Capability Evolution and Development Routes of U.S. Navy Shipborne Electronic Warfare Based on the AN/SLQ-32/SEWIP Lineage

To address blurred variant boundaries, component-centered discussions detached from platform constraints, and weakly validated route prioritization in open-source studies, this paper clarifies the relationships among AN/SLQ-32 variants, SEWIP capability blocks, and ship-class configurations, and extracts engineering lessons for shipborne electronic-warfare development. Sources available up to 30 July 2026 are graded and cross-validated. A four-layer framework covering capability chains, platform constraints, project maturity, and evidence confidence is applied to major AN/SLQ-32 variants, DDG-51, LCS, and CVN-78 cases, and five prospective routes. The principal gains of AN/SLQ-32(V)6 lie in wideband electronic support, open interfaces, and soft-kill coordination, whereas (V)7 adds shipboard AESA electronic attack at the cost of greater integration, thermal-management, and electromagnetic-compatibility demands. Evidence coding indicates that digital engineering and mission-data closure have comparatively high maturity and system leverage; scalable electronic attack and multifunction RF integration are in engineering expansion; and distributed coordination and cognitive EW still lack sufficient shipboard mission-level validation. U.S. shipborne EW modernization is not a linear replacement process tied to ship flights or variant numbers. It is a layered capability-generation process founded on open interfaces and mission data. New-build ships can move integration, digital arrays, and system-level EMC into the early design stage, whereas in-service upgrades should follow an interface-and-data-first sequence before adding platform-tailored electronic-attack effects.