DECEMBER 2016

Vol. 39, No. 12

www.crows.org The Journal of Electronic Defense

The Future of AEA

Also in this issue:
Cognitive EW
Technology Survey: Flightline and Portable EW Simulators
2016 AOC Award Winners
 ELECTRONIC WARFARE

SEIZE THE
SPECTRUM
Staying a step ahead of emerging threats. Protecting
warfighters. Improving survivability. Raytheon delivers
full-spectrum solutions that span a broad range of domains
and capabilities. Seize the spectrum. Protect the mission.

Raytheon.com/spectrum
@Raytheon
Raytheon

© 2016 Raytheon Company. All rights reserved.

 Integrated EW Testing
Lab Tested Installed Test Range Test

RSS8000 Portable Radar Signal

Radar Signal Simulator Simulator (PRS)

DT&E Through
OT&E
In service Worldwide

Chameleon Mobile EW & Radar Test

Radar Target Generator System (MERTS)

Coherent Radar Target and Threat Simulation

Ultra-Herley EW Simulation Technology Ltd.

9 Whippany Road, A8 Cody Technology Park, Ively Road
Whippany, New Jersey 07981 Farnborough, Hants GU14 0LX
Tel: 973-884-2580 Tel: +44(0) 1252 512951
Email: sales @herley-CTI.com Fax: +44(0) 1252 512428
www.ewst.co.uk
 December 2016 • Volume 39, Issue 12

www.crows.org The Journal of Electronic Defense

News Technology Survey: Flightline and

Portable EW Simulators 63
The Monitor 15 This month’s survey of portable simulators features
DARPA Seeks System for Protection Against 30 products from 10 companies.
Small UASs.
4 AOC EW Singapore Preview 71
Washington Report 26 A preview of January’s AOC EW Singapore
Congress Gains More EW Experience After Election. Conference.
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

World Report 28 Report from the 2016 EW

Aselsan Wins Pakistan Submarine ESM Order. GCC Conference 76
Report from the 2016 AOC
Features CEMA Conference 90
Interview: Col Jeffrey N. 2016 AOC Award Winners 93
Aldridge, USAF 30 Meet the winners of the AOC’s 2016 Awards,
Director, Joint Electronic Warfare Center presented during this month’s 53rd Annual
Interview: US Rep. Joe Pitts 34 International Symposium and Convention.
AOC Gold Award Winner; Founder,
Congressional Electronic Warfare Working Group Departments
The Future of Airborne 6 The View From Here
Electronic Attack 38 8 Conferences Calendar
John Haystead 10 Courses Calendar
The critical benefits of Airborne Electronic 12 From the President
Attack (AEA) are needed more than ever in A2AD 74 New Products
environments. JED looks at how the mission will be 78 Crows in the Community
performed in the coming decade.
80 The Heat is On
Regaining the Advantage – Cognitive 86 EW 101
Electronic Warfare 56 100 AOC News
John Knowles 105 Index of Advertisers
New threat technology is driving requirements for EW 106 JED Quick Look
systems that can learn from experience.

Cover photo courtesy U.S. Air Force.

Contents photo courtesy US Navy.
 No one knows EW simulation like

CONFIDENCE
Textron Systems, setting the EW
technology standard for decades. The
A2PATSTM EW simulator offers superior
reliability and precision, with an expandable

THROUGH PRECISION
architecture for any application. Plus,
our experienced team provides reliable,
responsive service and accessories —
for a trusted solution over time.

www.textronsystems.com/es
electronicsystems@textronsystems.com

Textron Systems Electronic Systems is a business of Textron Systems. © 2016 AAI Corporation. All rights reserved. A2PATS is a trademark of AAI Corporation, an operating unit of Textron Systems.
 the view
f rom he re

EW
www.crows.org The Journal of Electronic Defense

DECEMBER 2016 • VOL. 39, NO. 12

INNOVATION
EDITORIAL STAFF
Editor: John Knowles
Publisher: Elaine Richardson
Managing Editor: Cody Smith
Senior Editor: John Haystead
Technical Editor: Ollie Holt, Burt Keirstead
Threat Systems Editor: Doug Richardson
Editorial Assistant: Brittany Bowen
Contributing Writers: Dave Adamy
Marketing & Research Coordinator: Kent Agramonte
Proofreader: Ken Janssens

I
Sales Administration: Candice Blair
n this month’s JED, we are running several articles that, in their own ways, EDITORIAL ADVISORY BOARD
address different aspects of electronic warfare (EW) innovation. For our Mr. Petter Bedoire
Vice President and Head of M&S and EW Systems,
cover story, John Haystead wrote an excellent article on the future of air- Electronic Defence Systems, Saab
borne electronic attack (AEA) and the new technologies and concepts that Mr. Anthony Lisuzzo
Vice President, Strategic Innovation Group, Booz Allen Hamilton
will shape how that mission is performed in the coming decades. This issue Mr. Steve Mensh
also includes an article about cognitive EW technology, the first of examples of Senior Vice President and General Manager, Electronic Systems,
Textron Systems
which are just emerging from the DOD’s labs. Mr. Edgar Maimon
The examples of technological innovation in these articles are quite obvious. General Manager, Elbit Systems EW and SIGINT – Elisra
Mr. Jeffrey Palombo
However, we often fail to recognize that these new EW technologies will only Senior VP and GM, Land and Self-Protection Systems Division,
make a difference if the operational community comes up with new and creative Electronic Systems, Northrop Grumman Corp.
Mr. Steve Roberts
6 ways to employ them in the battlespace. So, there must be some degree of op- Vice President, Strategy, Selex Galileo
erational innovation to leverage the technological innovation. In fact, Deputy Mr. Travis Slocumb
VP, Electronic Warfare Systems, Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems
Secretary of Defense Bob Work often emphasizes that the DOD’s Third Offset
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

Mr. Brian Walters

Strategy depends not only on new technologies but on talented and imaginative Vice President and General Manager, Electronic Combat Solutions,
BAE Systems Electronic Systems
operators who can come up with new ways to use these technologies.
Dr. Jim Wickes
Our interviews this month show yet more forms of innovation in our EW Com- Senior Principal, Survivability, Defence Science and Technology Lab (dstl),
UK MOD
munity. Col Jeff Aldridge, director of the Joint EW Center, talks about important
Dr. Rich Wittstruck
new concepts, such as EMS Operations (EMSO), Electromagnetic Battle Manage- Associate Director, Field-Based Experimentation and Integration,
ment (EMBM) and the EMS Domain. These are examples of innovative doctrine, CERDEC, US Army

operational concepts and policy that are changing the framework of how we PRODUCTION STAFF
think about EW. Layout & Design: Barry Senyk
Advertising Art: Elaine Connell
In our other interview, US Rep. Joe Pitts, this year’s AOC Gold Award re-
Contact the Editor: (978) 509-1450, JEDeditor@naylor.com
cipient, recounts why he decided to create the Congressional EW Working Group Contact the Sales Manager:
(EWWG) back in 1999. At the time, the US, having retired its F-4G Wild Weasels (800) 369-6220 or tjenkins@naylor.com
and the EF-111A Ravens, struggled to conduct air operations over Serbia and Subscription Information: Please contact Glorianne O’Neilin
Kosovo during Operation Allied Force. It clearly was a low point in modern EW at (703) 549-1600 or e-mail oneilin@crows.org.
history. But instead of giving up, people like Congressman Pitts decided to act, The Journal of Electronic Defense
in his case by establishing the EWWG as a new caucus within Congress. From is published for the AOC by

those discouraging days in 1999, you can chart the progress our EW community
has made as it re-built and, in many ways, re-invented itself into the vibrant
community we see today. I’m not saying this progress all comes down to estab-
lishing the EWWG. It was simply that our community had reached a crisis point
in mid-1999 and, beginning with the EWWG, we started to innovate in ways we
had never thought of before.
Based on some of the examples cited above, we should be proud of what our
5950 NW 1st Place
Gainesville, FL 32607
Phone: (800) 369-6220 • Fax: (352) 331-3525
www.naylor.com
©2016 Association of Old Crows/Naylor, LLC. All rights reserved. The
contents of this publication may not be reproduced by any means, in
whole or in part, without the prior written authorization of the publisher.

EW Community has accomplished over the past two decades. We still have a lot
of work ahead of us. But I would argue that the EW Community is in the best
shape we have ever seen, and we are well positioned to tackle the challenges
that lay in our future. – J. Knowles
Editorial: The articles and editorials appearing in this magazine do not
represent an official AOC position, except for the official notices printed
in the “Association News” section or unless specifically identified as an
AOC position.
PUBLISHED DECEMBER 2016/JED-M1216/2986
 c ale ndar confe re nc e s & trad e s hows
JANUARY FEBRUARY IDEX 2017
February 19-23
Surface Navy Association Symposium 19th Annual Directed Energy Abu Dhabi, UAE
January 10-12 Symposium www.idexuae.ae
Arlington, VA February 13-17
www.sna.org Huntsville, AL Avalon Airshow 2017
www.deps.org February 28-March 5
AOC Electronic Warfare Singapore Geelong, Australia
January 17-18 Aero India www.airshow.com.au
Marina Bay Sands, Singapore February 14-18
www.crows.org Bangalore, India
www.aeroindia.in MARCH
AFA Air Warfare Symposium
March 1-3
Orlando, FL
www.afa.org/airwarfare
AUSA Global Force Symposium
March 13-15
Huntsville, AL
Capture, Process & Create Spectrum www.ausameetings.org/globalforce
Dixie Crow Symposium 42
In Full Precision with RFVision-360 March 19-24
Warner Robins, GA
1 MHz – 18 GHz Gapless Spectrum Processing, Simultaneous www.dixiecrow42.org
Recording of Wide & Ultra-Wideband Signals & RF Playback Directed Energy to DC Exhibition
March 27-30
Washington, DC

RFvision-360 www.deps.org

DTA-3380 Tunable Transceiver APRIL

(1 MHz - 8 GHz, 80 MHz BW)
Navy League Sea-Air-Space
DTA-9590 Tunable Transceiver April 3-5
(500 MHz - 18 GHz, 500 MHz) National Harbor, MD
8 4U
www.seaairspace.org

LAN LAAD
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

April 4-7
Rio de Janiero, Brazil
DTA-5000 RAID Server (up to 24 TB SSD) www.laadexpo.com.br
• 1 MHz – 18 GHz (Extendable to 40 GHz) Gapless Spectrum Monitoring of Radio AOC 46th Annual Collaborative
(HF to SHF) & Radar (VHF to K) Bands Simultaneously EW Symposium
• Simultaneous Recording of Radio (up to 80 MHz BW) & Radar April 25-27
(up to 500 MHz BW) Signals Pt. Mugu, CA
www.crows.org
• Tunable RF Playback
• SDK For Real-Time Multi-Core Software Processing AAAA Army Aviation Mission
• Optional (24-Bit) Acoustic Front-End For Processing From 1 KHz-18 GHz Solutions Summit
• Multi-Antenna option April 26-28
Nashville, TN
• SigInspector™- OMNI Software for Control, Operation, Playback & Signal Analysis www.quad-a.org/2016Summit
(1 MHz – 6 GHz) (500 MHz – 18 GHz)
RF In RF Out (option) RF In RF Out (option) MAY
DTA-3380 DTA-9590
X X
LOs LOs
X X IDEF
May 9-12
185 MHz IF,
250 250
500 MHz IBW, Ankara, Turkey
80 MHz BW 1.2 GHz IBF
MHz MHz www.idef.com.tr
16-Bit ADC & ADC DAC ADC DAC 12-Bit ADC &
16-Bit DAC 12-Bit DACs
DDC, DUC &
FPGAs FPGAs DDC, DUC & JUNE
Network Cores Network =
1 x 10 GbE Network 1 GbE 2 x 10 GbE Network 1 GbE AOC EW Europe
(I & Q Data) Control (I & Q Data) User
Control
PC June 6-8
DTA-5000 2U RAID Server with 24 TB SSD Storage
1 GbE
London, UK
www.crows.org a

For more information download the RFvision-360

presentation from the home page: www.d-ta.com AOC conferences are noted in red. For
more info or to register, visit www.crows.
www.d-ta.com sales@d-ta.com 1-877-382-3222 A Sensor Interface and Processing Company org. Items in blue denote AOC Chapter
events

834889_DTASystems.indd 1 2016-11-02 3:38 PM

 AO B v 2 hing

Vi ym #2 De DC
C o o t 9 to to n
sit p 2 c 1
S h
No a s

us os 1
W

at iu
Because you don’t have 2 years and $20M

m
for your next EW/Radar Test Cycle...
Rethink purchasing custom systems or building single platform solutions

Giga-tronics Scalable COTS Solutions

Broadband Up/Down Conversion (100 MHz to 18 GHz)
Coherent, Fast-tuning (< 1µs)
Wide Instantaneous Bandwidth (1 to 2 GHz)
Integrated Chassis Support for 3rd party hardware
Turnkey Solutions for Threat Simulation

Visit go-asg.gigatronics.com/EW to download whitepaper:

Radar RF Target and Environment Generator/EW Simulator: Considerations for a ‘Build vs Buy’ Decision

go-asg.gigatronics.com/EW

asg-info@gigatronics.com Solutions for Next Gen EW / Radar Test and Deployment

 c ale ndar c our se s & se mina r s
The Association of Old Crows is excited to DECEMBER JANUARY
increase the convenience of your learning
opportunities through our brand new Electronic Countermeasures – Theory EO and IR Sensors
on-demand professional development and Design January 9-13
library! The AOC is making some of our December 2-3 Shrivenham, Oxfordshire, UK
most popular courses available anytime & Washington, DC www.cranfield.ac.uk
anywhere you’re connected to the internet! www.crows.org
Radar Electronic Warfare
On-demand course offerings currently
EW Against a New Generation of January 23-27
include Dave Adamy’s Fundamentals
Threats – UPDATE COURSE Shrivenham, Oxfordshire, UK
& Advanced Principles of EW and Kyle
December 2-3 www.cranfield.ac.uk
Davidson’s ELINT - Principles and
Washington, DC
Practice. Visit www.crows.org.
www.crows.org FEBRUARY
Advanced RF Electronic Warfare
Principles
February 27-March 3
Atlanta, GA
www.pe.gatech.edu

Portable Tunable Dual Channel um On-The- MARCH

ctr
Wideband Transceiver with Recording,

Go
Basic Electronic Warfare Modeling

Sp

TM
March 14-17
Processing & Broadcasting Atlanta, GA
www.pe.gatech.edu

APRIL
RFvision1-mini
2 x Rx and 2 x Tx Directed Infrared Countermeasures:
Now operational inside Technology, Modeling, and Testing
or 4 x Rx / Tx
the shipping case; 40/80 MHz BW
April 11-13
Atlanta, GA
Simply open the lid www.pe.gatech.edu
and go! Introduction to Intelligence,
Surveillance, Reconnaissance
10 (ISR) Concepts, Systems, and
Test Evaluation
April 11-14
Dual Channel RFvision1-mini Transceiver Atlanta, GA
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

www.pe.gatech.edu
• Two (2) independently tuned receivers & transmitters (or quad receivers) Basic RF Electronic Warfare Concepts
• 20 MHz–6 GHz tuning range with 40 MHz IBW (DTA-320) or 1 MHz-8 GHz tuning range April 18-20
with 80 MHz IBW (DTA-680) Atlanta, GA
www.pe.gatech.edu
• 16-bit data converters & programmable DDC & DUCs for BW selection (2.5 MHz to 80 MHz)
• I & Q data recording at full BW for both channels for hours MAY
• Two (2) independently tuned RF output (40/80 MHz BW) of pre-recorded
or computer generated data Modeling and Simulation of RF Circuits
(20 MHz – 6 GHz)
May 2-4
• GPS option for time & position information RF In RF Out
Atlanta, GA
DTA-320
• SigInspector™- 1 GUI software for control & operation LOs (Tunable Dual www.pe.gatech.edu
RF / IF X X Ch. Transceiver)
75 MHz IF, Infrared Countermeasures
100 40 MHz IBW May 2-5
SigInspector™ - 1 GUI MHz
16-Bit ADC & Atlanta, GA
ADC DAC 16-Bit Dual
Interpolating DACs www.pe.gatech.edu
< 80 MHz > IF / Baseband
FPGA DDC &
Waterfall Display FFT (I & Q) Network Cores Military Electronic Warfare
20 MHz – 6 GHz May 15-19
Occupancy 10 GbE Network (I & Q Data) 1 GbE Control
Log Shrivenham, Oxfordshire, UK
DTA-590 RAID Server with Tablet www.cranfield.ac.uk
(Record/Playback) 6 TB Storage (GUI)
Current & Previous Scans (MAX-Hold) Signals Intelligence (SIGINT)
Dual Channel RFvision1-mini Fundamentals
(For DTA-680, IF = 185 MHz,
May 16-17
Record Button IBW = 80 MHz & Fs = 250 MHz)
Atlanta, GA
www.pe.gatech.edu a

Download the Spectrum-On-The-Go presentation

from the home page: www.d-ta.com

www.d-ta.com sales@d-ta.com 1-877-382-3222 A Sensor Interface and Processing Company

AOC courses are noted in red. For more
info or to register, visit www.crows.org.

834890_DTASystems.indd 1 2016-11-02 3:43 PM

 Keep Your FPGA System Integration
on Target and above Water
WILDSTARTM 40Gb 6U and 3U OpenVPX EcoSystem
Altera Arria 10® AND Xilinx UltraScaleTM

Ultra-Low Latency EW Solutions

24ns Latency from ADC Input to DAC Output!

All Systems Include Open Project Builder

TM

Our Vendor-Independent FPGA Development Tool

See a Demo at www.AnnapMicro.com/OPB
Made in USA
Annapolis Micro Systems
www.AnnapMicro.com
See us at Booth 531 at 53rd AOC International Convention 410-841-2514
 message
f rom the pre side nt

A STEADY, BRIGHT
Association of Old Crows
1000 North Payne Street, Suite 200
Alexandria, VA 22314-1652
Phone: (703) 549-1600
Fax: (703) 549-2589

FUTURE… PRESIDENT
Dave Hime
VICE PRESIDENT
Lisa Fruge-Cirilli
SECRETARY
Glenn “Powder” Carlson
TREASURER
Joseph Koesters
PAST PRESIDENT
Kenneth Israel
hat a truly great year this has been. As I said going into this journey, I
am extremely honored and humbled to have been able to serve as your AT-LARGE DIRECTORS
Jesse “Judge” Bourque
32nd President these past 12 months. Together with a great leadership Glenn “Powder” Carlson
team – the Board of Directors, Chapter Presidents, and military and in- Todd Caruso
Craig Harm
dustry leaders – the vision and strategy of the Association has firmly taken hold. Brian Hinkley
I had the great fortune of interacting with so many of you from the US to Europe Amanda Kammier
Mark Schallheim
to Asia about the future of the AOC. In return, you gave me hope and inspiration Muddy Watters
that we indeed are on the right track with this proud profession we call EW. And APPOINTED DIRECTORS
of course, it’s bigger than that – crossing and blurring the lines of electromagnetic Anthony Lisuzzo
Don Quinn
spectrum operations, cyber and spectrum control – with a newfound energy of col-
laboration and “reaching across the aisle,” regardless of technical specialty, to focus REGIONAL DIRECTORS
Central: Joseph Koesters
on controlling and winning the battle in the electromagnetic environment we all Mid-Atlantic: Jim Pryor
12 will face in the future. Northeastern: Nino Amoroso
Mountain-Western: Sam Roberts
And it’s with this undeniable sense of positive direction and energy that I ab- Pacific: Darin Nielsen
solutely know I’m leaving the gavel in very good and steady hands with your new Southern: Gene “Joker” McFalls
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

International I: Dr. Robert S. Andrews

President, Ms. Lisa Frugé-Cirilli, to continue this momentum and make our goals International II: Jeff Walsh
become reality. As I close out my tenure, I reflect upon all of your great support and AOC FOUNDATION ADJUNCT GOVERNORS
the kind words that so many of you took time to convey. In return, I discovered a Steve “Tango” Tourangeau
Rich Wittstruck
profound, renewed respect for the dedication, passion and perseverance that EW, cy-
ber and spectrum professionals bring to the table every day. Thank you all from the AOC CONTACTS
bottom of my heart. So to close out similarly as I began a year ago, here’s to a bright Mike Dolim
AOC future! Best Wishes and Take Care. – Dave Hime Executive Director
dolim@crows.org
Shelley Frost
huge heart-felt thank you to the AOC membership for putting your faith Director, Logistics
in me as your 33rd AOC President; I’m extremely humbled to serve such a frost@crows.org
fabulous organization! Dave, many thanks to you for your mentorship; not Glorianne O’Neilin
just this last year, but over the last many years. I’m truly grateful. Your Director, Member Services
oneilin@crows.org
leadership has set us on the course to focus and grow what I believe to be AOC “core”
Brock Sheets
responsibilities: advocacy, education, membership and outreach. Director, Marketing
It is an exciting time in the EW and Spectrum communities. Many of the changes sheets@crows.org

AOC and our membership have advocated over the past 10 years are finally coming Stew Taylor
Exhibits Manager
to fruition. EW strategy, spectrum management, the deployment of key leadership taylor@crows.org
figures who can ensure our industry receives the attention and funding it needs to Tim Hutchison
innovate and meet the next generation of threats – these are all happening now, Marketing & Communications Coordinator
hutchison@crows.org
creating even more opportunities but also responsibilities for us to work together to
capitalize on these benefits. Ken Miller
Director, Advocacy Programs
I look forward to enhanced communication and collaboration with our EW, Cyber
John Clifford
and Spectrum professionals around the world. Let’s continue our quest with educat- Director, Global Conferences
ing and breaking down barriers; we are much stronger with “one voice.” Philip DuPree
With that I say thank you again; I look forward to serving as your 33rd Associa- Director, US Operations
tion of Old Crows President! My best. – Lisa Frugé-Cirilli
 We’re Anything But Passive
When It Comes To RF Components.

Passive RF components – such as couplers, hybrids, dividers, and

combiners – may not be the first thing you think about
when putting together an electronic system; but
they’re the first and last things we think about
every day.
We’re always actively working on new ways
to make RF components better, stronger,
more durable, and more versatile. That’s saying
a lot, because our RF components are already
the best in the industry.
Plus, nobody beats our response time.
MegaPhase can even customize to your needs
with lightning speed. And no RF component provider offers a better value. So don’t be
passive. Give us a call or visit our website.

With the right connections,

anything is possible.

122 Banner Road, Stroudsburg, PA 18360-6433

Tel: 1-877-634-2742 | 570-424-8400
Solutions@MegaPhase.com | www.MegaPhase.com
 Signals can run,
but they can’t hide.

Introducing Keysight FieldFox handheld analyzers with real-time spectrum
analysis (RTSA) up to 50 GHz. Now you can capture every interfering signal in
real time with one integrated, lightweight unit. FieldFox with RTSA empowers
you to detect, locate and x with benchtop accuracy. At only 7.1 lbs, it’s also
an all-in-one cable and antenna tester (CAT) + vector network analyzer (VNA) +
spectrum analyzer + RTSA and more. This means you can forget about carrying
separate devices for every function you need. Go out there, get the job done
in real time, and carry the precision of one.
Keysight FieldFox Handheld Analyzers with RTSA
Now 16 new models with RTSA from DC to 50 GHz
Detect pulses as narrow as 22 ns;
63 dB spurious-free dynamic range
CAT + VNA + spectrum analyzer + RTSA and more
Benchtop precision, MIL-Class 2 rugged

Download RTSA app note today.

www.keysight.com/find/FieldFoxRTSA

USA: 800 829 4444 CAN: 877 894 4414

© Keysight Technologies, Inc. 2016.
t he
DARPA SEEKS SYSTEM FOR PROTECTION AGAINST SMALL UASs
The Defense Advanced Research Proj-
ects Agency, Tactical Technology Office
(DARPA/TTO) has issued a solicitation
for the Mobile Force Protection (MFP)
program aimed at development and
demonstration of an integrated defen-
sive system prototype for ground or na-
val convoys capable of defeating a raid
of self-guided, small unmanned aircraft
systems (sUAS) and other asymmetric
threats attacking a high value asset on
the move. The program considers sUAS
to be fixed- or rotary-wing air vehicles
of less than approximately 200 lb.
The MFP is seen as including “dis-
tributed and/or elevated sensors and
effectors networked to form a fused air
surveillance picture, and organically
controlled for fast decisive action.” The
US Army’s Maneuver Aviation and Fires
Integration Application (MAFIA) will
serve as the backbone operating system
to enable a system plug-and-play en-
vironment capable of integrating new
sensors and emerging technologies.
With a “focus on mobility, afford-
ability, and automation that can be
fielded as soon as possible,” the pro-
gram will be conducted in three phas-
es, with heavy emphasis on open-air
demonstration events starting with
an initial functionality demonstration
at the end of Phase 1 and culminating
in full capability demonstration on a
moving vehicle or vessel by the end of
Phase 3. The planned date for the final
demonstration is 2QFY22.
DARPA is currently only soliciting
proposals for Phase 1 (12 months) and
for a subsequent optional field evalua-
tion, as well as rough order of magnitude
(ROM) proposals for Phase 2 (18 months)
and Phase 3 (22 months). Phase 1 will
monitor
news
include a demonstration System De-
sign Review (SDR) focusing only on the
first-phase system. It will also include a
Technology Maturation Plan review and
a Phase 3 Concept Design Review (CDR)
of the full Phase 3 system.
Solutions are expected to include
a “flexible framework able to lever-
age existing systems and matured
technologies, as well as integrate new
technologies.” System affordability
and adaptability to host platforms
(ground and maritime) will be em-
phasized as well as “low size, weight,
and power (SWaP) and manning solu-
tions as well as low-collateral-damage
techniques.” Component technology
Technical Readiness Level (TRL) 4 or
higher is desired. Specifically exclud-
ed from consideration are solutions
that include the use of high-power
directed energy (DE) systems or high-
caliber guns with uncontrolled pro-
jectile trajectories.
DARPA envisions that a large ma-
jority of the effort will involve the
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
development of applications that can
be used to integrate both sense-and-
act subsystems, and that will provide
new advanced capabilities in: fusing
sensor data from asynchronous single-
to-multiple sources; advanced target
recognition; multi-target tracking; re-
source prioritization; decision aids and
optional implementation of automated
response; and user interfaces.
15
Multiple “other transaction (OT)”
awards are expected with total award
funding up to $9.6 million for Phase 1,
up to $23.5 million for Phase 2, and up
to $30 million for Phase 3. DARPA plans
to invest approximately $3 million for
each Phase 1 performer and currently
anticipates maintaining at least two
performers in Phase 2 and a single per-
former for Phase 3.
The proposal due date is: January
12, 2017. The solicitation number is:
DARPA-PS-17-01. The point of contact is:
Contracts Management Office/D. Peter
Donaghue. E-mail: desmond.donaghue@
darpa.mil. – J. Haystead
®
The EW data and systems
produced by SRC help keep our
warfighters out of harm’s way
Next generation solutions for the EW test & evaluation and training
communities that ensure electromagnetic spectrum superiority
for mission success.

