircraft after its earlier effort, dubbed the Silent Eagle, flopped.

Most Air Force platforms have a retirement date on the books, even if just for planning. But the F-15C is in a peculiar position. It was to be replaced by a fleet of F-22s, but high costs prompted then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates to end production for the stealthy, twin-engine aircraft in 2009 with only 187 jets produced. This is far fewer than the 350 hoped for. So the F-15C fleet is likely to stay on far longer than expected, at least until an F-22follow-on—dubbed the Next-Generation Air Dominance aircraft—is designed and fielded.

“They will not be producing another air superiority jet until the 2030s, and they will not be out there in sufficient numbers . . . until 2040 or beyond,” says Mike Gibbons, Boeing’s F-15 vice president

Air Force officials will not go so far as to call it a “gap” in capability, but there clearly is a shortfall. This is exemplified by the shift in plans for the critical air-to-air mission. A decade ago, the service projected a “high-low” mix of F-22s handling all of the air superiority tasks, with the F-35 relegated to a multirole mission of suppression/destruction of enemy air defenses and close air support roles. The F-35 was equipped for limited air-to-air engagement, including for self protection, but not as a front-line air superiority fighter.

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh says that now, however, the limited number of F-22s has pushed the service to look at a long-range plan for the F-15C as well as pressing the F-35 into that role. The F-35 “is not intended to be an air superiority fighter. That was not how it was designed,” he told reporters during a Sept. 15 press conference at the annual Air Force Association Air and Space Conference. “When the F-22 buy was curtailed . . . we [decided we] have to supplement it with something. Near-term it is going to be the F-15C . . . and then as the F-35 comes on board it is capable of supplementing the F-22, but then it will not be doing its primary job.”

Gen. Herbert Carlisle, who heads Air Combat Command, acknowledges the conundrum. The F-15C will require costly upgrades to stay relevant in the fight. And the service is already stretched for resources. Durability testing thus far—with more to come—suggests new longerons, wing spars and wings could be required on at least some of the F-15Cs. This will result in a “pretty significant bill,” he told reporters at the conference, adding it will total billions of dollars.

Ideally, the Air Force would be able to purchase a new platform for a new “low” end to its earlier high-low concept, Welsh says. Such an aircraft would operate in permissive airspace, conducting a variety of missions, possibly including air-to-air and air-to-ground sorties. But, funding is lacking to support this, he notes.

As the Air Force mulls its requirements, Boeing is crafting a menu of upgrades for the F-15C fleet to both keep it safe to fly and relevant in a changing threat environment. The initiative, dubbed “F-15 2040C” is a follow-on to the company’s unsuccessful push to sell options under the “Silent Eagle” effort. The latter, unveiled in 2009, was focused on reducing the F-15’s radar cross section, with a prominent feature being conformal fuel tanks (CFT) capable of carrying weapons internally, along with a canted tail option and coatings focused on reducing its radar signature. While Boeing officials say Silent Eagle was aimed at Israel and South Korea, it was clearly an option for the U.S. Air Force as well. Eventually, all three passed on the concept.

The new emphasis with 2040C is a shift from the Silent Eagle’s focus on adding as much stealthiness to the F-15 as possible. Instead, the new initiative maximizes the aircraft’s characteristically heavy weapons loadout with a variety of options. “We definitely don’t want to give up the range we get with the CFT and even if we could give up the reach, we didn’t want to limit ourselves to the number of weapons we can carry internally,” Gibbons says.

This puts the F-15 in more of a support role. While F-22s would be expected to penetrate air defenses, the operational concept would be for them to then relay data to the F-15s—operating at a safe distance—to deploy a large number of weapons for kills. This depends on the F-15’s load increasing and on much-needed new communications, also part of the 2040C offering.

One of the 2040C loadout options would place four external air-to-air missiles on each of the CFTs. That doubles the loadout from the current eight to 16. Another option—available only if the Air Force opts to add fly-by-wire controls to the aircraft—would add more air-to-air missiles on the outboard stations as well. These options involve a new CFT design, though it would follow the existing CFT outer mold line, Gibbons says. The service does employ CFTs for the F-15E Strike Eagle fleet, but they are rarely used for the air superiority variant.

