Supporting wingman's SARH ?

[Ragnarok]

never lived anything like. it's just a theory. There are many problems. exactly

[GGTharos]

I'll only post this once to keep OT at a minimum.

 

I've already said before there's a problem and it's not an R-27 problem. ( ... or a SARH problem ... though that's where you see it right now)

 

Is that some kind of acknowledgement of an issue?;)

[pepin1234]

They didn't use such tactics, precisely because they're not inferior and they actually understand the value of real multi-ship tactics and mutual support.

 

And really, if you want to call a 30v4 without aim-120 capability 'kicking butts' as opposed to an exercise, I have a few bridges to sell you :)

 

Lets don't talk to much and just wait and see the result in simulation combat. It Is a great tactic in some situation.

 

Also is possible shot the R-27 in ballistic with non lock and after a while you can lock and guide the missile. Also not implemented.

[*Rage*]

Lets don't talk to much and just wait and see the result in simulation combat. It Is a great tactic in some situation.

 

Also is possible shot the R-27 in ballistic with non lock and after a while you can lock and guide the missile. Also not implemented.

 

To be taken seriously pepin you need to provide a source.

[pepin1234]

To be taken seriously pepin you need to provide a source.

 

A source... Do you provide a source everytime you post?

[GGTharos]

The WCS tunes the missiles when the trigger is pulled the first time. If there's no ECCM action to change channels/freqs, all missiles are tuned after the first time.

It also supplies the missile with

 

Guiding an un-tuned, un-initialized missile is flat out unreliable and unlikely to work at all. This missile has no reason at all to select a target aircraft over any other radar reflection.

 

In fact, it doesn't even know when to turn its seeker on ...

 

See, when SA2's did 'ballistic launches', they were still feeding coarse course corrections to the missile via the missile uplink; the target data would come from other sources. The radar was then turned on to track for the last few seconds and supply the missile with more accurate course information.

 

The radar set you're using in-game is not equipped with such facilities as far as ED has been able to find out, nor are the missiles meant to be launched without the WCS tuning them.

 

This is also why you cannot use R-27(E)Rs with EOS, at least for the versions of the WCS and missiles represented in-game ... and no one's heard of this changing in subsequent times, either.

 

Lets don't talk to much and just wait and see the result in simulation combat. It Is a great tactic in some situation.

 

Also is possible shot the R-27 in ballistic with non lock and after a while you can lock and guide the missile. Also not implemented.

[pepin1234]

Should be a mode to shot the missile in active mode. So the missile go searching at the first stage the right frequency, when the launcher get a lock the missile get the frequency and get guidance.

[GGTharos]

How does the missile know the frequency if it hasn't been tuned? And which switch in the cockpit enables this mode?

[Dirty Rotten Flieger]

Anyone got any sources that mention these tactics in positive or negative manner?

 

I know I have heard of the flight leader illuminating the target for the wingman to attack. Is there a name for this tactic?

[Vincent90]

There is a lot of miscommunication and misunderstanding in this topic.

 

As I interpret this discussion, people confuse a datalink between multiple aircraft with the ability to launch missiles using that same data. However, datalinks ONLY share battlefield information between aircraft. They CANNOT

take over weapon responsibilities from other aircraft, for reasons already mentioned. (it's essentially a read-only file like you have on your PC)

 

Here is what datalinks can do in NATO aircraft, as far as is declassified.

 

For the F-22's IFDL:

Included in the CNI system is an Inter/Intra-Flight Data Link (IFDL) that allows all F-22s in a flight to share target and system data automatically and without radio calls. One of the original objectives for the F-22 was to increase the percentage of fighter pilots who make 'kills'.

With the IFDL, each pilot is free to operate more autonomously because, for example, the leader can tell at a glance what his wing man's fuel state is, his weapons remaining, and even the enemy aircraft he has targeted. This link also allows additional F-22 flights to be added to the net for multi-flight coordinated attack.

http://www.f22fighter.com/avionics.htm#2.4%20Inter%20/%20Intra-Flight%20Data%20Link%20%28IFDL%29

 

For Link-16 data in current 4th gen fighters

[ame]http://www.idlsoc.com/documents/symposiums/idls2006/3sdl_johnson.pdf[/ame]

 

Data-sharing between 5th and 4th gen fighters without a separate node (RC-135 et al)

http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/here-s-the-first-shot-of-the-f-15c-pod-that-will-change-1750314539

 

By the way, I highly doubt the Viggen had a data exchange system like earlier mentioned in this thread, as even the latest Gripen versions don't have something like this. They do have another toy though.

 

 

Edited January 14, 2016 by Vincent90

[pr1malr8ge]

Someone mentioned the aim120[?] and being able to be buddy guided..

