Eddie

Military IFF includes all the transponder modes used in civil aviation, with the addition of Mode 1 (mission code, cockpit selectable) , M2 (unit code, cockpit selectable in some aircraft)), Mode 3 (mil version of mode A & C), Mode 4 which is what most people are thinking of when they talk about IFF, and lastly mode 5 which is a secure military version of mode S. The secure modes are all encrypted much like secure radios, and it's the specific methods of encryption and encryption code that are "classified". With modes 1 & 2 exactly what setting means what is also protected. All the encryption keys etc are loaded on the ground by maintenance crews, the non cockpit selectable items are generally loaded either by maintenance crews or via the pilot's data cartridge. The codes can also be switched in flight (between the sets of codes loaded in the aircraft) in specific time blocks as a countermeasure to potential enemy "spoofing". e.g all codes may be changed at 6 hourly intervals in a given area of operations, if you're airborne at that time you'd need to ensure the correct code is selected. The potential for pilots to make mistakes with these settings, or systems to fail is why IFF can't, and doesn't, tell you who is not friendly. It can only ever confirm who is.

Incorrect. The purpose of china few short as discussed here is simple. Quick selection of maverick MFCD page and Mav as SOI in order to engage a target without requiring MFCD OSB interactions or multiple HOTAS inputs. The key that has not been mentioned already is the first point above, it calls up the page on the right MFCD AND makes the Mav SOI at the same time with a single HOTAS input. In order for this HOTAS function to operate you need both the HUD set as SOI and a Maverick weapon profile selected. It's all about facilitating rapid weapon employment.

Well, I think the best Razbam could do really is add the cockpit control functions that can be exported to things such as UniversRadio and LotATC given that DCS itself doesn't have IFF modelling yet. They might be able to implement M4 based on actually having your IFF set correctly I the cockpit at best, but that'd likely only work between Mirages. My view is that the all seeing magic "IFF" seen on the simplified jets should be a difficulty setting like other simplifications/cheats that can be enabled/disabled on servers.

I'm mainly referring to the M4/5 encryption codes, but yes the specific M1 & 2 codes would also be protected. My point really is that what each mode does isn't classified, and can be read about online. Even Wikipedia is correct.

They aren't, not at all. The only 'classified' part is the IFF codes themselves, and they aren't needed.

We already have one. LotATC. ;)

They don't want realistic IFF, they want an arcade god mode that tells them who the baddies and goodies are. If DCS ever gets realistic IFF the number of complaints from certain elements of the community will be insane. Personally I view 'IFF' (assuming M4 interrogation, as it's the closest real world mode to what people here think IFF is) as a very low priority, missing RADAR and weapon system feature are far more important. You shouldn't need it, and plenty of fighters didn't have it and some still don't.

:thumbup:

Both options would work I think. A unit/group name prefix sounds like a good solution if it's possible, it'd give mission designers good control over which units feed into lotatc.

Dart, another thought, is there any way to add a method of being able to choose/limit which RADARs in a mission feed info to lotatc? It'd be nice to be able to take SHORAD assets/non IADS units/non datalink equipped RADARs/etc. out of the feed. Or just limit to a single AWACS a/c for example (or even have individual controllers taking a feed from a separate RADAR station).

Yep, physical RCS reduction measures will always be more effective than ECM techniques when it comes to pure detection. Although the latter may allow for other advantages (cost, simplicity of maintenance, etc.).

Dart, how are you and Tacno planning on modelling IFF features? Is it just mode 4 you're planning as in UR IFF at the moment or are other modes possible as well (with cockpit switch interaction where available)?

That's just marketing speaking. They don't flat out say it's unique, but the language used tends to support that interpretation. Everyone does it. ECM systems have been doing this for decades, it's just that with modern systems having more processing power they are able to do more of the same thing at once and/or deal with more modern frequency agile RADARs. But as ever nothing is invulnerable, and the constant development race between RADAR ECCM and ECM/ESM continues as ever.

Just adjust the axis curve? It'll do exactly the same thing.

And? Why does that strike you as unreasonable? The Raptor is not magic. The question you should be asking yourself is, if a modern EW system can have that impact on a Rafale, what does the Raptor's or Lightning II's EW system do for them? Beyond many? Certainly. Beyond most? Perhaps. Beyond all? No. Rafale's defensive aids suite is more modern and more integrated that the systems on legacy gen 4 platforms. Of course it is more effective. The same is true of Typhoon and others. I think the issue here is that you greatly underestimate what modern EW systems can do. The claims you have identified are not anything outrageous at all, and Rafale is not special.

So, in summary, the Rafale has a reasonably good modern Electronic Warfare suite on par with many other western Gen 4.5/5 fighters. What's the big issue here?

RL refuelling speed for the A-10 is 220 KIAS. The default speed is not realistic and should be changed by mission designers.

No, it's the product of four nations with essentially the same requirements. With the U.K being the lead nation and also having the most capable aircraft of all the operators. Nobody has a greater Air-Surface capability that the RAF, the GAF are updating at pretty much the same time. VEAO are simply producing an old PSC (3.35.0, I suspect) which is all but out of service.

It shouldn't. Edit: To expand, IFF only ever confirms a friendly, it can't tell you if a contact isn't friendly. For example if a friendly aircraft has an incorrectly configured transponder, you get the same invalid IFF reply (or no reply) as you would from a civil aircraft or a bandit/hostile aircraft.

Not if you want to fly from the same airbase and operate in a realistic manner, no. Or if you wish to fly training mission profiles where, for example, you fly as a 4-ship and split into opposing elements for some bfm/low level evasion etc before rejoining to rtb or perform another phase of the sortie.

Contacts being unknown by default, with valid IFF return automatically classifying as friendly would be great. Classifying as hostile should always require a human action. At the moment it's quite difficult to control training scenarios with human aggressors where all units are actually blue in DCS, as they all show as blue for the controller. A much needed feature that would add a lot to LotAtC I think. Doing it via an "advanced realistic" profile would be a good idea as well.

They'd go to where the SOI that you have set as SPI generator is pointed at that moment.

If the SOI in question was previously set as SPI generator, yes, as the SPI will always follow where that sensor is pointed. If it wasn't the last sensor set as SPI generator then no, slave to SPI will always slew to the current SPI regardless of the current SOI.

Nope, I'm afraid it's you who needs to understand the principles correctly. There is no such thing as a permanent SPI/marker or a temporary SPI. There is only the SPI, which always exists. The only thing that changes is the sensor that is generating the SPI, the sensor generating the SPI is selected via TMS Up Long, the selected SPI generator remains such until you set another sensor as SPI generator. The SPI itself is a constantly updated point in 3D space, not a marked/locked/permanent target position b

There are plenty of ISR platforms out there that can provide constant area surveillance already. Why spend money to heavily upgrade a jet for a role it isn't there to provide. Never mind the complexity of what you're proposing. And you can already manoeuvre the aircraft to avoid masking anyway. It's a Targetting pod, not a search/recce pod.