Electronic Warfare Implementation

[Steinsch]

Hi everyone,

 

I've been having fun with the F-15 for a couple of months now. From what I've seen in the forum, a lot of people also enjoy the simulation, and that's great!

But it just occurred to me that one important component of modern aerial warfare is missing in DCS: electronic warfare.

It is my understanding that dedicated EW aircraft such as the retired EF-111 and EA-6B played a key role during deep strike missions over enemy territory and complemented wild weasels missions, at least in the pre-stealth era which seems to be what's simulated in DCS.

Are these airplanes, at least in their AI incarnation, work in progress?

[Kayos]

We can only hope!

[T_A]

To implement such platforms in-game is pretty much just guessing or using knowledge that is still classified, so i doubt you`ll get it, maybe just a 'game version' of it, like the very simple jamming we have now in DCS

[Steinsch]

I'll be happy with a simplified version of it for now.

After all, isn't the radar of the DCS Eagle or Flanker a simplification as well? (With a better modeling coming with F-18C?)

[Darkwolf]

CMANO wargame implement EW. It's probably more or less "guess work".

 

I'll be fine having guesswork in EW domain in DCS, but i understand some others would not appreciate.

[Django]

I'd really like to be able to fly EW missions with:

EA-6B Prowler

EA-6A Intruder

F/A-18G Growler

EF-111A Raven

And if we ever see wide body multi-user aircraft in DCS:

EC-130H Compass Call

An-26REP

I think a more advanced EM environment model would help to make SEAD missions more realistic even if the precise characteristics of the simulated EW equipment is partly guesswork.

Edited July 18, 2015 by Django

[paidapinga]

Hi everyone,

 

I've been having fun with the F-15 for a couple of months now. From what I've seen in the forum, a lot of people also enjoy the simulation, and that's great!

But it just occurred to me that one important component of modern aerial warfare is missing in DCS: electronic warfare.

It is my understanding that dedicated EW aircraft such as the retired EF-111 and EA-6B played a key role during deep strike missions over enemy territory and complemented wild weasels missions, at least in the pre-stealth era which seems to be what's simulated in DCS.

Are these airplanes, at least in their AI incarnation, work in progress?

 

+1 :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

 

I'm waiting for these improvements for a long long time, but I think it will never happen :(

 

get some improvement here is very difficult, they want real documents , they want the impossible ! ! !

 

I think the DCS must work to obtain the documents, but unfortunately it does not happen here. they expect users to send documents :( for them to do the improvements :(

Edited July 19, 2015 by paidapinga

[biller]

Actually...I think the electronical environment sim for flight simulator is a little bit luxurious

.....

(DCS LEVEL)EW requires a little deep understanding of electronic engineering..e.g. Fourier transform...Laplace transform.....Z transform...modulation...demodulation....DFT....FFT......FH....TH....

And may better know the electromagnetic field as well...........

(If a comprehensive EW facility is simulated...)

[King_Hrothgar]

I think asking for genuinely realistic EW simulation in DCS is asking too much. But I do think it's reasonable to ask for faking it a bit better than is currently done. A few extra lines of lua could break radars into a series of classes and giving jammers a set of effectiveness ratings against each class would be a massive improvement. This is potentially an easy way to greatly improve our perception of EW in game.

 

As an example, the Su-27's radar could be set at Class C. The F-15C's jammer would be set at 50% effective vs Class C radars. This would give the current effect of basically halving the radar range of a Su-27. But if we look at something like a MiG-21Bis, that might have radar Class F, the F-15C's jammer could be set at 90% effective vs Class F radars. In this case, the MiG-21Bis would almost never get a lock on an F-15C. Continuing with the MiG-21Bis, this system can further be expanded upon with the MiG-21's radar modes. In normal mode, it could have that 90% reduction but in continuous mode it might only be 60%. Moving on to SAM's, an S-300 might have radar Class M. The F-15C's jammer might be 0% effective against this but an ALQ-131 (such as on the A-10C) might be 40% effective.

 

These numbers are made up examples to demonstrate the idea. I do not know off hand what would be reasonable values. It can also be expanded on with additional parameters fairly easily since it is ultimately just a table. It is also suitable for ELINT and RWR gear too.

[Fri13]

I think asking for genuinely realistic EW simulation in DCS is asking too much. But I do think it's reasonable to ask for faking it a bit better than is currently done. A few extra lines of lua could break radars into a series of classes and giving jammers a set of effectiveness ratings against each class would be a massive improvement. This is potentially an easy way to greatly improve our perception of EW in game.

 

And that is what the ECM does now (AFAIK). Units have simple radar radius distances when it detects or doesn't detect the other unit. And then there are two other values. A range when the lock is achieved (max firing range) and then a multiplier that is in ECM.

 

So example a Strela-1 can have a radar search range of 30km so it detects every unit in that radius. Then it has a lock radius like 7km.

And of course there is a timer to simulate the calculating firing solution so if unit flies inside the 7km lock radius for 4 seconds it doesn't fire a missile if the firing solution timer is like 7 seconds, but once the solution timer is passed, missile is fired.

And now if the unit has a ECM, it can have a multiplier of 0.6 to the radar search range, meaning it is 30*0.6=18. So when the aircraft has ECM enabled, it can get to 18km distance from the SAM instead 30km before it gets detected. But the SAM still has the same 7km lock range (because it will anyways burn through at closer ranges and anyways usually the missiles are semi-active and backup guidance done optically (passive).

 

 

The radar system is so very basic thing in DCS that it is like the terrain for helicopters, simple "you see me" or "you don't see me".