The goal of 16 air-to-air missiles is at the “upper end” of the need, based on a variety of scenarios being examined by the Air Force, Gibbons says. “It is very easy to envision that with our forces around the world enemy threats can get an advantage . . . because they have aircraft on station and aircraft at bases [close by]. It is just a matter of numbers. If you are anywhere near their country, they can launch a lot of jets pretty quickly.”

Communications with the F-22 also are essential to support this operational concept. The Air Force is continuing to struggle with crafting a plan for so-called 5th-to-4th communications, named to reflect the pathways needed from fifth-generation F-22s to fourth-generation legacy platforms, like the F-15C/D.

Boeing’s Talon Hate pod is a pathfinder of sorts for this capability. Flight testing is slated to begin in the fall on the pod, but only a few are being procured, to address an urgent need. The service has yet to articulate a follow-on plan for 5th-to-4th communications for the entire fleet. The issue is that the F-22 is unable to covertly send and receive data with F-15Cs. This is significant, because increasingly sophisticated air defenses are pushing F-15s farther away from harm where the F-22s will be operating. The theory is F-22s, which carry few weapons, would designate targets and F-15s would launch missiles. Equipped with a long-range infrared search and track (IRST), F-15s could also relay targeting data forward to F-22s.

Another item on the 2040C menu is a long-range IRST sensor. This is part of the Talon Hate project. It is needed for the F-15 to be able to detect aircraft employing radar-evading technologies at long ranges. Gibbons says advances in survivability—both passive and active—also are included in the options.

These capabilities would be added to already planned work on outfitting the F-15C fleet with upgraded AN/APG-63 advanced active electronically scanned array radars. Boeing also is developing the Eagle Passive/Active Warning and Survivability System (Epawss), a $7.6 billion project. It is replacing the 1970s- technology Tactical Electronic Warfare System used today.

Gibbons says an announcement on the Epawss supplier is expected soon, after which a roughly one-year technology maturation phase will begin. Development would then take about five years, including flight testing, he says. Ultimately, Epawss should be ready for fielding in the early-to-mid 2020s. This would be a target time to implement desired 2040C modifications as well, he says.

In parallel, Boeing is working on extended fatigue-life testing on the aircraft to support additional service life. The C fleet is certified to 9,000 hr., says Robert Zwitch, F-15 deputy system program manager for the Air Force’s F-15 division in the Life Cycle Management Center.

The Air Force has directed Boeing to conduct additional fatigue tests on two jets—one to 33,000 hr. and another to 13,500 hr. For low-hour aircraft, inspection could be enough to get to 2040. However, those more heavily used could require new structures such as vertical tails or wings. In some cases, Boeing may offer to provide entire new platforms, with mission systems (radar, avionics, and pods) reused from aging models. The high-life aircraft could reach as many as 20,000 hr. of flight by 2040.

The Air Force operates 213 F-15Cs.

 

[Colonial-Marine]

We're down to just 213 F-15C/Ds? Wasn't that number quite a lot higher just a few years ago?

 

[bobbymike]

We're down to just 213 F-15C/Ds? Wasn't that number quite a lot higher just a few years ago?

I don't know 'recent' numbers but since the end of the Cold War

"Although, he [Gen. Carlisle] admits the air force has a serious capacity problem, having slimmed down from 188 fighter squadrons at the end of the Cold War to just 49 squadrons in the current five-year plan.

 

[Hanse]

We're down to just 213 F-15C/Ds? Wasn't that number quite a lot higher just a few years ago?

According the this year's USAF almanac the 213 is for Cs only. There are an additional 36 Ds and 220 Es. There are a lot of Eagles in the Bone Yard.

 

[bobbymike]

We're down to just 213 F-15C/Ds? Wasn't that number quite a lot higher just a few years ago?

According the this year's USAF almanac the 213 is for Cs only. There are an additional 36 Ds and 220 Es. There are a lot of Eagles in the Bone Yard.