Visit us at AOC International | Booth 620

www.srcinc.com/AOC
© 2016 SRC, Inc. All rights reserved.
 t h e m o n i t o r | n e w s
JEWC LOOKING AT ENHANCED EMS
BATTLE MANAGEMENT TECHNOLOGY
The US Strategic Command (USSTRAT-
COM) Joint Electronic Warfare Center
(JEWC) has released a request for infor-
mation (RFI) on technologies to provide
new or enhanced Electromagnetic Battle
Management (EMBM) capabilities for
situational awareness and command and
control of the electromagnetic spectrum
(EMS).
Technologies of interest include
real-time, policy-based spectrum
management, advanced electronic or-
der-of-battle (EOB) presentation, state-
of-the-art modeling, simulation, and
course of action (COA) analysis. Specific
system solutions should have an antici-
pated technology readiness level (TRL)
of 7/8 within the next five years. Ac-
cording to the RFI, the “data call in-
cludes all domains (air, land, maritime,
space, and cyber) and will focus on the
warfighting functions of EMBM across
all phases of conflict.”
Among the functional capabili-
ties identified for examination are:
provision of an interactive, compre-
18
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
Signal Intelligence Solutions
Electronic Warfare and Security Solutions
From Design to Delivery and Beyond
marketing@gew.co.za | www.gew.co.za
827716_GEWTech.indd 1
hensive, real-time User Defined Op-
erational Picture (UDOP) of the EM
environment to conduct Joint Elec-
tromagnetic Spectrum Operations
(JEMSO); display of real-time electronic
order of battle (EOB) of EMS systems
in the area of responsibility incorpo-
rating past, present, and future op-
erations and deliberate plans; and
coordination of real-time, automated
JEMSO including identifying and lo-
cating EMS interference/potential in-
terference, identifying real-time and
forecasted EM fratricide, and dynami-
cally deconflicting EMS allotments
with operations.
Responses are due by December 2. The
solicitation number is: RFI334511. The
primary point of contact is Captain John
Barron, (210) 977-3963, John.Barron.5@
us.af.mil. – J. Haystead
US ARMY LOOKING FOR SINGLE
SOLDIER ES/EA SYSTEM
US Army Contracting Command
(Joint Base Langley-Eustis, VA) has is-
sued a request for information (RFI) on
behalf of the US Army Rapid Equipping
Force for an electronic surveillance/
electronic attack (ES/EA) system that
can be carried by a single soldier.
Noting that while systems exist in
disparate locations, there are few rug-
gedized, tactical ES systems that oper-
ate in the frequency bands of interest
to the Army that are “capable of rap-
idly presenting a codified picture of
the Electromagnetic Spectrum (EMS) to
Army Electronic Warfare personnel in
tactical situations.”
The required system should “have
fast and broad scanning capabilities so
the operator can rapidly see and analyze
activity across wide portions of the ra-
dio frequency (RF) spectrum to assess
all relevant communications signals in
a militarily relevant area up to 6 GHz.
It should also have the capability to
concentrate its processing capacity at
smaller portions of the EMS as missions
may dictate. In other words, a broad
spectrum analyzer that can also do high
quality signals interrogation, analyze
and location right up to, but not includ-
ing, specific capabilities that only SI-
GINT personnel are able to employ.”
8/11/16 5:57 PM
Proven Performance of
GORE-FLIGHT™ Microwave Assemblies
A recent study conducted for the aerospace Performance That
Th
industry showed that more than 29 percent
of microwave assemblies fail during Meets the Challenge
Cha e
installation, and aircraft manufacturers
have
hav
ha ve accepted the practice of simply replacing Gore has engineered new ruggedized,
ed, lightweight and
them.
th
hem. However, with the need to decrease costs, they vapor-sealed airframe assemblies
ass hat withstand
that
the challenges of aerospace.
aerospa These
can no longer afford the total cost associated with
assemblies – known as GORE-FLIGHT
GO HT ™
assemblies that cannot withstand the installation
Microwave Assemblies, 6 Series –
process and the extreme conditions of aerospace. improve system performance
performa with:
Manufacturers need assemblies that provide the
same level of electrical performance before and after • Outstanding signal integrity
int with
h
installation as well as throughout their service life. lowest insertion loss bbefore and
after installation
• Lower installation cost
costs due to
fewer failures and reduced
red aircraft
aft
production delays
• *NQSPWFEGVFMFGkDJFODZBOEJODSFBTFE
*NQSPWFEGVFMFGkDJFO DSFBTFE
lightweight assembly
payload with lightweig bly
• Longer system life and reduced downtime due to
mechanically robust construction
c on
• Less RF interference aamong electronic systems due to
superior shielding effectiveness
effe
• Proven compliance with
wit MIL-T-81490 requirements

When compared to other lleading airframe assemblies, the

Performance Testing with
an Installation Simulator
W. L. Gore & Associates (Gore) has designed a
simulator to evaluate the stress of installation on
microwave airframe assemblies. The simulator has
several features that replicate minimum bend radius
conditions, routing guides that induce torque, and an
abrasion bar to simulate routing across sharp edges or
through access holes in the airframe structure.
insertion loss, more reliable VSWR
6 Series maintain lower in
consistent impedance of 50 ± 1 Ohms,
performance, and consist
eliminating insertion loss stack-up issues when routing
through airframe bulkhea
bulkheads.
With GORE-FLIGHTT ™ Micr
Microwave Assemblies, 6 Series, a
kUBOEGPSHFUQIJMPTPQIZJTOPXBSFBMJUZmQSPWJEJOHUIF
kUBOEGPSHFUQIJMPTPQIZJ
solution that ensures mission-critical
most cost-effective solutio
system performance for mmilitary and civil aircraft operators.
GORE-FLIGHT™ Microwave Assemblies, Series 6 VSWR

The simulator enables Gore not only to evaluate the

electrical performance of various cable assemblies after
installation but also to design products that meet real
application challenges. Testing electrical characteristics
such as insertion loss and VSWR before and after routing
UISPVHIUIFTJNVMBUPSWFSJkFTXIFUIFSBOBTTFNCMZDBO
UISPVHIUIFTJNVMBUPSWFSJkFTXIFUIFSBOBTTFNCMZDBO
withstand the rigorous challenges of installation – resulting
in lower total costs and longer service life.

Alternative Airframe Assembly VSWR

gore.com/simulator
 t h e m o n i t o r | n e w s

The RFI envisions the system as a
multi-channel transceiver in a back-
pack with applicable amplifiers and
antennas to address relevant RF bands
where “near peer militaries and non-
state terrorist organizations can oper-
ate in the EMS.” The weight limitation
is 30 lb for the base unit worn by the
solider on the move. Separate anten-
nas, amplifiers and batteries that can
be carried by another solider can be
used to address needs in specific RF
bands. Of interest are products or tech-
nologies that can be packaged into a
backpack to enable rapid detection,
identification and denial of RF commu-
nications across military relevant areas
and ranges.
The RFI seeks to select available
products at a technology readiness level
(TRL) of 6 or higher. Selected vendors
will be asked to attend a test event
sometime from March-June 2017.
Responses are due December 14. The
solicitation number is FA8522-16-R-0007.
The point of contact is Jay L. Fabley,
(703) 704-1025, jay.l.fabley.civ@mail.mil.
– E. Richardson
AFRL SEEKS AGILE CYBER
TECHNOLOGIES
In October, The Air Force Research
Lab (AFRL) held and industry day to de-
tail its upcoming acquisition strategy for
the Agile Cyber Technologies 2 (ACT 2).
Beginning with a sources sough notice,
AFRL intends to make small business
R&D set asides to fund the development
of technologies and capabilities that ad-
dress the USAF Cyber Mission.
Specifically, the program is “seeking
rapid development, design, prototyping,
demonstration, scenario development,

Big Things Come experimentation & evaluation, integra-

tion, testing, technical installation,

in Small transition, and support through initial

operations of cyber technologies for: 1)

Packages
Cyber threat avoidance and cyber de-
fense; 2) Full spectrum cyber operations;
3) Cyber network exploitation; 4) Cyber
situational and mission awareness; 5)
Cyber Infrastructure; 6) Cyber command
and control; 7) Information network
modeling, simulation, and wargaming;
20 8) Cyber mission assurance.”
ACT 2 is designed to take advantage
OC
tA of some of the changes filtering into the
37
a
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

Us
Vis
it
h 3 acquisition process. The program plans

Bo ot to facilitate “development and integra-

tion of cyber technology at points in be-
tween ‘product requirement’ and ‘initial
operational capability’” [IOC] and to
Don’t let the compact size fool you, SMART Solutions “support cyber technology maturation
from iRF give you more of everything. More frequency and handoff to appropriate systems pro-
range (up to 26.5GHz.) More bandwidth (500MHz.) gram offices (SPO).” The program will
And more data throughput. SMART supports monopulse create efficiencies by allowing transi-
tion of cyber solutions to IOC without
DF, cross polarization, and N-channel DF so you can do
the administrative burden of awarding
more too. SMART doesn’t just a new contract after the technology
extend capabilities—it rethinks development stage. As such, ACT 2 is
SIGINT and EW applications a contracting vehicle, as opposed to a
as a Sensor-to-Network solution program, to equip community, program
with a software definable offices and users with more agility in
iWR-6500 Wideband Digital the implementation of cyber solutions –
Microwave Receiver hardware platform.
quick solutions to urgent problems and
access to state-of-the art technology.
The target value for the program is
Intelligent RF Solutions $950 million with a performance period
www.irf-solutions.com of 60 months. The program anticipates
443-595-8500 issuing multiple award indefinite deliv-
contact@irf-solutions.com ery/indefinite quantity contracts. The
Draft RFP for ACT2 is due out in late
December with responses due Jan. 20,

828621_iRFIntel.indd 1 2016-09-29 12:51 PM

 GaN RF
Foundry Services
from Wolfspeed.

YOU DREAM IT. YOU DESIGN IT. WE BUILD IT.

FASTER AND WITH HIGHER RELIABILITY.

Wolfspeed is the leader in GaN-on-SiC MMIC technology.

We have the design assistance, proven process, testing and support
to realize your specifications from initial development to recurring
production. And we can do it with faster cycle times, higher first pass
design success and greater reliability than our competitors. †

Wolfspeed offers four released processes:

G28V3 G28V4 G40V4 G50V3

MMIC MMIC MMIC MMIC

Gate Length 0.4 µm 0.25 µm 0.25 µm 0.4 µm

Bias 28 V 28 V 40 V 50 V

Performance DC - 8 DC - 18 DC - 18 DC - 6
GHz GHz GHz GHz

All four processes have power densities from 4 to 8 W/mm.

†
Based on publicly available competitor data and customer feedback.

Visit http://go.wolfspeed.com/JED2016 for a FREE Process Design Kit in Keysight’s ADS or National Instrument’s MWO and start designing today.

WOLFSPEED.COM Powering More. Consuming Less.™

 t h e m o n i t o r | n e w s
2017 and full RFP release Feb. 24, 2017.
The solicitation number for the RFI is
RFI-RIKD-2016-ACT2. – E. Richardson
AFRL SEEKS CYBER ASYMMETRIC
FORCE APPLICATIONS
Air Force Research Laboratory (Rome,
NY) has issued a pre-solicitation for an
upcoming broad agency announcement
(BAA) to address current DOD gaps in
asymmetric campaigns and force pro-
tection capabilities through rapid pro-
totyping efforts, including “concepts
Cover your bases
with KRYTAR
22
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
KRYTAR, Inc., founded in
1975, specializes in the design
and manufacturing of ultra-broadband
microwave components and test
equipment for both commercial and
military applications.
Products cover the DC to 67 GHz
frequency range and are designed for
a wide range of applications including:
 Test Equipment
 Simulation Systems
 SATCOM & SOTM
 Jammers for Radar & IEDs
 Radar Systems
 EW: ECM, ECCM & ESM
KRYTAR has a commitment to
technical excellence and customer
satisfaction.
www.krytar.com
1288 Anvilwood Avenue • Sunnyvale, CA 94089
Toll FREE: +1.877.734.5999 • FAX: +1.408.734.3017 • E-mail: sales@krytar.com
710616_Krytar.indd 1
at the intersection of the areas of Sig-
nals Intelligence (SIGINT), Electronic
Warfare (EW) and Cyber Operations
technologies,” with specific interest in
proposals that apply to new ideas/con-
cepts for practical application.
Topics of interest include: “maturing,
integrating, and testing C2 and detec-
tion capabilities of unmanned aircraft
systems; developing new and applying
currently available cyber operations
technologies for use in airborne and
ground platforms; developing technolo-
These principles
form the basis for
the steady growth that has earned
KRYTAR an enviable reputation in
the microwave community.
Cover your bases. Contact
KRYTAR today for more information.
MIL-Qualified RF, Microwave & mmW Components
 Directional Couplers to 67 GHz
 3 dB 90° Hybrid Couplers to 40 GHz
 NEW! 3 dB 180° Hybrid Couplers to 45 GHz
 Beamforming Networks to 18 GHz
 Power Dividers to 45 GHz
 Detectors to 40 GHz
 Custom Applications
9/4/14 2:50 PM
gies to better equip the warfighter for
force and materiel protection opera-
tions; automatic decision making and
enabling autonomy in cyberspace op-
erations; developing concepts and ca-
pabilities that intersect the areas of
SIGINT, EW and Cyber for asymmetric
force applications; and developing big
data analytics methods for asymmetric
for non-traditional technologies and
weapon systems.”
White papers for FY 17 are due by
Jan. 31, 2017. The solicitation number is
FA8750-17-S-7001. The points of contact
are BAA Manager Philip J. Zaleski, (315)
330-3218, afrl.rigb.baa17-01@us.af.mil
and Deputy BAA Manager Brendon J.
Poland, (315) 330-2838, afrl.rigb.baa17-
01@us.af.mil. – E. Richardson
DEFENSE SPECTRUM ORGANIZATION
SEEKS SPECTRUM DATA MANGEMENT
AND STORAGE
The Defense Information Systems
Agency (DISA) (Fort Meade, MD) on be-
half of the Defense Spectrum Organiza-
tion (DSO) last month issued a request
for information (RFI) seeking sources
for Joint Spectrum Data and Data Soft-
ware (JDADS) and the Joint Spectrum
Data Repository (JSDR).
The DSO is looking for sources “for
developing, maintaining, and distrib-
uting mission-critical spectrum data
for access via the Joint Spectrum Data
Repository (JSDR) for the Combatant
Commanders (CCMDs), Joint Staff, and
Department of Defense (DoD) Spectrum
Management/Planning, electromagnet-
ic environmental effects (E3), Intel/
Electronic Warfare (EW), and Acquisi-
tion communities.”
The agency also seeks information
for sources for maintenance/informa-
tion assurance support for the Joint
Data Access Web Server (JDAWS) and its
associated Tactical Data Maintenance
System and Joint Data Management
Maintenance Console, which are both
used to collect, process and “transform
data that will be exposed in the JDSR.”
Responses were due November 30.
The solicitation number is JDADSand-
JSDR. The primary point of contact
is Deborah L. Murphy, (301) 225-4068,
Deborah.l.murphy37.civ@mail.mil. – E.
Richardson
Protecting America’s warfighters.
Now and into the future.

The proven IR-Based Missile Warning System for all aircraft

In the heat of battle, Elbit Systems of America provides protection for aircrews with PAWS-US, the only
combat-proven IR-based Missile Warning System for fixed and rotor-winged aircraft worldwide. This field-
proven, best-value solution allows for early threat detection and warning as well as enhanced situation
awareness. In the constantly changing combat environment, the PAWS-US protection allows pilots and
crews to focus on their mission, not the threat.

Visit us at the 53rd Annual AOC International Symposium & Convention, Booth #330

www.elbitsystems-us.com
© 2016 Elbit Systems of America, LLC. All rights reserved. The Spirit of Innovation®
 t h e m o n i t o r | n e w s
IN BRIEF
Air Force Materiel Command (Hill
AFB, Utah) has issued and request
for information to find sources that
meet design, production and field-
ing requirements for two Joint Threat
Emitter (JTE) Wideband Threat Emit-
ter Units (WTEU). The JTE, produced
by Northrop Grumman Amherst Sys-
tems (Amherst, NY) provides EW threat
simulators for aircrew training against
surface-to-air and anti-aircraft artil-
lery threats. Among the components is
24
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
835759_DowKey.indd 1
the Threat Emitter Unit (TEU), which
includes a standard and wideband ver-
sion. The JTE program office seeks two
additional WTEUs within 24 months of
order receipt and without impacting
the overall JTE program timeline. RFI
responses are due December 5. The so-
licitation number is FA8210-16-WTEU.
The points of contact are Michelle K.
Esquivel, (801) 586-4693, Michelle.
Esquivel@us.af.mil and Patrick M.
Jurkiewicz, (801) 586-6016, patrick.
jurkiewicz@us.af.mil.
2016-09-27 11:30 PM
✪ ✪ ✪
Air Force Materiel Command (Rob-
ins AFB, GA) has indicated that though
it will likely award a sole source con-
tract to Raytheon (Goleta, CA), which
produces the ALR-69A, it is seeking
sources to conduct Electromagnetic
Interference (EMI) testing related to
installing the system on the F-16 for
the ALR-69A Radar Warning Receiver.
Responses are due December 9. The so-
licitation number is ALR-69A_EMI_So-
lutions. The primary point of contact
is Christopher P. Nelson, (478) 926-7467,
christopher.nelson.74@us.af.mil.
✪ ✪ ✪
The Boeing Co. (St. Louis, MO) re-
ceived a $479 million cost-plus-incen-
tive-fee contract from the Air Force Life
Cycle Management Center (Wright Pat-
terson AFB, OH) for engineering manu-
facturing and development of the F-15
E Eagle Passive/Active Warning and
Survivability System (EPAWSS). The
contract covers planning, design devel-
opment, integration, testing and risk
reduction activities for the F-15 EPAWSS
program. Work is expected to be com-
plete by Aug. 31, 2020.
✪ ✪ ✪
Harris Corp. (Palm Bay, FL) has re-
ceived a $53 million firm-fixed-price,
cost-plus-fixed-fee sole-source contract
from the Air Force Space and Missile Sys-
tems Center (El Segundo, CA) to upgrade
the ground-based Counter Communica-
tion System. The contract includes up-
grade of Block 10.1 systems to the Block
10.2 configuration. Work is expected to
be complete by February 2019.
✪ ✪ ✪
BAE Systems (Nashua, NH) re-
ceived a $13.3 million contract from
the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA) for the Adaptive Radar
Countermeasures (ARC) program. The
program, designed to shape future US
jamming systems, seeks to use cogni-
tive EW technology, including advanced
signal processing and machine learning
techniques to develop algorithms and
techniques with the hopes of counter-
ing unfamiliar signals in real time. a
 Innovation
Amplified.
Mercury SySteMS offerS galliuM nitride (gan) power
aMplifierS froM 100 MHz to 40 gHz witH power to 4 kw.

Key Features:
•Compact, lightweight and high output power for improved SWaP metrics
•High-power broadband CW transmitters for ECM and threat simulation
•High-power narrowband pulsed transmitters for military/commercial radar systems
•High-power linear amplifiers for communication systems
• All of our amplifiers are designed and manufactured in the USA

MADE IN

Learn more and download our amplifier brochure at mrcy.com/amplifier

AMERICA

Copyright © 2016 Mercury Systems and Innovation That Matters are trademarks of Mercury Systems, Inc. - 3210
 washing t on
repor t
CONGRESS GAINS MORE EW EXPERIENCE
AFTER ELECTION
The national election has resulted in the potential for ad-
ditional positive attention to EW in both the House and Sen-
ate. In the House, the membership of the EW Working Group
(EWWG) remained largely intact including its leadership, with
both co-Chairs, Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-IN) and Rep. Rick Lars-
en (D-WA), returning.
Congress also picked up a new representative with exten-
sive EW background in the EC-130H Compass Call community.
Brig Gen Don Bacon, USAF (Ret.) won his contest for Nebraska’s
2nd District, which includes Offutt AFB. General Bacon, whose
call-sign is “Bits,” served as an EWO in the Air Force including
as commander of the 41st Electronic Combat Squadron and of
the 55th Electronic Combat Group (Davis-Monthan AFB, AZ),
home to EC-130 “Compass Call” aircraft, as well as a tour in
Iraq as Chief, Special Operations and Intelligence Information
26 during the surge of 2007-8, and as commander of the 55th Wing
(Offutt AFB, NE), operator of the RC-135 “Rivet Joint” aircraft.
Bacon won the seat currently occupied by EWWG member Rep.
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
Brad Ashford.
In the Senate, although the EW community lost a strong
advocate in Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL), who introduced the “Elec-
tronic Warfare Capabilities Enhancement Act of 2016,” it also
certainly gained from the election of Rep. Todd Young (R-IN),
who as one time co-Chair of the House EWWG, brings an EW-
oriented advocacy to the Senate from the House. – J. Haystead
DOD EW STRATEGY MOVES FORWARD
The DOD’s Electronic Warfare Strategy, which was
developed by the Department’s Electronic Warfare Ex-
ecutive Committee (EW EXCOM) earlier this year, has
been working its way up the DOD approval chain over
the past few months. As this issue of JED went to
press, the EW Strategy document was being reviewed
by respective staffs of the Deputy Secretary of Defense
(DEPSECDEF) and the Secretary of Defense (SECDEF).
The DOD EW Strategy focuses on high-level issues
across the Department’s EW enterprise. It identifies
strategic EW goals and discusses those goals in the context of
manning, training and equipping forces. The strategy is sig-
nificant because it is the first comprehensive EW strategy the
DOD has released for many years. It also contains language
that provides the basis for establishing an Electromagnetic
Spectrum Domain. In May, the EW EXCOM released the EW
Strategy to the Services for their review and comments. That
review phase in now complete, and it has been elevated for
DEPSECDEF and SECDEF approval.
The EW Strategy is written at the unclassified level and is
intended to act as the base document for two annexes that will
be released in the future. Annex A is an “Implementation and
Assessment Plan” that has been drafted by the EW ECXOM’s
EW Capabilities Team and is awaiting approval of the EW EX-
COM co-chairs. This document, classified at the Secret level,
outlines specific EW tasks, deadlines and responsibilities for
carrying out activities outlined in the EW Strategy. Once An-
nex A is approved by the EXCOM’s leadership, the EXCOM will
develop and release a third document, Annex B, which is an
EW Capabilities Roadmap. This Roadmap will reflect some of
the DOD’s major EW S&T challenges identified by the EW Com-
munity of Interest. It will also set up future programs and
analysis areas. – J. Knowles
IN BRIEF
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a
report sustaining Phoenix Air Group’s protest of the award
of commercial aircraft services in support of the Navy’s Elec-
tronic Warfare test and evaluation of integrated warfare sys-
tems to Tempus Jets. Phoenix protested the award on the
grounds that the agency misevaluated proposals and that
evaluations were inconsistent. The GAO concluded that the
evaluation of proposals was “unreasonable and inconsistent
with the terms of the RFP” and sustained the protest. GAO
has recommended that the agency re-evaluate proposals con-
sistent with the solicitation evaluation criteria and that if
unstated criteria reflect the intended evaluation, the agency
amend the solicitation to advise offerors of the intended
evaluation approach. a
 Berkeley Nucleonics Corp RF/ MICROWAVE TEST SOLUTIONS
FOR ELECTRONIC WARFARE

Phase Noise Measurement & Signal Sources Analysis

from 2 MHz to 26.5 GHz
• Measurements down to -185 dBc/Hz
• Absolute AND Residual measurements, .01 Hz to 50 MHz offset
• Fastest ATE measurements in industry (100ms)
• External or ultra-low noise internal references w/ industry leading sensitivity
• Pulsed and AM measurements

Berkeley Nucleonics Corp., 2955 Kerner Blvd. San Rafael CA 94901

Email RFsales@berkeleynucleonics.com, Call 800-234-7858 or LIVE-Chat @ www.berkeleynucleonics.com
 world
repor t
ASELSAN WINS PAKISTAN SUBMARINE ESM ORDER
Aselsan (Ankara, Turkey) has been
selected to provide its ARES-2 electronic
support measures (ESM) system as part
of the upgrade of the Pakistan Navy’s
Agosta 90B submarines.
Turkish technology and systems
engineering house Savunma Teknolo-
jileri Mühendislik ve Ticaret (STM)
was in June 2016 contracted to lead
the upgrade of the three French-built
Agosta 90B boats. The contract is firm
for one boat, with options for the re-
maining two.
According to Aselsan, its sec-
ond-generation ARES-2SC 2-18 GHz ESM
system is to be supplied for the Agosta
90B upgrade. The main part of system
is being sourced through STM as prime
28
SAGE ENTERS SERVICE IN INDONESIA
Leonardo’s Airborne & Space Systems
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
business has confirmed that its SAGE
digital electronic support measures
(ESM) system has entered service with
the Indonesian Air Force (TNI-AU).
Under contract to US-based prime
contractor Integrated Surveillance and
Defense Inc (ISD), Leonardo was in 2015
selected to supply the SAGE 600 variant
for integration onto the single CN-235
maritime patrol aircraft operated by the
TNI-AU.
According to Leonardo, the SAGE
installation and integration was per-
formed earlier in 2016, with the modi-
fication program led by PT Dirgantara
Indonesia and ISD (the latter respon-
sible for integrating the Merlin mission
suite comprising radar, ESM, AIS, and
forward-looking infrared). Flight test-
ing was conducted during the middle
portion of this year.
The SAGE system uses parallel wide-
band and channelized digital receivers
to achieve enhanced sensitivity, fine
frequency measurement and very high
probability of intercept in the frequen-
contractor; under a separate contract
with Airbus DS Optronics, Aselsan will
supply an omnidirectional RWR anten-
na for installation on the new SERO 250
periscope also being introduced as part
of the upgrade.
The company’s first-generation
ARES-2NS submarine ESM is already in
service on board two modernized Ay-
class Type 209/1200 submarines, and
has been specified for the six Type 214
boats being procured under the New
Type Submarine Project.
Aselsan is now developing a
third-generation submarine system that
will combine the functions of radar ESM
and communications ESM in a single an-
tenna. It is expected that this solution
cy range 2-18 GHz (with options for C/D
and K band extensions). In addition, the
use of advanced algorithmic techniques
and a pair of high accuracy interfero-
metric direction finding arrays (fitted
port and starboard in the rear fuselage
for the CN-235 embodiment) allows SAGE
to geo-locate from a single platform.
SAGE is already in service with the
Republic of Korea Navy as part of the
electronic warfare suite fitted to the
eight AW159 helicopters acquired un-
der the Maritime Operational Helicopter
program. The SAGE system is also being
refitted to eight Brazilian Navy Lynx
Mk 21A helicopters being upgraded by
Leonardo Helicopters and due to enter
service from 2017.
In parallel, the company is aggres-
sively pursuing opportunities for SAGE
in the UAS market. During October 2016
the system was demonstrated on the
Leonardo Helicopters SW4-Solo option-
ally-piloted helicopter and the Schiebel
S-100 Camcopter UAS during the Royal
Navy’s ‘Unmanned Warrior’ demonstra-
tion off northwest Scotland. – R. Scott
will be offered for the forthcoming mod-
ernization of the Turkish Naval Forces’
four Preveze-class Type 209/1400 sub-
marines. – R. Scott
IN BRIEF
❍ Last month the Government of New
Zealand released its 2016 Defence
Capabilities Plan detailing NZ$20
billion in needed defense invest-
ments for the country out to the
year 2030. Among recommended
investments to ensure the country’s
readiness are new land electronic
countermeasures systems to help
counter RCIEDs and an assessment of
new air surveillance capabilities, to
replace the country’s current six P-3
Orions, which will near end of life
in the 2020. The plan also detailed
the plans for implementation of the
country’s Network Enabled Army
program, which is currently mod-
ernizing command, communication,
battle management and surveillance
for land forces, with advanced capa-
bilities to include “blue force track-
ing, a common operating picture of
troop movements and secure satel-
lite communications at the section
level.” The first “tranche” of the pro-
gram, which focuses on equipping a
company-size group, is scheduled for
completion by 2019, with expansion
of technology across an Army light
task group by 2022. Future, broader,
introductions would be scheduled
for 2025 and 2028.
❍ Israel announced plans to pur-
chase hundreds of additional Trophy
active protection systems (APS),
manufactured by Rafael. The order
is intended to ensure that every new
version of the country’s Merkava 4
tank and Namer armored personnel
carrier (APC) will be equipped with
the Trophy System. a
 S E E ER DE NN T O N 1 2
S
5353NRV V E GGTTOEECC 1 3300
E UD AAOT I I ON D 20016
WW V V2 2SSTTAA
COCOS HH I –– D DD 6
NN

U S O C O N D CC , 16
A A S 99 NN
OO

S ATC N ,
N I NN D 6

AT
RFeye Nexus receivers
RFeye Nexus receivers
Exceptional POI, sensitivity and SWaP-c
Designed for deployments where real-time spectrum
Exceptional POI, sensitivity
monitoring and SWaP-c
and high probability of intercept are critical
to operational
Designed success.
for deployments Outstanding
where real-timephase noise, noise
spectrum
figure,
monitoring andchannel retune time and
high probability SFDR enable
of intercept arehighest
critical
levels of performance. Various form factors.
to operational success. Outstanding phase noise, noise
figure, channel retune time and SFDR enable highest
Coverage & instantaneous bandwidth 9kHz to 8GHz or 18GHz, 100MHz IBW
levels of performance.
Sweep speed Various Up form factors.
to 415GHz/s @ 1MHz RBW
Phase noise at 20kHz offset ≤ 125dBc/Hz
Coverage &Noise
instantaneous
figure bandwidth 9kHz to7–8dB
8GHztoor8GHz,
18GHz, 100MHz
11–15dB IBW typical
to 18GHz
Connectivity
Sweep speed PCIe (optical
Up to 415GHz/s or cable),
@ 1MHz RBW VPX or USB3.0 options
Size,
Phase noise weight offset
at 20kHz and power 6.7”x3.2”x0.7”, 11.6 oz, 15W (8GHz), 28W (18GHz) typical
≤ 125dBc/Hz
Cooling Air or conduction
Noise figure 7–8dB to 8GHz, 11–15dB to 18GHz typical
Channels Up to 8 channels operating coherently
Connectivity PCIe (optical or cable), VPX or USB3.0 options
Size, weight and power 6.7”x3.2”x0.7”, 11.6 oz, 15W (8GHz), 28W (18GHz) typical
Cooling
Channels
CRFS.COM Air or conduction
Up to 8 channels operating coherently

See through the noise

CRFS.COM
See through the noise
 interview
C ol Jef f rey N. A ldr idge, USA F
D ire ctor, Joint Ele ctronic Wa r fa re C e nte r
Col Jeff “Roofer” Aldridge, USAF, is the commander of the Joint Electronic Warfare Center
(JEWC). Located in San Antonio, TX, the JEWC is part of US Strategic Command (USSTRAT-
COM) J3E Joint Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations (JEMSO). The JEWC serves many
roles, but its fundamental job is to serve as the hub of EW support to the warfighter. JED
recently spoke with Colonel Aldridge to get a better sense of the JEWC’s current focus and
learn how he sees EW and the broader JEMSO concept evolving in the future.

