Sorbitsya L005 Data

[Darkbrotherhood7]

1+

I support your idea, however, I don't support fully detailed ECMs to FC3 modules, FC3 was made to be simple, but I certainly would support fully detailed ECMs to an DCS: F-15C/Su-27S(with ASM).

[Pitot]

FC3 wasn't made to be simple, it was made as tools and passage of time allowed it to. I believe FC3 should be looked at like a stepping stone, not a primary feature of the game.

 

Take into account that, after many outrages on release dates and promises made with good will by ED, they have realized that it's better to keep silent and make the thing than to promise you, for example, DCS fidelity level F15C or Su27. FC3 is a relic of the past that is still needed to keep DCS alive and well, until the time comes to have enough high fidelity modules. After that, the market will be clearly divided on simmers and casuals who play FC3. This is the promising future most of us eagerly await. This is why most of us don't have a problem with waiting for this or that thing from ED.

 

Having all that in mind, introducing better level of ECM simulation will enhance the tactical aspect of the game. Imagine that scenario, where you will really think about how to engage the enemy in Su27 or F15C (for example). Planning your engagement so you can burn trough ECM in a moment where you have the upper hand. To create that moment. Also, most of the people here ignore that fact that ECM can't be turned on and left on for 1.5 hours of the flight. It will die. So, there can be no situation mentioned where server is flooded with ECM. Also, your ECM can easily kill you because HOJ. Homing On JAM. So you don't want to use it anytime and anywhere. Especially when you are in Su27 going against F15C with Aim120C wich is very capable thingy for HOJ. With implementation of better ECM fidelity, HOJ becomes very important thing in the sim.

 

I am sure even people who disagree with the idea of more complex ECM can see how implementing it properly can actually widen the dynamic an tactical aspect of the fight in DCS.

[Darkbrotherhood7]

FC3 wasn't made to be simple, it was made as tools and passage of time allowed it to. I believe FC3 should be looked at like a stepping stone, not a primary feature of the game.

 

Take into account that, after many outrages on release dates and promises made with good will by ED, they have realized that it's better to keep silent and make the thing than to promise you, for example, DCS fidelity level F15C or Su27. FC3 is a relic of the past that is still needed to keep DCS alive and well, until the time comes to have enough high fidelity modules. After that, the market will be clearly divided on simmers and casuals who play FC3. This is the promising future most of us eagerly await. This is why most of us don't have a problem with waiting for this or that thing from ED.

 

Having all that in mind, introducing better level of ECM simulation will enhance the tactical aspect of the game. Imagine that scenario, where you will really think about how to engage the enemy in Su27 or F15C (for example). Planning your engagement so you can burn trough ECM in a moment where you have the upper hand. To create that moment. Also, most of the people here ignore that fact that ECM can't be turned on and left on for 1.5 hours of the flight. It will die. So, there can be no situation mentioned where server is flooded with ECM. Also, your ECM can easily kill you because HOJ. Homing On JAM. So you don't want to use it anytime and anywhere. Especially when you are in Su27 going against F15C with Aim120C wich is very capable thingy for HOJ. With implementation of better ECM fidelity, HOJ becomes very important thing in the sim.

 

I am sure even people who disagree with the idea of more complex ECM can see how implementing it properly can actually widen the dynamic an tactical aspect of the fight in DCS.

 

Well, I agree. :)

[Pitot]

Easiest solution: Game mode=Simpe ECM, SIM mode=Complex ECM. :)

[Looney]

The biggest thing I see with complex ECM is that once you start upgrading one system, you're now going to need to upgrade every single Radar/ECM unit in the game with their own parameters and functionalities. The russian system is totally different then the AN/ALQ pods carried by western fighters. Then we have the SAM units, EWR and Shipborne sensors.....

[Pitot]

That is right. Develop one by one to as much as it is possible. Airplanes first, navy and ground units later. P. S. Slight off-topic: Having functional IR jamming on tanks would be so awesome.

[Eihort]

I'm only going to say I know a thing or two about this stuff.

 

The problem isn't just simply "Hey, let's make it more realistic one thing at a time." Once you breach a certain level of complexity with just one system on one aircraft, you now have a whole host of variables that must be applied to all aircraft/systems in order to properly represent the EW environment, and allow the more advanced EW techniques beyond noise jamming to have purpose. We're talking every pod (external and integrated like MiG-29 and F-15) and every radar (ECCM). What's the point if you're going to add velocity-gate/range-gate techniques if the radars you're trying to jam don't have the proper victim response or ECCM response modeled? Let's not even get started on individual blocks/versions of radars and what was added to them for ECCM.

 

Some of these variables include what's the jammer set to jam, because a lot of them can't do everything they're built to do, all the time. A lot of times, this is only configurable on the ground. What exact channel is each individual A/C operating their radars on so they don't interfere? How fast does a particular pod figure out what it's getting hit with and then counter? There's -so- many variables, the complexity of the sim will increase exponentially the more aircraft you throw at it.

 

As "trollish" as GG sounds sometimes, he's asking very pertinent and important questions, to which the answer will almost always be "I don't know, and there's no way we can find out, because EW is the blackest of black boxes, next to the radars themselves."

 

So where does this leave the game? Break it down into the most basic ideas.

 

1. Since all ECM on player aircraft is self-protection, what capability does it provide?

It denies a shot and/or fouls one taken and obscures what the aircraft is actually doing.

 

2. Can this be counter-acted upon?

Yes. You either burn through for the most part or develop techniques in the radar to automatically or semi-auto sort itself out. The later requires an individual radar to be a generation, at least, ahead of the system that's trying to jam it. It's a constant back and forth between "measures" and "countermeasures".