We could have been up to between 300 and 350 F-22s by now*

* I will eventually stop posting this and just maintain the small black ribbon I wear over the cancellation.

 

[Triton]

The article I posted says that the Air Force operates 213 F-15Cs, it does not mention the number of F-15Ds.

 

[Triton]

Eagle Passive/Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS) datasheet:
http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/EPAWSS/Documents/northrop_grumman_epawss.pdf

 

[bring_it_on]

Boeing has to make a down select, so BaE is also a potential supplier.

 

[LowObservable]

BAE already has DEWS on Korean and Saudi F-15s. NG says its kit will be less expensive to retrofit.


With the Talon Hate pod idea, combining "5th-to 4th" with IRST, big AESA, lots of missiles and an effective jammer, the idea seems as much a complement to the JSF as to F-15.

 

[Triton]

I understand that Northrop Grumman has licensed Selex ES IRST technology for OpenPod.

What should we make of Selex ES claims for the capability of their SKYWARD-G pod and the usefulness of IRST on the "2040C"?

The IRST is capable of detecting low-RCS targets at distances compatible with a beyond-visual-range missile launch, Mason says. “We have seen them,” he responds when asked if Selex IRSTs have tracked low-RCS targets. “We are looking at very small delta-Ts [temperature differences between the target and the background]. Some infrared absorbent paints cause more friction than standard surfaces, and that causes kinetic heating that the IRST will pick up.” Skyward-G does not depend on a supersonic target—“skin heating at 300-400 knots is significant”—and detects heat radiating through the aircraft's skin from the engine, as well as skin friction and the exhaust plume.

The IRST uses a long-wave focal plane array sensor (a dual-band system, adding mid-wave capability, is a potential upgrade) with three fields of view. In its long-range search mode, the system is an IR telescope with a fast-moving scanning mirror (located in a transparent dome in front of the windshield) and “step-scans” through its search sector. It also has a single-target track mode, and in wide-field mode it provides a night-vision image on the head-up display. As a passive system, IRST does not have inherent range data, but it can perform “kinetic ranging”—the aircraft performs a weaving maneuver and the range is determined by the change in azimuth angle to the target—or the IRSTs on two aircraft can triangulate the target over the TAU-Link.

IRST hardware—the optics, detector and processor—has been improved since the development of Pirate started, but (according to Mason and other industry sources) the most important change has been the development of algorithms, based on operational experience and the analysis of real-world imagery, that look at IR signatures in detail, including variations of color and brightness within the target, in order to filter out false alarms caused by everything from birds to barbecue grills.

The IRST can give the radar a very accurate azimuth and elevation to the target, which allows it to focus its energy and increase the probability of achieving detection and track on a low-RCS target, Mason says. The AESA provides virtually instantaneous beam-steering within its ±70-deg. scan, but the repositioner is slower. One concept to be demonstrated will be the use of two Gripen radars and the TAU-Link to provide a wide-angle picture to both targets.

Source:
http://aviationweek.com/awin/gripen-sensors-claim-counter-stealth-performance

 

[Triton]

"Northrop unveils OpenPod as USAF seeks F-15 IRST"
02 June, 2015 BY: James Drew Washington DC

Source:
https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/northrop-unveils-openpod-as-usaf-seeks-f-15-irst-413022/

Northrop Grumman has responded to US Air Force interest in an infrared search and track (IRST) capability for its F-15C Eagle by unveiling OpenPod, a reconfigurable sensor pod which the company says is already being flight tested on a tactical military aircraft. Northrop’s system would employ an IRST produced by Italy’s Selex ES, owned by Finmeccanica.

The front end of the rail-mounted pod can be swapped out between sorties to host either an IRST, light detection and ranging (LIDAR), targeting, or communications payload.

James Mocarski, Northrop’s vice president of airborne tactical sensors, says OpenPod is the company’s answer to an unspecified air force sources-sought notice for an IRST system. It could also host the air force’s planned Maps System, a capability that will allow F-22s and F-35s to exchange tactical information with legacy fighters, he says.

