SAR High Res imaging Quality on the An/APg73 Phase 2 Radar

[Vatikus]

right

 

So i guess when GPS is jammed, and/or bad weather prevents any effective TGP use because the radar is still deemed useless they decide to call it a day and go home ? K Got it.

That is exactly how it happened numerous times in real life.

Also be happy we do not have SAR jammers which render a2g radar completely useless.

[jasonbirder]

Why, you've cracked it! Modern fighter pilots must just not train at all for any kind of peer level combat.

 

 

As the anti A2G "mafia" have pointed out...in a hypothetical situation without off-platform assets, no GPS and in bad weather (for FLIR - heavy rain etc) current doctrine is exactly that...for F16s/F/A18s etc to NOT fly A2G missions...to leave that to F15Es

As they no longer train for radar guided (principally radar offset) bombing...

 

 

Now I can't be the only one that feels its because of current operations...IE: Low Intensity ops/low numbers of TIC, no "existential" type threat...

 

 

Given that F111s, A6's, A7s, Tornado GR1s etc all were capable of Night/Adverse Weather bombing without GPS/off-platform assets in the 80's..would tha air force response to large numbers of lightly armed marines/Airborne troops being completely over-run in operations in quite typical North-West European/Chinese weather be to just say c'est la vie...if a peer level opponent deployed significant GPS disruption and the environment wasn't permissive enough for significant use of ISAR assets?

[stormrider]

So i guess when GPS is jammed, and/or bad weather prevents any effective TGP use because the radar is still deemed useless they decide to call it a day and go home ? K Got it.

 

 

That's pretty much the history of the Kosovo Air Campaign.

[Swift.]

Given that F111s, A6's, A7s, Tornado GR1s etc all were capable of Night/Adverse Weather bombing without GPS/off-platform assets in the 80's..would tha air force response to large numbers of lightly armed marines/Airborne troops being completely over-run in operations in quite typical North-West European/Chinese weather be to just say c'est la vie...if a peer level opponent deployed significant GPS disruption and the environment wasn't permissive enough for significant use of ISAR assets?

 

The difference between hornet and those aircraft, is those aircraft dont have pea sized radars.

 

Current scenarios: do you think they would use a 70s MC with a tiny old mech radar. Or a 00s MC with a massive AESA.

[Lex Talionis]

.... lots of theory crafting going on in here.

[QuiGon]

.... lots of theory crafting going on in here.

I would love to hear some actual knowledge on the matter :)

[whiteladder]

The difference between hornet and those aircraft, is those aircraft dont have pea sized radars.

 

Current scenarios: do you think they would use a 70s MC with a tiny old mech radar. Or a 00s MC with a massive AESA.

 

Actually they all have radars that are comparable or smaller for example in the follow image of the Texas instruments radar in Tornado the attack radar is the top array, the tfr is bellow.

 

[Rainmaker]

.... lots of theory crafting going on in here.

 

Keep making it up until it becomes true? :)

[Kev2go]

The difference between hornet and those aircraft, is those aircraft dont have pea sized radars.

 

Current scenarios: do you think they would use a 70s MC with a tiny old mech radar. Or a 00s MC with a massive AESA.

 

latter. But then again really because as of present day you actually have that luxuary. YOu have much newer technology in 2020 than you did a decade and a half ago not to mention various other recon assets to help build a picture that you simply do have in DCS. and FYI the APG73 isnt really 70s radar anymore. thast was APG65. its Late 80s tech if looking at the Phase1. And 90s A/G SAR tech if looking at the Phase 2 upgrade modules.

 

In Present day Legacy Hornets are retired from the USN active duty service, as are most Block 1 super Hornets. The Navy workhorse are now the block 2 super hornets and they have APG79. USMC is in the process of upgrading Legacies with a smaller APG79, ANG are upgrading thier Vipers APG83 AESA, Strike Eagles Mech A/G radar was better than most, but even some SE now have APG82 AESA., and beyond these upgraded legacy platforms you have the JSF.

