Unless you have information that states -239 does not have jamming capability despite statements and brochure that claim otherwise
One of the things that points me to it having a jamming capability is the antenna that is shown in the BAE PDF.
Those clearly look like Vivaldi antennas and I am unaware of them ever being used for receive only.

It specifically states jamming without interfering with radar.
Yes, but that probably refers to countermeasures – towed decoy, BriteCloud, chaff/flares.
Don’t forget that the F-35’s AESA radar & ESM share a dedicated connection so that they work as one. This means that the use of the AESA as a radar or jammer, the TD jamming or “something” else jamming will not interfere with the operation of the radar or the rest of the ESM.
If it’s using a runway then it’s taking off and landing normally, so not likely for STOVL ops.
If it does a VL then they will have a VL “pad” somewhere for that.
EPAWSS has not yet flown.
Sorry, my bad. I meant “fully updated”.
Nope
Nobody is going to sink the hundreds of millions into an “ADVENT” engine for the F-15E unless it has firm orders for it.
The ADVENT version of the F-135 is already in the works because they know there will be thousands of customers.
The F-35’s VLO airframe makes up for off-axis jamming and it also has towed decoys. The F-35’s can also engage in “Cooperative EW”.
The F-35 has already demonstrated it’s dominance over F-15Cs and F-15Es (with APG-82, EPAWSS, and JHMCS) while it was limited to Block 3i. We are beyond the opinion stage at this point. Given that a new F-15E cost more than a F-35 in both procurement and O&S, there is no economic argument for them either… unless you work for Boeing.
There is not enough of a customer base for PW/GE to pay for ADVENT development.
ADVENT for F-35 will come long before anything else (as an upgrade) so the gap between F-15 and F-35’s range will get even smaller.
To think the F-35 can overlap the F-15E is bogus.
The specific scenario was to possibly buy F-15Es because the F-15C were not getting their EW upgrades. In that scenario the F-15C is playing the part of Air Superiority which the F-35 is clearly dominant in. If the requirement was max range or max load then the conversion would be different.
The F-35 kicked the F-15E’s butt while it was G-limited & Block limited at Block 3i. It also kicked the F-15C’s butt in BFM. Stealth and Situational Awareness are the most important features to an Air Superiority Fighter, which the F-35 has in spades.
While the F-35 was not designed as an Air Superiority fighter like the F-15C, that does not mean that it can’t do the job.
The F-15C could only do mach 2.5 on paper as that was clean and would run out of fuel very quickly (ie it was not a combat-relative capability). Besides, it never did it in combat in achieving their 100+:0 combat record.
Time on station and range are all tied to fuel. They are all just different ways to describe using the same feature. However, we are specifically talking about the F-15C and not the F-15E, so it does not have “that” much fuel. In a clean A2A config (no EFTs), the F-35 actually has a longer combat radius than the F-15C but loses to the F-15C when it carries EFTs (by ~300nm).
Speed is a non-issue since no F-15 has gone above Mach 1.4 in combat.
As far as the EW, no, it does not stack up against the F-35’s, especially in the area of jamming or situational awareness.
On the radar, while it may have a larger array, it is not as advanced as the F-35 (it’s not new, but a combo of the old back-end with APG-79 front-end) or “sensor fused” the the extent that the F-35 is. It also makes no claim of LPI or jamming.
Why would they? The ONLY thing that the F-15E has over the F-35 is range. In every other category, including EW, the F-35 beats it hands down.
Nah, we use that to fuel the afterburners :very_drunk:
F-16.net has been down all day. Which one of you did it? 😡
Furthermore imagine if Iraq was just fighting KSA + kuwait + UAE airforces alone in 1990 and not the entire might of NATO.
Then the F-117s would have spent the 1st week taking them all out on the ground then the rest would have continued just as it did.
There are plenty of times that both carriers can be operational at the same time. Add to that the fact that fighter wings also need to rotate through update/training/rest cycles and you can easily see why you need at least 48.
The reason why they initially specified an all-F-35B force is for commonality and ease of basing wherever they go, just as they do with the Harrier.