How Germany Fixed The Eurofighter Typhoon Problem
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 06. 2024
- Germany's Self-Made Eurofighter Typhoon Problem stands on the precipice of being solved. Join me as I talk about the newest member of the Eurofighter family, the "Eurofighter EK" - transforming Typhoon into an Electronic Warfare aircraft.
Previous Videos in this "Series" - Oldest to Newest
- Why Germany is NOT buying the F/A-18 Super Hornet • Why Germany is NOT buy...
- Germany: NEW Eurofighters but NO Super Hornets • Germany: NEW Eurofight...
- Why Germany Doesn't Buy the F-35 • Why Germany Doesn't Bu...
- GERMANY RE-ARMING: F-35 is Back? • GERMANY RE-ARMING: F-3...
- Ripped Off? Why Germany pays $240m for one F-35 • Ripped Off? Why German...
- Check out my books -
Ju 87 Stuka - stukabook.com
STG-44 Assault Platoon - sturmzug.com
German Panzer Company 1941 - www.hdv470-7.com/
Achtung Panzer? Zur Panzerwaffe der Wehrmacht - panzerkonferenz.de/
- Support -
Patreon: / milavhistory
Channel Memberships: / @militaryaviationhistory
PayPal: www.paypal.me/MilAvHis
- Partner Discounts -
Naval Institute Press: 25% off with "MILAVHIS" at www.usni.org/press/books
Mortons: 10% off with "MAH10" at www.mortonsbooks.co.uk/
AK Interactive: 10% off with "AK10MAH" at www.ak-interactive.com/ (ALL categories except 'LEGO/AK Deals')
- Social Media -
Twitter: / milavhistory
Instagram: / milaviationhistory
- Sources -
Airbus, Airbus to make Eurofighter fit for electronic combat, last modified 29 Nov 2023, available at www.airbus.com/en/newsroom/pr...
Bundeswehr Journal, „Arexis“-Sensorsuite von Saab für deutsche Eurofighter, last modified 23 June 2023, available at www.bundeswehr-journal.de/202...
Bundeswehr Journal, Entscheidung über Tornado-Nachfolger ist gefallen, 14 März 2022, available at www.bundeswehr-journal.de/202...
Bundestag, Drucksache 20/8823, dserver.bundestag.de/btd/20/0... Oct 13, 2023.
Defense Network, Saab „Arexis“ zur Befähigung der deutschen Eurofighter zum Elektronischen Kampf (EK) ausgewählt, n.D. (June 2023) available at defence-network.com/arexis-vo...
Saab, Saab’s Arexis selected for German Eurofighter electronic warfare variant, 16 June 2023, available at www.saab.com/newsroom/press-r...
- Timecodes -
00:00 - Finding a Solution
00:09 - The German Eurofighter Problem
00:56 - Eurofighter "ECR"
02:34 - The Big Picture Solution
03:49 - Eurofighter EK
08:03 - Open Questions
11:37 - Outro
- Audio -
Music and Sfx from Epidemic Sound
I was the USAF’s lead (only) Tornado ECR tech in the mid-late 90’s, so it was nice to see those videos from Nellis. Also comforting to know the Luftwaffe is addressing the need for a more modern and capable EW platform.
Tornado Gaming
Sead only expensive till you start suffering jet losses in a war. Then the value of Sead is shown.
True and if you also have a working DEAD you get complete air dominance and nobody will complain about cost anmore.
@@geiers6013 Instead everyone after the fact will act like you didn't encounter air defenses at all and just stomped on a defenseless nation regardless of the actual numbers of modern and up to date air defense systems utilized by said nation. *cough* Iraq *cough*
@@dominuslogik484 True sadly
Kind of refreshing that the government does something that is somewhat cheap, fast, simple and logical. Is this the first time in the history of mankind?
Certainly a first for german arms procurement
all of Russia runs on the first 3 of those.
"cheap, fast and simple" is what I want out of my fast food. Idk if I want my country to send young men and women to fight in an aircraft that has those traits.
@@josephparisi1458 while yes.. I agree with that. But in this case the choise is not really between cheap and bad and expensive and good.
It's between cheap and fast or and expensive and with in 15 years.
And if ... well I'm not german. But if my country men would have to fight with either something cheap and good, of something expensive and not actually avalible.
I have to go with thr one they actually got to have.
Granted yes, eventually there will be a gen 6 eurofighter, and then it's a totaly diffrent thing.
Now I don't mind personally (of cause, I'm just a civilian) if eurofighter gen 6 share radar system with gen 6 tempest.
(Of cause, yes, the status of tempest is unclear)
I fear russia does not run well whatsoever right now@@grandrapids57
You might have missed this but what they announced was a two aircraft system, Eurofighter EK with defensive electronic warfare to detect enemy radar and a HARM equivalent and an accompanying loyal wingman drone with an offensive electronic warfare jammer pod. The jammer pod being offloaded to the unmanned aircraft is to increase the pilot survivability.
As to other customers, Italy were interested in a purchase of the ECR dont know if they maintain that interest in the EK.
source for this?
@@HJJ135 trust me bro
@@HJJ135 Tried responding already but CZcams doesnt allow links. Search Janes article: IFC 2023: Luftwaffe maps out vision for electronic warfare ‘loyal wingman'
@HJJ135 : FFS, the amount of seconds it took for you to ask & wait for a source, you could've just Googled it yourself, like what I did & found the info straight away, it's not hard.
