Enemy aircraft jamming

[Dave317]

I'm just getting in to the mirage and gave it a try today on multiplayer. On the radar screen I understand the chevrons with a dot at the point are friendly aircraft and the ones without are unknowns. Are the ones jumping around the screen jamming me? Are they only enemy aircraft that are jamming or will friendly aircraft that are jamming also move around the screen? Finally is there a way of locking them while they are jamming.

[Zeus67]

Those are false echoes created by jamming. Friendly or enemy. You only get a steady icon when the contact is below burn through range (about 29 nmiles).

[Dave317]

Thanks. Is every jammer able to be burnt through?

[mattebubben]

Pro tip about the Ghost contacts though.

 

With this tip its very easy to tell the real ones from the fakes.

 

Below the Chevron of real contacts there is the merge velocity in mach numbers.

 

(The merge Velocity is the speed at which you approach each other)

 

That number is only there for real contacts whether is be friendly or enemy.

 

So numbers below the Chevron = Real contact

no numbers below the chevron = Ghost contact.

 

(The Number is display directly below the Chevron like this

V

1.6 )

 

 

Edited May 23, 2016 by mattebubben

[Dave317]

Great, thank you. Is it best to leave my jammer on all the time or only activate it when I'm being locked?

[jojo]

Great, thank you. Is it best to leave my jammer on all the time or only activate it when I'm being locked?

 

In my opinion, since "burn through range" > missiles range, jammer are pretty much useless right now :music_whistling:

 

On the other hand, chaffs are very effective Vs missiles and you have plenty of in Mirage.

[Zeus67]

In my opinion, since "burn through range" > missiles range, jammer are pretty much useless right now :music_whistling:

 

On the other hand, chaffs are very effective Vs missiles and you have plenty of in Mirage.

 

Not quite so useless. The false echoes can be confusing and they actually do make difficult to lock on a real target. Specially if the fake is close to the real one.

[QuiGon]

It also denies the enemy range and IFF information until burn through which can be useful sometimes, even outside of missile range. It generally reduces SA for the enemy (and friendlies).

[diditopgun]

Burn through is 29nm now, since when ???

I stayed on the 25km since lock-on FC....

[Azrayen]

There is not one distance of BT, didi.

Depends on the target (jammer type).

Ranges from 22 to 52 km in FC fighters.

 

Still WIP on the M-2000C AFAIK.

[diditopgun]

Ah.... I am not up to date so... too much time passed on the Kamov and the Hog since my heyday BVR on FC1. :cry:

[Voodooflies]

There is something which is REALLY annonying regarding CCM. It tends to lock on an aircraft that is jamming instead of the one you're in WVR with, plus, unlocking then trough CCM is impossible. The only way to cancel the lock on the jamming target is to switch to the BVR mode and get back to CCM. Is that a normal behaviour onboard the RL M2KC ?

[PitbullVicious]

As we are on the topic about jamming, two questions:

 

1) About being jammed:

 

Should narrowing the radar beam (both lines and azimuth) and pointing it manually towards the jamming target mean faster burn through IRL? And if yes, is this currently modelled in DCS M2k (I got the impression that it doesn't from both PvE and PvP)?

 

2) About jamming the enemy:

 

Does jamming also hide my altitude information? Especially, if jamming, is it possible for the enemy still to estimate if I'm above or below him, for example by changing the elevation of the radar (or is this also plane / radar dependent)?

 

Cheers!

- PitbullVicious

[Azrayen]

1/

a/ that would be classified probably; and depend a lot on the jammer type/features and the radar type/feature/ECCM magic tricks

b/ that is not modelled in DCS (it's not about the 2K or not), simplified ECM

 

2/

Your exact altitude yes as it it extracted from your alt + your radar elevation + distance, and you don't have distance (above BT). But that doesn't prevent you to have elevation, hence to know if target is above/below.

[PitbullVicious]

1/

a/ that would be classified probably; and depend a lot on the jammer type/features and the radar type/feature/ECCM magic tricks

b/ that is not modelled in DCS (it's not about the 2K or not), simplified ECM

 

2/

Your exact altitude yes as it it extracted from your alt + your radar elevation + distance, and you don't have distance (above BT). But that doesn't prevent you to have elevation, hence to know if target is above/below.

 

Thanks for the reply, Azrayen.

 

To be honest, I'm not at all knowledgeable about the details of how jamming and radars work (the basic idea I understand, but is jamming effective from beyond the "field-of-view" of the radar and other details are a bit shady).