“OpenPod IRST combines state-of-the-art IRST sensor system technology from our partner Selex ES with the latest advances in target identification, clutter rejection and tracking from Northrop Grumman’s F-35 distributed aperture system, fire control radar, and infrared countermeasures products,” Mocarski said at the June 2 unveiling in Washington DC. “It’s our intended entry into an upcoming air force competition for infrared search and track.”

The air force’s F-15 division has formally expressed interest in a production-ready IRST capability for fielding in 2018, and in a longer-term development effort that would acquire a more advanced system in the 2020 time frame. The sensor would allow legacy, fourth-generation aircraft to “detect, track, target, and engage threats in radar denied environments.”

Meanwhile, the air force research laboratory is exploring next-generation IRST technologies with a programme to mature and demonstrate advanced, long-range offensive infrared search and track capabilities.

Northrop’s OpenPod would will compete against Lockheed Martin’s Legion Pod, unveiled in February. Legion Pod is a derivative of the company’s IRST21 sensor for the US Navy F/A-18 Super Hornet.

Lockheed intends to qualify the Legion Pod on the F-15 and F-16 with test flights planned this spring and into 2016. Mocarski declined to name any specific aircraft type for Northrop's product, but the F-16 and F-15 would be ideal candidates.

“It’s in flight testing today and we’re meeting our technical milestones, we’re meeting our schedule milestones, and we’re meeting our cost objectives,” he says. “I can’t go into details, but we are on contract and investing our own collaborative resources as well into integration on a variety of military platforms.

“We believe that there’s a growing requirement for infrared search and track across the entire industry and around the world. Our offering would be available to any upcoming competitions, but this is the first.”

Northrop says OpenPod could host new targeting pod capabilities through the company’s long-standing relationship with Israel’s Rafael on the development and sale Litening G4. Rafael’s latest Litening design is due to become operational next year.

“The OpenPod is an upgrade path we have for Litening,” Mocarski says. “We remain committed to Litening as a product, we remain committed to our partnership with Rafael. It’s been a long-lasting relationship and we see this as the next step in Lightning development. It offers a lot of opportunities to continue to evolve and improve that product with even better capability and higher-performance sensors.”

OpenPod weighs 500lb and is designed to Northrop’s open architect standards. Host platforms could include bombers, unmanned aerial vehicles or even cargo aircraft like the Lockheed C-130 and Boeing C-17.

 

[Triton]

Lockeed Martin Unveils 'Legion Pod' for F-15, F-16 Retrofit
by Bill Carey
- February 23, 2015, 9:44 AM

Source:
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2015-02-23/lockeed-martin-unveils-legion-pod-f-15-f-16-retrofit

Lockheed Martin unveiled an internally funded multi-function sensor pod for F-15C and F-16 retrofits that incorporates its new infrared search and track (IRST) system. The Legion Pod supports collaborative targeting between multiple aircraft in radar-denied environments, the company said.

The new system is housed in a 16-inch-diameter structure and contains an advanced networking processor and datalink in addition to Lockheed Martin’s new generation AN/ASG-34 IRST sensor, which it calls IRST21. In December, the U.S. Navy received approval to begin low-rate initial production of the IRST sensor pod on the F/A-18 Super Hornet.

In an announcement earlier this month, Lockheed Martin said Legion Pod components have completed “limited qualification.” The company plans to conduct initial flight tests this year, with further testing in 2016. It said the pod would be available to support the F-15C IRST program of record for a long-range detection and tracking system. “As a flexible, production-ready system, Legion Pod can be quickly procured and integrated to meet current and emerging customer requirements,” said Ken Fuhr, Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control director of fixed wing programs.

The Legion Pod also supports the Multi-Domain Adaptable Processing System (Maps), a “communication gateway” the U.S. Air Force seeks. Maps would enable the F-22 and F-35 fifth-generation fighters to share tactical data with fourth-generation fighters such as the F-15, F-16 and F-18, as well as other platforms connected by Link 16 data link. The gateway will be hosted on the F-15C, the Air Force has said.