 

3. Do pilots have control over what these systems are doing?

No, not really. The system is either on or off for the most part and all the signal analysis and transmission is almost completely automatic, and most functions are only able to be programmed on the ground. Often, some intel officers are the ones that determine what capabilities the pods are loaded with, based upon ELINT in-theater.

 

When you distill what's going on to the above, the current model, while not realistic, provides a decent abstraction of what's going on, in a way that's manageable for the developers to implement. Remember, especially in multiplayer, you have people borking up all the time in the A-10C their individual aircraft IDs. Now you're asking these same people to throw a jammer on their aircraft and, should we stick to realism, figure out what to load it with so it's useful in the field? It would be a cluster bunch, and a bunch of radars operating with identical settings messes it up for everyone. It wouldn't be up to the pilot, but the mission planners anyway, especially in Russian doctrine.

 

It's hard to justify the value-added vs the cost and effort of further developing the EW environment, just to get nearly the same effect of "Push to WVR to nullify ECM".

[Frostie]

Fantastic thread.

 

And proper ECM would make this worse, with everybody jamming himself to the merge.

1v1 maybe but a jammer only has so much power, if it has to jam two aircraft it has to split the power accordingly AFAIK, therefore increasing burnthrough range. This brings in a whole new level of tactics.

 

As it is now we can jam everybody. Strangely the AI is now able to blink his Jammer at you denying lock but this was taken away from players a long time ago with the 15sec warm up.

Edited September 29, 2016 by Frostie

[red_coreSix]

1v1 maybe but a jammer only has so much power, if it has to jam two aircraft it has to split the power accordingly AFAIK, therefore increasing burnthrough range. This brings in a whole new level of tactics.

 

As it is now we can jam everybody. Strangely the AI is now able to blink his Jammer at you denying lock but this was taken away from players a long time ago with the 15sec warm up.

 

Yes, but ESA ECM systems usually work on a pulse-to-pulse basis. So it wouldn't have to split any power, really. It just needs appropriate processing power. Or an AESA system like the L005 could alternatively create multiple beams, which would slightly increase burn-through range but not by much. I was actually more talking about jamming missiles rather than radar, as an AIM-120 will not burn through the L005 at any range.

[Eihort]

Half right.

 

Average power goes down, but peak power doesn't.

[rvotri]

Why are your comments often so negative and borderline cynical?

 

I had an interesting find and posted it. Now we discuss. In the meantime, someone with further info may appear and post it. You know, get the ball rolling.

 

Your comment makes me feel like you're almost flaming at us. How does your comment contribute to "Sim Research" in this thread? I believe you, Sir, need to stop trolling. Because these kind of comments get people banned on these forums regularly. These kind of comments, without any quality or saying nothing new that isn't already obvious, is called trolling and attempting to suffocate quality constructive discussion. Your attitude is like we don't know this is not a complete info and you feel the need to show us how stupid we are. That is unnecessary. I tend to try to find good in people, so I try to make myself think that you're unaware how you sound, so take this as a friendly advice.

 

And for the rest of people involved: Yes, me and 90% of others, are aware of lack of info. Now we could discuss how could it be applied in the sim and try to find more info. Not like everything in this sim is modeled accurately - so that argument needs to stop being used on these forums. It is destroying any chance of discussing matters in a way that opens the door for creativity and peoples will to help and be a part of the development. Seriously.

 

Why so serious? This kind of comment contribuite to sim research a lot more than yours.

This kind of comment doesn't ban, he's just asking what do you think about to ECM be more "funcitonal" not real.

AND YES! IT Should be! ECM sucks, i never use it due it's lack of a minimal functionality. Threads like this can contribuite to Eagle Dinamics, by showing where player is leaning to see changes.

I would like to have a real comlex operating ECM, who don't? But it would destroy the weak missiles performance, unexperienced players would not even have the chance... But yes, i'd still would love it.

[snuffles]

Like Radio and IFF simulation, ECM simulation for the player's dissemination is best kept to an UNCLASSIFIED level of fidelity, as this isn't a Classified Military Simulation Product - and Govts like to keep their secrets undisclosed.

 

I'm happy to work with a conceptually relevant model, because I sure as hell don't want to find NATO, EU or RU military secrets which would jeopardise the livelihoods of the developers.

[Pitot]

There is enough publicly available information on the web about L005 to make it more exciting to use and more realistic to use in the simulator. That is all. As someone likes to say on these forums - "quite enough to make an intelligent guess". And talk about "it would ruin the sim because other aspects are not modelled (ALSO) good enough" is not really, in my humble opinion, way to get a quality product. Cheers and tnx for the reply.

[Django]

Disclaimer... I know nothing about coding or software development!

 

Ideally I'd like to see not only a more detailed implementation of ECM, but an entire EM environmental model - perhaps an actual module. E.g. it might make possible a sensible implementation of EM pulses from a nuclear weapon. I imagine such an endeavour would be difficult on a commercial platform like DCS.

 

Anyway in principle, does anyone think such an EM environment is possible in DCS?

[GGTharos]

EM pulse from a nuke has to be the easiest thing to code, ever - nuke explodes, fail everyone's electronics. Nothing to it, no need for an EM model and completely inappropriate ... that said:

 

Sure, an EM model could be possible, simulating RF, UV and IR in particular. It's also very not trivial to implement when it comes to jamming and other effects such as EMI, but it would provide for a superior electronic warfare environment.

[upyr1]

I'd love to see ECM aircraft modeled.

[Veritech]

+1

It would be amazing to operate in a highly saturated ECM environment.

Specially interesting how IFF systems would become unrelaiable.

[FistofZen]

+1