AESA radar is even more susceptible because it is a vast array of tiny TR (Transmitter-Receiver) blocks that are individually steerable, and the individual signals have to be stitched together by a computer to present a composite image to the pilot.
AESA radar is also designed to detect targets with very small radar cross sections, such as cruise missiles, so the sensitivity and signal processing errs on the side of displaying an iffy return rather than suppress it.
I also find it interesting that most of these recent reports of UFOs are from the F/A-18 community, not the F-16 community.
Perhaps flying out at sea, where you don't expect to have any air-to-air returns, you tend to focus attention on these anomalies that might not be noticed by an aircraft operating over land with normal air traffic.
bttt
These are not just radar encounters. They have been visually confirmed and confirmed by radar on ships supporting the aircraft.
Most of the Hornets still use APG-65 Radar but a few use the newer APG-73 which is virtually identical to the APG-70 used in Eagles. Since there are no reports coming from the Strike Eagle community, these are anomalies and should be of interest. How the press got ahold of footage from the aircraft is problematic.
No visual targets. Sometimes show up on both IR camera and radar.
That jumped right out at me too.
Of all the radars in use, ATC, military search bands, civilian weather, and of course other military platforms, why is this only showing in one aircraft type of radar? I know it is newer and more sensitive but anything that shows a doppler shift could paint this.
Another factor is that these anomalies occur over water, not land. One issue that you have already covered, is that the radar is processed and all information displayed is synthetic based on signal processing. I'm not an RF expert but I know that even common systems like AM radio are susceptible to all kinds of noise.
+. Most likely an undocumented feature!