 

[Triton]

Yes and if the plan is to considerably upgrade the BVR capability through a new weapon then you already have a program that has demonstrated what is possible given current technology. All you need to do is roll that into a program and spend money to get this capability by 2025. There is no indication that the Raytheon weapon was the enhanced AMRAAM derivative that had been presented earlier. If one looks at the capability requirement from the T-3 it would make sense to completely replace some of the systems to get that dual use capability and If i were to guess I would guess that the missile plan for raytheon with that program was significantly different from the AMRAAM in both seeker technology, and propulsion technology. Lockheed has a multi-pulse missile proposal as well since it did not win contract awards for the T-3. I also doubt that Raytheon would be rigid when it comes to the propulsion concept, they did consider a dual pulse motor as well for the AMRAAM at one point of time. It would all come down to the range and other performance requirements for a future missile that will largely drive the choices in propulsion.

https://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/usaf-seeks-interim-champ-longer-range-air-to-air-416828/

Hopefully the United States Air Force will get on with it.

 

[Triton]

Published on Aug 3, 2015

Lockheed Martin’s Legion Pod recently completed its first flight test, successfully tracking multiple airborne targets while flying on an F-16 in Fort Worth, Texas. Legion Pod was integrated onto the F-16 without making any hardware or software changes to the aircraft.

https://youtu.be/FYpgwqSJMLI

 

[bring_it_on]

Bae Gets EPAWSS...

http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2015-10-01-Boeing-Selected-as-Prime-for-EPAWSS-Electronic-Warfare-Suite-Program?cm_mmc=BDS-_-Twitter-_-WarfareSuite-_-Program

The F-15 EPAWSS upgrade will significantly improve the F-15's capability to autonomously and automatically detect, identify and locate radio frequency (RF) threats as well as provide the ability to deny, degrade, deceive, disrupt and defeat RF and electro-optical / infrared (EO / IR) threat systems in contested and unplanned operations within highly contested environments through 2035. The F-15 EPAWSS will provide indication, type and position of ground-based RF threats as well as the indication, type and bearing of airborne threats with the situational awareness needed to avoid, engage or negate the threat. The F-15 EPAWSS will prevent RF and IR threat systems from detecting or acquiring accurate targeting information prior to threat engagement to complicate and / or negate an enemy threat targeting solution--and effectively counter enemy missiles / weapons if adversary threat systems engage and employ weapons against friendly forces--through components such as chaff, flares, decoys / angle countermeasures and jamming.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/budget/fy2015/usaf-peds/0207171f_7_pb_2015.pdf

 

[Hanse]

Sounds like it's got a built in DIRCM.

 

[Trident]

It does - although it might simply be a case of a very brief blurb failing to clearly separate capabilities according to the nature of threat (RF or EO). Nonetheless, worth watching more closely!

 

[Trident]

We're down to just 213 F-15C/Ds? Wasn't that number quite a lot higher just a few years ago?

According the this year's USAF almanac the 213 is for Cs only. There are an additional 36 Ds and 220 Es. There are a lot of Eagles in the Bone Yard.

... or with the ANG, right?

 

[bring_it_on]

The most detailed article I've come across was in the Old Crows journal a while back..

https://www.scribd.com/doc/283359838/EPAWS-AOC

 

[Hanse]

We're down to just 213 F-15C/Ds? Wasn't that number quite a lot higher just a few years ago?

According the this year's USAF almanac the 213 is for Cs only. There are an additional 36 Ds and 220 Es. There are a lot of Eagles in the Bone Yard.

... or with the ANG, right?

Forgot to check the Guard/Reserves.

 

[totoro]

as per almanac's figures - usaf has 101 C and 13 D, while ANG has 112 C and 23 D. AFRC has none.

 

[Hanse]

as per almanac's figures - usaf has 101 C and 13 D, while ANG has 112 C and 23 D. AFRC has none.

Dang. :'(

 

[bring_it_on]

Boeing, BAE Will Develop EW Suite For F-15

WASHINGTON — The US Air Force selected Boeing as the prime contractor on a new, all-digital electronic warfare suite for its fleet of F-15 fighters. BAE Systems will develop the new system.

The Air Force’s Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS) will counter threats and better protect F-15 air crews, according to an Oct. 1 Boeing statement. The system will be installed on more than 400 F-15Es and F-15Cs, replacing the legacy Tactical Electronic Warfare System, which has been in use since the 1980s.