JED: Looking back a few years, the
JEWC completed a DOD-wide “Elec-
tronic Warfare Capabilities Based As-
sessment” (CBA) in 2009 that identi-
fied 34 gaps and also recommended
solutions. That study energized DOD
leaders and helped to shape EW mod-
ernization in a DOTMLPF context.
Based on the study’s recommenda-
tions, in what areas has the DOD been
successful over the past few years
and where do some of the important
EW challenges still exist?
Colonel Aldridge:
For successes, I believe the mili-
tary services have made significant
30 progress since the CBA by reduc-
ing their vulnerability to advanced
electronic attack. Combatant com-
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
Study to address shortfalls that were
also included in our CBA gaps. The
EW EXCOM is developing a compre-
hensive EW Strategy that will guide
DOD and military Service roadmaps
and acquisition. In response to EW
EXCOM tasking, the military Services
have also reemphasized their indi-
vidual and unit EW training.
As far as challenges, we continue
to suffer from a fragmented organiza-
tional structure, which was the num-
ber one gap from the CBA. Without
singularly focused leadership with
the appropriate authorities neces-
sary to drive strategic decisions and
processes, we will continue to strug-
gle with creating and implementing
a unified vision for EW and EMSO at
the joint and departmental level.
CA: EMSO is the convergence of
EW and spectrum management ac-
tivities. EMSO, which includes EW,
enables all military actions within
the electromagnetic spectrum (EMS)
which primarily involves sensing,
communicating and attacking. The
most important aspect of EMSO is
the paradigm shift to view the EMS
as a maneuver space versus just a re-
source to manage or allocate.
JED: What are the major success-
es and biggest challenges that have

mands also stressed the need for
improved electronic protection, and
the military services are responding
by improving capabilities to operate
in congested and contested electro-
magnetic environments.
There have also been significant
gains in electronic warfare (EW)
and Electromagnetic Spectrum Op-
erations (EMSO) strategy, policy, and
doctrine since the CBA, and we have
published several DOD and joint-
level documents. These gains were
made possible by significant coor-
dination and collaboration between
the EW and spectrum management
communities.
The establishment of the EW Ex-
ecutive Committee (EXCOM) back in
March of 2015 was also a win for the
EW community since the committee
provides senior-level review and de-
cision making on EW issues. The EW
EXCOM was implemented by the Dep-
uty Secretary of Defense in response
to the Defense Science Board EW
I would argue that our most sig-
nificant challenge is developing ag-
ile forces and capabilities to “get in
front” of our adversaries. We have
very adaptive adversaries that con-
tinue to outpace our slow and cum-
bersome acquisition process and
“stove-piped” structure. Adversaries
will continue to leverage rapid ad-
vances in globally-available, low-cost
electronics, further eroding our US
technology lead. We require a more
responsive acquisition process and
integrated structure. The amount
of time it takes to develop and field
capabilities after identifying a new
threat or vulnerability is unaccept-
able for the warfighter.
JED: The JEWC has been a strong
proponent of the EMS Operations
(EMSO) concept. Many people still
don’t understand the essential dif-
ferences between EW and EMSO. How
would you describe the difference to
an operator or a senior leader?
happened in EMSO over the past
three years or so?
CA: Our initial challenge was secur-
ing support and buy-in to EMSO from
key stakeholders across the EW and
spectrum management communities.
There are considerable “stove-pipes”
and cultural differences across the
joint force that adversely affects inte-
gration. However, we’ve made signifi-
cant progress over the past few years.
Back in March of 2015, the Chair-
man’s Joint Concept for Electromag-
netic Spectrum Operations (JC EMSO)
was published, which was a major
success and milestone. JC EMSO pro-
vides the vision to drive ongoing
EMSO efforts to include strategy,
policy and doctrine development.
The JEWC was a major contributor
to drafting JC EMSO, and we are also
leading ongoing EMSO Cell develop-
ment efforts to refine processes and
tactics, techniques and procedures.
The military Services and compo-
Cobham Modular Platform -
Ready for YOUR Solution
The most important thing we build is trust
The Cobham Modular Platform (CMP) is the
solution you need for developing and testing
your next-generation EW, COM, SIGINT, ECCM
systems. The CMP is based upon the latest
industry standards and provides unmatched
speed, power and flexibility. The CMP supports
the complete life-cycle of your solution, from
conceptual design through field operation and
test.
The CMP supports development of JTRS-SCA
compliant waveforms and applications using the
best-in-class NordiaSoft™ SCA Core Framework Cobham AvComm
software. If you need to develop your own test 10200 W York Street
and analysis system, the CMP also supports Wichita, KS 67215 USA
industry standard IVI and VESA drivers. T: 316-522-4981
F: 316-524-2623
For signal analysis and emulation, our Signal info-test@cobham.com
Workshop™ software shows not only what
happened, but why it happened.
The Cobham Modular Platform is the key to
solving your next-generation problems. Visit ats.aeroflex.com/solution to
download the product information.
www.cobham.com/avcomm
 in t e r v iew | Col Jeffrey Aldridge, USAF

JED: How important is implement-
CA:
nents are also moving in the same
direction and understand the impor-
tance of EMS Control.
JED: How important is organiza-
tion/structure to EMSO?
CA: It is very important, but un-
fortunately DOD is not currently or-
ganized to effectively support and
implement EMSO. This problem is well
documented and is being addressed
in the latest DOD EW Strategy and
associated implementation plan. To
effectively implement EMSO, we re-
32 quire a top-down governance struc-
ture at the DOD-level, along with
alignment of EMSO-related centers
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
ing Electromagnetic Battle Man-
agement capabilities, and what is
STRATCOM’s and the JEWC’s role in
defining requirements and shaping
development of a future EMBM sys-
tem for the DOD?
Implementing electromagnetic
battle management (EMBM) capabili-
ties are crucial to our joint force to
provide automated EMBM tools and
applications. Without an EMBM sys-
tem, we cannot effectively execute
EMS Operations. EMBM will also en-
able future networked EW along with
dynamic spectrum management and
EW reprogramming.
As far as the JEWC’s role, we are
driving EMBM operational require-
ments through our EMSO Cell develop-
ment efforts and recently submitted
an EMBM Joint Capability Technol-
ogy Demonstration (JCTD) proposal to
help accelerate EMBM development.
The JEWC is also supporting two
STRATCOM-led efforts which include
an EMBM capabilities-based assess-
ment along with architecture devel-
opment which is the foundation of
forms. One thing we should not lose
sight of is with new capabilities come
new vulnerabilities for our weapon
systems. Adequate investment in
‘system-of-systems’ test and evalua-
tion capabilities for example are vi-
tal to mitigate potential effects from
advanced EA and cyber capabilities
delivered via the EMS.
Directed energy capabilities, which
are often overlooked as electronic at-
tack, are also important game chang-
ing, cost-imposing capabilities. High-
power lasers and microwaves, for
example, will help close capacity and
capability gaps to counter asymmet-
ric threats employed to overwhelm or
saturate friendly forces and defenses.
JED: The DOD is working on an EMS
strategy that seems to be concentrat-
ing on two areas – one is regulatory
and the other is more operationally
focused. The two areas seem to rep-
resent different challenges, but can/
should they be linked more closely in
terms of a unified DOD EMS strategy?
CA: The current published EMS strat-
egy was developed by the DOD Chief

under a single EMSO agency or com-
mand to provide unity of effort.
JED: Based on your experience in
EW, what is your view on the EMS
Domain discussion currently under
way? Is the EMS a warfighting do-
main or are we approaching this the
wrong way?
CA: I support the initiative and be-
lieve it will help drive the paradigm
shift within DOD to view the EMS as a
maneuver space. However, formally de-
claring the EMS as a domain alone will
not change how we organize, train and
equip our joint force. Additional due
diligence is required to examine the
advantages and disadvantages along
with implications across the eight pos-
sible non-materiel elements involved
in solving warfighting capability gaps
– doctrine, organization, training, ma-
teriel, leadership, personnel, facilities
and policy (DOTMLPF-P) – when treat-
ing the EMS as a domain.
an EMBM system. Providing a unify-
ing joint architecture to integrate
Service programs is essential.
JED: What do you consider the
game changing or cost-imposing
technologies on the horizon for EW?
CA: I believe the primary game
changers include networked systems
for cooperative, distributed and co-
ordinated EW along with cognitive
and adaptive capabilities. Networked
systems will enhance cross-domain
synergy and information-sharing
between sensors and platforms.
Cognitive and adaptive EW capabili-
ties are critical to counter agile and
adaptive threats that are defined
by their software. Expanding our
software-defined systems will also
enable multi-functional capabilities
to sense, communicate and deliver
electronic attack (EA) or cyber ef-
fects from a single aperture on tra-
ditional and non-traditional EW plat-
Information Officer (CIO) to present
a framework for how the department
should rapidly adapt to the changing
spectrum environment, and to assess
and respond to spectrum regulatory
changes. It focuses primarily on the
spectrum management side of EMSO,
with limited applicability to the op-
erational side.
The EW EXCOM is leading develop-
ment of a DOD EW strategy that will
also include an implementation plan
and capabilities roadmap. It will offer
the ends, ways and means to achieve
agile, adaptive and integrated EW to
achieve EMS superiority. The DOD EW
strategy captures the operational
side of EMSO and is designed to com-
plement the current EMS strategy.
Both strategies are designed to
work in unison. I believe it’s likely
that the next version of these strat-
egies will be a single combined EMS
strategy that not only includes EW and
EMS management, but will include key
aspects of space and cyberspace. a
When system engineers call for
ultra-reliable, lowest attenuation
military grade RF/Microwave cable
assemblies, the obvious choice is...
Today’s advanced military platforms depend on the quality,
selection, support and service that are the hallmarks of IW’s
INSULATED WIRE, INC.
product lines. We offer a range of jacket materials, armoring, Microwave Products Division
and a wide variety of connectors including SMA, TNC, N, SC, 203.791.1999
7mm, 3.5mm, 2.92mm, 2.4mm, ZMA, SMP, SMPM and Blind www.iw-microwave.com
Mate interfaces to provide highly reliable, lowest attenuation, sales@iw-microwave.com
application specific solutions.
See us at
Call us today with your project specs and we’ll show you the most AOC
reliable way to get connected in the industry. Symposium
Washington, D.C.
AS9100 Rev. C & ISO9001:2008 certified. Nov 29 – Dec 1
Booth #215

Scan code to find

out how you can
get connected

We’re how the microwave industry gets connected!

 interview
US Re p. Joe Pit ts

At the 53rd Annual AOC Convention and Symposium this year, the Association will award
the Gold Medal, its highest honor, to US Rep. Joe Pitts. Congressman Pitts first became
involved in electronic warfare while serving as an electronic warfare officer (EWO) on B-
52s in the 1960s. In 1999, just two years after Congressman Pitts was elected to the US
House to represent Pennsylvania’s 16th District, he formed the bi-partisan EW Working
Group (EWWG) to educate his congressional colleagues and focus more attention on im-
portant EW issues. Congressman Pitts will retire in January 2017, after serving 20 years
in the House. JED spoke with him about the EW Working Group and what he hopes to see
it accomplish in the future.

JED: How did you first get in-
volved in electronic warfare?
Congressman Pitts:
My introduction into EW was from
my service in the US Air Force. It
was certainly a defining experience.
It was rather jarring and surreal to
be an EW officer at the time. What
stands out to me was, essentially, the
fact that you could hear and see the
enemy pinging you and targeting you
as you were conducting a mission. As
an EWO, I was always detecting the
34 emerging threats and had to wait to
see if we ended up scoring a hit. It
was a very unnerving experience.
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
operations as an enabling capability
of our air power – these were not new
questions. These were questions the
US was asking back when I was an
EWO in B-52s.
I was concerned that we couldn’t
answer some of the big questions and
learn new lessons moving forward if
we were unable to answer old ques-
tions and learn lessons from the
past. So for EW, it was something
that I felt I could do, at least in a
small way, to help us – Congress,
the Defense Department and indus-
try – learn from the past and better
plan for the future. Congress didn’t
understand EW. Many military lead-
CP: Again, the goal was to get the
conversation started and put a long
overdue spotlight on EW. It’s easy,
or was easy, for EW to get lost in
the conversation for all the reasons
we’ve talked about for years. But
we learned very quickly that if you
asked the right questions, you could
get the right answers. We needed to
do that for EW. I wanted the EWWG to
be the connective tissue that brought
Congress, the Pentagon, industry and
academia together to move the con-
versation. Early on, we didn’t have

JED: What events or trends
prompted you to establish the EW
Working Group in Congress?
CP: The idea of an EWWG grew out
congressional oversight of US and
NATO intervention in Kosovo. There
were numerous trends and policy
considerations surrounding that
conflict. There were a lot of new
questions and “unknowns” that
were garnering attention. Then, dur-
ing the air campaign, when we lost
an F-117 Nighhawk, it revealed that
stealth, while an extraordinary ca-
pability, was not enough to ensure
air superiority. The cat-and-mouse
game of EW continued. Add to this
a growing competition for spectrum
that was taking place in the late ‘90s
as the digital/information age was
defining policy every front. From an
EW perspective, what stood out to me
was that the questions we were ask-
ing – about the role of EW in military
ers didn’t understand EW, and it was
clear that over the previous several
years we stopped or dramatically
slowed investing in EW across the
Services. What Kosovo showed me
was that EW was still a “first in, last
out” capability. We needed it in 1999
as much as we needed it in previous
conflicts – and we would likely need
it as much, if not more, in the future.
I wasn’t sure what Congress could or
needed to do to advance EW from a
policy or funding standpoint, but
I knew we could address one major
shortfall – education and awareness.
We needed to move the conversa-
tion forward. That’s why I started
the EWWG – to not only understand
EW as a capability, but raise aware-
ness about how essential it is and
will continue to be for success in any
military operation.
JED: What were your top-level
goals for the EWWG when you first
started it?
any designs on what 21st Century EW
should look like, but we wanted to
fix some of the things that we felt
were holding it back, for example: an
office in OSD that would serve as the
belly-button for EW strategy, organi-
zation and investment in next gen-
eration capabilities – very similar to
the charter of the EW EXCOM today.
The EWWG is very pleased about the
work of the EW EXCOM and we hope
they succeed at their mission.
JED: Has the EWWG exceeded your
initial expectations? How so?
CP: In some ways, yes. When we
started the EWWG, I didn’t expect
for it to still be going strong almost
18 years later. We have several core
members who have dedicated a tre-
mendous amount of their time over
the years to advancing the mission,
goals and objectives of the EWWG. The
AOC has played an important role in
this. They were early partners with
 EĞdžƚ'ĞŶĞƌĂƟŽŶ
ŽŵƉƵƚĞƌ'ĞŶĞƌĂƚĞĚͬ^ĞŵŝͲƵƚŽŵĂƚĞĚ&ŽƌĐĞƐ
zŽƵĐĂŶƌĞĂůůLJŐĞƚĞdžĐŝƚĞĚĂďŽƵƚ͘

͞dŚŝƐŝƐƚŚĞďĞƐƚƚƌĂŝŶĞƌǁĞ͛ǀĞ
ĞǀĞƌďĞĞŶŝŶ͘,ĂŶĚƐĚŽǁŶ͊͟
Ͳ DZ^KƵƐĞƌ͕E^&ĂůůŽŶ

/9&7(1$
&DSDEOH

,QWHJUDWLRQZ/LYH$LUFUDIW

ŽŶƚĂĐƚ^/ƚŽůĞĂƌŶǁŚLJ
DŝƐƵƐĞĚĨŽƌƚŚĞƐĞ
ĚŝǀĞƌƐĞƐŽůƵƟŽŶƐ͘ 9LUWXDO6$ -7$&7UDLQLQJ

ǁǁǁ͘ďƐƐŝŵ͘ĐŽŵ ΞϮϬϭϲĂƩůĞƐƉĂĐĞ^ŝŵƵůĂƟŽŶƐ͕/ŶĐ͘ ůůƌŝŐŚƚƐƌĞƐĞƌǀĞĚ͘ ĂƩůĞƐƉĂĐĞ

ƐĂůĞƐΛďƐƐŝŵ͘ĐŽŵ ^ŝŵƵůĂƟŽŶƐ͕D͘DŽĚĞƌŶŝƌŽŵďĂƚŶǀŝƌŽŶŵĞŶƚĂŶĚĂůůůŽŐŽƐĂƌĞ
ƌĞŐŝƐƚĞƌĞĚƚƌĂĚĞŵĂƌŬƐŽĨĂƩůĞƐƉĂĐĞ^ŝŵƵůĂƟŽŶƐ͕/ŶĐ͘
 in t e r v iew | US Re p. Joe Pit ts
the EWWG and have always been there
for guidance and knowledge. The JED
too has been a valuable resource. So,
thank you. When you look at the
conversation today about the electro-
magnetic spectrum domain and the
Third Offset Strategy, I like to think
we played a positive role in this over
the years. But there is still so much
left for the EWWG to do and, in some
ways, they have more to do today
than we did (or thought we had to do)
back in 1999. The pace and availabil-
ity of technology for everyone – state
and non-state actors alike – is amaz-
ing and alarming. The EMS domain is
a strategic maneuver space that our
armed forces must access and control
from Day 1 in every military contest.
It is not a US-only challenge, but
a global one – just like every other
physical warfighting Domain.
The EW profession too has changed
more in the last 10 years than it
did in the previous 30 years. In my
day, flying combat missions over
Vietnam, the EW technicians in the
36 maintenance shed would tinker with
our EW systems in the field, working
on solving problems and sometimes
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
require more advanced skills. In my
day, EWOs like me were operating the
EW system. Today’s EWO is becoming
an EW battle manager who needs a
different set of skills and tools.
So, while the EWWG has exceeded
my expectations, I believe what is
more important is how EW and EMS
operations have exceeded our expec-
tations. The EWWG mission is now
expanding, and I hope that it con-
tinues to be a valuable partner in the
conversation. I have great apprecia-
tion for Representatives Rick Larsen
and Jackie Walorski, Representative,
and now Senator-elect, Todd Young
and Senator Mark Kirk for keeping
the EWWG moving forward as I had
to reduce my role over the last sev-
eral years.
JED: What are some of the long-
term goals you hope to see the EWWG
accomplish in the coming years?
CP: As I’m retiring from Congress
in the coming weeks, I don’t want
to overshadow the hard work of the
current EWWG co-chairs and the
long-term goals that they are devel-
and resources they need to do their
jobs. On one hand, you have tremen-
dous rate of turnover – of Congress
and staff – and on the other hand
you have tremendous rate of change
in technology and capability. Trying
to keep decision-makers throughout
the community up to speed on the
latest knowledge and policy develop-
ments is a difficult task. Advocacy
for EW and EMS operations must be
comprehensive, reliable and endur-
ing. The EWWG cannot do it alone.
They rely on the cooperation of the
community at-large, especially or-
ganizations like the AOC, to provide
guidance, knowledge, outreach, etc.
As we welcome the 115th Congress
in January, we need to attract new
members and future leaders of the
EWWG. I hope that Representative and
Senator-elect Todd Young will be an im-
portant ally in the Senate, and I know
there are several incoming Freshmen
that have relevant backgrounds that
could serve the EWWG well.
So, I think the need for the EWWG
today is, in many ways, greater than
it was in 1999. I hope and expect that
they will be able to keep the conver-

making small modifications and
tweaking the system’s performance
in ways that could end up saving me
and my fellow crew members from
SA-2s and other SAM threats. Today,
EW systems are far more complex and
oping. But, I do hope that the EWWG
continues to grow, and I think it will.
One challenge we’ve had since Day 1
– and its a challenge I know will con-
tinue – is equipping Members of Con-
gress and their staff with knowledge
sation moving forward. I’m glad I
had the chance to start and lead the
EWWG for so many years. It was a
great experience and I look forward
to seeing it succeed in the coming
years. Thank you. a

1 GHz Bandwidth

SIR-4100 Series ELINT Receiver:

<100 usec in-band switching
1.8 GHz IF Output with 1GHz BW
160MHz & 70MHz IF with 80MHz BW
Graphical User Interface software
Contact: sales@fei-elcomtech.com 201-767-8030 x 280

834868_FEIElcom.indd 1 2016-10-23 1:00 AM

 The Future of Airborn
Building a “Smarter”
I
It’s already clear that US airborne forc-
es and platforms will need to operate
in much more highly-contested Anti
Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) environ-
ments than they have ever faced be-
fore. This already daunting challenge
is only expected to increase, and as a
result, the Services’ airborne electronic
attack (AEA) capabilities and overall
AEA strategy will need to be dramati-
cally improved and restructured to keep
pace with the threat. The DOD has de-
termined, however, that this require-
ment cannot be met with incremental
improvements to existing systems, but
38 rather must represent an exponential
advancement and implementation of the
very latest technological capabilities,
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
specifically artificial intelligence (AI)
architectures and machine-learning
techniques and algorithms. In the con-
text of AEA, these technologies are de-
scribed as cognitive EW – self-learning
systems combined in highly-integrated
networks able to detect, react and adapt
to threats in real-time.
STAND-OFF TO STAND-IN
The most pressing concern for AEA
planners is the increased operating
range and sophistication of advanced
integrated air-defense systems (IADS)
incorporating both active and passive
surveillance and targeting capabili-
ties. Current approaches rely almost ex-
clusively on dedicated AEA platforms,
such as the EA-18G Growler and EC-130H
Compass Call aircraft, with high-power,
wideband jamming systems. These low
density, high-demand systems, how-
ever, are intended to primarily operate
outside the range of threat systems, so
with the increasing reach of the threat,
the effectiveness of these “stand-off”
platforms’ high-power jamming is sig- jamming approach to something more of
nificantly reduced. At the same time, a stand-in nature for highly-contested
the beamwidth of their jamming signals environments. These systems allow you
is simultaneously expanded with range, to get in closer and generate effects at
making they themselves more visible lower power without being exposed to
and vulnerable to a broader range of attack themselves.”
threats. Improved systems, such as the
next-generation jammer (NGJ) being de- AEA AND THE THIRD
veloped for the EA-18G, will somewhat OFFSET STRATEGY
address the problem, but they will not Sitting atop the expectations and
solve it. plans for next-generation AEA is the
As pointed out by Bryan Clark, Se-
nior Fellow at the Center for Strategic
and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA)
(Washington, DC), and co-author of
the authoritative study, “Winning The
Airwaves: Regaining America’s Domi-
nance in The Electromagnetic Spec-
trum,” “With longer-range air defense
systems, we won’t be able to generate
the same level of effects (with stand-
off jamming) that we’ve been able to
in the past.” Still, says Clark, although
“some people have been writing off
these big jammers positioned outside
the range of enemy aircraft and anti-
aircraft fire, as sort of a legacy mis-
sion, I would argue that there is still
a role for stand-off jamming, but it
will be much more of a discreet, very-
narrow-beam, very-controllable-power
level approach, trying to minimize
your probability of detection.”
In any case, additional AEA capa-
bilities will be needed to complement
stand-off capabilities. These are expect-
ed to take the form of small, low-prob-
ability of intercept/low-probability of
detection (LPI/LPD) UAVs or expendable
systems, such as the Air Force’s Minia-
ture Air-Launched Decoy (MALD)-X and
the US Navy’s version, MALD-N. Clark
says, “We’re already seeing AEA evolv-
ing from basically a stand-off, side-lobe
e Electronic Attack –
Approach
DOD’s new “Third Offset Strategy,” put
forth by Defense Secretary Ashton Cart-
er and Deputy Secretary of Defense, Bob
Work. Intended to assure that US forces
will continue to have a decisive military
advantage over all possible adversaries,
a central element of the strategy is the
rapid development and deployment of
the very latest technological capabili-
The US Air Force’s EC-130H Compass Call fleet is the mainstay of the Service’s stand-off AEA
capability. It will soon be replaced by smaller aircraft. (US Air Force)
ties across all DOD Services and mission
areas. Included in the specific areas of
technology identified for maximum at-
tention are “Deep-learning Systems, Big
Data, and Human-Machine Collabora-
tion,” all based on the premise that the
tight integration of AI and human intel-
ligence will be essential to ensuring this
permanent advantage.
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
As described by Josh Niedzwiecki,
Director of Sensor Processing and Ex-
ploitation, BAE Systems (Nashua, NH),
“The whole idea is to make decisions,
and close the decision loop, faster than
our adversary. There’s a huge growth in
AI in commercial industry, and there’s
now also a lot of interest within the DOD
in applying AI and machine learning to
our systems to make them smarter and
more adaptive in real time and in mis-
sion time.”
Specific to AEA, Niedzwiecki points
to the proliferation of wireless tele-
communications throughout the elec-
tromagnetic spectrum (EMS), “which is 39
creating a ton of electromagnetic con-
gestion in the environment, so lots of
different and overlapping signals that
make it a much more difficult problem
to just sort out the signals in the envi-
ronment to know what to target, what
to jam and when to jam. The other di-
mension is that today’s systems are
much more software reprogrammable.
Whereas in the past, radars were built
largely of analog components that took
years to field and stayed out there for
a long period of time, today, with the
proliferation of software-programmable
and digital-processing architectures,
these threat systems are much more
agile making the historical approach
of collecting threat data and taking it
back to the lab to develop an antidote
or prescription for dealing with a new
threat-signal type completely impracti-
cal. That timeline is way too long and
the Third Offset Strategy recognizes
this, and that machine learning and ad-
vanced signal processing is the way to
overcome it.”
Rick Yuse, President, Raytheon Space
and Airborne Systems (McKinney, TX)
 sees the same picture. “Threat emitters
are increasingly agile in the spectral do-
main with waveforms, frequency, and
behavior able to be altered on times-
cales ranging from pulse to an engage-
ment. This challenge is compounded by
commensurate growth in spectral signal
density. Agile radars are showing up in
unexpected frequencies with waveforms
that are difficult to find, particularly
when they are obscured in high-sig-
nal-density environments. As a result,
systems will have precious few threat
behavior observations to use before de-
ciding what to do. Learning about a new
radar must happen in real time ahead of
the threat finding its target.”
COGNITIVE EW NEEDED
TO ADDRESS THE THREAT
To meet and keep pace with the
threat, Yuse says cognitive systems that
can sense the RF environment and adapt
to it are needed. “Our systems must rap-
idly respond to dynamic changes in ad-
versary EMS parameters. Cognitive EW,
real-time-decision-making and associat-
ed tactical execution are priorities. For
40
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
784724_Empower.indd 1
EMS operations (EMSO), machine learn-
ing provides the ability to observe, ana-
lyze and act against threats that were
unknown before the mission.”
Pointing to DARPA’s extensive ongo-
ing efforts in the area, CSBA’s Clark out-
lines the current state of the technology
and the path he expects to see followed
as advancements are made. “Today our
systems are pretty automated, able to
generate pre-planned responses to stim-
uli, but we’re now moving into the realm
of making these systems adaptable,
meaning they can take information and,
based on what that information is tell-
ing them, be able to take several pre-
planned responses and come up with a
technique or combination of techniques
that would be effective. The systems are
smarter, but their response is still based
on operator input.”
Clark describes the next step as the
place where actual transition to ma-
chine learning or AI will take place.
“We’re looking toward EW systems that
will be able to detect an unknown signal
that doesn’t look like anything they’ve
seen before, but based on its underlying
characteristics, be able to figure out a
technique that might be effective, use
that technique it creates, observe what
the effect is, and then change that
technique in real time. The technique
will continue to change in response to
what the machine is seeing in the en-
vironment.” Clark says this kind of ex-
periential learning is being worked on
now at DARPA as part of the agency’s ef-
forts in cognitive EW, and that they’re
currently building demonstrations of
the capability.
According to BAE’s Niedzwiecki, work
is, in fact, going on in cognitive EW
across the R&D community. “We’re heav-
ily involved in that process, particularly
in machine-learning algorithms.” He de-
scribes the goal as follows. “Instead of
looking up and seeing how a new signal
matches to things I’ve seen before, I use
its general characteristics to infer what
its capability might be and then I use
a series of techniques to try to attack
that threat and observe how its behav-
ior changes in response to determine if
I’m effective. I then use that knowledge
to train my algorithms.”
2016-10-17 1:53 AM
Leading the
way in RF
excellence.
Introducing the Vesper and PicoFlexor
Multi-Channel VHF/UHF Transceivers.

Excellent RF performance comes in different form factors.

Vesper is a breakthrough in high-performance RF, containing
up to ten 100 MHz channels in a single-slot 6U VPX module.
PicoFlexor, a tactical software-definable radio, integrates a
transmitter with a high-performance superheterodyne receiver.
Vesper and PicoFlexor are equipped with the performance,
density and transmit capability required for operational success
with SIGINT, ESM and EW systems.

