RWR Launch warning?

[mattebubben]

I assume that the RWR Launch warning is something that is comming along.

 

Since i have seen nothing to indicate that the M2000 should not have a Launch warning against Radar guided missiles.

 

This is currently one of the main weaknesses for me atleast since you have that a missile is incomming (especially since ur extremley unlikley so see a missile launched bvr)

 

Can i get a confirmation or something that the RWR launch warning is something that will be comming for the M2000?

 

Since atm the RWR is no more usefull then that of the Mig-21 in a combat scenario.

[LuSi_6]

You get a audio warning if a SAM was launched at you, against air borne targets you just get a audio that you have been locked

[mattebubben]

But is that as it should be?

 

Since it cant imagine a 4th generation fighter with an RWR without air-air radar launch warning.

 

And everything ive been able to find mentions its abillity to detect both airborne and ground launch missiles / fire control radars.

[0xDEADBEEF]

I got the impression its WIP as well. The F15/AMRAAM has a pretty decent warning tone when it goes pitbull. Not when it goes off the rail though. The Su27 only triggers a contant lock tone, no way of telling when the missile goes off the rail. And I've also heard the SAM-launch tone, not to overhear. Hope this improves. I really miss the signal strength indicator of the russian Beryoza, that kinda pays off for the disadvantage of not knowing which unit you face ...

[LuSi_6]

interesting question: does the Radar change something between lock (STT) and firering a SARH? be it the M2k, SU or Eagle?

 

launching the AIM 120 should give you no warning in any RWR, so that is correct

[mattebubben]

Launching the Aim-120 should not give a warning.

 

But the radar on the missile itself would set off the warning when it goes active.

 

I got the impression its WIP as well. The F15/AMRAAM has a pretty decent warning tone when it goes pitbull. Not when it goes off the rail though. The Su27 only triggers a contant lock tone, no way of telling when the missile goes off the rail. And I've also heard the SAM-launch tone, not to overhear. Hope this improves. I really miss the signal strength indicator of the russian Beryoza, that kinda pays off for the disadvantage of not knowing which unit you face ...

 

 

Yea and with the current clutterd state of the M-2000 rwr its very hard to tell direction let alone range.

 

But this is a beta and the rwr will be improved.

[TomCatMucDe]

Launching the Aim-120 should not give a warning.

 

But the radar on the missile itself would set off the warning when it goes active.

 

 

 

 

Yea and with the current clutterd state of the M-2000 rwr its very hard to tell direction let alone range.

 

But this is a beta and the rwr will be improved.

 

I am not sure the RWR can tell about the range. American RWR, from the same generation at least, dont tell you the range. What is in the inner ring are the most dangerous threats, they could be farer than threats in the outer ring.

[ttaylor0024]

I am not sure the RWR can tell about the range. American RWR, from the same generation at least, dont tell you the range. What is in the inner ring are the most dangerous threats, they could be farer than threats in the outer ring.

 

The 2000C's RWR is supposed to place threats closer to the inner ring as signal strength increases, or at least that's what I read somewhere.

[mattebubben]

yes they dont tell range in exact terms.

 

But lets say you have 2 Mig-29 flying towards you with radar on.

 

One at 40km and one at 70km.

 

The closer one will be closer to the center then the one at 70km since the signal strenght of the closer one will be more powerfull.

 

 

so in that term it tells range not in exact km or nm but it does let you know if something is "close" or far away.

 

but yets its all about signal strenght so a mig-21 at 30km would probably be further away on the rwr then a su-27 at 60km since the radar on the su-27 is more powerfull.

 

But on the M-2000 everything is so close to the center so its very hard to know if something is 20 or 100 miles away.

 

And the "Distance" is one major thing in knowing if its a threat or not.

[TomCatMucDe]

The 2000C's RWR is supposed to place threats closer to the inner ring as signal strength increases, or at least that's what I read somewhere.

 

I have no clue about how the RWR on the Mirage is. I am not sure that anything we read about it is solid enough. However, if the RWR can measure the radar signal strengh, you still can see in the inner ring a threat that has a powerful radar and is farer than another threat that has a weaker radar. For example, you can see F15 closer than F16 while in the air the F16 is closer. Both might have the same missile, so the F16 is in this case more dangerous and is the immediate threat. There should be also a kind of computer signaling the higher threats which is not only based on distance

[Azrayen]

Since it cant imagine a 4th generation fighter with an RWR without air-air radar launch warning.

Well... why? Because of previous DCS (LO/FC) implementation?

 

The question is this:

interesting question: does the Radar change something between lock (STT) and firering a SARH? be it the M2k, SU or Eagle?

I'm afraid the answer is no. And if it's no, then there is no launch warning since the ennemy radar sends the same waves to be picked by your RWR with ou without missile on the way.

