The two known test ships (98-0004 and 91-0396) are both F-16CM Block 50s, yes
1 Like
IVEWS isn’t an RWR, it’s a EW suite. IVEWS is only for domestic F-16s.
Viper Shield itself is inapplicable to the topic, as it’s solely used on export Viper packages.
Even then its inbuilt RWR lacks a lot of USAF-specific abilities, such as GPS algorithms that allow the RWR to estimate and store GPS positioning of RWR contacts or the ability to distinguish a signal’s estimated elevation.
I’m sure Elbit may have some home-grown system that can process signals to a good degree, but I don’t know if it’s sophisticated enough to get exact incidence angles out of them.
It also has an open threat library, given that it’s designed for use in various different countries.
Both ALR-69A and ALQ-254 have a vertical lobe precision of +/-30dg. Neither have deadzones. Both do indeed give a full +/-180dg vertical but without guaranteed precision.
3 Likes
Are the upper points not transmitters? I’m not too familiar with CJs, so sorry if that is wrong.
There is no “ALR-39”, there’s an APR-39 which is in your linked site, but that’s expressly used for technical aircraft like 130Hs and UH-60s and quite a few combat-oriented helicopters.
That’s a contract request, as I’ve said the only users of ALQ-257 are domestic F-16 units.
The most allowed for export was granted with a very strict FMS release, so this DSCA request leaves it up in the air.
They aren’t purchased, nor are the listed options set in stone. There’s a reason why it reads:
Okay, fair, Poland choose Viper Shield
For ALR-56 at least, they were receivers like the beer cans
I think the transmitters for IVEWS are in the two extended position light lobes on the sides of the intakes. Those are noticeably bigger than a standard USAF F-16C on the photos I posted before of the test airframes F-16 Fighting Falcon: History, Performance & Discussion - #1183 by da12thmonkey
1 Like
The word “interdependencies” seems to have slipped past ya, this is an Army site for their integration of IVEWS into the by the Army. Yknow, AH-64s and UH-60/MH-60s?
APR-39E, as I’ve said before, is expressly used for helicopters and niche utility aircraft. Given that APR-39E is needed for the FVL suite, and the next-gen ASE suite as a whole is based on IVEWS, they’re deducing that APR-39E is capable of being a sole RWR fixture of IVEWS despite it not being a dedicated ECM system in itself.
Wait. It says that APR-39 is detect system for USAF F-16 IVEWS. Nothing more.
And NG IVEWS page for some reason uses APR-39 antenna
I understand that much, the full digital receivers that replaced the superheterodyne dude up on the vert stab are both known to me, but to my knowledge the IVEWS rear 120dg output is done by those antennae on top of the vert stab, as the previous image pointed out.
Both of those are expressly for the right and left receiver coverage zones, but I have no clue what the difference in size may entail. Maybe it is true that a transmitter was added alongside the receivers?
Even the URL you’ve given is titled ‘-ase’, which is the Army’s provisional name for “aircraft survival equipment”. If you’ve read their FY24 release which details their ASE procurements then you’d see that APR-39E is explicitly tied to the FVL’s ECM program.
The FVL’s ECM suite is, as I’ve said, directly based on IVEWS.
Breaking news, Snorethrop Grumblin’s PR team doesn’t give two shits about what they portray.
I know. But why it writes that IVEWS on F-16 uses APR-39?
That’s the problem
3 Likes
Because god knows some junior enlisted guy packed full of nicotine and caffeine thought up some fancy sounding low effort bullet point to make their project manager page look like it was worth its time.
Once again, no F-16 uses APR-39… Unless the Army somehow got their hands on an F-16 and shoved their Army/Navy-exclusive avionics in there.
Top Aces alpha jet when??!?
And again, what’s stopping the APR-39 from appearing on the F-16? Sounds logical that the company that manufactures the APR-39 would try to shove the APR-39 into its EW suit?
That’s a system that is mostly used on helicopters, I don’t know any planes that use it
It makes sense why they wouldn’t add Private Vehicles.
Some French guy can buy a Russian jet under a company based in Brazil which uses U.S. armament while primarily being hired by the Chinese.
So where tf would you put that.
2 Likes