Tuesday, May 20, 2014

Intrepid Tiger II Pod.


Tyler over at FoxTrot Alpha blog has an interesting article you should check out about Marine Corps efforts to develop an electronic warfare system that isn't based on the EA-6 Prowler.  A tidbit...
The Intrepid Tiger II pod works by actively monitoring for enemy communications at certain bandwidths and then selectively jams frequencies that are being used by the bad guys once they start talking. This capability allows for a secondary communications intelligence ability, so the pod can be used to actually eavesdrop on the enemy's chatter as well as disrupting it. The pod can also actively jam known bandwidths that are commonly used to initiate IEDs, such as those used by cellular phones or garage door openers.
What makes this pod even more tactically potent is that it can either be used in automated modes set by the pilot in the aircraft that is carrying it or its information can be data-linked to a ground station for exploitation in real time. This means that the pod can be remotely controlled and the intelligence it gathers can be listened to and analyzed by experts who are fluent in local dialects. They can also gauge the effect of Intrepid Tiger's pinpoint jamming and change disruption methods to get the best effects in real time. Needless to say, having a ground station with experts in jamming and linguistics providing "virtual over-watch" for a bunch of Marines moving through a high-threat area on the ground is a godsend for commanders.
This is the type of thing that NAVAIR and the USMC should be shouting about from the rooftops.

This saved lives and IS a combat multiplier.

Isn't that just the way things roll?  The stuff we should be proud of we hide and stuff we should shut up about we broadcast to the world.

Amazing. 

10 comments :

  1. hey sol this is totally unrelated, but the supreme court ruled the establishment of the united states air force unconstitutional. so unless i missed the piece on this you might want to look into it and make a post.

    its asinine really, the usaf was formed and has been formed since 1947 because america wanted and needed it that way messing with it now is just making a mess. support the air force

    ReplyDelete
  2. you got "DUFFEL BLOGGED" my friend. i wonder how they keep fooling people with their stories?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My gf posted it on my facebook. so i take it that this hasn't actually happened and i can sleep knowing this didnt happen then

      Delete
  3. Also Ihave been playing a new strategy game that is totally awesome that i think you and your audience would like.
    its called wargame red dragon. Its awesome lots of opportunities to storm the beach with f-18 hornets, marines, lav ats, and lav 25 fsvs, and kill the guys on the other end of the map lol
    www.wargame-rd.com watch the trailer very realistic unit graphics. over well over 1000 different types of real life military units from 13 major countries.
    If you drove it man, its probably in this video game.kickin some ass.
    If this was just another rts videogame i wouldnt bug ya'll about it but this thing is really the closest videogame representation ive ever seen.

    http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/3336351318531502545/677C93AD7EB68CB16D8C2997D8BEAF2D1ED75AFF/

    that hotlink is a screenshot of some of my units for my usa deck.

    http://cloud-3.steampowered.com/ugc/3336351318531618647/92755DF267B837F3E46C3F334BB54B131AB8D87A/
    this is a close up of a lav-25

    THIS GAME IS AWESOME.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I wonder if this could be loaded onto hard points so that a MEU could carry one or two of the pods and equip a Harrier with them as the need arose. Think of the possibilities....a MEU with an electronic warfare capability.

    ReplyDelete
  5. With all the other upgrades recently talked about for the harrier this just adds to the versatility. Even if the 35's were ready tomorrow, it would still make sense to keep flying the harrier until 2028 or 2030. They have such a small footprint compared to the replacement, and are going to be simpler and cheaper to maintain even though the air frames are getting old. If an F16 will do the job it makes no sense to send the higher price and maintenance F22. It's the same with these two, or the 35 and the Hornet for that matter. I'd still like to see what they could squeeze out of a new production Harrier. Just like the A-10 fits in a space nobody else can truly fill, the Harrier seems to as well. I say give up on reinventing the wheel to replace both air frames, just crank out new runs of each with proven modern tech upgrades, none of that will be ready any day now stuff. If the mission calls for a plane that only the super high dollar ones could successfully complete then save those for that mission. Let the proven workhorses handle the rest.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am about to show some ignorance here....are they still building the Harrier in some sort of fashion? I know that Spain will sell a country a "carrier" fully equipped with a squadron of Harriers (Thailand). If they are building them still, why must we delve into a plane that will be difficult at best to support forward deployed?

    There I go again....speaking the obvious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. good idea and many would go for it. if BAE/Boeing were to offer new built harriers to countries but needed say 150 orders before it would be feasible i would bet you could get Italy, Spain, Thailand, probably Brazil and Argentina and a few others i can't lock onto.

      its a brilliant idea but probably will never happen,.

      Delete
    2. The British would probably purchase too because the F35 will have either been kicked to the curb or it will just be to costly to have in numbers.

      Delete
  7. The Harrier actually sucks as a ground support platform. Planning factor in RC-South was "one Harrier, one bomb, per one hour" in terms of supporting troops. I don't see the F-35B improving on that math at all though, so unless the requirement for vertical take off and land is removed, there aren't any better alternatives.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.