 

Why would SAMs be different? Because often they use a specific radar mode to guide their missiles, your RWR (if set correctly) is capable of detecting the specific waves associated with this mode.

Same for the radar of an ARH missile: if its onboard radar has specific emissions characterics and that your RWR is able to detect & recognize thoses specificities, then you can have a specific answer (launch threat) on your RWR. But as we know, chances are it will be too late.

[OnlyforDCS]

The RWR is highly classified in RL. The one in the M2000C currently works exactly like the FC3 RWRs AFAIK. Im fine with that, but I would like Razbam to place the contacts a little bit further away from center, because currently the RWR is next to useless since you cant judge the correct azimuth, and sometimes not even the direction of the enemy radar.

[Hook47]

It is definitely a cluttered mess right now. The launch warning isn't as important to me as just being able to read it.

[Azrayen]

The "all-at-center" is not the topic at hand here. Obviously work has to be done about that.

 

Does the RWR work exactly like the FC3 RWRs (and should it do so) is another matter, and the question of this thread.

[TomCatMucDe]

The "all-at-center" is not the topic at hand here. Obviously work has to be done about that.

 

Does the RWR work exactly like the FC3 RWRs (and should it do so) is another matter, and the question of this thread.

 

The RWR all at center thing is an acknowledge bug and will be fixed in the future. It would be however interesting to know how the RWR worked in real, something we may never know.

[LuSi_6]

Well... why? Because of previous DCS (LO/FC) implementation?

 

The question is this:

 

I'm afraid the answer is no. And if it's no, then there is no launch warning since the ennemy radar sends the same waves to be picked by your RWR with ou without missile on the way.

 

Why would SAMs be different? Because often they use a specific radar mode to guide their missiles, your RWR (if set correctly) is capable of detecting the specific waves associated with this mode.

Same for the radar of an ARH missile: if its onboard radar has specific emissions characterics and that your RWR is able to detect & recognize thoses specificities, then you can have a specific answer (launch threat) on your RWR. But as we know, chances are it will be too late.

 

so in this case the currend RWR works fine! :thumbup:

 

we get STT warning (and no SARH launch warning)

we get SAM launch warning

we get active ARH warning

 

besides hard to read symbology I'm fine now with the RWR :)

[ttaylor0024]

I am not sure that anything we read about it is solid enough.

 

100% correct. For obvious reasons these systems will be classified for years after the system is out of service. It's very easy to defeat them if you know their weaknesses and how they work.

[Slipp]

There is no launch warning for semi-active missiles in Mirage.

This is most likely a bug and will be fixed.

 

Zeus also stated that they'll most likely implement IR missiles launch warning.

[Azrayen]

100% correct. For obvious reasons these systems will be classified for years after the system is out of service. It's very easy to defeat them if you know their weaknesses and how they work.

Yeah, well we don't need specific power, range, frequencies data to know how the system works. Principles & logic should be enough:

Does anything changes regarding what radars emmit when they're in STT, between "just" a STT lock and a STT lock + missile in the air?

I'm not sure. Perhaps it depends on the precise radar type, on technology... but I would like to know.

Once this is known, in principle the RWR can pick-up the change if it exists (of course, assuming you know what change to look for).

[edit] looking around a bit, it seems differenciating STT and CWI could be the solution...

 

There is no launch warning for semi-active missiles in Mirage.

This is most likely a bug and will be fixed.

On what do you base your "most likely"?

 

Zeus also stated that they'll most likely implement IR missiles launch warning.

The DDM (D2M / MLWS) is not specific to IR missiles. It detects any type of missile, because it looks for the missile engine plume.

Edited January 11, 2016 by Azrayen

[unknown]

Here is a quote from GGTharos from another thread:

 

Nope. Those who know won't tell you the details you seek, the rest if us can only give you some suggestions, so here goes.

 

Assumptions:

- Your RWR has spherical coverage (for simplicity's sake)

- You don't have an MWS (RWR is the only warning equipment)

 

So, the bandit goes STT on you and your RWR does the following (and may be more!):

 

1. Classify the signal. (STT/Lock)

2. ID the signal (Say, MiG-29)

3. Compute signal azimuth

4. Compute signal relative elevation, if the antenna placement permits

5. Compute the signal power to determine lethal zone if known

 

At this point, you could trigger a missile launch warning based on 5. Maybe that's all the information you get. BUT.