That‘s correct (rgrd loyal wingman) however even during the announcement the Luftwaffe cautioned that this was at this point a vision only. There are as of yet no agreement anything specific. I could have worked this into the video as a bit of speculation - but I prefer not adding such tentative content.
Maan, the Tornado looks so good. It Looks like a muscular, low level, brawler.
I'm with you on this. Although, in terms of mission capability. The Typhoon's superior in almost every aspect. The Tornado just looks so much better.
LoL. No.
The tail art in the concept painting that Airbus released is . . . something.
From my observation, Germany has a faible for these over the top art styles on aircraft
@@MilitaryAviationHistory Its Tradition! Going back to WWI and the Flying Circus.
I think it looks cool. The obvious symbolism between lightning and electronic warfare is great and I’m sure they will refine this artwork several times before delivering those planes.
It certainly has some truck cabin airbrush art vibes 😅
@@T.efpunktExactly. Absolutely love it. 😊
I am honestly really happy how this turned out. I think the F-35 complements the EF really well and can bring some new capabilities to the Luftwaffe that the Growler would not have. Still think they should make the EKs two seaters, just in case.
It is a bit surprising that the EK is a one seaters, but that might be for cost/time reasons. I do wonder if the F-35 will take on EW missions as well, considering they bring a lot of tech with them, and the EKs seem to be less extreme modificatoins.
Either way, EFs and F-35s are likely among the best fighter planes out there, so after all its really not that bad of a spot to be. Expensive sure, but thats not surprising anyway.
Now I'm curious, just in case of what do you think the EK should be two seaters? What would the extra person do that isn't already being done by computers instead?
@@ViktorBengtsson military's general preference for human operators over machinery and computers. Basically a bunch of old people in policy think computers aren't reliable, but those policy makers get phased out over time.
A second seat can provide experience outside of a simulator, bottom line every time. Experienced pilots don't come from nowhere. Second-seat doesn't have to be Electronic Warfare Officer to a mission pilot, alone, in an age of digital cockpit displays and Fly-by-Wire.
@@BillMcD I mean, all recent EW planes are dual seaters. Even the Chinese J10D.
Yes, AI is making huge progress every day, but relying on digital components that can be jammed or hacked is not old fashioned.
So, yes, to me, it’s weird that Airbus is going with a single seater solution (with maybe an unmanned wingman).
to my knowledge, the electronic attack (EA) capabilities will be located in a seperate pod, developed by Hensoldt & Rafael (Sky-Shield, Kalaetron Attack). In my Opinion a pod-solution is fine, bc. this will be more readily upgradable than any components built into the airframe - and there will be probably lots of changes & new developments in the EW Area the next decades
Thanks Chris & wishing you a Happy New Year !
Thank you for another informative video, always enjoy them!
Thanks for the info. Great vid as ever.
How did I just now find your excellent channel! Great video! I have some catching up to do now! Thank you!❤🎉🎊😃
Seeing the Eurofighter and the Gripen together is just so amazing 😍 🔥💥🛩️🔝
Makes sense, and uses the right partners to develop this into production quickly.
Huh.... I never thought this project would really go anywhere. Perhaps I am just not in the loop as much anymore but these developments really didn't show up in media I follow.
Still interesting developments. Most informative Chris.
There were only a few “milesstones” in the international press. The main one was in summer 23 when the intention to have an Airbus-Saab cooperation was first announced. Beyond this, every now and then it popped up in specialist outlets in Germany - until the recent announcement that got shared again.
@@MilitaryAviationHistory Rather limited in the way of press releases compared to other programs. Always gotta keep an eye out for specialized press.
Cool makarov on the pdf
Would be great to get a squadron or two of these for the RAF to replace (or even rebuild) the Tranche 1s that we're retiring. Current experience coming out of Ukraine seems to be highlighting the importance of EW, it would be a useful niche capability to add into the NATO mix and it would help bolster the size of the Typhoon fleet (both nationally and across Europe), which helps keep prices down for everyone. Of course that would require a UK government that wants to do something other than cutting defence capabilities...
If anything, it makes more sense for our F35s to take that role as its stealth characteristics & its far superior avionics suite would help it to be more survivable in that role.
@@THE-BUNKEN-DRUM Tbf we dont actually know how the F-35 avionics compare to late Typhoons. The US navy also eg uses FA-18 Growlers for offensive electronic warfare missions, which the F-35s werent designed for. I dont think the USAF has specialized "EW fighters" like the US navy or german air force has anymore. F-16s or so can be equipped with jamming pods that are likely more powerful than an F-35s internal jammers, though.
But I do think it might make sense to use a more specialized EW version of the F-35, if the UK needs one. For Germany its quite useful for various reasons to keep more EFs flying, but the UK has cut down their aircraft numbers by a lot.
@@THE-BUNKEN-DRUM F-35B is a piece of junk.
@@LondonSteveLee: Well, if it's all the same to you, I'll side with the opinions of the people that actually fly it. 😉
@@THE-BUNKEN-DRUM The f35 has pathetic sustained energy and hence poor missile evasion. And a very questionable sortie rate: what is really significant here is that the Germans chose to jury rig a new Typhoon variant rather than using the F35 knowing its capabilities.