 

 

However we do not have such modern assets in DCS . Circa 2005 Hornet and a Circa 2007ish viper. Back then the only assets that had AESA radars were the F15C ( and only some) and the then new F22 raptor, none of which are meant to be utilized as strike platforms. Th APG79 was barely a thing for the super Hornet at that particular time.

 

I dont think we will get any sort of AESA radars in DCS for a long time. The best radars will F15E's APG70 coming from Razbam followed by the EF's Captor.

Edited August 19, 2020 by Kev2go

[Kev2go]

As the anti A2G "mafia" have pointed out...in a hypothetical situation without off-platform assets, no GPS and in bad weather (for FLIR - heavy rain etc) current doctrine is exactly that...for F16s/F/A18s etc to NOT fly A2G missions...to leave that to F15Es

As they no longer train for radar guided (principally radar offset) bombing...

 

 

Now I can't be the only one that feels its because of current operations...IE: Low Intensity ops/low numbers of TIC, no "existential" type threat...

 

 

Given that F111s, A6's, A7s, Tornado GR1s etc all were capable of Night/Adverse Weather bombing without GPS/off-platform assets in the 80's..would tha air force response to large numbers of lightly armed marines/Airborne troops being completely over-run in operations in quite typical North-West European/Chinese weather be to just say c'est la vie...if a peer level opponent deployed significant GPS disruption and the environment wasn't permissive enough for significant use of ISAR assets?

 

 

they would be forced to depending on the necessity or what the stakes are. F15E's cant be everywhere at once or be expected to be filling the slack for other military branches all the time. Their not as plentiful in quantity as Vipers or Hornets were produced. In older conflicts Vipers and Hornets were pretty much dumb bombers anyways, before TGP's became commonplace and before the existance of GPS. The Lantirns were prioritized for Strike eagles in GF1, even though the block 40/42's could use them.

Edited August 19, 2020 by Kev2go

[falcon_120]

.... lots of theory crafting going on in here.

Are you leaving us like that? Naughty boy...

 

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[sk000tch]

.... lots of theory crafting going on in here.

 

The amount of arguments that begin with "I think" or "It would make sense" is one of the reason many don't post here anymore, at least regarding technical topics. Tactical or procedural conversations are fair game i figure, some people want to learn to fly correctly, others are bored with or uninterested in that and would prefer to fly as they wish. Nothing wrong with either of those even if a bit funny at times, but for topics like this it doesn't benefit anyone to guess. It just confuses the topic with bad information.

 

The difference between hornet and those aircraft, is those aircraft dont have pea sized radars.

 

Current scenarios: do you think they would use a 70s MC with a tiny old mech radar. Or a 00s MC with a massive AESA.

 

fyi F-35 has the same size antenna as a legacy hornet, both significantly smaller than than 70s era F-14 and F-15 radar.

 

I am inclined to defer to ED and assume WIP status on most things unless given reason to think otherwise. It is public domain manual stuff that EXP1 and EXP2 and DBS sector and patch, respectively. To the pilot they are functionally the same as MAP with improved azimuth resolution at the expense of forward looking capability. EXP 3 SAR is different, DBS is technically SAR but most here seem to understand in the Hornet it refers to processing returns to generate an EO "like" image. Just so we are all on the same page...

 

ED depends on documentation and I don't think there is much regarding specific SAR cell resolution, latency, and other details required to properly model various geometric distortions, multipath errors, foliage or cloth penetration information, etc. In fairness it does get hyper complicated quickly trying to simulate SAR radar imaging, trying to mimic geometric distortions, how shadows, reflectors, vibrating or spinning objects (like compressor blades) appear. So some simplification is required but that is true of every system in DCS. But again, is there agreement that there is even a problem?

 

I won't argue effectiveness other than to note that an argument based on how it was/is employed in real life makes no sense unless the jet is employed in the same manner, with realistic planning, briefings, support, ISR, etc. AG radar is just another sensor, it has some unique capabilities and plays nice with some of the stand off stuff we have yet to get. Depending on implementation DCS pilots might find more utility that RL given the small force style of missions in the sim, but that's not really the point. If it's in the jet it should be in the sim right?

Edited August 21, 2020 by sk000tch