Visit DRS Signal Solutions at AOC, booth #431 to discover more.

drs.com/SignalSolutions
 As Niedzwiecki emphasizes, however,
it’s not just a potential threat’s signal
parameters and characteristics that
will be involved in the decision-making
process, but rather its behavior in gen-
eral. “For example, a weather radar or
commercial air-traffic-control radar will
have certain behavioral characteristics
in addition to signal characteristics,
such as scanning the entire air space.
These behavioral characteristics will be
different for a tracking radar that is tar-
The Miniature Air-Launched Decoy-Jammer (MALD-J) is capable of flying into defended air space geting a particular aircraft and the sig-
and disrupting an IADS from close range. (US Air Force)
nal it emits when it’s doing that. These
algorithms use that knowledge to help
determine which signals get priority
and what the best set of techniques are
to use against them.”
Niedzwiecki points out that the EW
FASTER, QUIETER, SMALLER community is leveraging a lot of the
advances in machine learning and in
SIGNAL SOURCES deep learning that the commercial in-
dustry has focused on in the big-data
QUICKSYN SYNTHESIZERS domain. “We’re applying those kinds of
things to the EW domain, combining
machine learning, advanced signal pro-
Engineers who design instruments cessing as well as our understanding of
physics to solve the problem.” In fact,
42 for SIGINT applications expect fast Moore’s law (rate at which processing
switching and low phase noise from capabilities advance) definitely comes
into play. “What is nice now is that a
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

their CW sources. That's why they lot of these algorithms we’re defining
use the popular 10 GHz QuickSyn Lite can run on very low SWaP processors, so
when you think of the machine learn-
Frequency Synthesizer. Plus, the
ing that some of the commercial ap-
QuickSyn Lite is very small, only a plications implement, those algorithms
live on racks of computers that sit in
4-inch square that's less than an inch
big network server rooms, but, we’re
high, and even smaller is the talking about applying those kinds of
price—$3950 algorithms to run on embedded systems
on a tactical platform. There’s a lot of
development work being done on opti-
ni-microwavecomponents.com/quicksyn mizing those algorithms to reduce SWaP
with minimal effect on performance, as
well as on improving the processors, for
example through the use of graphical
processing units (GPUs) that allow you
to do massively parallel computations,
and adopting those kinds of processing
architectures for EW applications.” (For
more on cognitive EW, see related story
on page 56 of this issue.)
QuickSyn Lite Synthesizer
NETWORKED OPERATIONS
ARE CRUCIAL
© 2016 National Instruments. All rights reserved. The ultimate solution, however,
doesn’t end at the individual platform

828932_NIMicro.indd 1 2016-09-29 10:21 PM

 level. It will require the resources of
as many different platforms and sen-
sors that can be simultaneously be
brought to bear on the problem. And, if
the benefits of sensor-/platform-level
machine learning are to be truly maxi-
mized, each system must be able to in-
stantaneously share all of its learned
information with every other system
on the network.
As referenced by CSBA’s Clark, one
of the areas emphasized in the Third
Offset Strategy is the ability to conduct
networked operations. “This is part
44
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
838351_4DSP.indd 1
741971_ETI.indd 1
and parcel of the task. EW is electronic
protection (EP), electronic support (ES)
and electronic attack (EA), and you’re
not going to be able to do networked
warfare unless you can manage and
control the EMS where the networks op-
erate and live. I would offer that our
advantage in networked warfare is at
risk because of that exact problem. We
may upgrade networking technology
and have lots of experience with it, but
because it depends on our access to, and
ability to use, the EMS, if our adversary
goes after our access to the EMS, all
2016-10-27
3/31/15 11:55 PM
that networking technology will be for
not. That is why there is so much at-
tention being paid to EW in the Third
Offset to ensure that we have the access
to the EMS required to facilitate that
networked capability.”
Raytheon’s Yuse echoes this point.
“The power of the simultaneous con-
vergence of technology, which will
integrate and optimize employment
of capabilities across mission systems
and ultimately the force package, is at
the heart of the strategy. Strategically
designing and deploying a success-
ful AEA capability requires systems
that adapt to previously unknown
behavior, while preserving legacy ef-
fectiveness. These systems must in-
tegrate multiple sensing modalities
and coordinate multiple effects. We’re
investing in transforming EMSO from
strictly a mission enabler to an effec-
tor in its own right. A variety of in-
tegrated technologies and systems will
have a part to play in the technology
and weapons mix. High-power stand-
off jammers, small light-weight AEA
systems on non-traditional platforms,
highly-integrated, complex systems on
high-value platforms will be included.
It will take layers of defense, ranging
from kinetic and non-kinetic EMSO ef-
fects, to defeat threats.”
To reach the ultimate capability cur-
rently envisioned for AEA, major ad-
vancements in networking technology
will be necessary. Says Niedzwiecki,
2:43 PM“Networking is always being asked to
push further because of a few differ-
ent factors. One is that the EMS is be-
coming more and more crowded and so
finding available spectrum to commu-
nicate without being interfered with is
an increasing challenge. This, of course,
is in addition to adversaries actively
attempting to jam your communica-
tions signals. So, operating and provid-
ing networking for these systems in an
A2/AD environment is a challenge, and
requires that we apply the same con-
cepts being advanced for cognitive AEA
to cognitive EP. How do I leverage my
understanding of the jamming environ-
ment on my communication signals to
optimize in real time my waveform and
maintain communications in the pres-
ence of jammers.”
 OCTAVE BAND LOW NOISE AMPLIFIERS
Model No. Freq (GHz) Gain (dB) MIN Noise Figure (dB) Power -out @ P1-dB 3rd Order ICP VSWR
CA01-2110 0.5-1.0 28 1.0 MAX, 0.7 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA12-2110 1.0-2.0 30 1.0 MAX, 0.7 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA24-2111 2.0-4.0 29 1.1 MAX, 0.95 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA48-2111 4.0-8.0 29 1.3 MAX, 1.0 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA812-3111 8.0-12.0 27 1.6 MAX, 1.4 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA1218-4111 12.0-18.0 25 1.9 MAX, 1.7 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA1826-2110 18.0-26.5 32 3.0 MAX, 2.5 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
NARROW BAND LOW NOISE AND MEDIUM POWER AMPLIFIERS
CA01-2111 0.4 - 0.5 28 0.6 MAX, 0.4 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA01-2113 0.8 - 1.0 28 0.6 MAX, 0.4 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA12-3117 1.2 - 1.6 25 0.6 MAX, 0.4 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA23-3111 2.2 - 2.4 30 0.6 MAX, 0.45 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA23-3116 2.7 - 2.9 29 0.7 MAX, 0.5 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA34-2110 3.7 - 4.2 28 1.0 MAX, 0.5 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA56-3110 5.4 - 5.9 40 1.0 MAX, 0.5 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA78-4110 7.25 - 7.75 32 1.2 MAX, 1.0 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA910-3110 9.0 - 10.6 25 1.4 MAX, 1.2 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA1315-3110 13.75 - 15.4 25 1.6 MAX, 1.4 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA12-3114 1.35 - 1.85 30 4.0 MAX, 3.0 TYP +33 MIN +41 dBm 2.0:1
CA34-6116 3.1 - 3.5 40 4.5 MAX, 3.5 TYP +35 MIN +43 dBm 2.0:1
CA56-5114 5.9 - 6.4 30 5.0 MAX, 4.0 TYP +30 MIN +40 dBm 2.0:1
CA812-6115 8.0 - 12.0 30 4.5 MAX, 3.5 TYP +30 MIN +40 dBm 2.0:1
CA812-6116 8.0 - 12.0 30 5.0 MAX, 4.0 TYP +33 MIN +41 dBm 2.0:1
CA1213-7110 12.2 - 13.25 28 6.0 MAX, 5.5 TYP +33 MIN +42 dBm 2.0:1
CA1415-7110 14.0 - 15.0 30 5.0 MAX, 4.0 TYP +30 MIN +40 dBm 2.0:1
CA1722-4110 17.0 - 22.0 25 3.5 MAX, 2.8 TYP +21 MIN +31 dBm 2.0:1
ULTRA-BROADBAND & MULTI-OCTAVE BAND AMPLIFIERS
Model No. Freq (GHz) Gain (dB) MIN Noise Figure (dB) Power -out @ P1-dB 3rd Order ICP VSWR
CA0102-3111 0.1-2.0 28 1.6 Max, 1.2 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA0106-3111 0.1-6.0 28 1.9 Max, 1.5 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA0108-3110 0.1-8.0 26 2.2 Max, 1.8 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA0108-4112 0.1-8.0 32 3.0 MAX, 1.8 TYP +22 MIN +32 dBm 2.0:1
CA02-3112 0.5-2.0 36 4.5 MAX, 2.5 TYP +30 MIN +40 dBm 2.0:1
CA26-3110 2.0-6.0 26 2.0 MAX, 1.5 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA26-4114 2.0-6.0 22 5.0 MAX, 3.5 TYP +30 MIN +40 dBm 2.0:1
CA618-4112 6.0-18.0 25 5.0 MAX, 3.5 TYP +23 MIN +33 dBm 2.0:1
CA618-6114 6.0-18.0 35 5.0 MAX, 3.5 TYP +30 MIN +40 dBm 2.0:1
CA218-4116 2.0-18.0 30 3.5 MAX, 2.8 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA218-4110 2.0-18.0 30 5.0 MAX, 3.5 TYP +20 MIN +30 dBm 2.0:1
CA218-4112 2.0-18.0 29 5.0 MAX, 3.5 TYP +24 MIN +34 dBm 2.0:1
LIMITING AMPLIFIERS
Model No. Freq (GHz) Input Dynamic Range Output Power Range Psat Power Flatness dB VSWR
CLA24-4001 2.0 - 4.0 -28 to +10 dBm +7 to +11 dBm +/- 1.5 MAX 2.0:1
CLA26-8001 2.0 - 6.0 -50 to +20 dBm +14 to +18 dBm +/- 1.5 MAX 2.0:1
CLA712-5001 7.0 - 12.4 -21 to +10 dBm +14 to +19 dBm +/- 1.5 MAX 2.0:1
CLA618-1201 6.0 - 18.0 -50 to +20 dBm +14 to +19 dBm +/- 1.5 MAX 2.0:1
AMPLIFIERS WITH INTEGRATED GAIN ATTENUATION
Model No. Freq (GHz) Gain (dB) MIN Noise Figure (dB) Power -out @ P1-dB Gain Attenuation Range VSWR
CA001-2511A 0.025-0.150 21 5.0 MAX, 3.5 TYP +12 MIN 30 dB MIN 2.0:1
CA05-3110A 0.5-5.5 23 2.5 MAX, 1.5 TYP +18 MIN 20 dB MIN 2.0:1
CA56-3110A 5.85-6.425 28 2.5 MAX, 1.5 TYP +16 MIN 22 dB MIN 1.8:1
CA612-4110A 6.0-12.0 24 2.5 MAX, 1.5 TYP +12 MIN 15 dB MIN 1.9:1
CA1315-4110A 13.75-15.4 25 2.2 MAX, 1.6 TYP +16 MIN 20 dB MIN 1.8:1
CA1518-4110A 15.0-18.0 30 3.0 MAX, 2.0 TYP +18 MIN 20 dB MIN 1.85:1
LOW FREQUENCY AMPLIFIERS
Model No. Freq (GHz) Gain (dB) MIN Noise Figure dB Power -out @ P1-dB 3rd Order ICP VSWR
CA001-2110 0.01-0.10 18 4.0 MAX, 2.2 TYP +10 MIN +20 dBm 2.0:1
CA001-2211 0.04-0.15 24 3.5 MAX, 2.2 TYP +13 MIN +23 dBm 2.0:1
CA001-2215 0.04-0.15 23 4.0 MAX, 2.2 TYP +23 MIN +33 dBm 2.0:1
CA001-3113 0.01-1.0 28 4.0 MAX, 2.8 TYP +17 MIN +27 dBm 2.0:1
CA002-3114 0.01-2.0 27 4.0 MAX, 2.8 TYP +20 MIN +30 dBm 2.0:1
CA003-3116 0.01-3.0 18 4.0 MAX, 2.8 TYP +25 MIN +35 dBm 2.0:1
CA004-3112 0.01-4.0 32 4.0 MAX, 2.8 TYP +15 MIN +25 dBm 2.0:1
CIAO Wireless can easily modify any of its standard models to meet your "exact" requirements at the Catalog Pricing.
Visit our web site at www.ciaowireless.com for our complete product offering.

Ciao Wireless, Inc. 4 0 0 0 V i a P e s c a d o r, C a m a r i l l o , C A 9 3 0 1 2

Tel (805) 389-3224 Fax (805) 389-3629 sales@ciaowireless.com
 Another dimension of the AEA net-
working challenge relates to network
capacity and data rate, with an ever
increasing need to pass more and more
information around the network. To
accomplish this effectively requires
highly efficient network-optimization
techniques. Niedzwiecki says this is
indeed another area that is receiving
significant attention, making sure that
network resource management and net-
work coordination algorithms are resil-
ient enough to handle dropped data or
Any platform.
Any time.
46
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
dB Control
delivers.
TWT AMPLIFIERS | M I C R O WAV E P O W E R M O D U L E S
Trust dB Control with your high-power solutions
for radar, ECM and EW threat simulation
systems. Our TWT Amplifiers (TWTAs),
microwave power modules (MPMs) and power
supplies can be custom-configured for mission-
critical ground-based, shipborne and high-
altitude manned/unmanned airborne platforms.
We utilize modular designs for rapid
configuration to create power products
that are reliable and easy to maintain. If your
expectations are as high as your power
requirements, contact us today.
© 2016 dB Control Corp. All rights reserved. Photos provided courtesy U.S. Air Force, U.S. Army and U.S. Navy.
838011_dBControl.indd 1
missing information. “This is especially
important where the signal density in
the environment from an EW perspec-
tive is high – the ability to manage your
resources and have, for example, one
platform targeting certain signals and
another platform targeting others.”
MERGING OF COMMS AND RADAR AEA
In addition to the evolving threat, ad-
vances in machine-learning algorithms,
processing, and networking technology
will also impact the types, mix and mis-
| POWER SUPPLIES
+1 (510) 656-2325
Jack@dBControl.com
www.dBControl.com
2016-10-12 12:33 PM
sions of platforms performing AEA. On
the mission side, communications and
radar AEA missions, which are currently
largely served by different, specialized
platforms and systems will be increas-
ingly met with single, multi-purpose
systems. Says CSBA’s Clark, “In the past,
we’ve had to treat them separately be-
cause when you’re using hardware-based
signal processing and jamming systems
(TWTs, waveguides etc.) you don’t have
that adaptability. The hardware drives
the frequency range and the charac-
teristics of the signals that you can
generate.”
Given that threat radars and com-
munication systems have generally op-
erated in different frequency ranges,
this has meant that different AEA sys-
tems and the platforms carrying them
have also been different. Now, Clark
says, however, with the advent of GaN-
based AESA technology, we can expect
to see more multi-function, software-
controlled systems able to operate over
much wider bandwidths performing
both missions. “We’re already seeing
some of this today where, for example,
some radar-jamming systems have the
ability to go down into the comms fre-
quency ranges and vice versa. We’ll see
more of this with NGJ and with SEWIP
Block 3 in the Navy, and it’s inevitable
that we’ll see common-purpose AEA sys-
tems for both comms and radar.”
Raytheon’s Yuse agrees but adds
that, “AEA capabilities will need to
be incorporated into sophisticated,
scalable, affordable end-to-end EMSO
systems, and the future of intelligent
EMSO is all about networks, high-gain,
EA, cyber, scalable common back ends
and multi-function arrays. A mix may
be effective, but will require networked
operation that comes with the inherent
challenges of distributed management
and communication. Multi-purpose
systems also face challenges, however.
Multi-purpose tools are compromised
to get something effective for multiple
uses, but suboptimal for one use. Sys-
tems with primary and secondary func-
tions (or redundancy) may be a good
compromise and contribute to overall
combat resiliency.”
BAE’s Niedzwiecki says this leads
back to the subject of resource manage-
“The Partner for Your Solution”
The Leading Provider of High Speed Data
Conversion and Signal Processing Solutions

Visit us at
53rd Annual AOC International Symposium
and Convention 2016
Washington, DC
Booth #515

www.apissys.com
 ment. “When you’re looking at multiple
signals in an environment, the algo-
rithms will have to figure out which of
those signals are the most important,
which are the most lethal, and which
are the highest priority for me to tar-
get with my system to maximize overall
mission effectiveness.”
This, in turn, relates to the mix
of platforms or systems that will best
meet the overall AEA requirement and
the need for effective resource man-
DARPA’s Gremlins program seeks to prove that swarming, networked unmanned platorms can carry agement at the EW level. This can then
out a variety of missions, including AEA, inside an IADS. (DARPA)
also be extrapolated to the broader-lev-
el, mission-management task, and the
New
Ava Catalo
www
extent to which systems will operate
il g
.cttiable! autonomously. “With access to all this
nc.c
om

Enabling
information,” observes Niedzwiecki,
“mission commanders will have a bet-
ter picture of the threat space so that

wideband frequency agility they can make those tactical decisions

during a mission.”
On the other hand, lessening the hu-
GaN and GaAs Solid-State Power Amplifiers man taskload is one of the most prom-
for Multi-Function, Radar, and EW System Design ising benefits of the application of
cognitive EW and machine learning to
the AEA mission. To describe the alter-
natives and tradeoffs to be considered,
48 Niedzwiecki points out that “there are
certainly configurations and mission
sets where you would want these sys-
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

tems to be completely autonomous be-

Whether your application is narrowband, wideband or Microwave Technology Leadership cause of the timelines required, but
ultra-wideband, operating in pulsed or CW mode, CTT’s v Power Amplifiers
power amplifiers are an especially • NEW GaN and GaAs Models
there are also others where you may
attractive choice for new multi-function • Radar Bands up to 1kW want to have an operator ‘on-the-loop’.”
frequency-agile systems that effectively • EW Bands up to 400W In this scenario, while an operator is
conserve weight, space and power • Pulse and CW not actually in-the-loop driving the
consumption. • Solid-State Microwave Power Modules decision process, they can observe
The characteristics of the portion of • Rack-Mount Configurations
the electromagnetic spectrum selected for any of v Low-Noise Amplifiers what is going on and confirm an ap-
these particular system designs are undoubtably the v Up and Downconverters proach that the machine recommends,
most important to the end user, as it has the greatest v Subsystems or in certain cases, manually override
impact on the type of information required and received. v Custom Engineered Options
it. The third option is the operator in-
Engineered specifically to meet the stringent
requirements imposed by many modern system designs, the-loop, which Niedzwiecki describes
CTT’s family of GaN and GaAs-based solid-state power as more of a mission commander, “where
amplifiers excel in a wide range of applications. you’re not only using the information
CTT has delivered production quantities of amplifiers
you collect and process about the EMS,
with power levels from 10 through 200 Watts – and higher –
for a variety of multi-function, radar and EW applications. but you’re also using all the informa-
• AMDR • Shipboard Radar • AESA Radar USA-based thin-film microwave tion that you’re collecting from all the
production facility other sensors on your platforms to help
• VLO/FLO Threats • New Land Radar • EW • UAVs
IS9100C
ISO 9001:2008
More than thirty years ago CTT, Inc. made a strong ISOQUALITY
9001:2008 optimize your overall mission. The mis-
commitment to serve the defense electronics market with a sion commander is where some of that
simple goal: quality, performance, reliability, service and on-time human-in-the-loop can take over.” Even
delivery of our products.
Give us a call to find out how our commitment can so, Niedzwiecki notes that there is also
support your success. ongoing research looking at automat-
It’s that simple. ing that process as much as possible, as
241 East Java Drive • Sunnyvale • California 94089 well, in order to “reduce the cognitive
Phone: 408-541-0596 • Fax: 408-541-0794 • www.cttinc.com • E-mail: sales@cttinc.com
load of the warfighter.”

788557_CTT.indd 1 2016-09-14 2:51 PM

 The Partner You Can Count On ™

Advanced Anti-Radiation
Guided Missile (AARGM)
Extended Range (ER)

An Orbital ATK concept for an extended range advanced weapon for multiple target
sets embedded in anti-access and denied environments

DefenseElectronicSystems.BDev@orbitalatk.com

©2015 Orbital ATK, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

 BEYOND COMMS AND
RADAR-BASED THREATS
Radars and communication systems
will not be the only threat systems
contributing to the challenges of pen-
etrating a sophisticated IADS or A2/AD
environment. Other potential surveil-
lance, targeting, and weapons technolo-
gies, both active and passive, will also
have to be considered and addressed
such as the use of commercial emitters
(television and radio signals) cueing
passive radars, satellite-based systems,
50
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
834864_Crane.indd 1
IR and other optical sensors, UAVs, and
man-portable air defense systems.
CSBA’s Clark says he believes the DOD
recognizes the need to include these
potential threats in its AEA mix and
capabilities, but also sees them being
constrained by the fact that the Ser-
vices haven’t yet generated operational
concepts that will drive requirements
for them. “That’s one of the problems
we have. Even though the technology
community is pursuing lots of options
that could improve our ability to detect
2016-10-24 5:55 PM
and engage these different targets, they
don’t have requirements to do that. The
requirements are based on what the Ser-
vices/warfighters are thinking they will
get into. So there is a little chicken-and-
egg thing going on where the technolo-
gists need to portray to the warfighters
what the level of technology is going
to be and what could be possible, and
the warfighters need to start incorpo-
rating those into requirements so they
can build the programs based on them.
There needs to be that OODA loop (deci-
sion cycle of observe, orient, decide, and
act) of technology that can offer certain
potentials, and then the warfighters can
figure out how to use those potentials
and turn them into requirements. That
cycle needs to be sped up or else you
just never get the acquisition process to
move at the speed that the technology
can provide.”
Although Raytheon’s Yuse says that
ultimately systems will in fact ad-
dress other surveillance and targeting
threats, he adds that, “it may not be
the AEA device (alone) that will do it.
A directed energy (DE) effect, onboard
laser, may blind the sensor, while a jam-
mer simultaneously engages the target,
increasing overall mission effective-
ness. A flexible, digital receiver exciter
can be an effective weapon against a
command, control and communication
infrastructure, denying detection as
sure as jamming the radar itself. It’s not
a stretch to think about a jammer that
could very well be effective against a
wide array of systems other than ra-
dars. The ability to attack the integrat-
ed air defense system rather than single
radars is what we need.”
SERVICES ROLES AND THE SYSTEM
OF SYSTEMS (SOS)
Although the DOD and the Third Off-
set Strategy is decisively supportive of
the smart-system approach to future
AEA, it has not been specific about the
particular operating concepts that will
be used, or the roles of the individual
Services, leaving this largely to the Ser-
vices themselves to determine. CSBA’s
Clark, says he doesn’t see this changing,
at least in the near term. Rather, he be-
lieves the DOD sees its role more orient-
ed toward getting the Services to pursue
 Bench
T st Boxes
e

Field
Replaceab
le
Connecto RF
rs

0 to 10 Vdc
Analog
Interface

al
t Seri
16 Bi rface
Inte
ard
PC Bo -in
Plu g
50dB
at
Notch Depth 60dB
500 M H z Notch Dep
th
at 2 GHz

Tunable Filter Solutions

500 MHz to 50 GHz
NOW AVAILABLE!
notch depth at 2 GHz. ALSO! Micro Lambda

For more information contact Micro Lambda Wireless.

www.microlambdawireless.com
Micro Lambda is a ISO 9001:2008 Registered Company “Look to the leader in YIG-Technology”

46515 Landing Parkway, Fremont CA 94538 • (510) 770-9221 • sales@microlambdawireless.com

 new capabilities in particular areas and
then transitioning out of others. “Their
intent is to accelerate the innovation
they need in EW without necessarily
providing direction, like differentiat-
ing AEA roles and missions by Service.
There will still be a kind of pick-up game
there with regard to who does what as-
pect of the AEA mission based on what
the individual Services’ own operating
concepts are.”
In the end, however, future AEA will
certainly represent a combination of
sensors, jammers, and actual weapons
platforms that will be capable of provid-
ing the required effects – in other words,
a system of systems (SOS) approach.
And, in fact, included in the 2017 Air
Force RDT&E budget is an activity aimed
at providing just that. Titled “AEA Sys-
tem Engineering Studies & Technology
Transition,” the line item represents
$9.2 million for “overall systems engi-
neering, modeling and simulation, ar-
chitecture and network requirements
development, effectiveness assessment
and requirements allocation to compo-
nent systems of the Airborne Electronic
52
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
789441_MassConsult.indd 1
Attack (AEA) System of Systems (SOS).”
The program will also “assess operation-
al effectiveness of multiple EW systems
in both offensive and defensive roles.”
The program description also notes
that the program is included in Budget
Activity 5, System Development and
Demonstration, “because it has passed
Milestone B approval and is conduct-
ing engineering and manufacturing
development tasks aimed at meeting
validated requirements prior to full-rate
production.” Target accomplishments
for FY 2017 call for support of the joint
Air Force/Navy offensive AEA SOS Anal-
ysis of Alternatives, update of the AF
EW Roadmap, and a report on “preferred
concepts that provide advanced cost
and operationally effective materiel so-
lutions to joint AF/Navy combat opera-
tions in the 2030+ time frame.”
CSBA’s Clark, says the effort is part
of the DOD’s work to rationalize their
investments in AEA between the Air
Force and the Navy. “The Services won’t
be told how to divvy up the mission,
but this SOS work will inform ways that
they can be more efficient, because each
Service is trying to find ways to spend
less money, and to avoid duplication of
effort.” Even so, he expects there will
be some effort to try to transition the
program’s eventual recommendations
into some form of roles-and-missions
differentiation, as well as delineation
of the new operating concepts that the
Services are expected to be pursuing.
“The work will be done within each of
the Services, led from within the AF
and Navy headquarters, but using the
technical expertise of the System Com-
mands,” says Clark.
In summing up his view of the cur-
rent state of AEA affairs, Raytheon’s
Yuse says that while his company is ac-
tively working to develop solutions for
these challenges, “transitioning these
new capabilities to users fast enough is
just beginning to be addressed. Ensur-
ing users trust the capability enough to
fully and effectively implement is key,
and spectrum dominance success will
ultimately come from Service collabora-
tion to achieve Joint Force Commanders’
objectives and making EMS dominance a
National security priority.” a
1/19/16 9:38 PM
We don’t need to fall behind
our enemies. Discover NEW,
no limits, mind-bending
SIGINT!

ing
cod
de
te
mple
C o

All-new precision classification

Compatible with National and Classified systems
Hyper-threading, multiple channel processing
From UAVs to ships to manpacks

Contact us to learn how we can

enhance your EA, ES or SIGINT system
sigint3@comintconsulting.com
www.comintconsulting.com
Can you afford not to?
 Teledyne Microwave Solutions
salutes the AOC Community,
and we thank you for helping us
support our warfighters with the
advanced EW technologies
required to prevail.
A Proud 50 Year Heritage Supporting Critical EW Programs
AN/ALR-20 ► World Leader in TWTs and Assemblies
USAF, B-52, C-130
AN/ALR-59 – USAF, ► A Full Range of Integrated Microwave Assemblies (IMAs)
F-15, F-16, C130J

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

AN/ALR-69 – USAF, ► Fast Tune Notch Filters (FTNF) for ESM Sensor Protection
A-10, B-52, C-130, F-16
► Channelizers ► DIFM ► SDLVA ► Local Oscillators
AN/ALQ-99 – USN/
USMC, EA-18G/EA-6B ► Synthesizers ► Transceivers ► Switched Multiplexers
AN/ALQ-126
USMC, AV-8B ► Converters ► Switch Filter Banks ► Exciters
AN/ALQ-131
USAF POD, F-16 ► Amplifiers, including SSPAs and Wideband GaN Amplifiers
AN/ALQ-135
USAF/FMS, F-15 ► YIG Technologies
AN/ALQ-136
USA, AH-1F
AN/ALQ-161
USAF, B-1B 55
YIG Filters and
AN/ALQ-164 Subassemblies
USMC POD, AV-8B Integrated Microwave
Radar Warning Assemblies
AN/ALQ-165 Receivers
USAF, FA-18
AN/ALQ-172
USAF, B-52
Fast Tune
AN/ALQ-184 Notch Filters
USAF POD, F-16 RF Channelizers

AN/ALQ-187
USAF, F-16
AN/ALQ-196 EW TWTs
USAF, C-130
SDLVAs
AN/ALQ-211 – USA,
AH-64D, CH-47, CV-22 Tranceivers

AN/ALQ-211(V9)
FMS, F-16
AN/ALQ-214
USN, FA-18
AN/ALQ-221 Switched
USAF, U-2 Multiplexers

AN/APR-39 – USA, USAF, Amplifier Products,

SSPAs & Wideband GaN Amplifiers
USMC, USN rotary wing
AN/SLQ-32 – USN,
CVN-68, CG-47, DDG-51 teledynemicrowave.com | 1.800.832.6869 | microwavesolutions@teledyne.com
 Regaining the Advantage –