 

I guess I need to read a little bit more into how jamming works to figure out if it makes even sense in terms of physics if narrowing the beam would mean faster burn through. Intuitively it seems so (the more focused beam could be distinguished from the noise created by the jammer earlier than a beam which energy is spread over larger area), but my intuition has been wrong before :)

 

I'd imagine things like signal processing etc comes into play when discussing the details, and as you wrote, the actual performance is most likely classified information.

[Eddie]

Thanks for the reply, Azrayen.

 

To be honest, I'm not at all knowledgeable about the details of how jamming and radars work (the basic idea I understand, but is jamming effective from beyond the "field-of-view" of the radar and other details are a bit shady).

 

I guess I need to read a little bit more into how jamming works to figure out if it makes even sense in terms of physics if narrowing the beam would mean faster burn through. Intuitively it seems so (the more focused beam could be distinguished from the noise created by the jammer earlier than a beam which energy is spread over larger area), but my intuition has been wrong before :)

 

I'd imagine things like signal processing etc comes into play when discussing the details, and as you wrote, the actual performance is most likely classified information.

 

Have a read about side lobes, much of the effectiveness of ECM comes from side lobe jamming. This is not simulated in DCS.

 

In short, no RADAR beam width won't affect "burn through". Target RCS, target ECM output power and your own RADAR output power will.

[Zeus67]

Thanks for the reply, Azrayen.

 

To be honest, I'm not at all knowledgeable about the details of how jamming and radars work (the basic idea I understand, but is jamming effective from beyond the "field-of-view" of the radar and other details are a bit shady).

 

I guess I need to read a little bit more into how jamming works to figure out if it makes even sense in terms of physics if narrowing the beam would mean faster burn through. Intuitively it seems so (the more focused beam could be distinguished from the noise created by the jammer earlier than a beam which energy is spread over larger area), but my intuition has been wrong before :)

 

I'd imagine things like signal processing etc comes into play when discussing the details, and as you wrote, the actual performance is most likely classified information.

 

My 2 cents. From what I have read for a long time in the subject of ECM and ECCM, burn through is not that simple.

 

From all the open literature available, and some Tom Clancy novels as well :D, jamming comes in several flavors. Noise, fakes and disturbance. Chaff is also a form of jamming by noise. The chaff is not just a random length of foil but it is actually cut to the specific frequency it is intended to jam, mainly the guidance signal of a GI or AI radar.

 

While looking for information about the M-2000C jammer I found a Vietnam war US Navy manual on the subject of airborne jammers detailing four ways to jam an enemy radar, including illustrations of a jammed radar screen.

 

So, true burn through is actually a process in which the radar technician (or the pilot in the case of radar equipped fighters/interceptors) tries to counter the action of the jammer.

 

With a issue so complex as ECM, ED decided to keep it simple. All jammers work the same. They just basically say "I am jamming a radar signal" and it deducts a % in radar accuracy and of course they also create fake radar contacts. We, the developers, then must find a way to show you that your radar is being jammed.

 

In the case of the M-2000C, I decided to keep it simple as well. Unfortunately Electronic Warfare is a heavily classified matter and few documents are openly available. I was lucky to find that US Navy manual.

 

So in this case, I worked the same as every other radar equipped aircraft in DCS operates: the jammer is just a noise generator. Your radar is drowned in noise, reducing the range at which you can not only detect but also lock a contact. Burn-through is just the distance where the return radar signal is strong enough to overcome the noise.

 

Noise jammer in action. The contact is masked by all the noise the radar receives.

 

Deception jammer in action. In this case, the true contact is hidden among the fakes.

 

One advantage of the M-2000C over the old systems portrayed in these images, is that the computer can keep a clean screen except for the fakes, which are shown.

 

Feel free to correct me. I am not knowledgeable on this subject and this is all I have learned from reading on the subject.

Edited May 25, 2016 by Zeus67

[PitbullVicious]

Very interesting discussion. Thanks everyone for participating.

 

P.S. I ended up ordering this book to understand radars and jamming a bit better: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B017HXE81Y/ref=docs-os-doi_0

Might take some time to go through, but seems interesting.

 

Most good looking books about ECM seem to come with a hefty price tag, like this series: https://www.amazon.com/EW-104-Electronic-Warfare-Generation-ebook/dp/B010G7GJRE/

[QuiGon]

There is also this US Navy training video about radar jamming/defensive electronic countermeassures:

 

 

It might not be up to date but it teaches some basics.

