AFRL Low-Cost Attritable Aircraft Technology (LCAAT) Program

Ronny said:
Valkyrie is many time bigger than MALD-J, of course it can carry jamming gear.
They have done crazier thing in the past, for example, putting AGM-65 and AGM-45 on small drone
View attachment 724416
View attachment 724417
Click to expand...
Yes, but I wasn't expecting a Valkyrie to be packing the nearly 7000lbs of jamming gear that the EA-18G does, either.

Because when you say "EW/Jammer CCA" to me, I'm hearing "Growler replacement"
 
7000 lbs is almost the XQ-58 MTOW. I have no idea what its payload consists of, but it is not that.
 
Josh_TN said:
7000 lbs is almost the XQ-58 MTOW. I have no idea what its payload consists of, but it is not that.
Click to expand...
Exactly my problem. A Q58 is not big enough to carry all the equipment as a Growler, and I don't want that volume of equipment split across multiple aircraft on the grounds that one of them may not even be flightworthy when you need it.

The way I see it, you need an EW CCA to carry at least that 7000lbs of gear, plus 2000 to 4000lbs of boom in the shape of a couple of AARGM-ERs and/or JASSMs or JSOWs for things that need to get blown up RIGHT NOW.

Yes, you might be able to reduce the weight of the EW gear, I'm sure just not using the pod skins would save a couple hundred lbs per pod-contents, minimum.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Yes, but I wasn't expecting a Valkyrie to be packing the nearly 7000lbs of jamming gear that the EA-18G does, either.

Because when you say "EW/Jammer CCA" to me, I'm hearing "Growler replacement"
Click to expand...
ALQ-99 only weight 950 lbs each, where did you get 7000 lbs from?
 
Scott Kenny said:
Wiki entry says 7000lbs of EW gear. Remember, there are 5 or 7 EW pods on a Growler. wingtips, 2 under each wing, and centerline.
Click to expand...
1 ALQ-99 under each wing, 1 under belly, total 3 pods, that around 3000 lbs
2 wing tip pod are passive ESM ALQ-218 sensor, which look a lot smaller than ALQ-99, it should be a lot lighter too
U.S._Navy_EA-18G_Growler_breaks_away_from_a_U.S._Air_Force_KC-135_(altered).jpg
 
Scott Kenny said:
Exactly my problem. A Q58 is not big enough to carry all the equipment as a Growler, and I don't want that volume of equipment split across multiple aircraft on the grounds that one of them may not even be flightworthy when you need it.

The way I see it, you need an EW CCA to carry at least that 7000lbs of gear, plus 2000 to 4000lbs of boom in the shape of a couple of AARGM-ERs and/or JASSMs or JSOWs for things that need to get blown up RIGHT NOW.

Yes, you might be able to reduce the weight of the EW gear, I'm sure just not using the pod skins would save a couple hundred lbs per pod-contents, minimum.
Click to expand...

Q-58 are not going to be able to replicate the EA-18's jamming pods in power or frequency range. But it probably can geo locate as a group using DToA, possibly with an option to jam at lower power on some target frequencies. The idea is to have something more available for reasonable cost, rather than have a high end solution that might not be deployable in theater or be purchased in sufficient numbers.
 
Scott Kenny said:
Yes, but I wasn't expecting a Valkyrie to be packing the nearly 7000lbs of jamming gear that the EA-18G does, either.

Because when you say "EW/Jammer CCA" to me, I'm hearing "Growler replacement"
Click to expand...

I think it is more like a growler supplement. The only people using Growlers now adays is the USN anyway; the USMC cannot rely on them being in range and available in a conflict with China. Q-58 has both greater range and far more deployment options (rocket launch/parachute recovery) than an EA-18.
 
