The Army is closing the gap on ground electronic warfare capability, but expectations should be calibrated. Incremental, software-first choices have set the stage for fielding meaningful soldier-carried and command-and-control EW capabilities before the end of FY2026. That does not mean every program of record will be in every formation by then. Read this as a practical inventory: what will be fielded, what remains uncertain, and what commanders need to do to turn capability into combat advantage.

Short answer: brigade-level manpack jammers and SIGINT suites are already moving into the force and will expand through 2026. Command-and-control software for EW is being modernized with the explicit aim of replacing the legacy EWPMT by FY2026. Larger airborne and fully integrated vehicle-mounted MFEW family elements remain developmental and subject to schedule and acquisition risk, so they cannot be counted on as brigade organic enablers across the force by 2026.

What is actually being fielded now and through 2026

1) TLS BCT Manpack and similar man-portable EW. The Army accelerated procurement and initial fielding for the Terrestrial Layer System Brigade Combat Team manpack variant in 2024. That manpack provides dismounted and small-unit EW and SIGINT capabilities for localization, direction finding, survey, and limited electronic attack. The program moved quickly from prototype awards into procurement and early handovers in 2024, which makes the manpack the clearest near-term ground EW capability to reach formations. Fielding will continue through follow-on procurement and unit training.

Operational implication: the manpack moves EW from a theater or division asset down into squads and teams. Expect initial employment to focus on force protection, C-UAS screening and local EMS awareness, plus episodic jamming and geolocation against tactical emitters. Units will need TTPs for rapid handover between dismounted teams and higher echelon C2.

2) EW planning and battle management tooling. The Army cancelled the EWPMT task-order competition during a program realignment in 2024 and announced a modernization path that shifts EW planning and spectrum management capabilities into a TAK-based architecture, sometimes called EWPMT-X, with replacement planned in fiscal 2026 if pilot work succeeds. That software side of EW is now explicitly on an accelerated, modular path to better integrate with mission command. Getting good planning, visualization, and deconfliction tools fielded is a prerequisite for effective use of the manpacks and other effects.

Operational implication: without a common EW C2 picture and spectrum planning tool, newly fielded jammers risk fratricide, degraded comms, and poor synchronization. EWPMT-X is the piece that turns standalone jammers and sensors into coordinated non-kinetic fires.

What is still uncertain by 2026

1) Multi-Function Electronic Warfare family maturity and fielding scope. MFEW has produced prototypes and demonstrations, including successful flight tests of airborne payloads. However, the family-of-systems approach that envisions large air, vehicle-mounted and dismounted variants has been evolutionary rather than immediate. Large airborne pods and fully integrated vehicle EW racks face integration and acquisition risk, and program timelines have slipped in the past as the Army rebalances requirements and buys incrementally. Relying on full MFEW capability across BCTs by 2026 is optimistic.

2) Vehicle-mounted EW at scale. The Army has active workstreams for TLS variants and vehicle adapter approaches, but full platform-integrated EW on Bradleys, Strykers or Abrams entails electrical, cooling and SIGINT stovepipe issues. The quicker path through 2026 is modular adapter kits and strapped-on appliance-style mounts that give mounted formations an economy-of-effort EW effect without long integration cycles. Expect more fielded adapters and kits than deeply integrated vehicle EW suites by 2026.

Operational implication: commanders should plan for mixed-modality EW in 2026. Dismounted manpacks will be common. Units that need persistent, high-power airborne jamming or vehicle-integrated long-range EA should not expect ubiquitous organic coverage in every BCT that year. Tactically, leaders must map where EW density exists in their brigade and plan movement and timing to exploit it.

Capability gaps that matter now

  • C2 and spectrum management. Software modernization for EWPMT-X is critical. Manpacks and point solutions without federated planning and deconfliction create more risk than advantage. Prioritize fielding, training, and reach-back to higher echelons for coordinated effects.

  • Logistics, sustainment and SWaP tradeoffs. Manpacks reduce integration time but increase logistics and training burdens at the soldier level. Predictable resupply of RF modules, power sources and spares is often the limiting factor in real employment. Build sustainment pipelines early.

  • TTPs for EMS operations in joint and congested environments. EW adds complexity to mission command and fires deconfliction. Units must practice integrating EW effects with kinetic fires, ISR, and comms planning at home station. Tools alone will not solve poor TTPs.

Recommendations for unit and program leadership

1) Train to the equipment you will have, not the one you hope to get. If your BCT will receive TLS Manpacks, build TTPs around dismounted employment, handover procedures, and combined SIGINT-EW reporting. Practice spectrum deconfliction with adjacent units.

2) Push for integrated EW exercises. Use rotational training to stress EWPMT capabilities and data exchanges between the EWO cell and maneuver commanders. Software fielding without operationalization equals shelfware.

3) Expect modular gold plating to be bypassed. Favor proven COTS software and modular hardware that are interoperable and fast to field. The Army is already prioritizing modular, TAK-based, and adapter-kit approaches to accelerate capability flow to the force. Program offices should continue to favor incremental capability drops with operational feedback loops.

Bottom line

By the close of FY2026 the Army will have a materially improved ground EW posture compared with 2023. Dismounted manpack EW and upgraded EW planning tools will be the primary enablers that arrive first. Larger, integrated MFEW family elements will advance but will not be uniformly fielded to every brigade by 2026. Operational advantage will depend less on hardware arrival dates and more on how units integrate, train, and sustain those new capabilities at the tactical level. Plan for a mixed ecosystem, prioritize C2 and training, and assume the EW fight in 2026 will be joint, distributed, and contested.