Sehr interessant. Be well and stay safe
And the Swedes are now a huge game changer now we’re all NATO friends.
Time to ramp up Meteor production and can we restart Storm Shadow/SCALP production? I know it’s a bit old hat for NATO but by George! It seems to mess up the Russians quite well.
This is the most important thing. I remember a bunch of years ago, Germany didn't even have one long range AA missile per Eurofighter. That's just ridiculous. The best aircraft is useless (besides isr) without the ammo.
Nothing has changed at all about the availability of Swedish avionics. They’ve always been for sale to western countries.
SWE already did Taurus together with GER. Not StormShadow / Scalp (that's MBDA only)
Storm Shadow/SCALP are due for replacement
EK is cool but I personally find the AMK aerodynamic rework even more interesting. The Eurofighter has always been an impressive airframe but the AMK managed to SIGNIFICANTLY improve turn radius etc. Maybe you could make a video about it.
It is such a simple airframe modification. It bugs me that it wasn't made standard on new airframes coming from the factory.
@@magoid100% agree. Its almost comical in a sense.
Ek, sensors, sensor fusion and networking is much more important than a better turn radius. The age of sog fighting is long over.
@@thorwaldjohanson2526: The age of dogfighting isn't & will never be fully over. What it is, is less likely. If it was "over." Airforces around the world wouldn't waste a shit load of time & money still practicing for that very outcome.
@@magoidApperantly the cost for recertification of the EF for the AMK is very high and the countries are already satisfied with the flight performance, hence nobody adapted it.
I loved the look of the Tornado.
At 26 seconds: It's weird to know that I worked on this aircraft over 25 years ago. Judging by photographs I found in the web, it is still flying.
One solution for adding jammers would be to use the conformal take shape but use them for ECM jammers. You could also use them for extra chaff and flares. That would allow the weapon stations to stay clear for use with Fuel tanks, ARM missiles, decoys, and other systems.
There's some sound logic to that. It shouldn't detract much from performance - In fact making it fatter but also slippery aerodynamically might enhance performance.
Maybe it comes down to need to be able to swiftly and easily swap modules & munitions out?
One slight problem.....the conformal tanks couldn't be made to work aerodynamically, hence why they were abandoned....so its a complete non starter.
@poiujnbvcxdswq That is not what Airbus have stated...
@poiujnbvcxdswq 'Merely'....Airbus said it wouldn't work, particularly at higher speeds. Adding the AMK would entail running a full flight test programme across the entire flight spectrum again, including release of all weapons....and that would cost £100's millions...at that point you may as well resurrect 3D Thurst Vectoring and the higher powered engines and do them at the same time.....and thats why no-one has done it...
Electronic warfare jets used to coat their canopies with a thin layer of gold or ITO (indium tin oxide) to protect the pilots from the aggressive electronic signals. EA-6B used gold film, F-22 I know uses ITO but more for stealth purposes not EW. I wonder why they stopped doing this with the Growler and other jets with a lot of EW.
Cos the pilots r gold.
Or so they believe
Two questions:
1. Where do the aggressive electronic signals come from (isn't the EA-6B's radar in the nose of the plane)?
2. Would a layer of gold sooo thin that visual photons pass right through *really* block lower energy radio photons?
@@RonJohn63 No they use pods, usually wing mounted. Photons don't easily pass through the layer. At certain angles, even visible light is deflected off the canopy. Search 'F-22 gold canopy' and click images, you can't see in and clearly make out the cockpit. I think the gold acts as a faraday cage for certain radiation emissions.
@@BasedF-15Pilot I think it's also a RCS reduction measure. The equipment in the cockpit has a larger RCS than a radio opaque canopy does. I seem to remember that was one of the reasons stated for gold-plating Rafale's canopy.
@@RonJohn63 Regarding the 2nd point: Radiation can't pass through a metal grid, if the grid has half the size of the wavelength. Visible light has a very short wavelength and can therefore pass through the gold layer, but radars have wavelengths of 1 mm to 10 m. At those wavelengths the gold coating appears as a solid sheet of metal.
Well it has a kickass paint scheme on the tail.
So those EW pods at the wingtips are Gripen's right? they look exactly the same so I imagine that's SAAB's part in it.
🇩🇪 has always put an emphasis on recee & EW aircraft. It's good to see some nations haven't dropped the ball.
If reality didn't get in the way German planning would be the best in the world.
I think the obvious answer to will it it do x is not yet- rather sensibly they're rushing to get SOMETHING down they can use to try and hope to add additional functions later. Either a switch to war procurement or to avoid the all or nothing procurement pifalls of the past. An experimental squadron perhaps.
There isn't a huge cost to doing this, it doesn't even cut them off from buying a different system in future. Its good to see them get the balls rolling before everything is confirmed.
Imho it is a good idea to do even if it is likely to be poor. And maybe should've been done on paper long before now.
Upgrade existing airframes is a smart move - if they buy additional Tranche 4 airframes. Considering the urge to modernise older airframes it is cheaper to buy Tranche 4 airframes and modernise older airframes, e.g. Tranche 2.
Sweden and Finland being admittedly NATO Partners will bring a new dynamic to next gen systems, not only due to their rapidly increasing Security needs.
