The U.S. Air Force recently completed Initial Operational Test & Evaluation (IOT&E) of the Eagle Passive Active Warning Survivability System (EPAWSS), validating the capabilities BAE Systems’ advanced system brings to the F-15. EPAWSS provides critical electronic warfare (EW) capabilities for the F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15EX Eagle II aircraft.

“EPAWSS was designed for upgradeability and rapid capability insertion,” said Amy Nesbitt, EPAWSS program manager at BAE Systems.

“We’re using agile software development to provide iterative upgrades to fielded EW systems—allowing our customers to defeat future electromagnetic threats.”

EPAWSS provides instantaneous full-spectrum EW capabilities—including radar warning, geolocation, situational awareness, and self-protection.

“EPAWSS is a leap in technology, improving the lethality and combat capabilities of the F-15E and F-15EX in contested, degraded environments against advanced threats,” said Maj Bryant “Jager” Baum, EPAWSS Test Director for the Air Force Operational Test & Evaluation Center (AFOTEC). “EPAWSS has set the baseline for EW within the fighter community.”

BAE Systems executes the EPAWSS programme at its facilities in Nashua, New Hampshire and Austin, Texas, actively producing EPAWSS hardware in support of F-15EX new-aircraft production and F-15E aircraft fleet modifications.

Tom has spent the last 13 years working in the defence industry, specifically military and commercial shipbuilding. His work has taken him around Europe and the Far East, he is currently based in Scotland.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

31 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Andy reeves
Andy reeves
5 days ago

U.k should look at getting a brunch of F 15 from the yanks,, they’ve got over a hundred of them at airbases in Norfolk and over 300 in reserve

DB
DB
5 days ago
Reply to  Andy reeves

Not very chewy though, are they?

Ian
Ian
4 days ago
Reply to  DB

Crunchy, like hash browns. Yum.

DB
DB
4 days ago
Reply to  Ian

🤣🤣🤣

Andrew D
Andrew D
5 days ago
Reply to  Andy reeves

Just like we have 300 Typhoons. 🤗

Jim
Jim
5 days ago
Reply to  Andy reeves

Why would we waste money on buying an older expensive less capable aircraft while junking Typhoons that still have thousands of hours on them.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
4 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Exactly. The U.K. has an active production line for typhoons. Any additional aircraft orders should be for typhoons or F35Bs. With the defence budget being cut again it’s extremely unlikely. More typhoons being ordered would be a really good idea in a number of ways. The money spent recirculates through the U.K. economy so the actual cost is a lot less than the sticker price. It keeps the line open which keeps more people employed for longer which benefits the economy and keeps trained staff ready for tempest. Also helps with the possibility of typhoon exports. Supports the numerous smaller… Read more »

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
4 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

We are spending £2.34BN on upgrading the fleet we have. The RAF want the very best capability over airframe numbers.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
1 day ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Nearly the cost of a new plane on the radar. If double the number of radars were bought the cost would come down. I really hope that the radar will keep costs down for tempest as £90m a radar is super expensive.
Also thinking that the raf want to get as many tempest as possible. With only 100 typhoons why would the government fund more tempest. 80 will do then cut to 50 with the promise of more drone wingmen in 10 years.
Tempest cost unit then goes through the roof

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
1 day ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

The £2.34bn isn’t just for the new radar, but a whole host of enhancements. But it is still a very expensive radar. It will be interesting to see how it compares to the new APG-85 coming to F35. I don’t think Tempest capability will be measured in simple airframe numbers and sqns. I fully expect the manned version to number fewer than 100, with the unmanned version making up more mass (drones) The US only expect 200 NGADs to be built as the costs will be huge. 350m per airframe is being quoted. Building large numbers doesn’t always mean cheaper.… Read more »

Frank62
Frank62
5 days ago

Do Eagles take many F-15s?
I feel an Atenborough documentary coming.

Last edited 5 days ago by Frank62
farouk
farouk
5 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

Frank62 wrote:
“”Do Eagles take many F-15s?””
I asked a girl in a flatbed ford that question whilst standing on a corner in Winslow, Arizona . She just replied “Take it easy”

I’ll get me coat.

Andy reeves
Andy reeves
5 days ago
Reply to  farouk

Good Idea

farouk
farouk
4 days ago
Reply to  Andy reeves

Damn since i wrote that initial post, I can’t get that tune out of my head

David
David
5 days ago

It shows that older designs to provide the mass are still important amongst 5th gen platforms. If Typhoon T1 are expensive to upgrade, in this new dangerous world ordering a further batch of Typhoon wouldn’t harm, particularly as the Germans are funding the tech for a sead variant . 3 squadrons of them, with AAAGM-ER which will also be integrated onto P8 and F35 would go someway to filling a gap, and wouldn’t harm Tempest unlike many more F35. Half the yearly foreign aid budget would pay for that. We are afferall a few years from war or so they… Read more »

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
4 days ago
Reply to  David

Others mentioned this before. How useful would all those T1 Typhoons be to Ukraine? Even post conflict? Maybe it’s too big an ask and left too late and F16 training is under way. I think Germany, Italy and Spain are all getting some additional new Typhoons as is Saudi Arabia(?) so the pricing should be good and what an opportune time if all that’s now in production. Monies, other priorities and commitments. A bit more on UK Defence might even be good for the elections!?

