Electronic Warfare

[FC_Schaefer]

I was wondering how Electronic Warfare would effect a multiplayer environment of (30) players in DCS in a conflict involving Russia and the United States? I've read that the USAF has the EC-130H Compass Call to disrupt communication and the USMC would have the EA-6B Prowler to jam radar sites and air defenses.

 

Can anyone provide a hypothetical synopsis of what would occur? Would the latter subject affect the fighter-vs-fighter aspect of things? What kind of equipment would the Russian military utilize? I see that we have two objects for Russian forces but I'm not really certain what they do.

 

~S~

[whitehot]

There are too few available public informations to model this kind of system in DCS, so basically the only ECM equipment being simulated is of a defensive nature (pods carried by aircraft which try to degrade search and attack radars).

 

Also, the scarcity of informations precludes to answer fully to your request to provide a hypothetical synopsis of the situation - the limits of offensive ECM normally are in the range of frequencies they are able to disturb and what kind of output power they can pump in their transmissions, while the robustness to such systems lays in the ability of a given sensor to recognize it's being jammed and to change its operating frequency (the "agility" of a given radar for example).

 

Not to forget, that nowadays electronic warfare would be surely joined by cybernetic warfare, as militaries employ a number of computer networks to manage data dissemination - networks which would become targets for attacks by opposing "hackers" as they are a vital piece in the management of the battle-flow.

[FoxHoundELite]

talking about ECM...i want to see Growler's module for DCS in the (far) future,that thing is a wonderful machine ,really XD

[*Rage*]

I think we are a very very long way away from simulating that in DCS. It would make things interesting for sure but there would be far too many unknowns.

[TAW_Blaze]

For a start they would have to work on the ECM we already have, because atm it's as far from simulation as it gets. But they probably won't, because there just isn't much information to get.

[Exorcet]

Keeping in mind the issues with accurate modeling, an update to DCS's ECM modeling would be nice. Specific information on jammers aren't necessarily available, but more general info is such as different types of jamming. The DCS jammers don't seem particularly effective since they instantly give away your position (rather than only activating when useful) and may not be all that realistic given they have no limits on what and how many radars they can jam.

 

I liked Falcon 4's ECM model, which to me makes more sense for fighters.

[doveman]

For a start they would have to work on the ECM we already have, because atm it's as far from simulation as it gets

 

If it's true that the defensive ECM is not properly simulated, then it somewhat undermines any argument that offensive ECM can't be added because it can't be realistically modeled.

Edited June 4, 2015 by doveman

[Emu]

I guess you could have a generic model but it would all be guesswork.

[Exorcet]

Which wouldn't be any different from now. If it was added it could be made optional anyway. I'd like to be able to disable ECM in single player completely with it as it is now. It's more of an annoyance than anything since it doesn't even really effect the AI.

 

Even a generic model can be helpful. Somethings might be too important to not simulate in someway. I'd say radar is one of those things. EW is not quite as high, but it's up there.

[Eddie]

There is more than enough information out there to develop a very detailed and highly accurate EW simulation in DCS, it's science, nothing more. And the internet is abound with numerous papers/book/reports/studies on the subject.

 

No you'll never get data on exactly how the ALQ-131, for example, performs against threat X or exactly what technique(s) it employs against threat X for obvious (I hope) reasons. But you don't need that data to simulate EW.

 

I have no idea where this idea that EW is somehow impossible to model just because some specifics of it are sensitive.

 

The only things stopping ED producing a highly detailed EW simulation are having the resources and the desire to do so.

[Fri13]

There is more than enough information out there to develop a very detailed and highly accurate EW simulation in DCS, it's science, nothing more. And the internet is abound with numerous papers/book/reports/studies on the subject.

 

No you'll never get data on exactly how the ALQ-131, for example, performs against threat X or exactly what technique(s) it employs against threat X for obvious (I hope) reasons. But you don't need that data to simulate EW.

 

I have no idea where this idea that EW is somehow impossible to model just because some specifics of it are sensitive.

 

The only things stopping ED producing a highly detailed EW simulation are having the resources and the desire to do so.

 

I agree.

 

I would like to see more realistic ECM than just the multiplier for lock distances (like range x 0.6 IF = ECM) and different kinds than just the bars going up/down. Like truly hiding the target.