In a more recent timeframe I can absolutely see the Migration of electronic platforms on drone airframes. ECW and even AWACS roles can be fulfilled by existing long range drones circling atop the Battlefield.
Thanks Chris, I feel like I'll need to read a transcript of this to properly process and understand this. I guess I can just watch it a few more times.
In the meantime, I hope you have a very Happy Holiday and don't get eaten by the Yule Cat or stuffed into a bag or any of those other things that happen in foreign parts.
Hey, thank you! Let me know what parts were difficult to follow - that is good feedback for next time
Welp ig no response for improvement there XD
@@MilitaryAviationHistory I thought it was pretty clear all the way through Chris (native English speaker here). Original commenter might have a different pov though.
@@MilitaryAviationHistory
Für mich als militärischen Laien und Englisch Fremdsprachler ist das Vortragen etwas zu flüssig. Ich würde mir im Redefluss eine etwas akzentuiertere Hervorhebung z.B. von Komponenten- und Systemnamen wünschen. Dies war mein erstes Video Ihres Kanals und ich fand es eben etwas zu _gleichmäßig_ betont, so dass teilweise die Struktur in der Betonung der Aussage etwas verloren geht.
Aber das ist nur meine Wahrnehmung. Vielleicht gewöhne ich mich noch ein.
Extrem wichtig finde ich, deutsche Aussprache aus einem englischen Vortrag rauszulassen. Das hört sich für mich schrecklich an.
"Luftwaffe" ist okay, weil Eigenname und englische Aussprache sinnlos wäre. Aber "Eurofighter" sollte definitiv englisch ausgesprochen werden. Bei "EK" tendiere ich mehr zur englischen Version, mit der deutschen Version ggf. mit eingeflochten. "EK" und "Elektronischer Kampf" in Deutsch eingebunden ist gut, damit die englischen Muttersprachler mal eine vernünftige Betonung eines kontinentaleuropäischen "E, e" hören.
Okay, zuviel Text von mir.
Vielen Dank für die Nachrichten und Einblicke! Viel Freude weiterhin mit dem Kanal!
From what I've seen so far, the underwing podded jammers have been put on indefinite hold at the moment. Typhoon has only 2 underwing stations capable of carrying the pods or the underwing tanks, and given that the 2-seat variant already removes some of the internal fuel to make room for the rear seat, the heavily laden and draggy aircraft would've been very short on fuel with only a single fuselage tank. Alternatives such as carrying fuel tanks on the inboard stations or adopting the conformal tanks have both been proposed but mooted by the looks of things. Supposedly clearance and flight control issues with the inboard tanks and the substantial modifications to the aircraft's electronic flight control systems and performance concerns with the CFTs seem to have killed both of those options for now.
The currently proposed AREXIS suite seems to be largely a replacement of the existing PRAETORIAN DAS suite with more sophisticated self-protection jamming and emitter locating capabilities. Giving the Typhoon ECR a role more akin to the Tornado ECR it replaces, locating and destroying emitters kinetically, rather than the EA-18G Growler with its additional electronic attack and escort/stand-off jamming capabilities.
There is obviously room to change this with enough will and money, or to find alternative solutions such as the integration of the UKs forthcoming SPEAR-EW decoy to plug the gap but only time will tell.
Thing is....Praetorian DASS is getting a massive upgrade anyway under Praetrian Evolution. And not having Radar 2 with its extensive EA ability is another massive loss....
Typhoon EK is a massive disappointment compared to ECR....
Military Aviation History, please make a video about LUWES while you are at it. IIRC Eurofighter EK is a (small) part of LUWES.
Despite the potential of automation, it feels like there would be more flexibility and more risk mitigation if the two-seat platform was used for EK.
Its kind of a cycle with aircraft: First automation gets better, so theres more focus on single seaters, but then the new capabilities are so complex they again need a two seater. Then automation gets better, so single seat, but capabilities grow, so again two seaters become popular. Then vice versa, the whole thing again.
Especially when the pilot soon is supposed to control a bunch of drones, I wonder if thats not just too much work load.
I wonder if the F-35 has a problem with that as well? Automation and big LCDs or not, they added a ton of capability to that flier.
Another interesting point: will it be a single oder two seat aircraft. KI or not. Having a dedicated system operator has it advantages.
BAe provides most of the (non RADAR based) ECR capabilities for F-35 - creating a package for Typhoon would be a trivial undertaking for them - this is why NG are mostly funding this project - they are left out in the cold and want a slice of the action.
Northrop Grumman are only providing the AARGM/AARGM-ER missile....not the EW components. Thats Saab....
And the BAE division that produces the EW components for F-35 is the US division, NOT the UK....and there are very strict firewalls in place. Any UK EW components would come from Leonardo UK.
Will this be based on 2 seat airframe?
I find it very odd that any modern fighter from the 90s and on isn't set up for any type of role, just by hanging different equipment from it. An EW variant should be as simple as taking ANY regular fighter and adding pods, like you'd add fuel tanks and missiles. Plug and play. If the systems need more power - then a generator in an underwing pod will handle that, and naturally the aircraft would be set up to be able to deliver fuel from its own tanks to that generator. The whole point of the generation of fighters developed in the late 80s was to allow them to switch between any and every role, from flight to flight, with the exact same airframe. Nuts, just nuts!
