F-14 RWR Question

[Airwolf435]

So ive been looking around trying to figure out how exactly the RWR worked in the F-14.. i dont see anything in the pilots cockpit that looks like one, so is it something only that the RIO could see and would call out threats?

[Dudikoff]

So ive been looking around trying to figure out how exactly the RWR worked in the F-14.. i dont see anything in the pilots cockpit that looks like one, so is it something only that the RIO could see and would call out threats?

 

It was shown on the bottom HSD screen AFAIK (there were other modes for that screen, like navigation, radar picture, RWR..). Apparently, a separate indicator was added to the front cockpit when the RWR was upgraded to AN/ALR-67 (not all were upgraded, of course).

Edited March 8, 2015 by Dudikoff

[captain_dalan]

Sorry for kinda necroing this thread, my reading on the FB F-14 page (on of then anyway) i came across a comment made from an apparent F-14 operator (either a RIO or a driver) that claims that early F-14 RWR system was only designed and programmed to detect known (at the time soviet SAMs) and had no air threat warning capability. Has anyone any more info on this? :book:

[SandMartin]

Sorry for kinda necroing this thread, my reading on the FB F-14 page (on of then anyway) i came across a comment made from an apparent F-14 operator (either a RIO or a driver) that claims that early F-14 RWR system was only designed and programmed to detect known (at the time soviet SAMs) and had no air threat warning capability. Has anyone any more info on this? :book:

 

If this true, then f-14a will be have a big problems in dcs online versus russians fighters with radar homing missles, becouse aim-54 very poor versus high manuv fighters, and aim-7m have much shorter launch distance than r-27er

Edited June 8, 2015 by SandMartin

[captain_dalan]

There is more to it. He proceeds to tell that the improvised solution was to mount 2 separate police radar receivers on the two sides of the cockpit, which gave of only visual signals when a radar was tracking you, so the only thing you knew was if the signal was coming in from left or right.

 

Forget Flankers, with a system this rudimentary, you are in trouble against any BVR capable opposition. According to the guy, this was the early-mid 70's (before Persia/Iran revolution and before the F-15A came along), but he claims it was one of the things why the AF insisted on more advanced avionics on the Eagle.

 

I would still like a confirmation from the information gurus here. The source of my intel is facebook after all, and there is no way to tell if what he says (or who he claims to be) is true. :huh:

[Dudikoff]

Interesting. And seems like it might be true:

 

"The Tomcat initially carried APR-25 and APR-27 radar warning receivers. These have largely been replaced by the Magnavox ALR-50 which is designed to warn crews of SAM launches. A major upgrade updated this equipment to deal with the SA-6 Gainful missile and its associated Straight Flush radar, which were initially so successful against Israeli aircraft during the Yom Kippur War."

 

http://www.joebaugher.com/navy_fighters/f14_8.html

 

A very interesting page lists some data for those APR-25 and 27 sets. Apparently, those early sets were quite limited:

 

AN/APR-25 S/X/C-Band Radar Detection and Homing Set; manufactured by Itek; part of AN/ALQ-27; used in RA-5C, A-6E, A-7E, B-52G/H, C-123, C-130, F-4, F-14, F-100, F-105, U-8,, U-21, OV-1D

AN/APR-27 SAM Launch Warning Set (similar to AN/APR-26); manufactured by Magnavox; used in F-4, F-14A, A-7, A-6E, RA-5C

 

http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/jetds/an-apr2aps.html

 

It would be nice to have more data on the later sets:

 

AN/APR-45 Radar Warning Set (development of AN/APR-25); used in F-14

 

AN/ALR-45 "COMPASS TIE" 2-18 GHz Radar Warning Receiver; manufactured by Litton; used in F-8, F-14, A-4, RA-5C, A-6, EA-6B, A-7, F-100, F-4, F/A-18, CF-104 (Canada)

AN/ALR-50 "CHARGER BLUE" L-Band Radar Warning Receiver; manufactured by Raytheon; used in A-4, A-6, A-7, F-14, EA-6A/B, F-8J, RF-8G, F-14, RA-5C, RF-4B, F-4J/N, F/A-18

 

AN/ALR-67 "COMPASS GO" Countermeasures Warning and Control System; manufactured by Litton; used in F-4, A-6E, AV-8B, F-14B/D, F/A-18; replaced AN/ALR-45

Edited June 8, 2015 by Dudikoff

[BlackLion213]

Interesting. And seems like it might be true:

 

"The Tomcat initially carried APR-25 and APR-27 radar warning receivers. These have largely been replaced by the Magnavox ALR-50 which is designed to warn crews of SAM launches. A major upgrade updated this equipment to deal with the SA-6 Gainful missile and its associated Straight Flush radar, which were initially so successful against Israeli aircraft during the Yom Kippur War."