O
By John Knowles

One of the most exciting trends in elec-
tronic warfare (EW) today is the leap
toward cognitive EW technology. Pro-
grams such as DARPA’s Adaptive Radar
Countermeasures (ARC) and Behavioral
Learning for Adaptive Electronic War-
fare (BLADE), as well as AFRL’s Precise
Reference Sensing for Cognitive EW
(PRESENCE), are among the first ex-
amples of this new generation of cog-
nitive EW technology that promises to
keep EW one step ahead of threat sys-
tems that are operating across wider
bandwidths and feature much better RF
agility than the previous generation of
threats. However, this emerging area
of cognitive EW can seem complex and
downright confusing at times because
everything about it is just so, well, new.
Lots of important aspects of cognitive
56 EW, including its label and what it ac-
tually implies, are not settled matters
within the EW community. At the same
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
portant to make the distinction. Adap-
tive EW focuses on capability that
adapts to the threat environment in
real-time and automatically changes
EW techniques based on the changing
characteristics of the threat. Cogni-
tive EW is one step beyond this, where
the EW system not only adapts based
on what it observes but it also uses Ar-
tificial Intelligence (machine learning)
to actually learn what EW technique
is working best at any given time and
remembers that so the next time it en-
counters those threat characteristics
again it goes immediately to that tech-
nique. If the threat evolves, the cogni-
tive EW system identifies changes and
tries multiple techniques until it finds
one that works best and remembers it
for next time. This is much like how
a human learns. Based on our past ex-
periences we make our best judgment
about how to respond to a situation,

time, as the EW community forges ahead
with cognitive EW technology develop-
ment and exploring new cognitive sys-
tems concepts, it is clear that we are
just beginning to scratch the surface
of what cognitive technology will mean
not only to EW, and its inclusion within
EMS Operations (EMSO) but to all areas
of defense electronics and all operations
within the EMS.
COGNITIVE VS. ADAPTIVE
One of the most frustrating aspects
of this emerging technology area is sim-
ply trying to determine what to call it.
The two leading terms are “cognitive
EW” and “adaptive EW.” Some people
think the terms are interchangeable
while others believe there are important
distinctions between these terms. Here
is what they say about them:
Josh Niedzwiecki, Director of Sen-
sor Processing and Exploitation at BAE
Systems Electronic Systems: “The ver-
nacular is currently being evolved in
the community, but I believe it is im-
and if we do not get the desired re-
sponse we try something else until we
get the response we desire. We remem-
ber this and use that knowledge next
time we encounter a similar situation.
In machine learning, this is referred
to as reinforcement learning. With our
cognitive EW technology, we use these
techniques to both adapt and learn
during the mission.”
Tom Szumowski, Senior Engineer,
Advanced Technology Laboratories
(ATL), Lockheed Martin: “I do see an
important distinction between the two.
For BLADE, I think it’s safe to use the
term cognitive EW. For more generic
discussion, adaptive can be fine too.
Here’s my thought on the distinction:
Adaptive means recognizing a change
in your operating environment and
modifying your behavior as a result.
Some examples: Target changes trans-
mit bandwidth, so the system adapts re-
ceive resources to match bandwidth. It
is a shorter-timescale response and does
not necessarily require learning.
“Cognitive on the other hand not
just recognizes changes in the environ-
ment, but it also makes assessments on
the effect of those changes. Moreover,
given that assessment, it coordinates
and adjusts potentially a sequence of
responses in order to achieve a longer
term goal. Cognitive can incorporate
longer timescale planning, downstream
decision error correction, and long-term
incremental learning.”
Dr. Alan Rosenwinkel, Senior Engi-
neer, Advanced Technology Laboratories
(ATL), Lockheed Martin: “Many sys-
tems are ‘adaptive,’ but the adaptation
typically happens as a set of responses
codified by rules based a small set of
predefined inputs and a predetermined
set of actions. I think cognitive implies
that the system either has learned (of-
fline) or can learn (online) some aspect
Cognitive Electronic Warfare
of its behavior. This learning can either
be how to interpret the inputs it’s get-
ting or what action should be taken as
a result.”
Col (Ret.) Greg “Patch” Patschke,
Senior Manager, Advanced Technology
Laboratories (ATL), Lockheed Martin:
“Operationally, the biggest difference
between adaptive and cognitive is time.
DARPA BLADE focused on digital com-
munications networks, which don’t re-
spond as quickly as some of the more
advanced radars. So you had time to ob-
serve signal behaviors and adjust your
counter appropriately. For a self-defense
capability against a modern threat ra-
dar, the sense of urgency drives you to
an adaptive solution. That being said,
the technology will mature to the point
where the cognitive algorithms are oper-
ationally feasible against radar threats.”
Anthony Nigara, Director, Electronic
Warfare Mission Solutions, Harris De-
fense Electronics: “In my opinion, these
two terms are interchangeable. Cogni-
tive in this case refers to utilizing ma-
chine learning, also known as Artificial
Intelligence (AI), processes and algo-
rithms to the EW field…Adaptive EW
is actually a very broad term that can
encompass any application of Artificial
Intelligence to the EW problem set. Due
to the broad definition, there can be
multiple technologies at play at once to
instantiate and realize any particular
cognitive EW system.”
David Tremper, EW Program Officer,
Office of Naval Research: “Adaptive EW
is a more encompassing term that cogni-
tive EW. ‘Adaptive’ can describe various
levels of dynamic spectrum operations,
including static, rule-based operations
as well dynamic, learning-based, auton-
omous operations, the latter of which
we consider ‘cognitive EW.’”
Paul Tilghman, Program Manager, Mi-
crosystems Technology Office, DARPA:
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
“In the general sense, the two terms
can be used somewhat interchangeably
in that they both refer to an EW system
that changes its jamming according to
its current environment, including, for
example, what radar systems are pres-
ent. To actually differentiate these two
adjectives, its best to think about it in
terms of timescale. Strictly speaking, an
adaptive system changes its jamming
parameters on a short timeframe ac-
cording to the received signal from the
adversary’s system. This could be on the
order of tens of microseconds to a sec-
ond. Adaptive systems, however, typi-
cally have no memory, which means that 57
each time they adapt to the adversary,
they ‘forget’ their previous adaptation.
Cognitive systems, on the other hand,
acquire knowledge across each adaptive
response, which enables them to learn
how the adversary system reacts over a
longer timeframe.”
Dan Kilfoyle, Technical Director, EW
Systems, Raytheon Space and Airborne
Systems: “The terms are often used
interchangeably, but when it comes to
EW, cognitive is more precise than adap-
tive. Cognitive captures the essential
idea that the system is able to confront
a threat that wasn’t anticipated by the
system’s designer, determine an effec-
tive course of action, and learn from
that experience – react ‘better’ the next
time that threat is seen. I could argue
that current systems are already adap-
tive in that they sense the threat and
adapt or select their response based on
what they see. I’ve also heard the term,
‘smarter EW.’”
From the responses above, it is clear
that the terminology is still evolving.
In this article, we will use the term,
“cognitive EW,” to describe advanced
 technologies that enable an EW system
to “learn” from experience against a
particular threat and to remember and
apply this experience as part of the sys-
tems countermeasures response. This
decision is not an effort to resolve the
terminology for the EW community but
rather for the practical purposes of this
article.
THREAT TRENDS ARE DRIVING THE
NEED FOR COGNITIVE EW
Over the past 15 or so years, EW
systems have exploited the advantage
provided by wideband software defined
radio (SDR) technology. It has enabled
EW systems to be reprogrammed more
quickly and more easily and to continu-
ally take advantage of new digital sig-
nal processing improvements. Of course,
technological advantages don’t last
forever, and threat systems have now
started to incorporate wideband SDR
technology, as well, which has given
threats basic technological parity with
modern EW systems.
Paul Tilghman of DARPA explains:
“EW today is a holdover from Vietnam-
58
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
era EW practices. The most important
thing to understand is that if we looked
at a radar system fielded in that time-
frame, we would find that it is com-
prised entirely of analog components.
This type of design makes the radar
very difficult to upgrade, which means
that once we determine how to uniquely
identify and counter a particular radar,
we can write that procedure down in
a ‘playbook.’ The EW system then can
consult the playbook in order to iden-
tify the radar and subsequently jam it.
Today, radar (and communications) sys-
tems are underpinned by digital elec-
tronics, which makes them inherently
much more flexible and easy to change.
This means we can no longer rely exclu-
sively on the playbook. We have to ex-
pect that adversaries may change their
systems and invalidate formerly useful
entries in the playbook. This drives
us into a new technology space in EW
where we must be able to counter the
unexpected.”
ONR’s David Tremper says, “Spec-
trum congestion and challenged spec-
trum access are requiring that all users
implement systems that can assess the
spectrum, identify available portions
of the spectrum and dynamically shift
operations into those less congested
portions of the spectrum. This approach
gained traction with cognitive radio
concepts developed and demonstrated
to maintain robust communication op-
erations. The proliferation of software
defined systems [in threats] has further
enabled the widespread development
of adaptive and unpredictable RF capa-
bilities. As RF developers trend toward
adaptive and unpredictable use of the
spectrum, the EW systems that detect
and counter those systems are required
to also adaptively interpret and respond
to the changing spectrum and the dy-
namic users.”
Tom Szumowski of Lockheed Mar-
tin says this new level of threat re-
programmability means there are more
“unknown” signals, as well as wartime
reserve modes (WARMs), that tradi-
tional EW systems cannot counter.
Greg Patschke agrees with his Lock-
heed Martin colleague. He says complex
threat waveforms, which can be rapidly

RF SITUATIONAL AWARENESS ON-CHIP

COGNITION BEYOND THE SPECTRUM

ULTRA-LOW-SWaP
Dense sensor networks across vast territories or on UAV swarms for
real-time RF situational awareness.

HIGH-PERFORMANCE COMPUTING ON-CHIP

Intelligence on the radio, tightening the RF sense-act loop and
enabling agile EW and ISR.

WAVEFORM PROCESSING, DEMODULATION, FEC

Full-stack, true software-defined radio on-chip with no
external hardware required.
DISCOVER A NEW APPROACH TO CYBER/
SPECTRUM OPERATIONS AOC booth 342

www.cognitivesystems.com/cognition

836097_Cognitive.indd 1 2016-10-23 12:47 AM

modified, “are challenging our tradi-
tional EW systems which rely on mission
data files or lookup tables.”
Josh Niedzwiecki, of BAE Systems
sees two factors that are driving cogni-
tive EW requirements. He explains, “One
is the proliferation of the commercial
wireless market, which is driving an
exponential growth in the use of wire-
less devices for both commercial and
military applications. This is creating
an electromagnetic soup that our EW
systems have not had to sort through
paradigm to counter these threats was
to take the knowledge of these signals
we obtained in theater and to go back
to the lab and spend months crafting an
antidote and then deploy it in our EW
systems. Today, the threat signals can
change minute to minute driving the
need for this paradigm shift.”
Dan Kilfoyle of Raytheon says the
key threat drivers are “RF agility and
software defined receiver/exciters.
Agility is enabled by large instanta-
neous and tunable bandwidths along
Finally, the operational willingness to
quickly field software updates and hold
back some behavior – so-called war re-
serves – complete the environment that
forces us to cognitive systems, which
can detect, identify and counter previ-
ously unseen threats while in the field.”
These trends, says Dr. Alan Rosen-
winkel, are “creating a need for differen-
tiating technology in the EW domain.”
WHAT IS COGNITIVE TECHNOLOGY?
Understanding how today’s EW sys-

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

that never existed in the past. The sec-
ond factor is systems are becoming more
and more digital and therefore repro-
grammable from minute to minute. This
adaptive nature of the threat signals
[radar, jammers or communications sys-
tems] requires a change in paradigm in
terms of how we counter these threats.
In the past, radars for example, were
based on analog components and took
a long time to develop and field. They
were also very static in nature, and their
signal parameters like frequency, band-
width, pulse width, etc., did not change
for the life of the system. The existing
with flexible waveform generators. Af-
fordable RF and processing component
technology advancements provide these
system features. By pushing all of the
functionality from bits to baseband into
digital processors, virtually any aspect
of the radar behavior (carrier frequency,
waveform, mode scheduling, and elec-
tronic protection) can be updated on
timescales far faster than the current
EW systems can adapt to. The ability of
active electronically scanned arrays to
form multiple, simultaneous beams and
rapidly change their direction create
additional complexity and dynamics.
tems operate against a threat provides
the basis for appreciating what cogni-
tive EW systems aim to do. Tilghman
explains that cognitive EW systems are
able to “learn on-the-fly to counter ad-
versary systems that they were not pre-
programmed for. The key technology
that enables this is ability to assess the
effectiveness of the jamming technique.
No other class of EW system today can
ascertain the effectiveness of their jam-
ming technique in real time.”
Another confusing aspect of cogni-
tive technology is that there is not wide
agreement on what it is, exactly. Is it
59

Bring down CoMMs

Next
exhibition dates.

Explore the jamming and deceiving capabilities by PLATH AG

▪ Follower jamming of fast frequency hoppers

▪ Fast responsive jamming
▪ Automatic and manual jamming modes
▪ Mobile, semi-mobile or portable solutions

PLATH AG ▪ Stauffacherstrasse 65 ▪ 3014 Bern ▪ Switzerland ▪ sales@plath-ag.ch ▪ www.plathgroup.com

826681_PLATH.indd 1 2016-10-14 3:16 PM

 limited to software algorithms or does it
also include hardware? Is it part of the
EW system architecture? The EW com-
munity does not yet agree on this. ONR’s
Tremper explains: “There are many de-
grees of dynamic operations and many
system parameters which can be adjust-
ed within an adaptive closed-loop. It in-
cludes both the algorithmic techniques
and software for the dynamic spectrum
management and behavior as well as the
digital and analog hardware components
which can be digitally controlled to sup-
port spectrum agility.”
“Adaptive EW is mostly enabled today
via software algorithms and enhance-
ments, but there are potential adaptive
EW benefits if an EW system utilizes a
hardware architecture built specifically
for adaptive EW,” says Anthony Nigara
of Harris. “In general, adaptive EW sys-
tems benefit from modern hardware
that supports complex signal process-
ing techniques and can handle a high
level of complex processing operations
in real-time.” BAE Systems’ Niedzwiecki
notes, “The primary focus in this field is
on algorithms and software.
60
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
834509_Photonis.indd 1
“Given the cost of making hardware
upgrades in terms of DOD procurement,
testing verification, platform integra-
tion, qualification and logistics and
maintenance, it is much more attractive
to add ‘smarts’ in the form of advanced
algorithm to existing DOD EW systems to
minimize costs. However, there is paral-
lel work that includes making our hard-
ware like our RF electronics increasingly
adaptive and flexible.”
DARPA’s Tilghman says, “Currently it
is restricted to software and algorithms.
However, what we’ve discovered is that
the hardware for modern EW systems
was not designed with an expectation
that we would one day make these sys-
tems intelligent. With that expecta-
tion in place now, we would like an EW
system to be able to perform far more
computation. As the community at large
starts to work towards ‘second genera-
tion’ cognitive EW, I suspect there will
be a renewed focus on the hardware and
computational aspects of such systems.”
Cognitive EW capability can be real-
ized in hardware as well as via software
algorithms, says Lockheed’s Szumowski,
adding that some cognitive EW capabili-
ties may only be possible through new
hardware advancements, such as GPUs
and neural networks. He explains that
on the sensor front, cognitive EW “re-
quires more than just an energy detec-
tor, which is what was sufficient for
conventional systems and operations.
It requires higher quality detection
data, which may require improvement
to sensor bandwidths, A/D require-
ments, noise figure, etc.” His colleague,
Dr. Rosenwinkel, says cognitive EW is
“primarily an algorithm technology, but
many of the new algorithms require new
computational hardware to make pos-
sible. Also, there is a fundamental in-
terplay between the algorithms and the
sensors that feed it data. I second Tom’s
point that the new algorithms often de-
mand more of the hardware than past
algorithms did.”
Of course, there are many broad tech-
nology trends, such as AI and machine
learning, which are fueling cognitive
EW development.
Szumowski says that deep learn-
ing research has also fed cognitive EW
2016-10-12 12:12 PM
technology, but that the EW communi-
ty “must take caution around the deep
learning buzz. It provides great ben-
efits in terms of static classification
without too much upfront engineer-
ing. However, it’s not a silver bullet
and needs to be paired with tradition-
al approaches and domain expertise to
be useful operationally. I can’t stress
this enough.”
Raytheon’s Kilfoyle adds, “Network-
ing technologies that support EW col-
laboration between platforms may also
performance improvements in the EW sys-
tem, but future EW systems built around
cognitive EW technologies are expected
to deliver much better performance. In
order to realize these advantages howev-
er, future EW systems will need to provide
more than cognitive EW algorithms and
better data processing. According to Szu-
mowski, “There’s a tighter interconnect
between backend adaptive algorithms
and the frontend resource management.
Adaptive EW systems need to operate on
a different quality of receiver data than
traditional systems, thus requiring the
need to adjust resources. They also may
need to respond in a specific timeline
(i.e., to target pulse-on-pulse for radar
or specific control channels for comms).”
His colleague, Greg Patschke adds, “There
is more than just comparing raw sig-
nal parametric data to onboard mission
data files.”
Kilfoyle says, “Existing cognitive EW
systems are at relatively low technology
readiness levels and complete reference
architectures are still being considered.

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

be a key feeding technology. As we con-
tinue down the path of the convergence
of EW and cyber, there may be important
contributions to cognitive EW capability
as well.”
Another broad trend that is support-
ing cognitive EW technology is the DOD’s MicroScan® Miniature, Ruggedized SDR Transceiver
push toward multi-function systems. For Cyber-EW, COMMS, Surveillance, SIGINT and DF
Tremper describes this as “migration of
system designs toward multi-function
operations with wideband and digitally
tunable analog components for receiv-
ers and transmitters, as well as the
application of computational and ma-
chine learning approaches toward spec-
trum assessment, prediction and access 61
optimization.” • SWaP: Size: 2.2 x 1.4 x 0.9 inches; Weight: 0.2 lbs.; Powered by USB 3.0/2.0
Aside from these general technology • Frequency Range: 70-6000 MHz, 56 MHz IBW, dual-channel coherent RX
trends in defense electronics, there are • TX Power: +20 dBm, with in-built capability to key external PA’s for higher power
also some specific EW technology trends • In-Built RF Filters: Essential for high RF performance including 9 tracking suboctave
bandpass filters for RX, and 9 fixed suboctave lowpass filters for TX
that are supporting cognitive EW. Szu-
• Integration: Inside antennas, manpacks, UAV’s, networked sensor nets, etc.
mowski says, “Modern EW systems are • Locking: Optional GPS time and frequency locking with 9 axis gyro/compass sensor
now providing the ability to operate on • Development Kit: Available with FPGA DSP blocks, examples in source code, and
‘pre-detection’ data (IQ) which enables Technical Support so Primes can get their missions going quickly
more advanced upfront signal recogni- • Software Support: GNURadio, Redhawk, Windows, Linux, Android
tion.” Rosenwinkel adds, “This is shift-
ing the differentiating aspects of EW MicroScan® Mission Applications
systems from better RF hardware to
better digital processing hardware and
advanced algorithms.”

FIELDING COGNTIVE EW TECHNOLOGY

Developing an understanding of what Soldier Worn & Handheld Inside DF Arrays Disposable Jammers
For Dismount SIGINT For Mounted DF For Remote EW
cognitive EW technology is provides a
better sense of the many ways it can be
integrated into EW systems. At its most
basic level, cognitive EW technology can
be fielded in today’s EW systems with
relative ease. For instance, algorithms
Multi-point Transceivers Inside Small UAV Pods Networked Sensors
developed for DARPA’s Adaptive Radar For Dismount COMMS For Aerial Cyber-EW For Remote SIGINT
Countermeasures (ARC) program have
been programmed into the US Navy’s ALQ-
Spectranetix, Inc.
214(V)4/5 RF Countermeasures (RFCM)
sales1@spectranetix.com +1-408-982-9057 www.spectranetix.com/products
system. This simple upgrade offers some

814780_Spectranetix.indd 1 2016-05-26 12:20 PM

 That said, I suspect the basic architec-
ture will have similar building blocks to
current systems. The key differences will
be more complex feature measurements,
a tighter coupling between the elec-
tronic surveillance and electronic attack
control, and multiple scales or layers of
emitter processing. The ability to retain
what the system learns and reuse that
information in later missions will be an-
other key difference.” Ultimately, cogni-
tive EW will need to be considered at the
system architecture level.
OPERATIONAL IMPACT
Of course, the true value and opera-
tional impact of cognitive EW will be
seen in the battlespace.
Szumowski says, that while cogni-
tive EW technology is certainly required
to keep EW systems current with threat
systems, he feels the benefits will go well
beyond that aspect. “It can improve the
situational awareness or overall human-
machine interface for an EWO through
the autonomous decision-making the
system enables,” he explains. In terms of
measures of effectiveness, it can reduce
62 the number of manned platforms re-
quired, increase the effective operating
range of each individual platform and
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
ease the burden on spectrum planning.
“A potential longer-term benefit for
EW is a decrease in the timelines for
programming EW systems and the as-
sociated testing and re-validation re-
quired before a new capability can be
deployed to the warfighter,” says Harris’
Nigara. As these adaptive EW systems
get fielded and their capabilities are
fully explored in operation and become
a trusted technology by the EW com-
munity, adaptive EW has the potential
to fundamentally alter how EW is con-
ducted from development, to logistics,
to operational employment.
Kilfoyle says, “Just as commanders
have spoken of owning the air and the
importance of that to winning the war,
cognitive EW systems along with effec-
tive spectrum management and robust
networks will enable us to own the
spectrum. While it’s primarily directed
at preserving our spectrum supremacy, I
can foresee new operational advantages
arising from the coupling of cognitive
EW with collaborative, networked EW.
The intelligent sharing across the bat-
tlefield of ‘learned’ awareness and EW
effects will have a profound effect on
our doctrine.”
COGNITIVE ELECTROMAGNETIC
BATTLE MANAGEMENT
Cognitive technology right now is
focused mainly on EW applications and
mostly at the system level. But in the
long-term EW systems are just an entry
point for cognitive technologies to en-
ter the battle network. In the future,
says Jesse “Judge” Bourque, Director,
EMS-Cyber-Influence Operations Policy
and Strategy, Expression Networks LLC,
other EMS dependent systems, such as
radars, datalinks and GPS receivers, will
incorporate cognitive technologies be-
cause they offers a better way for these
systems to handle the growing conges-
tion of the EMS, as well as offering bet-
ter electronic protect (EP) performance
against adversary EW and SIGINT sys-
tems. In Bourque’s view, “adaptive sys-
tems offer ‘structured accommodation’
to active electromagnetic operating
environments while cognitive systems
capable of adjustments analogous to
heuristic learning offer ‘unstructured
accommodation,’ or the ability to ne-
gotiate true abstractions effectively
at operationally relevant speeds.” Cog-
nitive performance can be realized
at many levels, he says, including the
component/system level, the platform
level, the inter-platform level and at
the collaboration level, in which dozens
or even hundreds of Blue Force cogni-
tive (and traditional) radars, radios, EW
systems, etc., will collaborate in an un-
structured way.
It is at this collaborative level in
which cognitive performance gets really
interesting, says Bourque, and there
are many questions yet to be answered.
What happens in the electromagnetic
operating environment when we have a
large number of cognitive radars, com-
munications systems, PNT systems, EW
systems, etc., behaving in a non-linear
way (i.e., without strict rule sets) with-
in the battlespace? How do cognitive
systems behave together? Even more
perplexing, how do we perform electro-
magnetic battle management (EMBM) in
an EM operating environment populated
by a diverse mix of cognitive systems,
behaving in an unstructured way, and
traditional systems behaving in a very
structured way? This coming reality
means new types of EMS command and
control concepts and technologies will
be needed in order to “optimize at the
speed of exchange,” says Bourque. “Can
we lay a cognitive command and control
(C2) rule set on top of EMBM?,” he asks.
“How do we achieve machine learning at
the network level?”
Instead of the DOD’s current “system-
of-systems” approach, do we instead
need to think in terms of a “cognitive
system of heterogeneously-accommo-
dating (i.e., cognitive, adaptive, and
static) systems” in which there is cen-
tralized control and decentralized ex-
ecution? Bourque says that this actually
aligns very well with the US military’s
emphasis on enabling mission com-
manders to make decisions, which tends
to distribute decision making in order
to “enhance aggregate engagement tem-
po and therefore distribute risk.” One
thing is certain, says Bourque: The DOD
must evolve from its current, very struc-
tured model of EMBM, which relies on
static spectrum management and Joint
Restricted Frequency Lists (JRFLs) to
an unstructured EMBM concept that is
much more dynamic and accommodat-
ing. Cognitive technologies could enable
that transition.
TRUST
While cognitive EW shows a lot of
promise, it is also important to recog-
nize that it is still a very young set of
technologies. Acknowledging this fact,
Lockheed Martin’s Rosenwinkel, said “I
think one major challenge is the user
community’s trust [in] the algorithms.
For some of these new machine learning
approaches, it can be very, very difficult
to determine what the algorithm learned
and to figure out what it is making a de-
cision or taking an action. The DOD isn’t
going to accept a magic black box that
you can’t prove will work and you can’t
explain how it works. [DARPA’s] Explain-
able AI program is getting at this, but
it’s a very hard problem.” Gaining the op-
erators’ trust is essential. Cognitive EW
is at the beginning of that process, but it
is off to a very promising start. a
TECHNOLOGY SURVEY
FLIGHTLINE AND PORTABLE EW SIMULATORS
By Ollie Holt
T
his JED survey examines Flightline and
Portable EW Simulators for testing EW
systems in the following spectrums: RF,
UV, IR and laser spectrum. Prior to flight,
most pilots or EW operators will ask main-
tenance personnel to verify the opera-
tion of the EW equipment. The pilot or EW operator
could just run a typical built-in-test program, but that
mostly ensures the software/firmware is loaded and
all signal connections are intact. To further verify the
correct operation of the EW system, it is desirable to
run a true test signal through the system that in some
ways mimics the signals that would be observed in the
electromagnetic environment. In order to perform this
test, a device is required that a maintainer can use at
the flightline that can generate test signals and couple
these signals into the platforms EW systems.
This verification can vary from the generation of a
single RF tone to the generation of multiple RF pulses
that mimic one or more signal types the system is de-
signed to detect. In the UV, IR and laser spectrums,
signals need to be generated that mimick missile
plumes or laser beams. Because most EW systems will
have more than one sensor to provide a wide field of
view, the simulator needs to be able to stimulate each
sensor to verify its operation. One method is to just
move the signal source around the platform to make
sure all sensors are operating. You may want to check
the complete RF operational range in case more than
one antenna is used in each sector, to cover the op-
erational frequency range; similarly, the same may be
done in multiple IR bands or laser bands.
These testers can vary from a simple handheld sig-
nal generator that can simulate a series of RF pulses
or CW tones and can be easily moved around the plat-
form, to a complex combination of signal generators
that, under computer control, can simulate multiple
RF threats and is usually brought to the platform in a
cart. They may attach conformal “hats” or couplers to
the sensors for more accurate stimulation or use free-
space radiation. In the UV/IR spectrum, the simulators
simulate a missile plume spectrum by creating a UV or
IR thermal image. A laser threat simulator needs to do
the same with a laser stimulus. These systems can be
complex, but their purpose is to verify operation of the
EW system before the platform leaves the flightline.
The survey received responses on RF, UV, IR and la-
ser simulators. Some companies had some of each type.
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
The results were grouped into simulators of a similar
type for ease of comparison.
The spectrum column identifies the operational
spectrum of the simulator. Some are single-spectrum
systems, while others operate in multiple spectrums.
The operational spectrum or spectrums define opera-
tional range within the spectrum where threat signals
can be simulated.
The “Coupled” column defines the method of inject-
ing the signal into the EW system to be tested or evalu-
ated. For RF systems, the simplest method is radiating
into the antenna with or without a coupler attached
to the antenna. For flightline testing, a coupler can be
used that is designed to attach over the installed EW
system antennas. If free-space (radiated) RF is used,
then the spatial component is created just by the 63
placement of the radiated signal. For UV, IR and laser
systems, free-space radiation is the method of signal
injection. Again the spatial component for UV, IR or
laser signals is controlled by the radiators location and
signal amplitude.
The “Number of Signals” column defines the number
of different types of signals the simulator could gener-
ate. The column specifies the total number of different
signals the simulator can be programmed to emulate. It
does not tell you how many signals it can create simul-
taneously. The next column, which is the “Number of
Simultaneous Signals,” tells you how many signals the
simulator can create at a single time. This allows the
simulator to create a dense environment of more than
a single threat. Typically, for pulsed-RF signal simu-
lations, more than one threat can be simulated with
a single RF signal generator, but with some dropped
pulses. Most multi-signal simulations will attempt to
simulate all the pulses of a signal, but will have to drop
some pulses because of pulse-on-pulse conditions.
The “Programmable” column defines if the system
is user-programmable or fixed to only generate a spe-
cific signal type and not changeable by the user. Most
of the systems listed can be programmed. Some al-
ready come supplied with some pre-programmed threat
simulations.
Look for our next survey on analog-to-digital con-
verters coming in the February 2017 edition.
 FLIGHTLINE AND PORTABLE EW SIMULATORS
SIMULATOR # OF SIMULTANEOUS
MODEL SPECTRUM COUPLED
PURPOSE SIGNALS SIGNALS
Dragoon ITCN; Dayton, OH, USA; +1-937-439-9223; www.dragoonitcn.com
CM2-T-47 CMDS Tester CMDS • • • •

CM2-T-130 CMDS Tester CMDS

DRS Network, Computing and Test Systems; Melbourne, FL, USA; +1-888-872-1100; marketing@drs.com; www.drs.com
Electronic Combat End-to-End Test System RWR, RF 500 MHz-40 GHz Coupled and Free Multiple 12
Jammer,MAWs space,
Enhanced EW End to End Tester RWR, UV/ 100 MHz - 40 GHz Coupled and Free Multiple 4-8
IR, CMDS, RF space,
Jammer, MAWs
Enhanced Common Optical Test Set (eCOETS) Simulates: Laser UV (solar blind), eye safe Free Space 2 2
Range finder, class 2 emissions. and Light Tight
Laser Designator 850 / 1550 nm Attachment to
and Beam Rider Laser class 1, 2, 3R (eye Sensors.
Threats safe at 10”
distance)
Pulse width 10ns – 1000ns
Handheld Threat Simulator RWR, Laser & .625-18 GHz and 26 to 40 Coupled and Free Multiple 1
Missile Threat GHz, Laser, Solar Blind space,
Simulation
Harris Electronic Systems; Fort Wayne, IN, USA; +1 (260) 451-4600; www.harris.com
AN/PLM-4 Radar Signal Simulator(RSS) RWR, ELINT, 500 MHz to 18 GHz,options Free space, direct, Fully 16
ESM, MWS, to add 50-500Mhz, 26- antenna coupler programmable,
Jammer 40Ghz and W-band: UV able to store
100 threats
in removable
module
64 CIED Field Test Set (CFTS) IED jammer • Free space or direct 1 No
couple
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

My-konsult; Solna, Sweden; +46 (0)70 344 03 50; www.mykonsult.com

TEMPO MY-03 RWR/ESM/ 2 - 18 GHz Free space, * *
Jammer test
Northrop Grumman Amherst Systems; Buffalo, NY, USA; 800-631-0610; www.es.northropgrumman.com
OMNI Pulseman Portable Combat RWR, jammer, 0.5 GHz to 18 GHz Free space, direct, 128 128
Electromagnetic Environment Simulator (CEESIM) ELINT Synthesized Source antenna coupler
1-2 Channels
OMNI Pulseman Portable Combat RWR, jammer, 2 GHz to 40 GHz Free space, direct, 128 128
Electromagnetic Environment Simulator (CEESIM) ELINT Synthesized Source antenna coupler
1-2 Channels
AOA Pulseman Portable Combat Electromagnetic RWR, jammer, 0.5 GHz to 18 GHz Up to 24 Amp/TDOA 128 128
Environment Simulator (CEESIM) ELINT Synthesized Source Ports
Up to 12 Amp/
phase/TDOA Ports
AOA Pulseman Portable Combat Electromagnetic RWR, jammer, 2 GHz to 40 GHz Up to 16 Amp AOA 128 128
Environment Simulator (CEESIM) ELINT Synthesized Source Ports
Environment Generation Analysis (EGA) RWR, jammer, 50 MHz - 40 GHz Digital 128 128
ELINT
 SIZE (HxWxL WEIGHT
PROGRAMMABLE POWER (W) FEATURES
inches/cm) (lb/kg)

Yes 40-50 W 5.5 x 7.5 x 8.2 cm 8 lb CM2-T-47 tester works with CM2-C-16 Collector unit; simulates all
munitions firing pins in up to 16 buckets (480 signals ).
Yes 40-50 W 5.5 x 7.5 x 8.2 cm 8 lb CM2-T-130 tester works with CM2-C-16 Collector unit; simulates all
munitions firing pins in up to 16 buckets (480 signals).