This kind of system will require a lot more computing power which can not simply be stored in pods. Plus it has a way higher energy consumption so you will have to account for that as well. Further the EF only has a 100 Mbit databus which most certainly is not sufficient for this.
EF EK will require a lot of rework and modifications if they actually want to integrate it into the existing airframe. I do not envy the engineers tasked with this and my assumption would be this will take quite a while before it is actually operational, like 5-10 years with 5 being quite optimistic.
@@CoComator Which was my point. It's absolutely INSANE that a modern fighter isn't prepared for any kind of loadout, even ones not yet developed (but whose general characteristics and demands can be reasonably estimated). Then again, a large underwing pod the size of a fuel tank definitely has many times more volume than any spare avionics volume available inside the fuselage, so that's not an issue. 100 Mb/s sounds plenty enough if all processing is done externally, and just the condensed results are relayed into the cockpit.
@@mytube001 But thats the point: The calculations cant be done in the pod because the processing power required for that wouldnt fit in the pod which already has to store the transmitters and receivers and the electronics attached to that.
Further 100 Mbit is nothing. Modern systems run on 10 Gbit fibre and depending on the application that is already painfully low bandwidth and latency. Even using FPGAs to do preprocessing the amount of data that needs to be transfered in as little time as possible is huge.
And to tackle the upgradability: The technology used nowadays was not available in the 90s and nobody was really able to predict the impact of GaN HEMT amplifiers while they were still trying to figure out how to apply 2DEGs in semiconductors.
Same goes with BUS systems.
Yes, it is an outdated solution. Originally, planes were developped around very specific missions. Progressively, planes were developed with variants for different missions, with less and less variants with time. Modern fighters are supposed to be capable of nearly all the missions using pods if they are designed with provision for power generation, some cables space, ...
Compute would absolutely fit in a pod and the power requirements are not that bad. The transmitters are the power hogs. But really any modern fighter should have aesa radar, which can be used for electronic warfare given it has enough compute and the software.
We need a video how helicopters were used in korean war tactics and logistics
Phenomenal aircraft
How did they solve the nuclear capable plarform? Referring to your previous video. And as always, very informative and thoroughly researched. Thank you.
They, Germany, ordered thirtyfive F-35 just for that role. Would be sure not a big thing just to integrate the nuclear package to the Eurofighter but the yanks said no because they wanted a dead-end argument for it's "allies & friends" to waste a ridiculous amount of money on their F-35's instead. That's the yanks for you.
@@nomenestomen3452 More like, it would take time and money to rate an aircraft for nuclear delivery when the F-35 comes like that from factory.
Anti-Americanism is so funny.
Me when seeing German government doing something useful and in a speedy manner: *shocked pikachu face*
Will the standard engine and power produced be enough power for the AI and advanced analytics being used for EK
Thanks
Thanks so much!
FCAS is a Germán, French and SPANISH program, and you must know that
Spain joined in later though.
@@bluefox9436 Yes, like Japan joined to the UK-Italian program, but today, FCAS is a Ger-Fr-Sp program
@@jessrr3780 Or SCAF
The Saab Gripen story has learned us that all critical components of a EU jet fighter should be sourced from EU suppliers.
Good to see that Airbus has learned from this story.
At least to get licenses to manufacture the stuff "locally". The new Gripen E/F variants use the GE F414G engine (more or less the same as the F-18 Super Hornets).
Given the recent lessons i wonder if the electronic attack component should not receive a higher priority.
If it is a two seater varient it would make sense to build brand new air frames.
Single seater would tax the pilot to much if they are considering MUM-T foe ECA attack.
Lots of comments about "this year". Does Germany work of calendar years (Jan - Dec) or financial years (Jul - Jun) in this context? That is, do they have days to make this decision or six months?
Hello. Very nice video.
Just one comment, currently FCAS Is not a France- Germany Programme.
Yes.
Next I want see is the Dassault Rafale
Yes, but does it have a Griping Gretchen?
All criticism are complete BS.
The US developed the E/A-18 Growler and there are only orders from the USN and RAAF (Just 172)
A ECR version can be integrated into the forces of Germany, Spain, UK and Italy.
@MilitaryAviationHistory, if I may venture some personal questions and opinions ... the decision to develop the Eurofighter EK is interesting in light of previous German government interest, brief as it was, in the SuperHornet F/A-18E/F for the strike role with the Luftwaffe. Had that order occurred, acquisition of the EA-18 Growler, which shares the same airframe, might also seem to have been a logical, if not irresistible, decision? (That was certainly the case with my own country, Australia, which ordered the Growler even as it awaited delivery of its first SuperHornets. In fact, the first "AusGrowlers" were built out of airframes already acquired for RAAF SuperHornets.) So I'm guessing that the idea of doing the Eurofighter EK may have been around for several years and could even have been a factor in Germany's loss of interest in the SuperHornet? In other words, the much greater expense and significant delays caused by developing the EK were weighed and offset by non-financial benefits - creation of local skilled jobs, development of intellectual property etc?
The SuperHornet and Growler were seen as a dead end (which they are). They're very soon to be out of production with limited numbers of users. F-35 was required specifically for the nuclear delivery mission. SuperHornet could not compete for that role, it wouldn't be survivable and would need the B-61/12 integrated at huge cost. Once SuperHornet was out of that requirement you then got to the fact that it would be insane to run a small fleet of F-35, an even smaller fleet of Growler and a large fleet of Typhoon's simultaneously...at that point Typhoon ECR then EK became the only real choice...