 

http://www.joebaugher.com/navy_fighters/f14_8.html

 

A very interesting page lists some data for those APR-25 and 27 sets. Apparently, those early sets were quite limited:

 

AN/APR-25 S/X/C-Band Radar Detection and Homing Set; manufactured by Itek; part of AN/ALQ-27; used in RA-5C, A-6E, A-7E, B-52G/H, C-123, C-130, F-4, F-14, F-100, F-105, U-8,, U-21, OV-1D

AN/APR-27 SAM Launch Warning Set (similar to AN/APR-26); manufactured by Magnavox; used in F-4, F-14A, A-7, A-6E, RA-5C

 

http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/jetds/an-apr2aps.html

 

It would be nice to have more data on the later sets:

 

AN/APR-45 Radar Warning Set (development of AN/APR-25); used in F-14

 

AN/ALR-45 "COMPASS TIE" 2-18 GHz Radar Warning Receiver; manufactured by Litton; used in F-8, F-14, A-4, RA-5C, A-6, EA-6B, A-7, F-100, F-4, F/A-18, CF-104 (Canada)

AN/ALR-50 "CHARGER BLUE" L-Band Radar Warning Receiver; manufactured by Raytheon; used in A-4, A-6, A-7, F-14, EA-6A/B, F-8J, RF-8G, F-14, RA-5C, RF-4B, F-4J/N, F/A-18

 

AN/ALR-67 "COMPASS GO" Countermeasures Warning and Control System; manufactured by Litton; used in F-4, A-6E, AV-8B, F-14B/D, F/A-18; replaced AN/ALR-45

 

Nice find!

 

I just pulled out the venerable "Tomcat" by RADM Paul Gilchrist and it contains a nice overview of Tomcat ECM and RHAW systems.

 

The F-14A started with the ALQ-100 jammer and APR-25/27 system, but the APR-25/27 was replaced with the ALR-45/50 after aircraft #39 in production (is this around Block 85 or 90 aircraft?).

 

These systems stuck until the ALQ-126 was integrated late in F-14A production. The ALR-67 was first installed in the F-14A+ aircraft and I think (?) was retrofitted to F-14A's in the early 1990s. I believe that these are the "ECM bumps" that showed up on the F-14As shortly after the Gulf War - along with the NACA style gun vents. I haven't verified though.

 

Chances are, the LNS F-14A will have the ALQ-100 (they already confirmed this in Update#2) and the ALR-45/50. While the F-14B will have the ALR-67.

 

It was noted (in this same book) that the F-14s in the 1989 Libyan shoot down could not detect the MiG-23's radar emissions. The ALR-45/50 was quite outdated by the late 80s.

 

-Nick

[CheckGear]

Forget Flankers, with a system this rudimentary, you are in trouble against any BVR capable opposition. According to the guy, this was the early-mid 70's (before Persia/Iran revolution and before the F-15A came along), but he claims it was one of the things why the AF insisted on more advanced avionics on the Eagle.

 

I've never understood the fuss over BVR. Unless you can actually visually identify your target, even the best of sensors can never conclusively tell you what you are shooting at. Something they never say is that being a fighter pilot is a lot of educated guesswork. That said, the improved sensors on today's latest fighters is finally making BVR more of a reality.

[captain_dalan]

Interesting. .......

"The Tomcat initially carried APR-25 and APR-27 radar warning receivers. These have largely been replaced by the Magnavox ALR-50 which is designed to warn crews of SAM launches. A major upgrade updated this equipment to deal with the SA-6 Gainful missile and its associated Straight Flush radar, which were initially so successful against Israeli aircraft during the Yom Kippur War."

 

http://www.joebaugher.com/navy_fighters/f14_8.html

 

.......