Yes and Encrypted 1,600 13in x 24in x 30in 260lbs. Hand Held Terminal (HHT) allows for walk around aircraft or sit in the
cockpit for testing.
Yes and Encrypted 1,000 13in x 24in x 30in 180lbs Hand Held Terminal (HHT) allows for walk around aircraft or sit in

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

the cockpit for testing. Modular design supports configuration of test
capabilites to support specific aircraft platform requirements.
Yes and Encrypted * 6.5in x 6.5in x 10in > 5lbs Realistic IR Laser simulation to Missile Warner systems for detection of
Laser Range Finder, Laser Designator and Beam Rider threats. Provides
repeatable on -aircraft test set to sensor and a consistent light tight testing
environment when required to baseline sytem performance and measure
sensor degradation over time.

Yes and Encrypted * 12in x 6.6in x 10in 8lbs All in One Threat Emmissions, Radar, Laser & Missiles. RF programmabel
CW, Pulse, Staggered Pulses. Fully menu driven system tailoed to different
languages. MOPPR friendly interface.

Fully programmable 90-240V, 50- 40 x 30 x 30 cm with 12 kg Operates from internal batteries or external AC power; extensive Built-In-
(Frequency, PRI, PRI 400Hz or battery cover on Test and designed to MIL-T-28800; Class C; Type II specifications. Over
type, PW, Scan type, powered (internal 2000 units already fielded
Scan Parameters, battery charger)
Power out, etc)

Yes • 15 x 34 x 29 cm 4.3 kg Tunable across the RF spectrum of interest, with amplitude threshold 65
adjustment; programmable for EW system growth, new systems and legacy
systems.

Yes max +20 dBm 320 x 170 x 90 mm 4.5 kg LHCP, RHCP.Handheld, 4-hr battery life,

Yes 1440W (12 A) 5.2 x 17.5 x 24.5 in. 50 lb (single) Full suite of signal programming tools. TWTA Control Interface, video output

Yes 1800W (15 A) 5.2 x 17.5 x 24.5 in. 90lb (dual) Full suite of signal programming tools. TWTA Control Interface, video output

Yes 1800W (15 A) 5.2 x 17.5 x 24.5 in. 90lb (dual) Full suite of signal programming tools. TWTA Control Interface, video output

Yes 1800W (15 A) 5.2 x 17.5 x 24.5 in. 90lb (dual) Full suite of signal programming tools. Fully dynamic scenario with platform
motion and geometry calculations.
Yes 100W 17 x 12 x 1 5 lb Full suite of signal programming tools. Fully dynamic scenario with platform
motion and geometry calculations.
 FLIGHTLINE AND PORTABLE EW SIMULATORS
SIMULATOR # OF SIMULTANEOUS
MODEL SPECTRUM COUPLED
PURPOSE SIGNALS SIGNALS
Textron Systems (AAI Corp.); Hunt Valley, MD, USA; +1 (410) 628-3434; www.textronsystems.com
AN/USM-670 (JSECST) EW, comms, 10 MHz - 18.5 GHz Antenna coupler Multiple 16
and navigation
systems
Advanced Architecture Phase, Amplitude and High density, 20 MHz - 22 GHz through Direct Couple Multiple: >256
Time Simulator (A2PATS) high fidelity 40 GHz 2048
laboratory EW
simulator
AN/GLM-11 Universal Test Set (UTS) IED jammer Communications Free space, direct Multiple •
couple

Integrated Tester for Aircraft Survivability DIRCM, LWR, RF Freq Range:Low 100 Free-space, direct Multiple 8
Systems (ITASS) RWR, MWR -1Ghz, High 1Ghz-18Ghz, connect cable
Millimeter 26 – 40Ghz

EO/IR Range: Laser 905nM,

Laser 1550nM, UV 275nM,
IR 3 -5 uM

Model 527 Radar Signal Simulator RWR 500 MHZ - 18 GHZ, Free space, antenna Multiple 8
28 GHz - 40 GHz coupler, direct
10-500 MHz option connect
Textron Systems (ESL Defence Ltd.); Southampton, Hampshire, UK; +44-2380-744272; www.esldefence.co.uk
IR Baringa IR MWS testing MWIR (2 colour) Free space 2 2 simultaneous
signals (IR)

Baringa 5.5 UV MWS testing UV Free space 1 1 signal (UV)

66
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

Multi-Spectral Test Set (MSTS-EO/IR) - UDL UV MWS, LWS, UV, MWIR, NIR (2 bands) Free space 4 4 simultaneous
DIRCM/IRCM signals (UV,
testing NIR, MWIR) + 1
detector
Multi-Spectral Test Set (MSTS-EO/IR) - UI3L UV/IR MWS, UV, MWIR (2 bands), Free space 5 5 simultaneous
LWS testing NIR (2 bands) signals (UV, NIR,
(DIRCM/IRCM MWIR)
option available)
Phantom UV MWS, LWS UV, NIR Free space 2 2 simultaneous
testing/aircrew signals
training

Ultra Electronics - EW Simulation Technology Ltd.; Farnborough, Hampshire, UK; +44-1252-512951; www.ewst.co.uk
PTS 8000 Multi Spectral Test Set RWR 500 MHz-18 GHz, 32-40 Free space, antenna 6 pulsed/CW No
GHz coupler per RF band
PTS 8000 UV UV MWS Solar blind UV region Free space 8 No

PTS 8000 LWR LWR 525nm,905nm,1550nm Free space 8 No

 SIZE (HxWxL WEIGHT
PROGRAMMABLE POWER (W) FEATURES
inches/cm) (lb/kg)

Yes >20 dB 26 x 19 x 22 in./ 98 lb/ 44.5 Fully automated test of complex, modern electronic combat and avionics
66 x 48 x 56 cm kg systems; cable sweep. Full Frequency Receiver included.

Yes Modular Modular Modular Continuous automatic alignment;

Configuration Configuration Configuration Physics-based geolocation;
Dependent Dependent Dependent High resolution doppler and Time Direction of Arrival capability

Yes • 7 x 14 x 9.5 in./ <12 lb/<5.4 Able to simultaneously measure and analyze background electromagnetic
17.8 x 35.5 x 24 cm kg environment;

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

8-hour battery operation.
Yes External Power: 16.8 x 13 x 9.75 in./ 21 lb/ 9.5 kg Typical operating range 10-60 m; includes countermeasures detector. Fully
+15VDC, 52W, 3.5A 42.7 x 33 x 24.8 cm integrated multi-spectral testing
nominal

Internal Power:
14.4-volt
rechargeable
Lithium Ion battery
pack
Yes • 12 x 14 x 8.5 in./ 27 lb/ 12.2 Typical operating range 120 feet from aircraft; DC or AC powered.
30.5 x 35.5 x 21.6 kg
cm

Yes (8 signatures) Removable 5.3 x 4.5 x 13.8 in/ <10 lb/ < Effective range typically 5-30 m.
rechargeable 135 x 115 x 350 mm 4.5 kg Hand held or remote controlled
battery or external (exc handle)
12 V supply
Yes (8 signatures) Removable 5.3 x 4.5 x 13.8 in/ <10 lb/ < Effective range typically 5-30 m.
rechargeable 135 x 115 x 350 mm 4.5 kg Hand held or remote controlled 67
battery or external (exc handle)
12 V supply
Yes (>1000 Removable 5.9 x 7.5 x 11.8 in/ <8.8 lb/ < Effective range typically 5-100 m;
signatures) rechargeable 150 x 190 x 300 mm 4 kg includes countermeasures detector
battery or external (exc handle) Hand held or remote controlled
12 V supplyy Can be networked and synchronised with other units
Yes (>1000 Removable 5.9 x 7.5 x 11.8 in/ <8.8 lb/ < Effective range typically 5-30 m;
signatures) rechargeable 150 x 190 x 300 mm 4 kg countermeasures detector optional
battery or external (exc handle) Hand held or remote controlled
12 V supply Can be networked and synchronised with other units
Yes (>1000 Removable 5.9 x 7.5 x 22.8 in/ <22 lb/ < Effective range typically 500-5000 m
signatures) rechargeable 150 x 190 x 300 mm 10 kg Shoulder mount or remote controlled
battery or external (exc handle) Can be networked and synchronised with other units
12 V supply

Yes 10.8v 4.5AH NiMH 22 x 17.5 x 25.5 cm 4 kg Modular design; offline software allows user to program hundreds of
battery complex emitters.
Yes 4 x AA battery 10.3 x 10.3 x 21.0 1.5 kg Uses UV LED technology to reproduce MWS/HFI threat profiles; lightweight;
cm battery powered.
No 4 x AA battery 10.3 x 10.3 x 21.0 1.5 kg Compact and lightweight.
cm
 Survey Key – FLIGHTLINE AND
P O R TA B LE E W S I M U L ATO R S
MODEL NUMBER OF SIGNALS
Product name or model number One specific signal or able to simulate many different signals?

PURPOSE SIMULTANEOUS SIGNALS

What function of the EW or SIGINT System does it test? How many signals can the device transmit simultaneously?
• CMDS = countermeasures dispenser system
PROGRAMMABLE
• COMINT = communications intelligence systems
Can the user program different signals?
• DIRCM = directed infrared countermeasures system
• ELINT = electronic intelligence system POWER
• IED = improvised explosive device jammer Power drain in Watts, VDC or VAC
• IR = infrared
• LWS = laser warning system SIZE
• MWS = missile warning system H x W x L in inches/mm
• RWR = radar warning receiver WEIGHT
• UV = ultraviolet Weight in lb/kg
SPECTRUM FEATURES
RF frequency range; EO/IR bands Additional features
• MWIR = mid-wave infrared
* Indicates answer is classified, not releasable
COUPLED or no answer was given.
How are the threat signals delivered into the EW system for
test or evaluation?
• Direct = directly injected
FEBRUARY 2017 SURVEY:
• Antenna coupler = RF coupler/hat
ANALOG-TO-DIGITAL CONVERTERS
This survey will cover analog-to-digital (ADCs) and digital-to-
• Free space = free-space radiation analog (DACs). Please e-mail JEDeditor@naylor.com to request a
survey questionnaire.

68

Dominate the RF Spectrum

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

Rugged, field-tested S2 systems

now offer the highest
dynamic range & sensitivity
over the widest bandwidth for
RF spectrum sensing.
The Spectrum
in a Flash
40 GHz
INSTANTANEOUS Bandwidth
Coverage Today…

… and Up To 110 GHz

On The Way!

www.S2Corporation.com Come visit us at the 53rd Annual AOC

International Symposium and Convention, Booth 632

834852_S2Corp.indd 1 2016-10-13 2:11 PM

 Move Beyond TWTs
Take advantage of what low voltage, integration friendly
solid state HPA’s have to offer over TWT’s and MPM’s.

Model BME69189-20/50 Model BME2969-200

6-18 GHz, 20 & 50 Watts* 2–6GHz, 200 Watts*
Solid State Power Amplifier Module Solid State Power Amplifier Module
n Full Power Across the Entire Bandwith n Highest Power Density to Footprint
n Maintains Output Power, Gain, and Ratio
Efficiency with Real World Load n High Efficiency Over the Entire
Conditions Bandwidth
n Low Harmonic Distortion n RF Input/Output Sample Ports
n Superior Harmonics AND Input /Output n Internal DC to DC Converters
VSWR n Optional T/R Switch Available
n Compact, Lightweight, and Usable in n Maintains Output Power with Real-
the Harshest Environments World Load Conditions
n 28 Vdc GaN Technology * 300 Watts coming soon!
n High Speed Blanking
*100 Watts Coming Soon!

Contact us today with your requirements and specs.

We’ll meet your needs and exceed your expectations.

Comtech...Simply More.

ISO 9001:2008 AS9100C: 2009

105 Baylis Road, Melville, NY 11747 • Tel: (631) 777-8900

Fax: (631) 777-8877 • www.comtechpst.com • sales@comtechpst.com
 Produced by
L
BA
O
L

G
AOC
EW SINGAPORE 2017
The Future of Electronic Warfare in the Asia-Pacific Region

In 2017, join us and connect with:

GET IN TOUCH
200+ delegates attending
team@ewsingapore.com
+44 (0) 20 7384 8102

15+ exhibiting companies

REGISTER AND
FIND OUT MORE
2 day conference programme
WWW.EWSINGAPORE.COM

credit: UK MoD Crown Copyright 2016

Lead Media Partner Organisers of Organised by

AOC Electronic Warfare
Singapore, 17-18 January 2017,
Marina Bay Sands, Singapore
Singapore is Asia’s meeting place
for the exploration of the future of
electronic warfare with EW operators,
commanders and industry participat-
ing. The event – taking place at the
Marina Bay Sands, Singapore from 17-18 January 2017 – will
feature displays from leading global suppliers, as well as a
thought provoking conference spanning two days.
AOC EW Singapore will consider the future of EW and EM Op-
erations in the changing light of current and emerging threats,
including Hybrid Warfare and Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD)
where potential opponents are out-performing the West. Or-
ganised by Clarion Events and produced by the AOC, EW Singa-
pore will look to replicate the success of the EW Europe event,
which is now in its 17th year.
Session topics will build on the successful format of previ-
ous years and include:
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
• Keynote addresses
• Operational updates and activities
• National perspectives
• Defensive and offensive capabilities
• Technological developments including autonomous
vehicles, swarm technologies and countermeasures.
• Future warfare – capability, integration and
interoperability
• Critical EM lines of development
• EM operations, information operations, cyber and net-
work enabled capability
• Industry briefs on new technology, innovations and
applications
• A networking reception.
The EW Singapore 2017 conference will address the theme 71
of The Future of Electronic Warfare in the Asia Pacific Region.
 EW Singapore
DAY ONE Tuesday 17 January 2017
08:00 Registration
08:50 Conference doors open
09:00 Welcome and introduction - Chairman’s opening remarks
Wing Commander John Clifford MSc CEng CITP OBE RAF (Retd)
AOC Director Global Conferences, UK
Session 1 – Welcome
09:10 AOC Welcome
AOC International Regional Director
Dr Lee Kar Heng Singapore Chapter President, Singapore
09:20 Opening Keynote:
09:50 Developments in Information (Hybrid) Warfare – How Well Does China Fare?
Professor David Stupples, Professor of Electronic and Radio Systems,
Director EW Research, City University, London, UK
10:20 Protecting Commercial Radar and Communications Systems
Dr Lee Kar Heng, Technical Chief,
TBSS Center for Electrical & Electronics Engineering, Singapore
10:50 Networking and refreshment break
Session 2 – Operational Focus
11:20 Tactical Operations & Special Missions in an Urban Environment
Daniella Pistoia, Corporate Chief Scientist, Elettronica SpA, Italy
72 11:45 The Electromagnetic Environment (EME) – NATO & UK Perspective
Wg Cdr John Clifford OBE RAF (Retd),
President AOC UK Chapter, Director JMC Defence Ltd. UK
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

12:10 Data Strategy & Modern Information Operations Across the Spectrum of Conflict
William Sokol, CTO, MarkLogic Pte, Singapore
12:35 Lunch break and Networking
Session 3 – EW Developments
13:45 An Advanced Integrated Holistic Approach for Naval EW Protection
& Situational Awareness Suite
Elbit Systems
14:10 Reserved
14:35 EW Threat Range Modernization
Paul M Vavra, BD Executive, DRS, US
15:00 Networking and refreshment break
Session 4 – EW & EM Technology
15:30 On-board Naval ECM Effectiveness
Filippo Neri, President, Virtual Labs Sri, Italy
15:55 The Challenges posed by Active Electronically Scanned Array (AESA)
Radars to EW Systems
Dr Sue Robertson, Director EW Defence Systems, AOC International Region 1 Director, UK
16:20 Reserved
16:45 Chairman’s closing commentary
17:00 End of Day One. Networking reception to be held in the Exhibition area
 EW Singapore
DAY TWO Wednesday 18 January 2017
08:50 Conference doors open
09:00 Chairman’s remarks
Dr Sue Robertson, AOC International Region 1 Director TBC
Session 5 – Cyber & Electromagnetic Operations
09:10 Keynote:
09:40 Combining Sensitive Data: Synergies & Differences Between EW and Cyber
Plath TBD
10:10 Yesterday’s Tactical EW is Today’s Tactical Cyber Electromagnetic Activities (CEMA)

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

Maj Chris Fogarty, OC 237 Signal Squadron, 14th Signal Regiment (Electronic Warfare), UK
10:40 Networking and refreshment break
Session 6 – Spectrum Dominance & Big Data
11:10 Big Data: Increasing Multinational EW interoperability
Through Harmonised Information Management Practices
Peter Davidoff, Spectrum Planning Engineer, Australia
11:40 Reserved
12:10 Spectrum Dominance – Staying Ahead of the Spectrum Evolution
Roland Castor, Head of EW & Strategic Concepts & New Business Airbus DS Electronics
& Border Security, Germany
12:40 Lunch break and Networking
Session 7 – Operational Support
73
13:40 Achieving Information Superiority in Secure Command & Control Environments
Jeremy Chappell, Managing Director, APAC, Thinklogical, US
14:10 Maritime Real-Time RCS Simulation& Prediction
Peter Huber, CEO, IBH Engineering, Germany
14:35 Reserved
15:00 Networking and refreshment break
Session 8 – Future Vision
15:30 Colonel Stephen Miller USAF (Ret.),Senior Research Engineer,
Strategic Program Development Lead, GTRI, US
15:55 Future Electronic Warfare TBC
Professor David Stupples, Professor of Electronic and Radio Systems,
Director EW Research, City University, London, UK
16:20 Stand-Up Panel – Invited Speakers
16:45 Chairman’s closing remarks
Appreciation
Farewell
17:00 End of Day Two / End of Conference
 new
products
WIDEBAND AMPLIFIER
Custom MMIC has introduced
the CMD233C4 amplifier, which
replaces its CMM4000 with a pack-
aged form in the 2-18 GHz range. The
wideband GaAs amplifier has a noise figure of 4.5 dB and
output 1 dB compression point of +20.5 dBm, delivers
over 9 dB of gain and operates from a single 3 to 6 volt
supply. The device is 50 ohm an the design eliminates
the need for external DC blocks or RF port matching. The
amplifier is designed for military, space and communi-
cations systems. Custom MMIC, Chelmsford, MA USA, +1
978-467 4290, www.custommmic.com.
SINGLE SLOT PXI FREQUENCY SYNTHESIZER
The MLMS synthesizer receives systems, converts fre-
quencies and tests and measures equipment. The series
provides 1 kHz frequency resolution over the 250 MHz to
16 GHz frequency range, power levels of +8 to +13 dBm
74 and a full band tuning speed of 1-3 mSec. Its features
include enhanced phase noise, 1kHz step size, optional
external reference of 10-200MHz, the ability to
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
fit into a single slot PXI and 5 line serial
and USB control. Micro Lambda Wireless,
Freemont, CA, USA, +1 510 770 922, www.
microlambdawireless.com.
ANTI-DRONE SYSTEM
Elbit Systems has intro-
duced the ReDrone system,
described as an anti-drone
protection and neutraliza-
tion system that provides
protection of closed air spac-
es, national infrastructures
and other critical areas against hostile drones penetrat-
ing a protected perimeter. According to the company,
ReDrone detects, identifies, tracks and neutralizes dif-
ferent types of drones that are flown within a range of
radio frequency communication protocols, as well as of-
fering an open system architecture, separating a drone’s
signals from its operator’s remote control signals, pro-
viding a 360-degree perimeter protection and enhanc-
ing environmental protection. Elbit Systems Ltd.; Haifa,
Israel, +972 4 8315315, www.elbitsystems.com.
SINGLE CHANNEL AND WIDEBAND
MODULE
The AMP1049A module covers the en-
tire instantaneous 2-6GHz frequency range
at 40W CW minimum and 50W CW typical with
flatness of less than 4dB peak to peak. This mod-
ule is enclosed in a small 4 x 2 x 1 and uses GaN devices
and operates from a 28VDC source at less than 10Amp. It’s
designed to be used with all single channel modulation
standards and applications that require high power and
ultra-wide band coverage, as well as EMI/FRI and High
Power Testing. Other features include built-in protec-
tion circuits and light-weight housing. Exodus Advanced
Communications, Henderson, NV, USA, +1 702 534 6564,
www.exoduscomm.com.
100 WATT L- & S-BAND RADIO FREQUENCY POWER
AMPLIFIER MODULE
The NuPower 12K08A provides saturated RF power of
100 Watts in L- & S-band (frequency coverage from 1.7
GHz to 2.5 GHz), with module efficiencies of up to 58
percent. The NuPower 12K08A offers 50 dB of RF gain
with a nominal input drive level of 0 dBm. Other features
include a PA aluminum chassis with improved heat dissi-
pation characteristics for higher temperature operation,
a compact size of 7.25” x 4” x 0.8” enabled for integration
into a wide variety of air- or ground-based tactical, test
or training platforms. The NuPower 12K08A can be used
with communications and telemetry systems to provide
range extension or with electronic warfare systems for
airborne electronic attack (AEA) at low and medium alti-
tudes, including unmanned aircraft systems (UAS). Nu-
Waves Engineering, Middletown, OH, USA, +1 513 360 0800,
www.nuwaves.com.
X-BAND RADAR SOLID STATE POWER AMPLIFIER
The model BMPC9X89X8-8000 X-band radar solid
state power amplifier operates over the 9.0 to 9.9 GHz
frequency range with instantaneous bandwidth of
500MHz. Generating 8000 watts, it features class AB
gallium nitride (GaN) technology, high output power
dynamic range, RF input and output sample detectors,
pulse width and duty factor protection, thermal and
load VSWR protection, and remote status/
control interface (ethernet). It is
designed for use in ruggedized
radar applications. Comtech PST,
Melville, NY, USA, +1 631 777-8900,
comtechpst.com. a
 ONE
PARTNER.
ANY
50 YEARS OF INNOVATION
AND EXPERTISE.
The industry’s broadest RF portfolio,
ultra-wideband converters, highly
integrated transceivers, Enhanced

MISSION.
Products and GaN technologies,
plus extensive subsystem design
capabilities, make Analog Devices the
one partner to help you conquer your
most critical mission challenges.

LEARN MORE ABOUT OUR CAPABILITIES IN ELECTRONIC

SURVEILLANCE AND COUNTERMEASURES
#ADIahead analog.com/EW
 Report from the EW
GCC 2016 Conference
76
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
T
he Electronic Warfare Gulf Cooperation Council
(EW GCC) 2016 conference was held October 25-26
in Abu Dhabi. Hosted by EW Command (UAE), more
than 300 delegates, mainly from GCC states and
Europe, participated in the event, which was orga-
nized by Tangent Link of the UK.
The conference, which was held at the armed forces officer
club in Abu Dhabi, was opened by UAE Commander EW Com-
mand Brigadier Staff Eng. Ahmed Khalfan Mohamed Al Qubaisi
and UAE Chief of Military Intelligence and Security General
Aqab Shaheen Al Ali. The first conference day covered the
topics of collaboration between electronic warfare and cyber
warfare. The second day brought up some critical insights in
current and future information warfare. Professor David Stup-
ples of City University London used Russian examples to show
how Information Warfare, using a combination of electronic
warfare, cyber warfare and psychological operations, can tip
nations into chaos. He also addressed some of the important
EW and cyber developments that countries need to consider in
order to “play in the new game.”
The conference also addressed the topic of cyber attacks
and whether they should be considered as acts of war. The
challenges in this area are mainly due to missing internation-
al regulations and laws that should be addressed soon. Brian
Weedon of the Secure World Foundation talked about EW and
satellites. He said that users need to change their mindset
about space platforms and explained that satellites and space
capabilities are essentially computers in space. Mitigating EW
and cyber attacks against satellites requires space operators to
learn lessons from other warfighting domains.
Another interesting presentation was delivered by W.J. van
den Berg of GEW Technologies, who discussed “Metadata – the
DNA of Signals.” He said that metadata is no longer considered
the lower level of information. It can yield information about a
target’s life patterns, as well as social and political links with-
in a group. Properly analyzing metadata often can be a more
powerful strategy than investigating signal content, yielding
far more insight with the same amount of effort.
The EW GCC 2016 conference included 29 exhibitors from
the Europe, South Africa and the US. Exhibitors regarded this
event as a unique opportunity to meet potential customers at a
time when cyber and electronic warfare are among the leading
priorities topics for many governments. The main goal of many
exhibitors was not to show their newest products but rather
to connect with customers and discuss requirements and ben-
efits. The conference also highlighted some of the challenges
facing the EW industry. For example, establishing EW part-
nerships among GCC states or creating partnerships between
European and GCC states still faces substantial political and
strategic hurdles.
Despite the fact that the EW GCC conference was much
smaller than many other EW conferences, it was extremely well
organized and focused on the EW challenges facing the GCC
members. All major and reasonable industries have been pres-
ent as well as key users of GCC EW organizations.
The conference clearly showed the strong cooperation be-
tween UK and UAE in the field of defense intelligence that
also was highlighted by UK Chief of Defence Intelligence Air
Marshal Philip Osborn CBE, RAF in his international welcome
address. It was refreshing to see UK military representatives
providing excellent support to their national EW industry dur-
ing the conference, which is obviously a more aggressive ap-
proach than most other European countries. – M. Niewöhner
and J. Knowles a
 CUSTOM
MODULES.
Our system-level expertise, and RF
to bits portfolio, enable us to
customize modules that meet your
most challenging specifications.

ANALOG DEVICES HMC8114 CRITICAL

MISSIONS.
POWER AMPLIFIER MODULE
5.8 GHz to 18 GHz
49.5 dBm typical saturated RF
output power (Pout)

LEARN MORE ABOUT OUR ADVANCED

CUSTOM MODULE CAPABILITIES
#ADIahead analog.com/ISS
 CROWS IN THE COMMUNITY

DIXIE CROWS SUPPORT

HABITAT FOR HUMANITY

T
he Dixie Crow Chapter chuckwagon crew, led by
the AOC’s own Chef Roadkill (a.k.a. Mark Leslein)
assembled on Saturday November 12, to feed the
Habitat for Humanity crew while they worked
on the Moye family home off of Orchard Way in
Warner Robins, GA. The crew prepared and served
the following menu: grilled brats with peppers and onions,
hotdogs, BBQ chicken served with baked beans, fresh fruit
salad, chips, homemade salsa, homemade brownies, and water
and soda.
Dixie Crow members in attendance included Mark and Mar-
tha Leslein, Ron Herpst, Bob Thrower, Lenwood and Betsy
Moore, Tom Miller, Deb Koenig, and Ken and Lisa Cirilli. a
78
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
 53
RD SE
AO E U
BO C S S AT
OT YM
H 1 PO
16 SIU
M
...the power in microwaves!

