EW Competitors Begin Defining Efforts

David A. Fulghum/Seattle Competitors for the nascent U.S. Navy EP-X, Army Aerial Common Sensor and Air Force Rivet Joint programs are beginning to define their efforts by sorting through the art of the possible.

"[We're] looking at the full spectrum of assets currently available, Defense Department-wide, both manned and unmanned, to see what may help facilitate [definition of] that requirement," says Capt. Mike Moran, program manager for both the P-8A and EP-X. Robert Watt from Booz Allen Hamilton was recently tapped to lead the EP-X analysis of alternatives, and the Office of the Secretary of Defense has approved the EP-X study plan.

Meanwhile, "We're concentrating on the cooperative data links so that the EW suite on a P-8A and an EP-X has the ability to reach into an EA-18G to find out where it has been, what it is collecting and what it is going after next," says Tim Norgart, Boeing's director of business development for airborne ASW and ISR systems. "Being able to move that information around to make a single picture lets there be an EW/EA battle manager."

"I can see some real synergies [between EP-X and Growler]," says Paul Summers, Boeing's director of Airborne Sigint Campaigns. "We'll have the ability [with EP-X] to detect emitters pretty far out there. Using Growler to suppress some of those target emitters while [EP-X] is doing something else could be a great help. The Growler has a selective, reactive capability that can focus on unique emitters with very high-power jamming."

"Given the number of available EA-18Gs available and the larger footprint of the EP-X, it might be wise to assign the individual, specialized tasks to Growlers and use the EP-X as the battlefield manager of surveillance, targeting and electronic warfare," Norgart says. "That power is made possible by having analysts - right there at the fight - sort through what's important and what's not and send it where it needs to be."

Boeing is also looking at several options for an EP-X radar. The bigger the array, the smaller the target that can be detected. One concept is a radar in a canoe along the centerline. Another involves conformal side arrays, although they may not necessarily be flush or embedded in the aircraft structure.

"If we get the size, density of elements and flexibility within the radar that we require, it could be leveraged into an electronic attack capability," Summers says. "It's unclear whether the Navy will evoke that capability. We'll have broad frequency jamming capability, and we'll be able to build on that as we see the need."

Photo credit: USAF