 

Great find indeed!

 

Nice find!

 

.......Chances are, the LNS F-14A will have the ALQ-100 (they already confirmed this in Update#2) and the ALR-45/50. While the F-14B will have the ALR-67.

 

It was noted (in this same book) that the F-14s in the 1989 Libyan shoot down could not detect the MiG-23's radar emissions. The ALR-45/50 was quite outdated by the late 80s.

 

-Nick

 

Ware the ALR-45/50's capable of detecting A-A threats?

EDIT: sorry i wasn't paying enough attention, apparently not..... this will make some air to air encounters rather "interesting"....

 

I've never understood the fuss over BVR. Unless you can actually visually identify your target, even the best of sensors can never conclusively tell you what you are shooting at. Something they never say is that being a fighter pilot is a lot of educated guesswork. That said, the improved sensors on today's latest fighters is finally making BVR more of a reality.

 

The fuss becomes apparent when you have no way of knowing you were being tracked or engaged by a hostile (or even friendly) aircraft. The guy even mentioned that the system could not detect (therefore display) ground threats that weren't of soviet origin (i.e. the HAWK).

Edited June 9, 2015 by captain_dalan

[BlackLion213]

Great find indeed!

 

 

 

Ware the ALR-45/50's capable of detecting A-A threats?

EDIT: sorry i wasn't paying enough attention, apparently not..... this will make some air to air encounters rather "interesting"....

 

 

 

The fuss becomes apparent when you have no way of knowing you were being tracked or engaged by a hostile (or even friendly) aircraft. The guy even mentioned that the system could not detect (therefore display) ground threats that weren't of soviet origin (i.e. the HAWK).

 

OK, after reading a bunch of online sources, such as google books and websites. Here are a few highlights:

 

http://www.ausairpower.net/TE-RWR-ECM.html

 

https://books.google.com/books?id=RjZTqYTEADYC&pg=PT16&lpg=PT16&dq=ALR-45+detecting+air+targets&source=bl&ots=CmOWCyFNkY&sig=qNLUf4rPcIA2-fxPeoa6RLzormk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=sQV3VbWZN8fgoATekqDIAg&ved=0CDsQ6AEwBTgK#v=onepage&q=ALR-45%20detecting%20air%20targets&f=false

 

It seems that the ALR-45/50 could detect air targets (if any USN aircraft could from the 1960s-1982, we seems to be the case). The issue with the ALR-45/50 was that it had a rudimentary signal processor, so the burden of differentiating targets based on radar band, frequency, search patterns, etc - fell onto the crew and it took a lot of training to be proficient. The ALR-45/50 was also notorious for a high false alarm rate and there was a lot of "noise" that distracted the aircrew. To make matters worse, the system chirped loudly and the volume could not be adjusted by crews (only by maintenance crew on the ground). So many aircrew simply pulled the circuit-breaker in "low threat" environments. It may be the case that the MiG-23 radars were not detected because the circuit breaker was pulled.

 

Also, because these RWRs were analog, they could not be upgraded easily or reconfigured to ID newer threats. The ALR-45/50 was Vietnam era ESM and the Navy used it in nearly all of its aircraft until the ALR-67 was released in 1982. Even the early Hornets used the ALR-45 for a while, especially with export customers.

 

It sounds like it can detect most things, but differentiating is another matter, especially in a "noisy" environment. It still should tell you direction of the threat and if you are being painted in STT mode. I expect it will be pretty similar to the MiG-21's RWR and nothing like the TEWS in the F-15.

 

-Nick

[Dudikoff]

Regarding the MiG-23, its radar supposedly works in J-band which seems to be 10-20 GHz. Since those short specs state 2-18 GHz for the AN/ALR-45, it would indicate that it should be able to pick up the MiG-23's radar in general.

Edited June 9, 2015 by Dudikoff

[captain_dalan]

The F-14 had the AN/ALR-45 right from the start?

 

P.S. i would rep you both guys, but unfortunately i have to "spread it around" :noexpression:

[BlackLion213]

The F-14 had the AN/ALR-45 right from the start?