THE MICROWAVE
SPECIALISTS IN
SECURITY & DEFENCE,
RADAR, EW, AND
COMMUNICATIONS
APPLICATIONS
For over 70 years TMD has been at the forefront of
microwave technology. With a wide range of products
for airborne, ground-based and navel platforms, recent
developments have included ultra-lightweight and compact
MPMs (offering both TWT and solid state options).

For more information on our leading edge technology

email us at wecare@tmd.co.uk or visit our website.

Microwave Power Modules – Travelling Wave Tubes

TWT & Solid State

HV Power Supplies & Rugged Amplifiers Instrumentation

Capacitor Charging PSUs & Transmitters Amplifiers
 TH E H E AT I S O N
Defeat ing ATGM s
By Burt Keirstead
P
rior columns have focused on infrared counter-
measures for airborne platforms. This month
we’ll do a little ground poundin’ and look at how
countermeasures have been applied to main battle
tanks. Tanks have been a big part of military his-
tory as a means to project force on the ground. In
the modern era, after heavy use of tanks in World War II, the
concept of the Anti-Tank Guided Missile (ATGM) emerged as a
means to thwart tank capability. The Egyptians and Syrians
were notoriously effective during the Arab-Israeli War in the
1970s using Russian-made ATGMs to destroy or disable Israeli
80 tanks. Today, ATGMs are being used by rebels in Syria, who
are targeting Russian-made government tanks equipped with
Russian-made electronic defense systems.
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
In 2013, the last American tank temporarily left Europe-
an soil, more than 20 years after the Soviet Union collapsed.
There didn’t seem to be any more need for a US tank in a Europe
where the Iron Curtain was up, the Berlin Wall was down, and
the Fulda Gap scenario, in which the Soviets would invade the
West with their tanks and troops, seemed obsolete.
But, hold the presses; in historic irony, only a year later,
upgraded American Abrams tanks were sent back to Germany
in response to Russia’s move into the Ukraine and the gen-
eral threat that Vladimir Putin’s posturing poses to the Baltic
States and NATO. These new developments mean US armored
capability may still be needed “Over There.”
At first, it’s almost illogical to think about electronic coun-
termeasures for a tank. It’s survivability has overwhelmingly
depended on mobility and armor for much of its history.
For years, the dominant threat to a tank in battle was an-
other tank or an anti-tank gun. In World War II, the Allies
had guns, both on the ground and mounted on planes, which
were dedicated to killing tanks. During Desert Storm, the US
Air Force’s A-10 aircraft wreaked havoc on Iraqi tanks with its
nose-mounted GAU-8 Gatling gun raining a hail of metal on
targets.
As technology progressed, the guided missile also became
a threat to tanks. The first ATGMs were the French SS-10s and
SS-11s that appeared in the French inventory in the 1950s and
could be fired either dismounted or from a vehicle.
During the 1973 Arab-Israeli war, the Israel Defense
Forces (IDF) learned the hard way about the lethality of an
ATGM. After tank battles with the Egyptians and Syrians,
there were many wires strewn on the battlefield among the
disabled Israeli tanks, a telltale sign that a Soviet-made mis-
sile had taken out the tanks. The missile, which has the
NATO name AT-3 Sagger, was the Soviets’ first ATGM, and
like its counterpart, the SA-7 that is fired at helicopters, it
proliferated widely. As a first-generation ATGM, an operator
manually guided the Sagger to the target using a joystick,
from which guidance commands were sent to the missile by
wire. The Israelis eventually countered the Saggers by put-
ting a hail of fire on the joystick operators, but not before
losing hundreds of tanks.
Second-generation ATGMs featured improved guidance,
evolving from the Sagger’s manual command to line-of-sight
(MCLOS) mode to a semi-automatic command line-of-sight (SA-
CLOS) mode. In a SACLOS missile system, the gunner sights
the tank through an optical system that is collocated with the
missile launcher. Once fired from its tube, the missile is guided
to the target by a controller that makes a comparison of the
tank’s location in the optical sight to the missile’s position in
flight. The difference is computed, and the missile’s course is
automatically adjusted by transmitting the necessary course
corrections over a wire that pays out behind the missile. The
missile’s position is always known because there is a beacon in
the rear of the missile, transmitting back to the launch point,
enabling the difference between the current and desired tra-
jectories to be computed. Most SACLOS ATGMs are wire guided,
but some use an infrared beacon instead of a wire link to trans-
mit the guidance data.
One clear advantage to the SACLOS approach is that the
operator doesn’t have to guide the missile all the way in to
the target using the joystick. He is therefore less susceptible
to counter-fire, and more likely to hit the target. The US TOW
(Tube-Launched, Optically Tracked, Wire Guided) missile is a
SACLOS ATGM that is currently being used by rebels in the Syr-
ian conflict.
In thinking about top-level jamming requirements to de-
feat a SACLOS ATGM, it’s instructive to contrast them with the
 L-3 NARDA-MITEQ...SOLUTIONS
FOR EXTREME DESTINATIONS

Credit: Johns Hopkins University

Proven Mission-Critical Space-Qualified Components and IMAs

L-3 Narda-MITEQ combines more than 60 years of innovation and expertise in
microwave and RF technology to deliver performance and packaging solutions
not considered possible in the past. With amplifiers in operation on the New
Horizon Space platform and additional space-qualified components that include
couplers, power dividers, mixers, modulators, multipliers, oscillators and
IMAs, we are expanding the capabilities of many modern space programs.
When your next project demands a highly specialized approach, count on
L-3 Narda-MITEQ – your best resource for space-qualified solutions.

Learn more about all we have to offer by visiting us at nardamiteq.com, or call

us at (631) 231-1700.

Narda-MITEQ L-3com.com
 Radar sensors are visible on
the left-hand side of this Israeli
Merkava IV tank. (IDF photo)

requirements to defeat the helicopter’s
comparable missile threat, the infrared
MANPADS (Man-Portable Air Defense
System). A MANPADS, such as an SA-7,
82
Mistral or Stinger, is a fire-and-forget
system that computes its guidance cor-
rections by passively sensing its tar-
get’s heat radiation through the nose
of the missile. In jamming a MANPADS,
infrared energy from the jammer enters
through the “front door” of the mis-
sile’s IR seeker. On a SACLOS ATGM, the
countermeasure must go in through the
“back door” in order to drive the mis-

Look To Norden
sile off its course. This requires find-
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

ing a way to degrade the uplink data

coming from the launch point by either
confusing the sensor that detects the
missile’s beacon at the launch point,
or disrupting the operator. Along with
counter-fire, smoke is a means to dis-
rupt an operator, and smoke grenades
have been used as a countermeasure
when they can be dispensed after an
alert that the missile is approaching.
Block 26.5 - 40 GHz During Operation Desert Storm, the
Frequency Converter Down Converter 10.7 - 12.75
40-70 GHz 4 Input / 1 Output Down Converter US Army rapidly developed some active
electronic jamming systems to protect
Norden Millimeter designs Receivers, Down /Up Converters and
its ground vehicles from ATGMs in the
Switched Filters for the Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) market. Norden
has delivered a variety of Down and Up Converters to extend the battle to oust Saddam from Kuwait. The
operating frequency range of ELINT and SIGINT systems to 70 GHz. The AN/VLQ-6 and AN/VLQ-8, exploited the
down converters have been designed to accommodate input signals ATGM’s beacon by jamming the ATGM
from multiple antennas and provide a single output in the operating
frequency of most 0.5 -18 GHz receivers. launch point sensor with an electro-
optical signal that competed with the
missile’s beacon. These were simple,
low cost systems placed centrally on
the tank and were comprised of optical
sources and reflective optics that pro-
For more information on these products go to: jected either a modulated or un-modu-
www.nordengroup.com or call 530.642.9123 lated beam toward the launch point of
an ATGM.

803337_Norden.indd 1 2016-09-14 2:56 PM

 AOC Courses
L I V E AT T HE 53 R D ANNUAL SYMPO SIUM AND CONVENTION

Electronic Countermeasures - EW Against New Generation

Theory and Design Threats - UPDATE COURSE
Instructor: Kyle Davidson Instructor: Dave Adamy

The goal of this course is to educate the participants in the
the field of Electronic Countermeasures (ECM) and Electronic
Attacks (EA). This includes the complete countermeasures
development cycle from analyzing threat systems, to
developing jammer techniques, and finally confirming their
effectiveness.
Recent upgrades to legacy threats and a new generation of
threats present significant challenges to Electronic Warfare
equipment and tactics. We simply cannot continue doing
things the way we have been doing them, with significant
success, for decades. This is a practical, hands-on
course which covers 2016 threats and the new equipment
capabilities and Tactics required to meet the new threat
challenges.

Friday, December 02, 2016 Saturday, December 03, 2016 Friday, December 02, 2016 Saturday, December 03, 2016
08:00 until 17:00 EST 08:00 until 17:00 EST 08:00 until 17:00 EST 08:00 until 17:00 EST
Marriott Marquis, Washington, DC Marriott Marquis, Washington, DC

F O R M O R E I N F O R M A T I O N V I S I T W W W. C R OW S. O R G

On-Demand Courses
Fundamental Principles of An Introduction to RF and
Electronic Warfare Microwave Front Ends
Mr. Dave Adamy Dr. Warren du Plessis
This is an introductory Electronic Warfare course in eight three hour sessions. It provides August 01, 2016 until August 24, 2016
insight into the whole electronic warfare field at the systems and operational level. It
uses little math beyond algebra, yet the sources of important propagation and jamming For four weeks in August, Warren du Plessis will instruct participants for three hours on
equations are made amply clear. New threats and EW techniques are covered at an Monday and Wednesday afternoons over eight sessions. The sessions are available for
unclassified level. purchase individually or as the whole course at a discounted rate.

Advanced Principles of
Electronic Warfare
Mr. Dave Adamy
This Advanced Electronic Warfare course has eight three hour sessions. It is designed for
individuals who have completed a fundamental EW course or have significant experience
in the field. Legacy and new generation threats and EW techniques are covered at an
unclassified level. The course avoids deep mathematical coverage, explaining all concepts
in practical, physical terms. Each of the sessions includes lecture and in-class problems.
Although each session stands alone, the set of eight provides full coverage of the EW field.
Electronic Intelligence
- Principles and Practice
Kyle Davidson
The goal of this course is to educate participants in the principles and practice of
Electronic Intelligence (ELINT) for radar and communications systems. At the conclusion
of these modules you will have an understanding of the theory behind ELINT and be
able to apply it in practical scenarios. This includes estimating radar performance from
ELINT, using it to develop countermeasures, and hacking communications channels. This
course is composed of six modules designed with a progressive approach to learning the
principles and practice of ELINT. As a result it is recommended they be taken in order.
 As ATGMs have evolved, there are
now more sophisticated, fire- and-for-
get systems that include the US Javelin
and the Israeli Spike. These systems
are similar to advanced MANPADS in
that they have a sensor on the front
of the missile that provides an image
of the tank. They have the potential to
be jammed electronically but, like the
seekers on advanced MANPADS, they
are more difficult to defeat because of
their resistance to conventional jam-
ming techniques.
In recent years, much attention has
been devoted to Active Protection Sys-
tems (APSs), like the Israeli Trophy and
the US Quick Kill, as a means to defeat
ATGMs. These systems are attractive be-
cause they are effective against guided,
as well as unguided, anti-tank weapons.
The Trophy system uses radar to cue a
kinetic countermeasure (a barrage of
metal pellets) that intercepts the in-
coming round.
Electronic warfare systems usually
have to earn their way onto a platform.
A tank is arguably one of the harder
platforms for which to make the case for
84
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
838714_Epiq.indd 1
a jamming system as part of the coun-
termeasure. Cost alone is prohibitive. To
defeat the wide range of ATGM threats,
from TOW-like ATGMs to fire-and -orget
Javelins and Spikes, the same functions
of warning, pointing, and sophisticated
jamming that characterize MANPADS
countermeasures are ultimately re-
quired for ATGM countermeasures, as
well. But, the cost of MANPADS coun-
termeasure systems that are currently
protecting airborne platforms are in the
neighborhood of 20-50% of the cost of
the tank, a poor value proposition for
a tank installation. It’s easy to see why
an APS system might be more attractive
because it can defeat a wider class of
threats and uses a hard-kill response
that is likely to be less expensive than
a soft-kill response that must cover the
same range of ATGM threats. A down-
side to APS is the potential for casu-
alties to friendly troops near the tank
caused by the burst of metal fragments
from the countermeasure.
The Russians appear to be keeping
up with electronic countermeasures for
their tanks. There is relatively recent
High Power Solid State
Radar Amplifiers
www.ophirrf.com • 310.306.5556
2016-10-28 12:33 PM
796087_Ophir.indd 1
video footage showing rebels firing TOW
missiles at the Syrian Army’s Russian-
made tanks in Aleppo. Amid this and
other reports of tanks being engaged
by ATGMs in Syria, the Russian system,
the Shtora-1, is mentioned as an effec-
tive ATGM countermeasure system. The
Shtora-1 system is a more integrated
version of the US AN/VLQ-6 and AN/
VLQ-8 type systems mentioned above. It
has a laser-warning receiver to alert the
crew and cues both smoke grenades and
a beacon jammer similar to the one used
in the US systems.
With the recent developments in
Eastern Europe and the continued vola-
tility in the Mideast, it will be inter-
esting to see how the tank continues
to play a role in modern warfare. The
latest model tanks have better armor,
more maneuverability, and greater
situational awareness that make them
less susceptible to enemy fire. But,
with a lethal array of anti-tank weap-
ons to contend with, it seems tanks and
other ground vehicles will continue to
need some form of electronic defense in
the future. a
3/17/16 6:17 PM
46th Annual
Collaborative Electronic
Warfare Symposium
“Collaborative Electronic Warfare: Enabling
Collaborative EW Through Innovation and Invention”
APRIL 25-27, 2017 | NAWCWD PT. MUGU, CA
As EW warfighting requirements continue to evolve in their
complexity and interdependency, it is clear that future EW
systems must work collaboratively with other Air, Ground,
Surface Space and Cyberspace systems. The 46th Annual
Point Mugu Electronic Warfare Symposium will facilitate
the exchange of enabling concepts and provide a venue to
disseminate current research in the fields of Collaborative
Electronic Warfare. Prominent leaders, contributors and
representatives from the United States and Australian military,
government, academia, and industry will come together
to address current Electronic Warfare gaps and emerging
technologies in Collaborative Electronic Warfare required to
address these gaps.
F O R M O R E I N F O R M AT I O N V I S I T
CALL FOR
PRESENTATIONS
This call for presentations or demonstrations
challenges presenters to explore the way forward
in enabling collaborative EW through innovation
and invention. Presentations or demonstrations
from all United States and Australian Services,
DoD, Industry, and Academia are requested that
identify technical paths, options, and potential
opportunities for EW collaboration. Submitted
abstracts are specifically requested to address
one or more of the symposium sessions: threat
trends, collaborative EW science and technology
perspectives, cognitive and adaptive EW
technologies, coordinated/distributed networked-
enabled systems, and warfighter perspectives.
Amplifying information on these supporting
topics and draft agenda are referenced below.
Abstracts for presentations are required in
unclassified textual format. Please forward
abstracts to Ms. Shelley Frost at frost@crows.
org. The deadline is February 3, 2017. We
request that abstracts be limited to one page of
text or 400 words.
All sessions will be classified SECRET
releasable Australia.
www.crows.org.
 EW 101

Space EW – Part 7
Location of an EW Threat
By Dave Adamy

S
ince we are starting to talk about space-
based Electronic Warfare systems, we need
to consider the geometry between the sat-
ellite and hostile threat locations. This
month, we will consider threats on the sur-
face of the Earth. We will just call a hostile
transmitter or receiver a “threat.” An EW system on the
satellite will either intercept signals from a threat trans-
mitter or transmit jamming signals to a threat receiver
86 at the considered location.
As shown in figure 1, the location of the threat from
the satellite will be defined in terms of the azimuth and
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
CALCULATING THE LOOK ANGLES
The azimuth is the angle in a plane perpendicular to the vector
from the sub-vehicle point (SVP) from true North to the threat loca-
tion. The elevation is the angle between the SVP and the threat. For
the azimuth calculation, we need to consider the spherical triangle in
figure 2 defined by the North pole, the SVP and the threat location.
For convenience, we define the parts of the triangle in the way
we have in earlier discussion in this series: The capital letters
are for “angles” (i.e. the intersection of two great-circle planes
through the center of the Earth). The lower case letters are for
“sides” (i.e. the angle between points located on one of the great
circle planes that form the spherical triangle). Remember that, in a

elevation of a vector from the satellite that would point spherical triangle, both the sides and the angles are angles. In this
at the threat location, and the range between the sat- case A is at the North Pole, B is at the SVP, and C is at the threat
ellite and the threat. You could think of the vector as location. Side a (opposite angle A) is the path along the Earth’s
the pointing information for a satellite antenna aimed surface from the SVP to the threat. Side b is 90° less the latitude of
at the threat. the threat location. The latitude is, of course, the geocentric angle
from the equator up to some point on
the Earth’s surface. Side c is 90° less
the latitude of the SVP.
N Azimuth North
Horizontal
To threat Pole CALCULATING THE AZIMUTH
Plane
TO THE THREAT
The azimuth to the threat is angle
THREAT
B. (This is what we want to calculate.)
Since we start the problem by enter-
Center of ing the locations of the SVP and the
Earth threat, we know the sides b and c and
the angle A. Angle A is the longitude dif-
Elevation ference between the SVP and the threat.
To threat (∆ longitude). Before diving into these
trigonometric equations, you may want
to review the July EW101 column which
Sub-vehicle defines all of the plane and spherical
Point trigonometric formulas we will be using
over the next few columns.
First, we calculate side a from the
Fig 1: The azimuth and elevation angle from nadir define the direction to a threat from
the satellite. (spherical) law of cosines for sides:

Fig 1: The azimuth and elevation angle from nadir define the direction
 The Absolute
Authority In
Electronic
Warfare

The Journal of
Electronic Defense
in Print and Online
As the final word in electronic defense, you rely on JED as your go-to source on
electronic warfare throughout the year but did you know that in addition to print, JED
is also emailed to you in a digital format? The digital edition of JED lets you virtually
flip through pages, forward articles of interest to colleagues and click on ads to be
redirected to the company’s website. Enjoy JED wherever you are, in print and online.
 E W 101

the Earth. To be consistent with our

Longitude spherical triangles, we will use capital
North
Pole letters at the Angles and lower case for
the sides. But, of course, since this is
Threat a plane triangle, the sides are physical
Location
lengths – rather than geocentric angles.
Latitude E is at the satellite, F is at the threat,
Sub-vehicle of Threat and G is at the center of the Earth.
Point The side e is the radius of the Earth
A (6,371 km). The side f is the semi-major
Latitude
of Sub-vehicle axis (the radius of the Earth plus the
b
point c satellite altitude = 10,560 km), angle G is
the side a from figure 2 above (21.57°),
C and side g is the propagation distance
Center a
between the satellite and the threat.
of Earth B
The law of cosines for plane triangles
is: g2 = e2 + f2 - 2ef cos(G)
Fig 2: A spherical triangle is formed between the North pole, the sub-vehicle point and the
threat location
Plugging in values and solving for g:
g = sqrt[63712 + 105602 – 2 (6371)
Cos a = cos b cos c + sin b sin c cos A (10560)(0.930)] = 5193 km
Now that we know side a, side b and angle A, we can find This is the propagation range from the satellite to the threat.
angle B fromFigthe
2: A sphericallaw
(spherical) triangle is formed between the North pole,
of sines: To find the elevation angle to the threat (angle E) from the
the sub-vehicle point and the threat location plane triangle law of sines:
The sine of angle B = sin b sin A / sin a
For example, let’s choose a low Earth orbit with a period of 3 SinE/e = sinG/g,
hours. From table 2 in the June 2016 EW101 column, this satellite so sinE = e SinG/g
will have a semi-major axis of 10,560 km. Let’s specify that it has Plugging in the values: E = arcsin[(6371)(0.368)/5193] = arc-
a circular orbit. Then it will be at a constant altitude of 4,189 km. sin(.451) = 26.8°
88 Our SVP is at 30° North latitude and 100° East longitude.
The target we are considering is on the surface of the Earth at WHAT‘S NEXT
45° North latitude and 120° East longitude Next month, we will continue our discussion of space EW
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

The dimensions of the spherical triangle parts in the for- with the calculation of the range to the horizon and then the
mula are: determination of the amount of time that the satellite can see
Angle A = 20° the threat in a direct overhead pass. For your comments and sug-
Side b = 90° - 45° = 45° gestions, Dave Adamy can be reached at dave@lynxpub.com. a
Side c = 90° - 30° = 60°
Plugging these values into the spher-
ical triangle for sides: Elevation
Angle Propagation
Cos a = cos(45°) cos(60°) + sin(45°) Satellite E
Range
sin(60°) cos(20°)
= ( 0.707 x 0.5) + (0.707 x 0.866 x 0.940)
= 0.930 g
H
Threat
So side a = arccos (0.930) = 21.57° Location
Now, from the spherical law of sines: F
Sin (angle B) = sin(45°) sin(20°) /
f
sin(21.57°) RE
= (0.707 x 0.342 ) / 0.368 = 0.657 e
So angle B = arcsin(0.657) = 41.08°
This is the azimuth angle to the Side a RE
From
target.
Figure 2

CALCULATING RANGE AND ELEVATION Center G

TO THE THREAT LOCATION
Now consider figure 3. This is a plane
triangle in the plane that includes the
satellite, the threat and the center of
of Earth
Fig 3: The elevation from nadir and range to a threat from a satellite can be determined from the
plane triangle defined by the satellite, the threat and the center of the Earth.
Fig 3: The elevation from nadir and range to a threat from a satellite
can be determined from the plane triangle defined by the satellite,
the threat and the center of the Earth.
AOC SPONSORSHIP
OPPORTUNITIES IN 2017
The AOC bridges the gap between Electromagnetic Warfare practitioners,
Industry partners, Policymakers, and procurement decision-makers.
For over 50 years, Electronic Warfare (EW), Electromagnetic Spectrum Operations (EMSO), Cyber-
Electromagnetic Activities (CEMA), and Information Operations (IO) professionals from military, government,
industry, and academia have looked to the Association of Old Crows (AOC) to provide access to emerging
technologies and the latest developments to protect the warfighter.

Either EMS Professionals know about your organization’s products,

capabilities and technologies… or they don’t!
By partnering with the AOC, Industry Partners have a variety of ways to connect with members throughout
the year. Stay relevant to your customer base, participate in high-level discussions and, most importantly,
nurture relationships with key contacts.

AOC Conferences, Webinars, Courses, and the Annual AOC International

Symposium & Convention are the perfect place to:
+ Target a niche audience or reach out to a broad + Get immediate feedback and accelerate
market, depending on event topic and attendee the buying process
composition + Launch a new product
+ Develop personal relationships with clients
+ Raise brand awareness
+ Showcase a full product range

Secure your sponsorship positions TODAY...

before your competition does.
Contact the AOC online at www.crows.org/sponsorships, or over the phone at (703) 549-1600
Our expert staff is able to customize sponsorship and exhibit opportunities that help your organization
expand your market share in the Electromagnetic Warfare community.
 Cyber Electromagnetic
Activity 2016
October 17-20, 2016 | Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD
Report from the 2nd Annual
Army Cyber Electromagnetic
Activity Conference (CEMA) 2016
By Brandon Pollachek, PEO IEW&S PAO
W
ith the theme of “Achieving Overmatch through the
Convergence of Cyber, Signal, Electronic Warfare,
Intelligence, and Space Capabilities,” on their mind,
more than 800 Soldiers, Joint partners industry
90 members and partnering nations descended upon
Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, for the Second
Annual Cyber Electromagnetic Activity (CEMA) Conference.
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
The CEMA conference, which is co-sponsored by the Army and the
Association of Old Crows (AOC), was held from Oct 17-20 with a series
of keynote speeches, technical sessions, networking opportunities and
capability displays.
Exploring how the Army can provide the Joint Force with multiple
options in the areas of electronic warfare, cyber, and electromagnetic
spectrum operations and establishing the best ways to integrate these
efforts with multiple partners, while operating across multiple domains,
and presenting adversaries with multiple dilemmas was the overarching
purpose of the conference according to Col. Marty Hagenston, Project
Manager Electronic Warfare & Cyber (hosting organization). “The group
met to discuss all things CEMA from user sessions designed to identify
current issues and introduce initial problem solving amongst field unit
representatives, system developers and associated policy makers.”
In just its second iteration, the CEMA conference has quickly grown
in popularity with an approximate boost of 60 percent in attendance to
now include participation from all major Army Commands. Due to the
evolving threat the need for the CEMA community to step to the fore-
front of DoD planning is essential.
“This October marked 15 years of persistent conflict where the
Army has enjoyed a distinct technological advantage in its fight
against terrorism and in the conduct of counter-insurgency opera-
tions. Today, we are on the brink of a new era of great power com-
petition conflict. With a resurgent Russia and an escalating China, a
civil war in Syria with international implications as well as Iran and
North Korea steadily flexing their military presence, all are forces to
be reckoned with,” noted Mike Ryan, Deputy Proj-
ect Manager, Electronic Warfare & Cyber and Confer-
ence Chairman.
“All are employing advanced electronic warfare
and cyber capabilities at a rapid rate. Given these
recent developments from prospective near-peer ad-
versaries, the Army must prioritize competing over-
match capabilities against limited resources. An
innovative approach to this problem is to develop an
effective enterprise capability convergence of cyber,
signal, electronic warfare, intelligence, information
operations, and space capabilities. The idea of capa-
bility convergence as a combat multiplier is the basis
for this year’s conference theme.”
Laying the groundwork for the conference keynote
speakers to include: Maj. Gen. Bruce Crawford, Com-
manding General, Communications Electronics Com-
mand and Aberdeen Proving Ground; Maj. Gen. Kirk
Vollmecke, Program Executive Officer-Intelligence,
Highlighted Topics
◗◗ Emerging Threats, Capability Gaps,
Requirements and Doctrine
◗◗ CEMA Acquisition Imperatives
◗◗ EW/Cyber/Signal/Intelligence Convergence
◗◗ Maintaining EW/Cyber Overmatch
– Operational Perspectives
◗◗ Science and Technology Trends in CEMA
◗◗ Advanced Concepts & Technology
◗◗ Experimentation, Exercises and Training
◗◗ Joint Partnering and Industry Perspectives
Electronic Warfare & Sensors, Maj. Gen.
John Morrison, CG, Cyber Center of Ex-
cellence and Ft Gordon; Henry Muller,
Director, Communications-Electronic
Research Development and Engineering
Center; Kevin Coggins, Direct Reporting
Program Manager, Positioning, Naviga-
tion & and Timing; Col. Keith Hirschman,
Director of Emerging Technologies, Army
Rapid Capabilities Office and David Hine,
AOC International President, addressed
their organization’s roles and perspec-
tives in tackling CEMA challenges.
Electronic Warfare systems were on display during the 2nd Annual Cyber Electromagnetic Activity
(CEMA) conference held on Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, Oct 17-20.
During his welcoming comments,
Crawford emphasized that investments
need to be made in the future to address
the new strategic realities. He also im-
plored the CEMA community to ensure
they don’t miss the opportunities avail-
able because the window for the future
is closing.
In a budget constrained environment
choices will need to be made regarding
the best solutions available to address
CEMA challenges. “Something no one
wants to talk about is divestiture. What
we need to do is identify what we have
to stop doing and transition that fund-
ing into what we need to do going for-
ward to find comprehensive solutions,”
said Crawford.
Generating the questions and areas
that the conference should focus on
(see sidebar) was paramount in Voll-
mecke’s comments. Additionally, he left
the audience with some key concepts
to consider. “In the past we achieved
‘Overmatch’ – looking into the future
that may no longer be an achievable
objective with the different view to im-
pose spectrum dilemmas to create win-
dows of superiority for friendly forces,”
said Vollmecke. “We must present inte-
grated EW, SIGINT, and Cyber capabili-
ties across multiple domains to outpace
our adversaries.”
In discussing how to best pace the
threat, Vollmecke suggested a changed
approach that emphasizes incremental
fielding, adaptable prototyping, rapid
engineering/integration, and small and
frequent software releases with direct
user and stakeholder involvement. “We
must pursue a different acquisition
model for aerial ISR (Intelligence, Sur-
veillance, and Reconnaissance), EW, and
offensive cyberspace operations. Our
cultural mindset must place greater em-
phasis on ‘deliver now.’”
Vollmecke stressed that PEO IEW&S’
core activities are in the middle of rap-
idly congested and contested electro-
magnetic spectrum. “EW capabilities
have atrophied and we must make the
investment in our people and re-estab-
lish those critical strategic relationships
and industry support partnerships. We
must also recognize that we are in com-
petition with the commercial sector and
we must adapt too it.” He also empha-
sized the importance of cross-Service
experimentation, operational employ-
ment, and joint and coalition collabora-
tive development.
With an eye to toward the research
and development arena, Muller stated,
“CEMA domain advancements are often
not due to novel technologies, but rath-
er new applications of existing tech-
nologies. At CERDEC, we look to leverage
the best of breed technology as part of
an integrated capability set and antici-
pate and mitigate known operational
gaps and challenges through novel ap-
plications of technologies.”
“During the past year, the Army
has emphasized Cyber and CEMA situ-
ational understanding rather than only
situational awareness. We use to look
at ‘what do we know,’ approaching it as
‘now that we know, how will the mission
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
be effected and what are we going to do
about it?’” added Muller.
The conference also served as a plat-
form for leaders to discuss the recent
standup of the Army Rapid Capabilities
Office, which aims to accelerate critical
capabilities to the field to overcome ur-
gent and emerging threats. Hirschman,
described the office’s initial focus areas
of cyber, electronic warfare, surviv-
ability and positioning, navigation and
timing, as well as its unique focus on
capabilities that will deliver operational
effects within one to five years – a mis-
sion that is complementary to both the
Army Rapid Equipping Force and longer- 91
term programs of record.
“Where the Rapid Capabilities Of-
fice comes into play can be summed up
in ‘three Ds:’ demand, decision-makers
and development,” Hirschman said.
“Our demand signal comes from the
Combatant Commanders and what they
need to achieve overmatch in their
areas of responsibility. We will pres-
ent a full-range of potential solutions
to the Army’s decision-makers, name-
ly the Secretary and Chief of Staff of
the Army, who are both on the Board
of Directors. Their decisions will drive
projects undertaken by the Rapid Ca-
pabilities Office, allowing us to reach
for high-risk, high-reward capabilities.
Finally, development will be needed, in
most cases, as we’re not buying items
off the shelf for immediate fielding –
we will work with program managers,
the Army Science & Technology com-
munity and industry to adapt, enhance
and integrate selected technologies.”
Due to the criticality of the CEMA mis-
sion and the success of the first two con-
ferences, plans are already in the works
for a larger conference next year. a
 A O C 5 3 RD A N N U A L I N T E R N AT I O N A L
SYMPOSIUM AND CONVENTION