The EPAWSS program is valued at $4 billion, according to the statement.

“Warfighters of today and tomorrow need the latest in jamming, targeting, infrared threat detection and enhanced decoy capabilities,” said Mike Gibbons, vice president, Global Strike Boeing F-15 programs, according to the statement. “EPAWSS will ensure the F-15 is relevant and dominant through 2040 and beyond.”

Boeing has chosen BAE Systems as the subcontractor to develop EPAWSS, which provides advanced EW capabilities and a “significant growth path” for the F-15, according to an Oct. 1 BAE Systems statement. The system will improve aircraft protection by adding advanced electronic countermeasures, radar warning and increased chaff and flare capability.

“By upgrading to an enhanced all-digital system, the Air Force, in conjunction with the platform prime, Boeing, will provide next-generation electronic warfare capability to F-15C and F-15E aircraft to help keep the platform capable and mission-ready against current and future threats, ” said Brian Walters, vice president and general manager of Electronic Combat Solutions at BAE Systems, according to the BAE statement.

 

[Trident]

as per almanac's figures - usaf has 101 C and 13 D, while ANG has 112 C and 23 D. AFRC has none.

Whoa - that IS unexpected!

 

[Ian33]

Well, my thought is this: How are they going to get this EW capability and IRST (As well as a helmet with missile cue tech) into the F22.

 

[bring_it_on]

Why would you want to get "this EW" into the F-22? All you need to do is modernize the current digital EW system onboard. HMS can come through the two products that the ACC has previously shown interest in (and may have been evaluated as well), the Scorpion and JHMCSII. IRST would be harder if not completely impossible.

 

[Sundog]

Why would you want to get "this EW" into the F-22? All you need to do is modernize the current digital EW system onboard. HMS can come through the two products that the ACC has previously shown interest in (and may have been evaluated as well), the Scorpion and JHMCSII. IRST would be harder if not completely impossible.

Considering the F-22 was originally designed to carry IRST, I don't see what the problem is with adding it. Unless you're referencing integrating it with the on board systems.

 

[bring_it_on]

Yup, as in using an existing systems and sensors. You could obviously try to develop the solution that was originally intended for the program but then one must weigh that against other potential upgrade paths.

 

[bring_it_on]

EPAWSS MOVES FORWARD WITH BAE

One of the questions surrounding the design of EPAWSS has been the choice of technology that would be used to power the system's jammer transmit­ters, whether a solid-state amplifier ap­proach or more conventional traveling wave tube (TWT) technology. Walters answers that question saying BAE's ap­proach is a GaN-based solid-state amplifier design. "We already consider it to be in the TRL-7 to TRL-9 range, and it will definitively be TRL-9 very shortly. We're already deploying this technology on other programs

Moore points out that there are extensive aircraft modifications required to put a new EW system on an aircraft including, in this case, removal of the wings and replacement of the aircraft's 'tailbone' between the engine exhaust nozzles. "A lot of work has to be done all over the aircraft to support the program.

We're taking off all of the TEWS components, with a savings of 13 LRUs [Line Replaceable Units] going from TEWS to EPAWSS, so a lot of weight is being re¬moved from the aircraft, as well as providing for a smaller footprint." Moore adds that the determination of the com¬position of the Group A (cables, panels, etc.) and Group B (actual EPAWSS compo¬nents) modification kits, including any "swing" elements was also a challenge.

https://www.scribd.com/doc/291713432/EPAWSS

 

[fightingirish]

A F-15C with a new Talon HATE pod has been spotted flying out of Nellis Air Force Base in Nevada.
Sources:
http://airwingspotter.com/f-15c-new-talon-hate-pod/
http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/here-s-the-first-shot-of-the-f-15c-pod-that-will-change-1750314539

 

[SpudmanWP]

Bout time they enable forward/combat deployable BACN nodes. Now they need to add MADL to it's capability set.

 

[bring_it_on]

Talon Hate from what I recall is an interim solution before MAPS which will be competed.