The AESA radar is just one of the emitters that the NGJ platform employs – a HOJ attack can target another emitter.

There are no other emitters on a NGJ platform other than AESA based jammers. If you are speaking about other (non-jamming) emissions like data links, then you will need to provide links that show SAMs can track those.

Nobody has said that the JSF with NGJ will be as stealthy as a clean JSF, that would be an absurd claim.

What is obvious is that a JSF with a stealthy NGJ will be FAR stealthier than any other existing platform, no matter what the pod carried. This will allow the JSF to get in closer to the targets and put more energy into jamming.

Since EW support aircraft rarely fly alone, when one is the target of a HOJ attack, other assets can take over and lure the attack away. Also, because NGJ is AESA based, a HOJ attack is less likely because you are not jamming the missile, but the ground/airborne radar with a very narrow AESA beam.

There is an interesting addition to the scheduled Blk5 upgrades.

The item I speak of is “Cooperative EW”. This seems to indicate that other pilots in the area can task each other’s EW assets while in flight, be it NGJ or APG-81.

Right. Pod. External. Stealthy? Nope.

If they can make a gun pod stealthy, they can do the same for the NGJ.

From batteries?

It’s called a RAT (Ram Air Turbine). Here is a good PDF writeup on the NGJ’s internal RAT.

You will need a lot of electrical power….

The NGJ will provide it’s own power just as current pods do on the EA-18G and EA-6.

If the F-35 had to “go in the weeds”, it would not have much of a problem. With the EODAS and APG-81, the F-35 would feel right at home in the weeds.

As far as weapons go the SDB, JSOW, and JDRADM can work at any level.

The USAF never looked at a twin engine design pre-JSF:

Multi-Role Fighter (MRF) 1990-1993
The U.S. Air Force’s MRF program began in 1991 as a relatively low-cost F-16 replacement. Similar in size to the F-16, the MRF was to have been a single-seat / single-engine aircraft, with a unit flyaway cost in the range of $35 to $50 million.

IIRC the weapons bay can accommodate a 2000lb class “bomb” and then 4 (?) AMRAAM sized missiles.

Each bay has two stations, an A2A and a A2G station. The A2A station, on the door, is currently (per Blk3) rated for an AMRAAM and can be mounted no matter which bomb (Blk3) is on the A2G station.

The A2G station, buried in the belly, is the one that can be either A2G or A2A. For the A&C it is rated for a 2k class weapon (1k for the B) or a BRU-61 with 4 SDBs. It can also optionally mount an AMRAAM instead (Blk3) of the bomb.

Scheduled to be part of Block 5 is a dual AAM mount that will reside on the A2G station in the belly.

When Meteors or ASRAAMs will get certified, and the stations they will be on, has not been set.

@Spudman,
and that is incorrect as well, because if the F-35 wants to perform recce missions with cameras or offensive jamming role it needs pods as well (recce pod, NGJ…). In other words such a claim is simply incorrect for ANY aircraft.

With EOTS and EODAS it does not need any camera pod or jamming for that matter.