THANK YOU TO
OUR SPONSORS
CONVENTION HOST

PLATINUM SPONSORS

SILVER SPONSORS

Advanced Microwave Signal Generation

BRONZE SPONSORS

CONTRIBUTORS
CSIR • Elbit-Elisra • Giga-tronics • Harris • Raytheon

T
he AOC will recognize the premier lead-
ers in EW, IO and EMS Operations fields
throughout our 53rd Annual Symposium
and Convention. Please join us in celebrat-
ing these award winners for their exempla-
ry service to our community. The Gold Medal Award
is the highest award given by the AOC for outstand-
ing advances and contributions in all fields of EW and
IO. The Gold Medal Award will be presented during
the Opening Session on Tuesday, November 29th.
GROUP 1 – AOC PRESTIGE
Gold Medal Award
The Honorable Joseph R. Pitts
Hal Gershanoff Silver Medal
Col Douglas “Chopper” Lamb,
USAF (Ret)
Joseph W. Kearney Pioneer
Award
Dr. Jim Wickes
2016
AOC
Award
Winners
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
The Hal Gershanoff Silver Medal Award is presented
to an AOC member to recognize outstanding service
in furthering the goals of the Association or its Chap-
ter Organization(s). It is the highest award given to a
member for service to the AOC. The Hal Gershanoff
Silver Medal, the Colonel Anton D. Brees Lifetime Ser-
vice Awards and the Joseph W. Kearney Award will
be presented at the Annual Banquet on Wednesday,
November 30th. All other Individual awards will be
presented at separate venues.
93
Anton D. “Tony” Brees Lifetime Service Award
Mr. Laurence Edward Bode
WG CDR Phil Davies, RAF (Ret)
Col Joseph Durso, USA (Ret)
GROUP 1 cont’d. on next page
 AOC Award Winners

GROUP 1 cont’d. from previous page GROUP TWO –

ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM
AOC Technology Hall of Fame
OPERATIONS (EMSO) AWARDS
Mr. Jeffrey
Anderson

Dr. Clive A.C. McMullin Electronic Jeffrey B. Jones Cyber

Coleman Attack Award Operations Award
Captain James Mr. Charles Kendzierski
Maday, Jr., USAF

Mr. Michael
Panopoulos
94
Electro-Optical/
Jerry Sowell Electronic Infra-Red Award
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

Protect Award Mr. Phil Maciejewski

Mr. Roderic Perry

Dr. Stephen
Schneider

Spec 4 James Davis

Mr. James John Marks Electronic Maintenance Award
Van Kirk Warfare Support Award TSgt William Woosley, USAF
Mr. Stewart James

Electromagnetic (EM)
Battle Management Award
JEWC JEMSO
Integration Branch

CTTCM Clay A Conner

Training Award
Capt Kai N. Grimmell, USAF

GROUP THREE -
ELECTROMAGNETIC SPECTRUM (EMS) PROGRAM AWARDS
Stanley B. Hall Executive
Management Award
Ms. Karen Brigance
Clark G. Fiester Program
Management Award
Maj Nathan Yerrick, USAF
GROUP FOUR – MILITARY SERVICE
Military Service Award
– Air Force
Capt Kyle Eichorst, USAF
Military Service Award – Army
VROD IPT
AOC Award Winners
Integrated Product
Team Award
F-22 Electronic Warfare Defense
Systems Team
Military Service Award
– Coast Guard
LT (0-3) Evan Richter, USCG
Military Service Award – Navy
LCDR Kristen Levasseur, USN
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
Test & Evaluation Award
Capt Brian O’Dell, USAF
International Achievement
Award 95
Mr. John Gates
Military Service Award
– International
Major Isaac Adcock, USAF
Outstanding Unit Award
– Air Force
Dr. Stephen Schneider
53rd Electronic Warfare Group
GROUP 4 cont’d. on next page
 AOC Award Winners

GROUP 4 cont’d. from previous page

Outstanding Unit Award Outstanding Unit Award –

– Marine Corps (IO/Cyber) Navy (Air)
Outstanding Unit Award III Marine Expeditionary Force Electronic Attack Squadron 139
– Army (IIIMEF) (VAQ139)
4th Infantry Brigade Combat
Team (Airborne) 25th Infantry
Division Electronic Warfare
Cell Team

Outstanding Unit Award –

Outstanding Unit Award Navy (Shore)
– NATO (Operational EW) Navy Information Operation
96 NAEW & CF E-3A Component Command San Diego

Outstanding Unit Award

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

– Marine Corps (AEW)

Marine Tactical Electronic Warfare
Training Squadron 2

Outstanding Unit Award –

Navy (Surface)
USS Farragut (DDG 99)

2016 Chapter of the Year Winners

Large Category

Two-way tie for Chapter of the Year – Dixie Crow Chapter and the UK Chapter
 AOC Award Winners
LARGE CATEGORY cont’d. from previous page
NEW

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

Capitol Club Chapter – Distinguished Chapter

97
Kittyhawk Chapter – Distinguished Chapter

Medium Category

APG Susquehanna Chapter – Chapter of the Year

Patriots Roost Chapter – Distinguished Chapter

CHAPTER OF THE YEAR AWARDS cont’d. on next page

787753_CurtissWright.indd 1 1/11/16 11:12 PM
jed-board-set-2016.indd 1 11/01/2016 16:41:02
 AOC Award Winners

MEDIUM CATEGORY cont’d. from previous page

Maple Leaf Chapter – Distinguished Chapter

Garden State Chapter – Distinguished Chapter

Billy Mitchell Chapter – Distinguished Chapter

98
India Chapter – Excellent Chapter
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

Small Category

Pikes Peak – Distinguished Chapter

Palmetto Roast – Chapter of the Year

Aardvarks Roost Chapter – Distinguished Chapter

Lafayette Chapter – Distinguished Chapter

 AOC Award Winners

SMALL CATEGORY cont’d. from previous page

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

Mountain-Western Region
Gulf Coast Crow’s Nest Chapter – Cochise Crows Chapter
– Distinguished Chapter

2016 Region Chapter

Growth Award
Congratulations to the following chapters for having
the largest membership increase in their region.
Pacific Region –
Frozen Crows Chapter

99

Northeast Region – Granite State Chapter

International Region I – India Chapter

Southern Region – Dixie Crow Chapter

International Region II – ROK Roost Chapter

Central Region – Kittyhawk Chapter Overall increase winner – India Chapter

 news

RUTGERS UNIVERSITY ARMY ROTC CADETS EARN

THE 2016 AOC SCHOLARSHIP AWARD

The Garden State Association of

Old Crows (AOC) is a professional,
non-profit Electronic Warfare
organization that is engaged in
the science of Electronic Warfare
(EW) and Information Operations
100 (IO). AOC Chapters nationwide
sponsor a variety of educational
opportunities including hosting
seminars, lectures, awarding
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

grants and scholarships, as well

as studies and analysis to support
aspects of national defense. The
Garden State AOC Chapter awards
Cadet Mellody $10,000 in scholarship funds to
Cadet McCraw Rutgers Army ROTC Cadets yearly
Cadet Morris to enhance educational benefits
and generate interest among
Cadet Onoshko Cadets in EW and IO as possible
Cadet Kim future military career paths.

EMERALD COAST CHAPTERS OF ITEA AND AOC AWARDS PRESENTATION

 AOC as sociation news

AOC 2016 ELECTION RESULTS

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

REDSTONE REBEL
ROOST CHAPTER:
REVITALIZATION ON
THE HORIZON

101

813511_Boger.indd 1 5/25/16 11:17 AM

Radio Signal Monitoring Solution

HF, VHF, UHF Monitoring

A softwarebased monitoring
solution for multi-channel
recording,classication and
Ol’Heidelberg Restaurant in Huntsville, decoding. Scalable and
AL. Pictured L to R: Scott McPheeters,
Matt Ko, Lisa Fruge’-Cirilli, Ken Cirilli,
modular by all means.
Susan Askew Simply connect an SDR and
Redstone Rebel Roost Leadership: Scott start monitoring and decoding
McPheeters, Chapter President, and the most advanced protocols.
Susan Askew, Chapter Vice President
Visit us at 53rd Annual AOC International
along with new member Matt Ko met
Symposium and Convention, booth 230
with AOC President Elect, Lisa Frugé-
Cirilli and Ken Cirilli to discuss chapter
revitalization. Conversation and Part of the product line www.go2signals.de
discussions were phenomenal!

834869_go2SIGNAL.indd 1 2016-10-12 12:21 PM

 AO C as so ciation news

2016 NEW JERSEY KITTYHAWK CHAPTER PRESENTS

RUN FOR THE NATIONAL AOC AWARDS
FALLEN – AOC GSC
PARTICIPATION

Mr. Keith Everly (Kittyhawk Chapter President),

Mr. Joe Koesters (AOC Central Regional
Director), Col Martin O’Grady (PEO ISR/SOF),
and Mr. Philip Maciejewski

102
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

CEMA AWARDS PRESENTATION

 AOC as sociation news

PALMETTO ROOST AOC MILITARY SERVICE

CHAPTER HOSTS AWARD – NAVY PRESENTATION
DAVE ADAMY

The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

MO hav e
VE e
D!
W

103

43 Lathrop Road Extension 860-564-0208

Plainfield, CT 06374

834886_ARSProducts.indd 1 2016-10-26 2:41 PM

836642_Dynamic.indd 1 2016-10-07 12:16 PM

 AOC Industry and Institute/University Members
SUSTAINING Analog Devices Giga-tronics Inc. QPAR Antennas USA
BAE Systems Anaren Microwave, Inc. GTMR Inc. Radio Frequency
Ball Aerospace & Annapolis Micro HP Marketing & Consulting Wust GmBh Simulation Systems Inc.
Technologies Group Systems, Inc. Innovationszentrum Fur Research Associates
Bharat Electronics LTD Anritsu Company Telekommunikations of Syracuse, Inc. (RAS)
The Boeing Company ApisSys SAS -technik GmbH (IZT) Rincon Research Corporation
Chemring Group Plc Aselsan A.S. Intelligent RF Solutions Rohde & Schwarz
ISPAS as GmbH & Co. KG
DRS Defense Solutions Astra Microwave Products Ltd.
IW Mircowave Products Division Roschi Rohde & Schwarz AG
Electronic Warfare Associates Atkinson Aeronautics &
Technology, Inc. JT3, LLC Rotating Precision
General Atomics
Mechanisms
General Dynamics Avalon Electronics, Inc. Kerberos International Inc.
S2 Corporation
Harris Corp. Azure Summit Kranze Technology
Technologies, Inc. Solutions, Inc. (KTS) SAZE Technologies
Keysight Technologies
Base2 Engineering LLC KRATOS GENERAL MICROWAVE SciEngines GmbH
Lockheed Martin Mission Systems and
Battlespace Simulations CORPORATION Scientific Research Corp.
Training (MST)
BEEcube Inc. KRYTAR, Inc. Semper-Fortis Solutions LLC
Mercury Systems
Berkeley Nucleonics Kudelski Security, A Division of Signal Hound
Northrop Grumman Corporation
Nagravision S.A. SimVentions
Raytheon Company Bittium
L-3 Communications Spectranetix, Inc.
Rockwell Collins Blue Ridge Envisioneering, Inc.
Cincinnati Electronics
CACI Internatoinal Inc. Spectrum Instrumentation Corp.
Rohde & Schwarz USA L-3 Narda-MITEQ
CISR Babcock International Group Spherea GmbH
Saab L-3 TRL Technology
Cognitive Systems Corp. SR Technologies
Leonardo-Finmeccanica
Colorado Engineering Inc. SRC, Inc.
MILITARY UNITS Communicaitons Supply and
LGS Innovations
SRCTec, Inc.
453 EW Squadron Research LIG Next1 Co., Ltd.
Support Limited SRI International
51 Sqn, Royal Air Force LS Telcom AG
Comtech PST Corporation STEATITE
Japan Air Self-Defense Force MacAulay-Brown
Concord Components Inc. Stimulus Engineering
JEWOSU MAROPS Limited
CPI Sunshine Aero Industries
VMAQ-1 MarServices GmbH
Crane Aerospace & Electronics SynQor
VMAQ-2 Mass Consultants
CRFS Limited Systems & Processes
VMAQ-3 MBDA France Engineering Corp. (SPEC)
104 CSIR DPSS
VMAQ-4 MC Countermeasures, Inc. TCI International Inc.
Cubic Defence
MDA Systems Ltd. Tech Comm Inc.
Dayton-Granger, Inc.
MegaPhase, LLC Tech Resources Inc
INSTITUTE/
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016

dB Control
Meggitt Defense Systems TECOM Industries
Decodio AG
UNIVERSITY Meggitt Target Systems TEK Microsystems, Inc.
Electronic Warfare Studying Group, Defense Engineering Corporation
MICREO Limited Tektronix Inc.
Korean Institute of Electromagnetic Defense Research Associates
Engineering & Science Micro Lambda Wireless Teledyne Microwave Solutions
DEWC Pty Ltd
Georgia Tech Research Micro-Coax, Inc. TERMA A/S
DHPC Technologies, Inc.
Institute (GTRI) Microwave Products Group Textron Systems
Digital Receiver
Mercer Engineering Technology Inc. Milso AB Textron Systems Electronic
Research Center DragoonITCN The MITRE Corporation Systems UK Ltd.
National EW Research and D-TA Systems, Inc. Modern Technology Thales Suisse SA
Simulation Center Solutions, Inc. Third Wave Strategies LLC
Dynetics, Inc.
Riverside Research Institute Mountain RF Sensors Inc. Times Microwave Systems
e2v, Inc.
MULTICONSULT SRL TINEX AS
Elbit Systems EW and
My-konsult
GOVERNMENT GROUPS SIGINT – Elisra TMC Design
Naval Surface Warfare Center, Electro-Metrics Corp. Narda Safety Test TMD Technologies Ltd.
Dahlgren Division Solutions GmbH
Electronicon AS Transformational Security, LLC
New World Solutions, Inc.
Electronic Warfare Training Support LLC TriaSys Technologies Corp.
Nova Systems
Empower RF Systems Triumph Thermal Systems -
GROUP Orbital ATK Defense Maryland, Inc.
3dB Labs Inc. EOIR Technologies Inc.
Electronic Systems
Epiq Design Solutions Inc. TRU Corporation
3SDL Ltd. Overlook Systems Technology
ESROE Limited TrustComm
4DSP PA&E
Esterline Defense Technologies Ultra Electronics
Acutronic USA, Inc. Parker Aerospace Avalon Systems
Aeronix Evans Capacitor Company
Parrillo Associates Ultra Electronics TCS Inc.
Aethercomm, Inc. EW Simulation
Peralex ViaSat, Inc.
Technology Ltd
A.G. Franz, LLC Photonis
EW Solutions W.L. Gore & Associates Inc. (Gore)
Airbus Defence and Space GmbH Physical Optics Corporation
EXIANT Aerospace Warrior Support Solutions, LLC
ALARIS Antennas Plath, GmbH
FEI-Elcom Tech, Inc. Wavepoint Research Inc.
Allen-Vanguard Professional Development
Finmeccanica (formerly Selex ES) Wrap International AB
Alpha Design Technologies Pvt Ltd. Tech Group Inc.
Galleon Embedded Computing Norway X-Com Systems
Alpha Product Inc. Q-Microwave
Generic Systems Sweden AB Zodiac Data Systems

JED, The Journal of Electronic Defense
(ISSN 0192-429X), is published monthly
by Naylor, LLC, for the Association of
Old Crows, 1000 N. Payne St., Ste. 200,
Alexandria, VA 22314-1652.
Periodicals postage paid at Alexandria,
VA, and additional mailing offices.
Subscriptions: JED, The Journal of
Electronic Defense, is sent to AOC
members and subscribers only.
Subscription rates for paid subscribers
are $160 per year in the US, $240 per
year elsewhere; single copies and back
issues (if available) $12 each in the US;
$25 elsewhere.
POSTMASTER:
Send address changes to
JED, The Journal of Electronic Defense,
c/o Association of Old Crows,
1000 N. Payne St., Ste. 200,
Alexandria, VA 22314-1652.
Subscription Information:
Glorianne O’Neilin
(703) 549-1600
oneilin@crows.org
JED Sales
Offices
5950 NW 1st Place
Gainesville, FL 32607
Toll Free (US): (800) 369-6220
Fax: +1 (352) 331-3525
Project Manager:
Tabitha Jenkins
Direct: +1 (352) 333-3468
tjenkins@naylor.com
Advertising Sales Representatives:
Shaun Greyling
Direct: +1 (352) 333-3385
sgreylin@naylor.com
Erik Henson
Direct: +1 (352) 333-3443
ehenson@naylor.com
Chris Zabel
Direct: +1 (352) 333-3420
czabel@naylor.com
NAYLOR (Canada) Inc.
300 – 1630 Ness Ave.
Winnipeg, MB Canada R3J 3X1
Toll Free (US): (800) 665-2456
Fax: +1 (204) 947-2047
Index
of ad ve r tise r s
4DSP, LLC................................................www.4dsp.com���������������������������������������������������44
Analog Devices Inc..................................www.analog.com�������������������������������������������75, 77
Annapolis Micro Systems Inc...................www.annapmicro.com���������������������������������������� 11
ApisSys SAS............................................www.apissys.com�����������������������������������������������47
ARS Products..........................................www.arsproducts.com�������������������������������������� 103
BAE Systems...........................................www.baesystems.com���������������� Outside Back Cover
Battlespace Simulations, Inc....................www.bssim.com�������������������������������������������������35
Berkeley Nucleonics Corporation...............www.berkeleynucleonics.com������������������������������27
boger electronics GmbH...........................www.boger-electronics.de��������������������������������� 101
Ciao Wireless, Inc....................................www.ciaowireless.com����������������������������������������45
Cobham..................................................www.cobham.com����������������������������������������������31
Cobham Advanced Electronic
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
Solutions Inc........................................www.cobham.com/EW����������������������������������������43
Cognitive Systems Corp............................www.cognitivesystems.com��������������������������������58
COMINT Consulting..................................www.comintconsulting.com��������������������������������53
Comtech PST Corp....................................www.comtechpst.com�����������������������������������������69
Crane Aerospace & Electronics..................www.craneae.com����������������������������������������������50
CRFS .....................................................www.crfs.co.uk��������������������������������������������������29
CTT, Inc..................................................www.cttinc.com�������������������������������������������������48
Curtiss-Wright Defense Solutions..............www.curtisswrightds.com�����������������������������������97
dB Control..............................................www.dBControl.com�������������������������������������������46
Dow Key Microwave Corporation...............www.dowkey.com�����������������������������������������������24
DRS Signal Solutions, Inc.........................www.drs-ss.com������������������������������������������������� 41
D-TA Systems Inc....................................www.d-ta.com������������������������������������������������ 8, 10
DynamicSignals LLC................................www.dynamicsignals.com��������������������������������� 103
Elbit Systems of America.........................www.elbitsystems-us.com�����������������������������������23
Empower RF Systems, Inc.........................www.empowerrf.com������������������������������������������40
Epiq Solutions.........................................www.epiqsolutions.com��������������������������������������84
ET Industries..........................................www.etiworld.com���������������������������������������������44
FEI-Elcom Tech, Inc.................................www.fei-elcomtech.com��������������������������������������36
105
GEW Technologies (PTY) Ltd.....................www.gew.co.za��������������������������������������������������18
Giga-tronics Incorporated........................www.gigatronics.com ����������������������������������������� 9
go2SIGNALS............................................www.go2signals.de������������������������������������������� 101
Harris Electronic Systems........................harris.com���������������������������������� Inside Back Cover
iRF - Intelligent RF Solutions...................www.irf-solutions.com���������������������������������������20
IW Microwave.........................................www.iw-microwave.com��������������������������������������33
Keysight Technologies.............................www.keysight.com���������������������������������������������14
KRYTAR..................................................www.krytar.com������������������������������������������������22
L-3 Narda-MITEQ .....................................www.nardamiteq.com�����������������������������������������81
Mass Consultants Ltd ..............................www.mass.co.uk������������������������������������������������52
MegaPhase..............................................www.MegaPhase.com������������������������������������������13
Mercury Systems ...................................www.mrcy.com��������������������������������������������������25
Micro Lambda Wireless, Inc......................www.microlambdawireless.com��������������������������� 51
NI Microwave Components........................www.ni-microwavecomponents.com/quicksyn������42
Norden Millimeter, Inc.............................www.nordengroup.com���������������������������������������82
Northrop Grumman Electronic Systems
– Amherst Systems...............................www.northropgrumman.com������������������������������� 7
Ophir RF Inc...........................................www.ophirrf.com�����������������������������������������������84
Orbital ATK Defense Electronics Systems- .w ww.orbitalatk.com�������������������������������������������49
Photonis USA PA, Inc...............................www.photonis.com���������������������������������������������60
PLATH AG...............................................www.plathgroup.com������������������������������������������59
Qorvo.....................................................www.qorvo.com�������������������������������������������������37
Raytheon Company.................................www.raytheon.com���������������������Inside Front Cover
S2 Corporation........................................www.S2Corporation.com�������������������������������������68
Spectranetix, Inc....................................www.spectranetix.com��������������������������������������� 61
SRC, Inc..................................................www.srcinc.com/AOC�������������������������������������16, 17
Teledyne Microwave Solutions..................www.TeledyneMicrowave.com����������������������� 54, 55
Textron Systems......................................www.textronsystem.com/es��������������������������������� 5
TMD Technologies Ltd..............................www.tmd.co.uk��������������������������������������������������79
Ultra EWST EW Simulation
Technology Ltd.....................................www.ewst.co.uk�������������������������������������������������� 3
W. L. Gore & Associates............................www.gore.com/simulator������������������������������������19
Wolfspeed...............................................www.wolfspeed.com�������������������������������������������21
 JED
quick look
Details Page #
2016 AOC Award winners.................................................... 93
2nd Annual Army Cyber Electromagnetic
Activity Conference (CEMA) report................................. 90
Active Protection Systems (APSs)....................................... 82
AEA and Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2AD)............................ 38
AFRL, BAA for asymmetric force applications for UAS.......... 22
AFRL, RFI for Agile Cyber Technologies............................... 20
Air Force Materiel Command, EMI testing for ALR-69A......... 24
Airborne Electronic Attack (AEA), future of........................ 38
Anthony Nigara, Harris Defense Electronics........................ 57
Anti-Tank Guided Missile (AGTM)....................................... 80
AOC 2016 election results ................................................ 101
AOC EW Singapore Preview................................................. 71
Aselsan, ESM for Pakistan submarines................................ 28
BAE Systems, DARPA contract for Adaptive Radar
Countermeasures program............................................. 24
Boeing, EPAWSS contract for F-15....................................... 24
Brig Gen Don Bacon, USAF (Ret), elected to Congress........... 26
Bryan Clark, Center for Strategic and
Budgetary Assessments (CSBA)...................................... 38
CEMA Awards.................................................................. 102
Cognitive Electromagnetic Battle Management.................... 62
Cognitive EW vs Adaptive EW............................................. 56
106 Col (Ret.) Greg “Patch” Patschke, Lockheed Martin.............. 57
Col Jeffrey N. Aldridge, USAF, interview............................. 30
Comtech PST, X-Band radar solid state power amplifier........ 74
The Journal of Electronic Defense | December 2016
Custom MMIC, wideband amplifier...................................... 74
Dan Kilfoyle, Raytheon Space and Airborne Systems............ 57
DARPA, seeking protection against small UASs.................... 15
David Tremper, Office of Naval Research.............................. 57
Defeating Anti-Tank Guided Missiles (ATGMs)...................... 80
Defense Spectrum Organization,
RFI for Joint Spectrum Data and Data Software .............. 22
Dixie Crows, support Habitat for Humanity......................... 78
DOD EW Strategy............................................................... 26
Dr. Alan Rosenwinkel, Lockheed Martin.............................. 56
Dragoon ITCN, flightline and portable EW simulators........... 64
DRS Network, Computing and Test Systems,
flightline and portable EW simulators............................ 64
Elbit Systems, Anti-Drone System....................................... 74
Electronic Warfare Executive Committee (EW EXCOM).......... 26
Emerald Coast chapters of ITEA........................................ 100
EW GCC Conference............................................................ 76
EW threat location in space................................................ 86
EW Working Group (EWWG)....................................... 6, 26, 34
Exodus Advanced Communications,
single channel and wideband module............................. 74
Visit the AOC EW/SIGINT Resource Guide online at www.ewsigint.net.
Details Page #
Garden State Chapter....................................................... 102
Harris Electronic Systems,
flightline and portable EW simulators............................ 64
Jesse “Judge” Bourque, Expression Networks LLC................. 62
JEWC, RFI for enhanced EMS battle
management technology............................................... 18
Josh Niedzwiecki, BAE Systems.....................................39, 56
Kittyhawk Chapter.......................................................... 102
Leonardo, SAGE digital ESM system.................................... 28
Man-Portable Air Defense System (MANPADS)..................... 82
Merge of Comms and Radar AEA......................................... 46
Micro Lambda Wireless, Single Slot PXI
Frequency Synthesizer.................................................. 74
My-konsult, flightline and portable EW simulators.............. 64
Naval Aviation, Electronic Attack Ball.............................. 103
New Zealand, Defence Capabilities Plan............................... 28
Northrop Grumman Amherst Systems,
flightline and portable EW simulators............................ 64
Nu Waves Engineering, RF power amplifer module............... 74
Palmetto Roost Chapter................................................... 103
Paul Tilghman, DARPA....................................................... 57
Phoenix Air Group, GAO protest upheld............................... 26
Rafael, Trophy systems for Israeli tanks and APCs............... 28
Redstone Rebel Roost Chapter.......................................... 101
Rick Yuse, Raytheon.......................................................... 39
RUAG Aviation, flightline and portable EW simulators......... 66
Rutgers University, Army ROTC cadets.............................. 100
Semi-Automatic Command Line of Sight Mode (SACLOS)....... 80
Space EW, part 7............................................................... 86
Textron Systems (AAI Corp.),
flightline and portable EW simulators............................ 66
Textron Systems, ESL Defence Ltd.,
flightline and portable EW simulators............................ 66
Tom Szumowski, Lockheed Martin...................................... 56
Tube-Launched, Optically Tracked, Wire Guided (US TOW).... 80
Ultra Electronics, flightline and portable EW simulators...... 66
US Air Force, RFI for Joint Threat Emitter
Wideband Threat Emitter Units...................................... 24
US Army, Maneuver Aviation and
Fires Integration Application (MAFIA)........................... 15
US Army, RFI for single soldier ES/EA system...................... 18
US Congress, post-election report....................................... 26
US Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-IN), election.............................. 26
US Rep. Joe Pitts, interview............................................... 34
US Rep. Rick Larsen (D-WA), election.................................. 26
US Rep. Todd Young (R-IN), election................................... 26
Wideband Software Define Radio technology, new threats.... 58
 Disruptor SRx
Cognitive Electronic Warfare
Electronic Support Measures
Electronic Protection
Communications Jamming
Electronic Intelligence
Electronic Attack

CONFIGURABLE ON THE FLY.

SIZED TO FIT ANY PLATFORM.
ELECTRONIC WARFARE REIMAGINED.
Disruptor SRx represents a new approach to electronic warfare.
TM

Multifunctional capabilities address evolving global threats and adapt

in real time to changing mission needs. Significant reductions in size and
weight enable deployment on manned and unmanned platforms in all
domains. And an open architecture facilitates system upgrades and
lowers life-cycle costs.
harris.com | #harriscorp
Inspiration from the past.
Innovation for the future.

On the foundation of more than

60 years of electronic warfare
experience, BAE Systems continues
to innovate to meet the future
needs of the warfighter, providing
advanced technology to counter
the threats of today and tomorrow.

www.baesystems.com/EW