 

I know that there was implimentation and programming in the F22 that would allow it to DL with a b1 lancer that could act as a launching platform for the aim120[x].. I thought I read somewhere that they also tested this.

 

I think this was done to allow the f22 to be More effective in lower numbers. Since 1 b1 lancer could carry 20+ aim120s. leaving 2 f22s to search and guide and still have missiles on board for "close" proximity protection

[Sweep]

That was the B-1R upgrade that never happened.

 

B-1s never got to be SPAMRAAM trucks. :(

[PiedDroit]

Someone mentioned the aim120[?] and being able to be buddy guided..

AIM-120 uses datalink and active seeker - different beast.

[Sweep]

I *think* Primal was referring to the largely theoretical ideas that could be implemented with the two-day DL on the 120D.

[PiedDroit]

I *think* Primal was referring to the largely theoretical ideas that could be implemented with the two-day DL on the 120D.

Oh sorry, we're not talking SARH anymore, nervermind, then yes, surely possible.

[Vincent90]

EDIT: Nevermind...

[pepin1234]

Guys did you notice the thread is about Su-27 using SAHR missiles in wingman tactics??

[Dirty Rotten Flieger]

I don't mind the conversation expanding . I'm happy to learn about similar tactics and equipment.

 

There are many cases where a spotter designates the target and another platform launches the weapon. It is common practice for air to ground weapons.

[GGTharos]

It isn't for air to air weapons.

 

Target information may be transferred to your aircraft, but your aircraft does the rest using its own systems.

 

SAMs on the other hand might be able to do some slightly more interesting things; but they have a lot more equipment and operators available.

[pepin1234]

It isn't for air to air weapons.

 

Target information may be transferred to your aircraft, but your aircraft does the rest using its own systems.

 

SAMs on the other hand might be able to do some slightly more interesting things; but they have a lot more equipment and operators available.

 

I Don't think so

[GGTharos]

You don't think some SAMs have more equipment and operators?

[pepin1234]

So do you think two fighters with the same radar frequencies are not able to guide the missiles as a combination guidance?

 

The question is not if it is good tactic, this is a matter of the pilots skill as wingman.

 

Could you please explain why do you think this is technical impossible?

[GGTharos]

I didn't say it's technically impossible, I said exactly the opposite.

 

What I did say is that it is well documented that if both aircraft are operating their radars at the same time, it can (most likely will) prevent a missile launch, cause early fuzing, etc - you're effectively jamming your own radar and missile.

 

It's actually so bad that engineers work hard to make sure that those radars are de-conflicted. The process of launching a modern missile is fairly complex and the weapon system does a lot of things to help that missile hit its target. The moment you try to pull something like you are suggesting, you take those things away and you add interference.

[pepin1234]

I understand what you mean, but I guess the tactic does not work like that. All depend in how work the R-27. There are two possible options.

 

Fighter Nr.1 guide his missile while the Nr. 2 hold down with radar off for a while. After some seconds Nr. 2 set his radar on with the right setting so this lock should be in a couple seconds. When Nr. 2 confirm target locked, Nr. 1 disengage and start defensive maneuvers. Is a matter of 2 or 3 seconds so is not that jamming.

 

The other way is Nr. 1 disengage at all and after a second Nr. 2 engage the target. In this case is a matter of the missile reaction for looking again for the right radar signal of Nr. 2

[pr1malr8ge]

I understand what you mean, but I guess the tactic does not work like that. All depend in how work the R-27. There are two possible options.

 

Fighter Nr.1 guide his missile while the Nr. 2 hold down with radar off for a while. After some seconds Nr. 2 set his radar on with the right setting so this lock should be in a couple seconds. When Nr. 2 confirm target locked, Nr. 1 disengage and start defensive maneuvers. Is a matter of 2 or 3 seconds so is not that jamming.

 

The other way is Nr. 1 disengage at all and after a second Nr. 2 engage the target. In this case is a matter of the missile reaction for looking again for the right radar signal of Nr. 2

 

 

Think im getting to see why you think this might be a viable option. How ever Can I toss a wrench in your theory with out you thinking im trying to just solely side with Tharos?

 

 

So as I see you're thinking buddy guiding is being used as a "backup" should the launching platform either needs to break lock or has an issue with it's radar.. While as GG said it is possible to buddy guide, it how ever being used as a full on tactic is horrible. Using it as a when all else fails then it is sound. How ever the issue though is that unless both aircraft are roughly on the same radial to the target you're going to have missile guidance issues.

There is the possibility the missile could be completely blind to the radar return from the buddy aircraft trying to guide. In my opinion this tactic would reduce the PK value of the missile 10fold.. Still better then 0% if the launching aircraft cannot keep lock.