Josh_TN said:
Q-58 are not going to be able to replicate the EA-18's jamming pods in power or frequency range. But it probably can geo locate as a group using DToA, possibly with an option to jam at lower power on some target frequencies.
Click to expand...
Bingo. Mostly networked ELINT. Use a group of the sensors to locate targets and threats for someone else. With enough bandwidth available, they could do all the processing on a ship or an E-2 (big part of your SWaP-C problems), but I don't know that this is what they are doing.
If it is low enough cost, you can also get them closer to threats than you would like to send a manned aircraft. And since the inverse-square law never seems to go away, closer means less wattage required for the same effect (or more effect for the same wattage). The (apparent) signature means it can probably get closer for a given wattage before burnthrough as well.

It's not going to be a one for one Growler replacement. It'll be part of a network enabling other drones or Growlers or Hornets or F-35's to do more with less.
 
https://ir.kratosdefense.com/news-r...continueFlag=53fe8410c9163c91d48b43b71d933650
The test was conducted as a part of Emerald Flag 2024—a multiservice and multi-domain training exercise. During this milestone event, the USMC demonstrated cooperative kill chain closure between crewed and uncrewed strike platforms, specifically Kratos’ XQ-58A Valkyrie, for the first time in a large-force exercise.

The USMC kill chain closure demonstration, hosted in a joint force environment, showcased collaborative electronic warfare (EW) operations in addition to newly added tactical data link capabilities. These tests mark the first time the Department of Defense(DoD) controlled an XQ-58 using expeditionary methods. Initial results indicate the system met threshold requirements for autonomously exchanging relevant tactical information. These capabilities significantly enhance the Marine Air-Ground Task Force’s ability to conduct integrated and joint operations, contributing to the USMC’s mission to deter conflict and, when necessary, defeat enemies in complex and evolving scenarios.
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6348.png
    IMG_6348.png
    912.1 KB · Views: 50
_Del_ said:
Bingo. Mostly networked ELINT. Use a group of the sensors to locate targets and threats for someone else. With enough bandwidth available, they could do all the processing on a ship or an E-2 (big part of your SWaP-C problems), but I don't know that this is what they are doing.
If it is low enough cost, you can also get them closer to threats than you would like to send a manned aircraft. And since the inverse-square law never seems to go away, closer means less wattage required for the same effect (or more effect for the same wattage). The (apparent) signature means it can probably get closer for a given wattage before burnthrough as well.

It's not going to be a one for one Growler replacement. It'll be part of a network enabling other drones or Growlers or Hornets or F-35's to do more with less.
Click to expand...
Thank you! Yes they are going to be thousands of these, and potentially hundreds in any one attack, they don't need to carry a fraction of what a Growler carries...
Also, ALQ-99 wouldn't be used anyway!
By the time that conflict comes around and any CCA's are operational, there will be the next generation jammers in multiple different waveforms/lengths that are much lighter than 99 and each CCA will likely carry just the equivalent to on pod.
Meanwhile, other CCAs will be sent out flying low at treetops, with their onboard HPM blaring out Microwaves and frying any vulnerable/un-shielded electronics of anything it flies over...
 
TeourdBeourglaer said:
Thank you! Yes they are going to be thousands of these, and potentially hundreds in any one attack, they don't need to carry a fraction of what a Growler carries...
Also, ALQ-99 wouldn't be used anyway!
By the time that conflict comes around and any CCA's are operational, there will be the next generation jammers in multiple different waveforms/lengths that are much lighter than 99 and each CCA will likely carry just the equivalent to on pod.
Meanwhile, other CCAs will be sent out flying low at treetops, with their onboard HPM blaring out Microwaves and frying any vulnerable/un-shielded electronics of anything it flies over...
Click to expand...

They are going to be software defined ECM like Angry Kitten.
 
I wonder what types of jamming effects would be possible with over a hundred point sources spread across a wide bearing arc. As a simple thought experiment, I can picture a wave of hundreds to low thousands of false targets being fed into an IAD system just with DRFM delays, with the opposing network having to cross reference the returns at different angles to determine which were real targets. Now have all of the jammers alter their time delays in sync to force that exercise to rerun every couple seconds. A DoS electronic attack. I’m sure a lot of much more clever solutions are possible with that many transmitters working in concert.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom