Ships/Aircraft carrier as datalink contributor

[Eaglewings]

Hello fellows

I have read that Ships/Aircraft Carriers are link 16 equipped. Can say the Stennis contribute to the SA page of the Hornet?

If yes, any likelihood of we seeing the implementation of the Stennis and others as contributors to the situation awareness page?

[Harlikwin]

It should as well as other ships. As well as some well equipped minivans.

 

https://stennis74.wordpress.com/category/cvw-9/

Edited March 7, 2019 by Harlikwin

[sk000tch]

In real life or in DCS?

 

RL Humvees have link-16 terminals, ground fighters and JTACs have handheld terminals. Actual tactical data networks are comprised of multiple platforms communicating on different protocols, joint operations with multiple simultaneous missions, some of which communicate directly, others that don't, all with the potential to conflict, with each frequency and contributor managed via military doctrine. For an F18 part of a carrier group, the Control Officers and various network managers who plan and manage all this during real world operations are all ship based.

 

DCS doesn't model this, or other unnecessary complications of deconfliction, probability of reception or any of the other various not-fun stuff. I don't know whether it even requires line of sight yet. I don't know whether ships actually contribute yet, they don't show up on the SA page yet, but I think its a fair assumption that they will. I would expect at a minimum ships will provide C2 function. AWACS is great, but it cannot match the array size or 6MW power of a single AN/SPY-1, much less the dozen or so within a typical carrier strike group.

[Eaglewings]

Great information from the link and second post.

I would imagine it would be quite a task to model the carrier as contributor to the present datalink system in the sim.

It is already somewhat complex in its basic form with all the radio channel thing and to add carrier as C2 would amount to a whole lot.

 

Thanks guys

[sk000tch]

I don't think it would be that bad. Pure speculation, but I would think the bigger chunk of work would be building missile cruiser/destroyers as C2 assets like awacs that can provide tasking or radar tracks. But form a communication perspective (just making them donors), i suspect would be rather easy. It would be a good addition as well, adding to the somewhat underwhelming strength of the CSG overall.

 

If you are interested in military tech/tactical communication there is a lot of material to read online, just start with googling link 16, tadil, mids. It is... complex, necessarily so, given the varying modernization of units, communication protocols, system requirements, etc. However, DCS does not need to model those things. DCS is supposed to be fun.

 

That said, maybe not this year, or next, DCS is going to evolve. More modules will have link capability. tactical communication will become an increasingly important capability. In multiplayer, for example, the ability to degrade the other side's C3 by targeting particular assets would be very cool.

[Eaglewings]

That said, maybe not this year, or next, DCS is going to evolve. More modules will have link capability. tactical communication will become an increasingly important capability. In multiplayer, for example, the ability to degrade the other side's C3 by targeting particular assets would be very cool.

 

It would indeed be very interesting to see these features in dcs.

[NineLine]

We don't have any data on this to model at this time.

[sk000tch]

We don't have any data on this to model at this time.

 

In what sense? We talked about a few things in this thread, from tactical communication 101 to controller function and specific sensors on DDG/CG class.

 

I don’t think you all need to model the procedural assignments or handoffs for deconfliction or even relay, but it would be great if the carrier strike group got some attention given the USN focus of the current flagship modules. If you really don’t have data I’m happy to provide information on AEGIS/AN/SPY-1, would be great to just add as an awacs style C2 donor.

 

Not to drag out the missile dead horse but with the naval focus the SM-1/2/ER are a fraction of their RL counterparts, and I don’t know if evolved seasparrows are in game at all? With harpoons coming missile defense might be an area to consider looking at.

[NineLine]

We don't have any good data on the Stennis being able to share data to the SA page, or if it's possible.

[sk000tch]

I didn't see this clarification before the PM reply so the scope was broader, just focus DL stuff. For what its worth however, its not the Stennis, but rather the AEGIS DDGs, that are important. Stennis is important, obviously gotta land, but in the context of tactical data - Stennis is a runway, the multiple AEGIS vessels in the CSG have the monster sensor. Each AN/SPY-1 supposedly can detect a golf ball at a 100 miles, that's probably about as accurate as an AIM-120 having a range of 70 miles but networked together they can detect artillery/mortar shells against clutter, or guide SMs to satellites/ballistic missiles. They are BIG radars, big arrays, big wattage...

 

The control function seems unnecessary for DCS, but it would be cool if the fleet were to be a bit more -- formidable?

[Ramsay]

We don't have any good data on the Stennis being able to share data to the SA page, or if it's possible.

 

I'm somewhat surprised to hear that - it's pretty much covered in a404334.pdf

 

• TADIL J - Introduction To Tactical Digital Information Link J and Quick Reference Guide

 

with example mixed networks and a break down of unit capabilities, limitations and special considerations (in a general way without getting into specifics), most of the info is from 1998, so out of date ?

 

CV/CVN, CGV/DDG, LHA/LHD, E3, etc. can all contribute.

E3 ---> TADIL C (Link 4) is one way.

E2-C couldn't do TALIDs A (Link 11) and J (Link 16) simultaneously.

AEGIS CGV/DDG have TALID A (Link 11), C (Link 4) and J (Link 16).

... etc, etc.

 

IMHO, if Redfor's surface based EWR's contribute to their data link, Blufor's surface vessels should have their RL capability, to contribute to their fleet's air defence.

Edited March 10, 2019 by Ramsay

[NineLine]

The issues is having the info for our specific Hornet, and how its indicated on the SA page.

[sk000tch]

I've got or have seen the ship symbols, will track them down and provide. I don't think I have the specific f18/lot SA options, but you guys do - is there an option to show/hide naval assets?

[NineLine]

Info has to be somewhat close to what we are modelling, but feel free to provide what you find, we appreciate any effort to help.