Edited May 25, 2016 by QuiGon

[Eddie]

I was going to link that video later. It's a very good starter explanation on ECM, just remember when watching it that that was what could be done in the 1960s, imagine what it's like 50 years later. ECCM has evolved greatly of course as well, but ECM is still very powerful and a much bigger consideration in reality than in sims.

 

In some cases there is no such thing as "burn through". You could quite literally be a few hundred feet behind an enemy aircraft and not be able to defeat their ECM (but you might be able to work around it).

 

Just the top level logic covering ECCM behaviours of modern RADARs and their various modes is quite a long read in the manuals.

[IvanK]

"I guess I need to read a little bit more into how jamming works to figure out if it makes even sense in terms of physics if narrowing the beam would mean faster burn through. Intuitively it seems so (the more focused beam could be distinguished from the noise created by the jammer earlier than a beam which energy is spread over larger area), but my intuition has been wrong before "

 

In a former life using the Cyrano II in the Mirage III a standard technique to increase burn through range against a simple noise jammer was to Spotlight the target. This was done by stopping the antenna azimuth scan over the jamming strobe (Physically you placed the Lock on cursour or TDC at the same azimuth as the jamming strobe but not at target range). You then pressed the lock on lever. This then stopped the azimuth sweep and provided a narrow pencil beam. If successful the target blib would then appear in the jamming strobe, You now had Azimuth and range.... though of course this technique could also be taken by the jammer as an attempted Lock on also.

[QuiGon]

"I guess I need to read a little bit more into how jamming works to figure out if it makes even sense in terms of physics if narrowing the beam would mean faster burn through. Intuitively it seems so (the more focused beam could be distinguished from the noise created by the jammer earlier than a beam which energy is spread over larger area), but my intuition has been wrong before "

 

In a former life using the Cyrano II in the Mirage III a standard technique to increase burn through range against a simple noise jammer was to Spotlight the target. This was done by stopping the antenna azimuth scan over the jamming strobe (Physically you placed the Lock on cursour or TDC at the same azimuth as the jamming strobe but not at target range). You then pressed the lock on lever. This then stopped the azimuth sweep and provided a narrow pencil beam. If successful the target blib would then appear in the jamming strobe, You now had Azimuth and range.... though of course this technique could also be taken by the jammer as an attempted Lock on also.

 

That's some really interesting information. Thanks for sharing :thumbup:

[jojo]

"I guess I need to read a little bit more into how jamming works to figure out if it makes even sense in terms of physics if narrowing the beam would mean faster burn through. Intuitively it seems so (the more focused beam could be distinguished from the noise created by the jammer earlier than a beam which energy is spread over larger area), but my intuition has been wrong before "

 

In a former life using the Cyrano II in the Mirage III a standard technique to increase burn through range against a simple noise jammer was to Spotlight the target. This was done by stopping the antenna azimuth scan over the jamming strobe (Physically you placed the Lock on cursour or TDC at the same azimuth as the jamming strobe but not at target range). You then pressed the lock on lever. This then stopped the azimuth sweep and provided a narrow pencil beam. If successful the target blib would then appear in the jamming strobe, You now had Azimuth and range.... though of course this technique could also be taken by the jammer as an attempted Lock on also.

 

You increase the number of hit on target, so you increase the return signal strength...

[PitbullVicious]

In a former life using the Cyrano II in the Mirage III a standard technique to increase burn through range against a simple noise jammer was to Spotlight the target. This was done by stopping the antenna azimuth scan over the jamming strobe (Physically you placed the Lock on cursour or TDC at the same azimuth as the jamming strobe but not at target range). You then pressed the lock on lever. This then stopped the azimuth sweep and provided a narrow pencil beam. If successful the target blib would then appear in the jamming strobe, You now had Azimuth and range.... though of course this technique could also be taken by the jammer as an attempted Lock on also.

 

You increase the number of hit on target, so you increase the return signal strength...

 

Good to hear my intuition wasn't completely off then.

 

I'd also imagine that a "simple noise jammer" isn't the only jamming technique used and that in reality situation is more complex. As also the video, while being rather old material, demonstrated (thanks for that QuiGon).

[IvanK]

Why are we seeing these False targets on the Mir 2K when we dont see them on any other aircraft in DCS ?

 

As I understand it in DCS the only jamming modeled is Noise jamming. There are no false target generators in DCS. So imo all we should be seeing are jamming strobes ... like you see for the SU27/MIG29 and F15..... or however the RDI depicts them.