Make a video on HAL Tejas mark1a and mark2 matching it’s class to other jets
Every Gripen fighter has EW capability 👍🏻
Very interesting!
Thank you for the update....
The photos show the single seater. Is this confirmed? This would be different from the EA-18 and the Tornado and require a lot of automation.
It will indeed employ plenty of AI. The software will not come from Saab it will come from AI specialists Helsing.
Hi. Please enlighten me on a bit of a naive question: What part of EW requires a specific adaptation of the airframe?
External pods seem so much more flexible in terms of future development and mission specifics.
The video mentioned the cooling of the components? Is it volume/weight relevant?
This question already applies to Tornade IDS vs ECR of course.
And Super Hornet vs Growler, although in that case I can see the different requirement in the two-seat variant for EW.
Anyone know the specifics of airframe internals for EW? At what cost do they come compared to the regular variant? (weight? fuel capacity?)
Cooling is relevant to volume, electronics that pump out heat have a limit to their operation and thus the aircraft must be capable of keeping temperatures lower than this limit. An external pod has little outside area to serve as cooling. An internal system could have the electronics cooled by the aircraft systsems or have the heat directed through an exchanger to preheat fuel before injection, etc.
When a video about helicopters in korea?
Sounds like it would be great if it had a datalink - obviously it does - but one which could immediately send back everything it found and/or communicate it to friendly aircraft. Perhaps a satellite link would do what was needed?
The Airbus A330M tankers will be upgraded for use as communication node for FCAS. Before the FCAS aircraft will even be flying. It could be a useful stopgap solution to integrate the EF EK as well. For the moment the F35 will be integrated as first fighter into FCAS, before the FCAS aircraft is even design complete.
Having such a specialist variant aircratft in so few number is a solution of the previous century. The modern solution would have been for all upgraded EF to use the EW pods and the antiradar missiles only with internal software modifications. This should have been part of the Quadriga upgrade, not a separate program.
This is Dunning Kruger Logic. Yes, that’s an obvious solution. So anyone with a brain would suspect there are good reasons this wouldn’t work that aren’t obvious to an amateur. See CoComator’s post above…
One would have thought that SEAD was properly the province of the F35. It had a much greater level of survivability in that environment.
That is my thought too. A stealth jet should have an advantage
You might think so but the F-35 would have to carry Anti-Radiation Missiles externally so things aren't really that cut and dry.
@@Eboreg2 to be fair, the Brits are funding SPEAR EW for the F-35, no?
F-35 A and C can carry the AGM-88 internally.
@@brianmaloney9784 only the new G version (that was designed to fit inside the F-35A/C). Existing missiles won't fit.
f35 ecm? isnt that a bit daft adding emitters to a stealth plane?
Nice. Really. But can it run doom?
Ist PRAETOR (die EW-Suite die Airbus für die TR4 vorsah) wohl doch nicht so gut, wenn die das Saab-System nehmen?
hit 400k guys
India could be interested. They are currently considering buying 114 fighters of foreign design. Offering an EW capability could increase odds of winning the selection.
Anything to do with selling to the Indians is a nightmare.
India will probably just buy more Rafales
The EF has basic EMW capability build in, but I wouldn't say this is going to be easy or cheap.
I don't get it. It doesn't need to be a high speed, highly manoverable jet fighter. A longer fuselage and larger wings would make sense
My new bus had same issue. It was a Volvo.
Volvo is a chinese company.... so black flagged for anything regarding military technology within NATO
@@m.h.b.3828 not if it was a bus then it is still Swedish, Geely group only owns Volvo Cars, and the rest of the Volvo brand, buses, trucks, haulers, and so on are still Swedish!
This sounds similar to how ea-18G Growler was developed from the F18.
"sort off..." savage. lol
Could be a situation where the Luftwaffe specialise in EW and then partners such as the RAF offer the strike platforms?
Just grab a 2 seat version of the Eurofighter,
Slap a few "Growler pods" on it and there you go.....
But I'm guessing that would be too efficient and be missing the over budget component that is a must for any and all government projects......
(I'm half series, and half joking....)
Didnt you make a video on Germany buying the Growler, and why dont you mention their approval to purchase exaclty 15 Growlers in 2020?
Have Germany stepped away from that, or will they work parrallel?
I can see reasons for both paths, but whats the status - was there an order?
(EDIT: you did make an exact video on the topic ;) and explained why Germany hadnt ordered and wouldnt, and this EK development is a natural outcome of this)
Let's not forget that these birds are getting fairly old. A successor to eurofighter should atleast be considered
That's already in the pipeline: Tempest will replace Typhoon, but not the F35. Italy, Japan & UK are the consortium partners for the new aircraft.
I think, that it is about keeping the production line open for Eurofighter, until we have a decision on the production of FCAS (or rather the complimentary drones, which might be Germany’s part, if France secures exclusive production of FCAS). We don’t want to lose the skills and production facilities due to a gap in political decision making…
France, stamping their feet & not playing well with others in a consortium. Some things never change. 🙄
@@THE-BUNKEN-DRUM Oh, absolutely. Some things never change like Euros blaming the French for being forward thinking and having a firm grasp on the issue and then years later coming up with lame excuses for why their own preferred solution failed to measure up to the one the French went with.