 

What happens when the other guy is operating his radar? Maybe some or all or more than the below:

 

1. Radar locks on in STT and creates a track file.

2. PRF is usually automatically switched to HPRF

3. Pilot pulls trigger.

4. The radar begins tuning the missiles if necessary.

5. The radar may now switch the waveform for guidance. Or not.

6. The radar generates a missile uplink signal to send data to the missile.

7. The missile launches.

 

So now, our RWR may use 5 or 6, if either of those is done. If the missile uplink signal is known, and it's coming from the radar that locked you (it is transmitted through the radar antenna usually, at least for fighters), then trigger the missile launch warning.

 

A lot of SAMs typically have a different search and track radar, and when the TR locks onto you, it really has only one reason to do so, so you may as well just trigger the launch warning. Some SAMs also have a separate missile uplink or guidance waveform that the RWR can detect, so again, more cues.

 

RWR capability and the issuing of a missile launch warning depends heavily on the hardware and software capability, as well as the specific Air Force's philosophy regarding such warnings.

 

Does that help?

[mattebubben]

Here is a quote from GGTharos from another thread:

 

Thanks for linking that quote.

 

And that also tells me that the M-2000 most likley should get the missile warning for airborne targets aswell.

[Azrayen]

Again, why "most likely"?

 

A RWR will issue a launch warning if it detects (and classify) what is unambiguously a missile guidance signal (waveform):

--- teleguidance for old SAMs

--- continuous wave illumination

--- specific radars known to be on ARH missiles

 

It may or may not issue a launch warning if it "only" detects & classify a lock (STT) signal, depending on its settings (i.e. it can "assume" that a strong enough lock (STT) signal = launch warning, even if it's not sure that a missile has been launched. A safe gamble, if you like.

 

Now, early Fox 1 needed a CWI (continuous wave illumination) to work. A RWR can pick-up that. But more modern Fox 1 (such as the AIM-7M or the 530D) can be guided on a HPRF signal from a pulse doppler radar.

Some radars have CWI (e.g. the F-15's one, that's what flood mode is => and guess what, flood mode makes opponent RWR issue a launch warning, even with no missile shot). Some radars have not; apparently, the RDI has not, because it doesn't need it to guide the 530D. So we can guess that depending on their settings, opponent RWRs won't or will issue a launch warning when locked/shot at by a M-2000C+RDI+530D.

 

Regarding missile uplink, perhaps basic ones are detectable & classifiable, but modern systems are more likely to be low power, intermittent, varying in frequency, unclassified by your ennemy... all reasons for them not to be picked up by opponent RWRs.

[GGTharos]

.Some radars have CWI (e.g. the F-15's one, that's what flood mode is => and guess what, flood mode makes opponent RWR issue a launch warning, even with no missile shot).

 

No, it isn't. FLOOD provides the exact same signal as normal STT sparrow guidance. For 7F this MAY have been CW, and indeed the F-15 even had a CW switch on the stick, IIRC. But 7M is PD, uses HSTT+ illumination (HPRF STT) for guidance, and FLOOD provides exactly that signal. CW switch has been removed from F-15 a very long time ago.

 

Regarding missile uplink, perhaps basic ones are detectable & classifiable, but modern systems are more likely to be low power, intermittent, varying in frequency, unclassified by your ennemy... all reasons for them not to be picked up by opponent RWRs.

 

Missile uplinks are an additional signal on top the radar signal - they are generated by the radar itself, and possibly alter the guidance signal slightly simply due to timing (you need to include that signal in the train, this possibly interrupting your regular signal).

 

There are other things that may be altered such as a chirped frequency or PRF to help with guidance as well.

[Azrayen]

No, it isn't. FLOOD provides the exact same signal as normal STT sparrow guidance. For 7F this MAY have been CW, and indeed the F-15 even had a CW switch on the stick, IIRC. But 7M is PD, uses HSTT+ illumination (HPRF STT) for guidance, and FLOOD provides exactly that signal. CW switch has been removed from F-15 a very long time ago.

Well, I guess DCS F-15s are older than that? ;)

 

Missile uplinks are an additional signal on top the radar signal - they are generated by the radar itself, and possibly alter the guidance signal slightly simply due to timing (you need to include that signal in the train, this possibly interrupting your regular signal).

Not always. Mirage 2000-5 is a (rare?) counter-example. It has a dedicated antenna (on the leading edge of the fin) for the "LAM" (Liaison Avion-Missile / missile uplink). And this was marketed specifically as "discrete".

 

There are other things that may be altered such as a chirped frequency or PRF to help with guidance as well.

Yeah, sure :)

[GGTharos]

Well, I guess DCS F-15s are older than that? ;)

 

It does not matter, we know for a fact that the signal changes detectably upon launch.

 

Not always. Mirage 2000-5 is a (rare?) counter-example. It has a dedicated antenna (on the leading edge of the fin) for the "LAM" (Liaison Avion-Missile / missile uplink). And this was marketed specifically as "discrete".

 

That's sounds unique :-)