Last edited 4 days ago by Quentin D63
Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky
4 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Now that Sweden is in NATO it’s possible Ukraine may get some older Gripens too as they update to newer variants.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
4 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Yes. They’ll be very useful and delivery only just a couple of hours away!

Coll
Coll
4 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Gripen has too few number airframes and not enough spares. F-16 has had decades of refined experience, logistics/supply chain and spares behind it. Also, too many different aircraft will make maintenance training, armament types, and pilot training more complicated. Poland, Slovakia and Romania operate the F-16 and can offer immediate spares if needed just over the border in an emergency.

Last edited 4 days ago by Coll
DaveyB.
DaveyB.
3 minutes ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Ukraine have certainly asked Sweden for surplus Gripens. Which would be the older C/D version. However, Sweden are at the moment reluctant to let them go. Primarily due to how Russia is acting and the rhetoric they are promoting. The Gripen C/D is still a better offering than the Dutch/Danish/Belgium F16s in terms of capability. Its avionics are some 10 years newer that the these F16s even after the mid-life upgrade. Plus it can use some of the latest western weapons including the Taurus ALCM. It also a more robust aircraft that is designed for the kind of war Ukraine… Read more »

Ron
Ron
4 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

T1s to the Ukraine, with a full weapons fit out yes please. As for new versions of the Typhoon, I agree that the RAF should get the new versions and that they need about 200+ for ADUK and oversea deployments. I also think the RAF needs a bomber built around a drum of 8 cruise missiles, 700 knts at sea level. Basically a modern Canberra, if I could really dream within the real world a upgraded Concord with upgraded engines, fuel tanks, radars with two missile drums. Three front line squdron of these would give the RAF some real long… Read more »

Andrew D
Andrew D
4 days ago
Reply to  Ron

Just don’t think our government know how to plan , like for me maybe a new SQN of Typhoons or two sames the government are saying T1s to old and let the Navy have the F35s .But like I said on an earlier post we had many Aircraft types in the cold war and a lot of them were vintage 50s ,60s and still kept the wolf’s at Bay like Lightens etc .And if the wall didn’t come down I wonder how long the likes of Buccaner would of solider on for and many others .Tornados and Harriers even liked… Read more »

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst
4 days ago
Reply to  Ron

Thank you. Somebody else talking sense about the UK’s need for a bomber aircraft. I would argue both for a heavy tactical bomber, and also an ultra-long-range strategic bomber carrying an alternative to the submarine-based strategic nuclear deterrent. Keep it moderately stealthy so go for say a Vulcan “II” design with re-heat for the heavy bomber, and a Concorde “II” design with much longer range. While we are about it, also a “missile warehouse.” e.g. ex-Jumbo or something rammed with long and medium range air to air missiles, all linked to AWACS or forward fighters, to counter any mass attack.… Read more »

Andrew D
Andrew D
4 days ago
Reply to  David

Our government saying Typhoons are two old for the job ? If you look back to the 80s we had Aircraft like Canberra bomber ,Buccaner still going strong and many other platforms .Specially the likes of the Lighters for AD and theses aircraft were 50s 60s vintage ,even the Phantom was getting long in the tooth . 👍

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
4 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

The French have retired early Rafales. Early Gripen’s have gone. Early F22s are going. Its a common theme. These are extremely complex and expensive aircraft. And with T1 Typhoons we have a fleet within a fleet that is costing the RAF a fortune compared to the return in capability. You cannot compare today’s aircraft to those of the 70s and 80s. Today’s fleet of Typhoons and F35s would are the most capable fast jets we have ever operated. The same cannot be said of aircraft types of the past.

Andrew D
Andrew D
4 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

See were your coming from Robert, but T1 Typhoons still very capable intercepted ,cost ? War a lot more costly .Aircraft like Nimrod , Jaguar,Harrier went before replacement were in place it’s call cuts to save money 💰just look at Hercules, AEW gone .In my book its call Bloody stupid . 🙄

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
4 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

But whether we like it or not, a defence budget is exactly that, a budget. And we can only do so much with it. T1 is capable. But the RAF would rather the investment go into the T2/3 fleet. £2.34bns worth of investment.

Andrew D
Andrew D
3 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Absolutely it’s right investment going on T2/T3 fleet but we do need a another one or two SQNs of Typhoons .That’s what I call an investment ,but won’t be happening 👍

Robert Blay
Robert Blay
3 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

Future mass will come from drones. Another 27 F35B’s will be ordered before the end of the
this year, then another 10 or 20 post 2030. By then, it should be clear what Tempest capability will look like.

Last edited 3 days ago by Robert Blay
Bringer of facts
Bringer of facts
4 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

The government always uses obsolescence as an excuse to scrap good kit. Case in point is Challenger 2, the tanks it is most likely to meet in battle are T-72/T-80/T-90 which are older designs.

Modification and upgrades of Good reliable designs would save a fortune and much time in new procurement.

Andrew D
Andrew D
4 days ago

I’ll agree with you on that one 👍