@@adrien5834: Yes, when the Fart 1st entered service. In some ways, it was a more sorted aircraft. But that was then, this is now. The Typhoon has now matured into a highly capable multi-role aircraft & is widely regarded as 1 of the best air superiority aircraft on the planet.
@@THE-BUNKEN-DRUM lol, the what? Are you a child? You sound like one.
@@adrien5834: Nope? Also, you've never heard me speak, so that's more bullshit your spouting.
The UK had the worlds most advanced SEAD platform in the form of the Tornado EF3 (the fastest and best version of the Tornado) armed with the British Aerospace ALARM missile used extremely successfully in the Iraq wars. Oddly, when the missile propellant time expired the UK decided not to build new ones for the Typhoon. The combination of the ECR 2 as will be fitted on the UK Typhoons and new build ALARM missiles would be unbeatable. Not holding my breath though.
They should develop both Tempest and FCAS in a major consortium and then pick the jet that is better for each role
No no no no no....
We're not working with the German's or French again!
A.I. is a good fit for signal classification. It is nothing new. The question would be what kind of A.I. is used.
Surely the enhanced ECM capability’s of the F35 are more capable. Not to mention the first block of major f35 upgrades mainly huge leaps in processing power almost double the Lightning’s defensive and offensive ECM capabilities. Typhoon is a worthy platform but the f35 can penetrate into a SEAD environment while passively collecting electromagnetic data then jam at a much closer range. Whilst not hanging easily detectable offensive ordinance on pylons. This is one of the main advantages of the f35 proven at multiple large scale air exercises. It makes jets like the typhoon and other 4/4.5 gen platforms more lethal.
The F-35 has hit a limit for electrical capacity and heat management. There’s just no more power to spare, and no more cooling system capacity, so additional EW pods are not going to happen.
Using active EW negates stealth
But would it not make far more military sense for Europe to move away from buying US war planes? Simply put: being dependent on US planes will have the US always being the major player in the European military system. And seeing how the relationship between Europe and the US isn't anywhere near as strong as it has been, it would stand to reason for Europe to concentrate more on European military plane manufacturers.
Europe has a couple of military airplane manufacturers that between them could relatively easy fulfill all the military needs of Europe. Europe could even compromise on a scheme that would see the likes of Sweden (Gripen), Germany (Eurofighter), France (Raphale) and Britain (Tornado) get a fair share of the market, by allowing each manufacturer to specialize in a certain type of military plane (fighter, bomber, AWACS, tanker, transport, etc).
@@petesjk F-35 is getting a new engine which will increase both electrical capacity and cooling. Beside All EW pod is self power.
@@jimc1654F-35 is not getting a new engine. The USAF stopped funding the F-35 adaptive engine program. Only the NGAD has plans for an adaptive engine.
This is not a dedicated ECM aircraft like the E/A-18G Growlers of the USAF, RAAF but more like the limited lite ECM aircraft.
The lacking of large jamming pods said it all, one just has to look at the large Next Generation Jammer (NGJ) pods for the EA-18G to realise this aircraft is of limited capability.
Generation 4.5 aircraft can not operate over a battlefield without true dedicated ECM aircraft if at all...............what is needed is 5th or 6th gen with stealth now.
Seems to me that the Eurofighter could easily be modified similar to the F-16XL for ground attack missions. Why not do that?
If the CGI mockups are anything to go by, I think they are making one grave mistake. Namely in making it a single seater. When it comes to ground attack, and even moreso when it comes to electronics warfare, you want a dedicated person in the rear who can focus their entire attention to the task, while the pilot can focus on flying.
The idea that automation or AI as they love to call it now, can take over those tasks have proven time and again to not pan out.
But their decision to convert existing airframes rather than doing new builds may be the reason. Everyone is operating single seaters as their main aircraft and only uses twin seaters for trainers, so there is too small a fleet to draw from in that case.
The thing about what happened in the past is that it’s.. In the past. Things change.
I'm really wondering how effective this will be. Based on what I see it really does not seem to bring a lot of actual dedicated hardware to the table. If no new radar I see it being even more limited.
Curious interpretation of what's just been presented
Nutshell version: You get everything the EW Tornadoes can offer, plus more performance including enhanced SEAD & DEAD, AND somethink akin to 'radar cloaking'
(And that's just the stuff they're publicising so far)
What wasn't mentioned in the video is how much of a downgrade from Typhoon ECR that Typhoon EK is.....
ECR got 2 seats with a dedicated EW operator...
ECR got a rebuilt wing with different plumbed pylons, this enabled the jammer pods to be sited in the best location for 360 degree coverage...
ECR got the UK's Radar 2 with full Electronic Attack capability....
EK in comparison has no seperate EW operator...a huge loss
EK's are rebuilt aircraft so do not get new plumbing in the wing...so no decent location for pods...
EK's get no pods....this must call into question the actual capability of the system as a whole....
EK gets Radar 1, with no/limited EA capability...
If Growler needs 2 crew and massive jamming pods then I think its clear that Typhoon EK will have far, far less capability than Growler....
Is this only for a single seater? Losing an EWO is gonna be a big loss surely
Even with AI to assist it seems like it would increase pilot workload significantly. Using two seaters seems more pragmatic to me.