 

Even the Chaffs are off, so those would be require to be fixed too.

 

When currently the whole radar system is not even simulation but just "there", it makes difficult to make any ECM. While there truly are a lot of research papers and books about ECM it would be enough to make a realistically behaving systems, while if not 90% accurate but at least 70-80% accurate.

[Weta43]

I have no idea where this idea that EW is somehow impossible to model just because some specifics of it are sensitive.

 

Might just be my paranoia talking, but maybe on the one hand there's "Impossible", and on the other there's not possible for us to do.

 

One could be "we don't have enough information to do this", the other might be "we don't think it's expedient to assemble all the information we do have into the SIM"

[SDsc0rch]

WHAT EDDIE SAID

 

by the way, just to show you just a little bit about the kind of information "out there" take a look at tactics and techniques of electronic warfare in vietnam (amazon)

 

the bibliography is full of declassified (S) and even some (TS) source material

 

boom!

 

 

i have this book and i was amazed - i've never seen such material posted publicly before

==EDIT==

well for petes sake.. would you look at that!

 

PDF

 

you don't even have to buy it.............. lol

Edited June 5, 2015 by SDsc0rch

[FC_Schaefer]

Electronic Warfare

 

Thank-you for the feedback. SDsc0rch...well done. I'll read the PDF. Would tapering the radius of the SAM systems be an example of "showing" the players the effects of this particular subject?

[Eddie]

If you're interested in reading some of the available material yourself, as well as books such as the above. The EW fundamentals publication by the USAF ACC training support sqn at Nellis is a very good read. Quite in depth and heavy for someone not familiar with the subject, but still a very good starting point.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/e8ldbrc8xql77ew/Electronic%20Warfare%20Fundamentals.pdf?dl=0

[SDsc0rch]

@eddie - thx for providing this

 

downloading - looking fwd to going through it : )

 

==EDIT==

 

wow - this is really great! i'm just skimming through it and i see they are covering topics that i would not even hint at for fear of crossing a line

 

one can only hope that we eventually get to see even just a few of these concepts modeled in DCS

 

again, fantastic doc and thx for sharing! : )

Edited June 5, 2015 by SDsc0rch

[FSKRipper]

I won't say it's impossible but we should remember that ED had to make some confessions to the Air National Guard (?) in system modelling for the public during A-10C development. If they want to get a deal with any military contractors they have to follow the rules...

 

I remember (I hope correct) that the development of a third party AH-64 was canceled by a NDA Agreement between the developer and the mighty industry to provide them a professional simulator...

 

So ECM is not magic, you can try to employ some generic jamming models but it won't be a simulation. Remembering the ECM, ECCM modes and frequency switching profiles of the shipborne radar I operated, I would say you have to model it equally for all parties to be fair but as said before it would be far from reality...

[Pilum]

Here is a link to a quite comprehensive guide to ECM & ECCM. I know it’s in Swedish but it has some nice explanatory pictures and you can always copy text and run it through Google translate. I tried and while the English grammar sucks it’s still understandable.:smilewink:

 

I agree with Edddie that while the exact inner workings and algorithms used in ECM and ECCM are closely guarded secrets the internet provides sufficient info to build a much better model than we have today in DCS.

 

The current ECM model in DCS is bluntly put WW2 technology: Broad band noise jamming. In addition, the burn- through distance is IMHO way to far out. Especially since even a post-WW2 noise jammer would most likely be more of a cover pulse jammer and consequently the burn- through distance would be much closer.

 

The book also gives some hints as to how jamming should look on the scope: Instead of the single noise jamming bearing we get today in DCS, multiple bearings, false targtes etc would be more appropriate.

The book also mentions things like towed decoys, cross-eye jamming, illumination of chaff by active jamming, DRFM techniques etc. so really there is quite a lot to go on.

 

It also mentions ECCM techniques, like noise jamming triangulation via data link or even passive triangulation by a lone aircraft.

 

Today the radar model we have in DCS is also based on guesswork: Detection distances, susceptibility to beaming, chaff, look down angle etc. so there is no reason really not to do the same type of assumtions and model ECM based on a guesstimate as well.