 

I just find it sad that DCS has focused so much to aircrafts flight modeling (includes weather), clickable cockpits and graphics that the very crucial features like radars and colliable trees with LOS effect has been on third class features in the warfare simulation.

Like helicopters can't even get close the unit unless there is a building that blocks the line of sight or ground isn't there blocking it.

 

 

And that renders the Combined Arms module almost totally useless as ground units have exactly same behavior with firing solution, a MBT engage target at max range as long it has LOS (remember, trees doesn't offer concealment or cover) and AA units are just sitting ducks on ground as those can't build a ambush NEZ where the trees would have blocked the radar waves to alarm the aircraft that a SAM is near by.

 

 

One day we might actually get hardcore A-10C/Su-25 pilots to curse the difficulties raising exponentially once the collidable trees are included to block LOS as well (instead just crash the aircraft) and helicopter pilots to find more use to themselves as they can actually fly NOE and get close in cover/concealed.

[King_Hrothgar]

My suggestion was an expansion of the current system. As far as I know, all jammers are equally effective against everything. I could be wrong though. The tree and ground clutter issues are separate, but I absolutely agree they should be higher priorities than they currently are.

[Backy 51]

I think an interesting approach might be to "degrade" the PK of SAMs when an EW aircraft/platform is within a certain radius of the SAM emitter. That would encourage mission builders to include EW aircraft in strike packages. Rather than get worked up over exact numbers and the classification issue, simplify the concept for playabilities sake. The math required to calculate "threat masks" for just hundreds of moving objects in DCS is immense. The KISS principle is key here. That's my two cents on the matter. :doh:

[Frostie]

My suggestion was an expansion of the current system. As far as I know, all jammers are equally effective against everything. I could be wrong though.

 

Not all jammers in DCS are equal, just as the F-15 radar is more powerful than the MiG-29 (seeing fighters 60nmi vs 40nmi) the ECM of the MiG is weaker too. An F-15 achieves burnthrough on a MiG29 at nearly 30nmi while a MiG achieves it against an F-15 at about 22nmi.

[Farlander]

I just find it sad that DCS has focused so much to aircrafts flight modeling (includes weather), clickable cockpits and graphics that the very crucial features like radars and colliable trees with LOS effect has been on third class features in the warfare simulation.

 

What?! :megalol:

[Eddie]

Not all jammers in DCS are equal, just as the F-15 radar is more powerful than the MiG-29 (seeing fighters 60nmi vs 40nmi) the ECM of the MiG is weaker too. An F-15 achieves burnthrough on a MiG29 at nearly 30nmi while a MiG achieves it against an F-15 at about 22nmi.

 

I'm pretty sure that in DCS at present it's because the F-15's RADAR is more powerful that is archives "burn through" sooner, not because the Fulcrum's ECM is weaker. I've never seen any kind of ECM type/power configuration anywhere in the DCS files. Happy to be shown otherwise however.

 

 

Although obviously in reality RADAR output power is a factor, the main factors are the ECM output power and radar cross section of the "target". (NB following vasty simplified to illustrate the point) "Burn through" happens at the point where the "target's" real RADAR return exceeds any false return(s) that the "target's" ECM can generate.

 

In some cases it is entirely possible that ECM "burn through" would occur well within visual range, or even not at all. This is especially true for modern deception techniques vs. older RADAR systems.

[SDsc0rch]

yes - definitely would like to see improvements in the EW arena

 

just because "some" aspects of a given field are classified doesn't mean we have to (or should) abandon the entire concept

 

(btw.. the A-10 is held up as the model DCS-level simulation - am i right? do you think EVERYTHING about the A-10 is modeled to perfection? or we've modeled classified systems ---- absolutely NOT ----- yet i don't hear anybody complaining about the A-10....)

 

but i would like to say, missile ranges and guidance plays in to this EW problem DCS has ---- ranges are so short we don't have a realistic HOJ shot

 

yes - fix EW ------ yes - fix missiles

 

and YES - you can model systems where some aspects are classified

 

we're doing it already - and nobody gives a hoot

[Frostie]

I'm pretty sure that in DCS at present it's because the F-15's RADAR is more powerful that is archives "burn through" sooner, not because the Fulcrum's ECM is weaker. I've never seen any kind of ECM type/power configuration anywhere in the DCS files. Happy to be shown otherwise however.

 

As far as I remember burn through against an F-15 is achieved at the same distance whether you're in a MIG or an F-15. Likewise burnthrough against a MiG they both achieve at the same range ie. 29v29 and 15v29. This points to radar strength not mattering.

 

15 v 29 = 28nmi

15 v 15 = 22nmi

 

29 v 29 = 28nmi

29 v 15 = 22nmi

 

Personally I think it's a bit of a hash and Ed has overlooked this.

Edited July 31, 2015 by Frostie

[Destroyer37]

I would also love to see some more implementation of ECW, and reconnaissance aircraft and capabilities in the sim. Granted if it is going to happen im sure it is not even on the radar yet at ED. They are pretty busy it seems with 2.0

[Vectury]

I would also love to see some more implementation of ECW, and reconnaissance aircraft and capabilities in the sim. Granted if it is going to happen im sure it is not even on the radar yet at ED. They are pretty busy it seems with 2.0

 

I'd love that in the (far) future. An EA-6 Prowler would be awesome. Not gonna even start about an EA-18g Growler... :pilotfly:

Flying with a squadron of other planes and provide ECM for it would be great!

[PFunk1606688187]

Until we get even a bare bones EW model (as well as a proper modeling of what constitutes the drivers of SEAD/DEAD doctrine) there's no hope of DCS actually modeling real aerial warfare outside of the rock and roll hollywood stuff people focus on.