 

P.S. i would rep you both guys, but unfortunately i have to "spread it around" :noexpression:

 

Yes, nearly all F-14As had the AN/ALR-45/50. The first 39 aircraft had the ALR-25/27, but the transition to the 45 started with the 2nd block 70 aircraft (which is pretty early). These early aircraft were mostly early VF-124 and 1st deployment VF-1 and VF-2. There were also a few VF-14 and VF-32 aircraft in these early blocks.

 

Here is an image from 1986, the VF-14 aircraft in the background has an early "cut back" beavertail - so it is probably a very early aircraft that could still have it's original ALR-25/27.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/F-14A_VF-32_Exercise_Display_Determination_Mediterranean_1986_3.JPEG

 

But it seems that the 1989 Gulf of Sidra aircraft were Block 80 AC.

 

-Nick

 

P.S. Luckily it didn't stop me from rep-ing you. ;)

Edited June 9, 2015 by BlackLion213

[captain_dalan]

Then maybe the problem was not in the system capabilities, but the "factory settings". If signal processing was indeed that much of a problem (no reason to doubt that) and because of the analogue nature of the design reprogramming was a complicated task, then maybe in order to decrease clutter and noise most of the systems were tuned only to major threats (at the time soviet made SAMs)?

[Dudikoff]

It's hard to say without knowing the exact capabilities of these earlier devices, but obviously the RWR (as the engines) system on the F-14's was not the priority for the Navy given their primary mission. Hopefully the LN will get some ex-F-14 pilot to help them with such questions.

 

If anything, limited RWR capabilities of the simulated F-14A as compared to the digital AN/ALR-67 on the F-14B will add an extra distinguishing feature between the two to the mix.

[captain_dalan]

It's hard to say without knowing the exact capabilities of these earlier devices, but obviously the RWR (as the engines) system on the F-14's was not the priority for the Navy given their primary mission. Hopefully the LN will get some ex-F-14 pilot to help them with such questions.

 

If anything, limited RWR capabilities of the simulated F-14A as compared to the digital AN/ALR-67 on the F-14B will add an extra distinguishing feature between the two to the mix.

 

Indeed it would. It will no longer be only a question of different flight model, now the avionics will be different as well. I wonder if this is the road they are going to take?

[CheckGear]

The fuss becomes apparent when you have no way of knowing you were being tracked or engaged by a hostile (or even friendly) aircraft. The guy even mentioned that the system could not detect (therefore display) ground threats that weren't of soviet origin (i.e. the HAWK).

 

So... just shoot at anything and everything because your aircraft has no means of defense? That's a disastrous policy if I've ever heard of one.

[BlackLion213]

Indeed it would. It will no longer be only a question of different flight model, now the avionics will be different as well. I wonder if this is the road they are going to take?

 

I suspect that they will model both RWRs. Their plans for both the F-14A and F-14B operating 6-10 years apart would likely involve some tweaks to the avionics. The addition of the ALR-67 is widely mentioned as a key difference between the two and I bet they were ready for that. It further reinforced the need to separate the modules in game.

 

At least the ALR-67 is basically described as a digital version of the ALR-45, don't know if that makes it easier. We'll see what they come up with, but the RWR shouldn't be a highly demanding part of the avionics, but hard to know.

 

-Nick

[Dudikoff]

At least the ALR-67 is basically described as a digital version of the ALR-45, don't know if that makes it easier. We'll see what they come up with, but the RWR shouldn't be a highly demanding part of the avionics, but hard to know.

 

For the game, the RWR is basically just a presentation device so IMHO only the capabilities of those systems are important to determine whether a radar emitting object around the plane should be presented and in which way (e.g. depending on angles, processing delays, radar type, distance, etc.).

[captain_dalan]

So... just shoot at anything and everything because your aircraft has no means of defense? That's a disastrous policy if I've ever heard of one.

Eh? Who ever mentioned anything about shooting? :huh:

[Basher54321]

At a guess the 45 was a basic strobe vector type display - whereas the upgraded 45F was more like a TEWS display.

[Grundar]

Radar Warning Receivers are just that receivers of radar band width that displays a threat - either on HUD, panels, via tones etc... It's a rather basic device and it's use is more for avoidance or knowledge of directional radar emissions rather than as a complete means of target acquisition. More advanced RWR's feed back to jamming systems to allow jamming of specifically tested radar bands to optimise ECM/Jamming. If an enemy aircraft's radar was operating within the band range of the RWR then it should be able to display at least a directional threat - though it may not differentiate altitude.