 

So really, if there was an ambition to improve the ECM & ECCM modelling in DCS this could be done quite nicely based on open sources and, like Dr Strangelove would have put it, it only requires the will to do it!

 

 

http://www.google.se/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.luftvarn.se%2Fhot%2Ftklv.pdf&ei=7wR0VdiYBqOlygOPyYJw&usg=AFQjCNHu_m72ky0zG8pLQDssDbHJWtUFrQ&bvm=bv.95039771,d.bGQ

Edited June 7, 2015 by Pilum

[whitehot]

The DCS jammers don't seem particularly effective since they instantly give away your position (rather than only activating when useful) and may not be all that realistic given they have no limits on what and how many radars they can jam.

 

I always used the ecm sparingly, and only when being locked or engaged. imho, being the systems simulated in dcs all of defensive nature, they are made to degrade the performance of radars which are already going through the engagement process.

 

Using defensive ecm constantly (which is something that sadly, many folks in mp normally do), is always a wrong tactic - your emissions start to appear all-over the enemy radars and, they just have to decrease their distance to you to burn-through.

 

Also, in RL, would be something that would actually negate the ecm effect and basically give an advantage to the attacker - ECCM are deployed, and likely the attacking radar has the ability to work around the defenders ECM by shifting frequencies and employing other techniques.

 

Anyway, even if in DCS we have a very generic model for this kind of systems, my opinion is that EMCON should be applied very strictly..

[Eddie]

Also, in RL, would be something that would actually negate the ecm effect and basically give an advantage to the attacker - ECCM are deployed, and likely the attacking radar has the ability to work around the defenders ECM by shifting frequencies and employing other techniques.

 

In reality, you don't "turn on" the ECM system in the first place. It turns itself on if, and only if, it determines it can successfully counter a threat emitter. All the pilot does is consent to its operation by switching the system out of standby which would normally be part of the fence check.

 

DCS very much does not match reality at all when it comes to ECM, either in mechanisation or useage.

[GGTharos]

All that needs to be done is the following:

 

Does the (let's say radar - can be missile, plane, ship - who cares) sensor have a lock on target, or is trying to lock on target (if the actual lock-on process is modeled)?

 

If yes, trip the ECM suite, and jam only THAT sensor.

 

The sensor code now looks a couple of variables and conditions, and rolls a die. Is the lock broken?

If no, keep on going! Maybe re-roll the die now and then (an ECM system might 'pause and listen' after a few seconds)

If yes, try to lock-on again.

 

That's for the most part all you need. You could get fancy and complicated with techniques and other things, but it isn't really necessary.

 

So really, if there was an ambition to improve the ECM & ECCM modelling in DCS this could be done quite nicely based on open sources and, like Dr Strangelove would have put it, it only requires the will to do it!

[Eddie]

You could get fancy and complicated with techniques and other things, but it isn't really necessary.

 

Not sure I agree really. While not implementing such detail at all would still give a better simulation than we have now, I think it'd still be very limited.

 

While you wouldn't need to model the techniques in detail, something as simple as having each technique as yes/no values to be set as capabilities against each ECM system, and also set as to if they affect each given emitter type would give a very effective model.

 

That way you could have older ECM systems only able to employ, for example, barrage and/or spot noise jamming whereas current system could have everything up to and including filter skirt and/or image jamming for monopulse threat systems and everything inbetween.

 

That combined with simple values for area of antenna coverage, maximum output power, max number of simultaneous threats that can be countered, and capable bands would give a very good simulation indeed when plugged into the die rolling method you describe.

[GGTharos]

I agree, but also I think most of these are all parameters we can only guess at.

[Eddie]

Nothing wrong with an educated guess. Once you understand the use/employment of a particular system it's reasonably easy to design a simulation that replicates real world functionality without needing any sensitive data at all.

 

As with RADAR and ESM, an ECM model that operates in a manner that is a reasonable facsimile of reality is all you can ever hope for in an entertainment simulation.

 

I really wish there were far more educated guesses in the sim, instead of blank spaces and absent functionality/capabilities.

[HiJack]

If I'm having just half an hour to fly I normally just switch on the ECM so the bandit can find me more easily. Works every time :D