@@stupidburp growler is 2 seater for a reason, I wonder whether this is a case of “it has jamming and can shoot AGM-88s therefore it’s an EW platform”. It more likely will use software to try and bridge the gap but 2 seater jets are cool!
Question: What ever happened to the 2 seater electronic warfare version of the 2 seater Gripen Fighter? - I might be wrong but I assumed it would be similar in approach as the EF 18 Growler. Great video guys!
No one is interested, a huge risk for Saab right now.
Saab claimed that their Gripen E/F is better than most fighters around.
Sweden just does not have the political and economic power to influence and bribe other countries to buy their aircraft. The gripen looks excellent and could be very cost effective when produced in large numbers. But it nobody buys it, so it's more expensive. The f35 A is now cheaper than the gripen due to its mass production.
Gripen already have advanced EW built in.
Brazil is developing the Gripen F.
@@ghostviggen They're not developping the F. Saab did. Brazil purchased the license to manufacture domestically.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD SAAB didnt developed a F version since Swedish Air Force never ordered it. I'm sure SAAB is helping Brazil with the development but the F version is a Brazilian project.
I like the Eurofighter Typhoon more than the Rafale
meanwhile the rafale is better :P oh and you can see the runway, unlike the 2k with the canards blocking the view.
The Typhoon is a better dogfighter but the Rafale is the superior multirole fighter.
Rafale desperately needs at least minimal engine update.
@@piotrd.4850 more powerful engine are available, but dga (military procurement) said nah, don't need those. F5 standard will have them or even more powerful. Biggest enemies of military tech are politics.
@@piotrd.4850 Really? The Rafale exhibits good manoeuvrability with A2G loads, reasonable acceleration and good high altitude performance. The French send their fighters to austere bases for extended periods. Their emphasis is on maintainability rather than outright performance.
Can anyone explain the capability differences between f-35 and a given dedicated ECR 4.5 gen? I always wondered when the UK dropped the tornado ECR what was filling that role, and i couldn't find where to look to find out so i just assumed an f-35 would fill the role or otherwise be able to perform sead using stealth and render the role irrelevant?
But given germany is acquiring F-35s and doing this anyway, and the RAF is adopting ECR capability in some of its eurofighters, clearly this isn't the case?
If thats true it feels as if we have had a massive hole in our capability since the tornado was dropped?
Short answer the Typhoon can accommodate a larger unit as such it's radar is more powerful than those fitted to other aircraft such as the F35. RAF has gone for the BAe Systems/Leonardo ECRS MK 2 radar which is the electronic warfare variant of the new AESA radars being fitted to it's next batch of 40 Tranche 3 Typhoons. As for the Royal Navy & it's F35's well EW capabilities are provided by BAe Systems AN/ASQ-239. So both the Navy & Airforce will have significant EW aircraft in their fleets. As for why Germany went for the ECRS Mk1instead of the Mk2 guessing they wanted to retain a domestic capability in electronic warfare.
i think it is a future investment, also meant for exports and nato allies. once such a system is developed, i doubt that it is limited to the eurofighter alone. this can be crarried over to future types or like mentioned to the gripen for example. rather seems to me as a european solution to that task. generally i think the EF is much underrated, especially when asking justin bronk.
Bronk in general seems to have a hardon for Gripen. Seems to go beyond it just being the best plane to send to Ukraine even. Either he really thinks the planes and the philosophy behind their use is special or they really treated him well when he was in Sweden, if not hooked him up in some way lol.
@@chickenfishhybrid44 exactly this.
some of his claims, for example about the role of the typhoon were sheer wrong. its not just a high flying AA missile carrier. i see them frequently cause base nearby, one can tell different by just watching them training. gripen isn't bad at all, but i would not even compare them on paper. it's a bit like F-15 vs F-16.
Eurofighter Typhoon is Jäger 90 light :-)
I wonder how the F-35 is gonna fit in with this. It is said that the aircraft can provide a Lot of EW capabilities without needing any special variant.
Stilll baffles me where all the fuel is stored - skinny wings!
not a two seater?
For a good and cheap solution Germany could have planned for these needs a decade ago.
A new airframe is sensible as Germany needs: UAV, Tanker, EW, SEAD rolls filled.
The phrase "higher tempo" does not usually apply to German politics, but hey
2:09 F-45? Is VTOL VR leaking?
While this is good news and seems to be working well, i am still worried about the numbers. F35 and EK may be great, but they are highly specialized planes with expected low availability, and then only 35 and 15 respectively?
For now the question is how many you can afford - but once things go south, the real question becomes if you can afford to not have enough of them.
How is the f35 highly specialized. It's the exact opposite.
@@thorwaldjohanson2526 maybe complicated would be a better word. It's not the same do it all workplane the F15 or F16 were, but a more complex system with much more limited weapons space etc
The F-35s are really just a stopgap measure to maybe carry US nukes around if worse comes to worst, procured for the sole reason that someone finally realized they can't keep Tornados flying until FCAS hopefully materializes in another two decades from now. That's their only purpose, so I was actually surprised to hear Germany ordered this many.
More EF-EKs on the other hand would be more useful, I think ... although this is only 6 less than the number of aging Tornado ECRs the Luftwaffe is still operating these days.
EW is accentual to day. A good EW suite came blind stealth aircraft and level the playing field. The F-18G proved that.