 

The ALR 45 operates within the 2 - 18 GHz range and consists of 4 crystal antenna which feeds back to four crystal video receivers giving you the directional component for the RWR. That is further fed back to the threat processor that can filter threat and from there linked to a display/threat panel and ?HUD.

 

In the F-14a the RWR linked to a threat warning panel and would kick a video display from navigational mode to a strobe indicating direction of radar threat as well as giving the warbling tone of the RWR reporting radar threat contacts (at least by 1981 it was doing this).

 

Reading Bio's book Topgun Days, he mentions watching the RWR, in context of an environment of simulated SAM's with Echo Range, but doesn't mention airborne RWR contacts. This was about 1984 or so (I think) so maybe by this stage the ALR-45 had been upgraded (I think the current model is ALR-45f). If at this point the RWR still wasn't capable of determining air radar threats maybe they relied on other sensors and the AWG-9 and the RIO's assessment of the data gathered. Would certainly make BVR contacts much more interesting - especially at phoenix engagement ranges.

 

So i guess this is another reason why the F-14's RIO had a lot of responsibility - all that radar interpretation from that AWG-9 would of kept them busy, not to mention that on top of all their other duties.

 

Sorry for the long winded post probably just regurgitating what others have said :p

[Basher54321]

Airborne radars could be picked up on Nam era RHAW vector scopes - even the MiG-21-F13 ranging radar......albeit at very short range. Be very surprised if this wasn't the case with any RWR in the 70s either considering the limited frequency range radars worked in back then.

[captain_dalan]

Sorry for the long winded post probably just regurgitating what others have said :p

 

Nothing wrong with long posts that are informative. Keep 'em coming :thumbup:

 

Addendum: just to clarify how the topic came up on fb; there was an article shared about inaccuracies found in "Top Gun" - the movie and someone asked if the cockpit sounds were done right (sidewinder tones, radar warning, air conditioning...). Then this guy came around and pointed out that (aside from the air conditioning being quite loud but efficient) there would be no warning chrips from the RWR when the MiG got a lock on you. He then proceeded with what i mentioned earlier about the system...

[BlackLion213]

Radar Warning Receivers are just that receivers of radar band width that displays a threat - either on HUD, panels, via tones etc... It's a rather basic device and it's use is more for avoidance or knowledge of directional radar emissions rather than as a complete means of target acquisition. More advanced RWR's feed back to jamming systems to allow jamming of specifically tested radar bands to optimise ECM/Jamming. If an enemy aircraft's radar was operating within the band range of the RWR then it should be able to display at least a directional threat - though it may not differentiate altitude.

 

The ALR 45 operates within the 2 - 18 GHz range and consists of 4 crystal antenna which feeds back to four crystal video receivers giving you the directional component for the RWR. That is further fed back to the threat processor that can filter threat and from there linked to a display/threat panel and ?HUD.

 

In the F-14a the RWR linked to a threat warning panel and would kick a video display from navigational mode to a strobe indicating direction of radar threat as well as giving the warbling tone of the RWR reporting radar threat contacts (at least by 1981 it was doing this).

 

Reading Bio's book Topgun Days, he mentions watching the RWR, in context of an environment of simulated SAM's with Echo Range, but doesn't mention airborne RWR contacts. This was about 1984 or so (I think) so maybe by this stage the ALR-45 had been upgraded (I think the current model is ALR-45f). If at this point the RWR still wasn't capable of determining air radar threats maybe they relied on other sensors and the AWG-9 and the RIO's assessment of the data gathered. Would certainly make BVR contacts much more interesting - especially at phoenix engagement ranges.

 

So i guess this is another reason why the F-14's RIO had a lot of responsibility - all that radar interpretation from that AWG-9 would of kept them busy, not to mention that on top of all their other duties.

 

Sorry for the long winded post probably just regurgitating what others have said :p

 

Great post with lots of helpful info. Seems crazy to me that a primary A-A fighter wouldn't be able to detect airborne radars. Plus, given the tech of these RWRs, it would probably take w deliberate engineering effort to exclude airborne radar info.

 

I bet that it could detect A-A threats, but either wasn't reliable or very specific.

 

-Nick