Cannot identify HAFUs with IFF and NCTR

[hungoverpilot]

Hi,

 

I've been trying to recreate the usage of IFF and NCTR as per Matt's video (

), but I haven't been able to identify the HAFUs with a combination of IFF mode 4 interrogation and the NCTR on.

 

I am currently using 2.5.4.29004.

 

I recorded myself trying to do so, while heading towards a group of MiG-21bis (also tried with MiG-29s) and nothing happens when I hit sensor depress, even when well within 25nm. In the video, I demonstrate what button I was using and I know the joystick is working properly, because I can do an IFF interrogation with a locked target. I'm assuming that the NCTR mode isn't working properly (you can see that the bandits are never identified in the SA page)-

 

I've attached the track file, the mission and uploaded the video to YouTube:

 

Is this a bug or am I doing something wrong?

 

Cheers,

Nuno

iff.trk

test.miz

[Harker]

To identify a contact by yourself, without donors, currently you need a Mode 4 and a NCTR print. You get the latter by locking the target up in STT.

 

There's a bug currently with LTWS though, that will allow you to IFF by simply making the contact the L&S target.

[fitness88]

To identify a contact by yourself, without donors, currently you need a Mode 4 and a NCTR print. You get the latter by locking the target up in STT.

 

There's a bug currently with LTWS though, that will allow you to IFF by simply making the contact the L&S target.

 

 

Is a donor another source such as an AWAC that your plane is fed radar data?

 

 

Where is the actual Mode 4 switch is this it in the photo below?

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=207457&d=1553736338

 

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

Is a donor another source such as an AWAC that your plane is fed radar data?

 

 

Where is the actual Mode 4 switch is this it in the photo below?

 

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=207457&d=1553736338

 

 

Yes, donors are other friendly aircraft like AWACS and fighters that send ('donate' to) you data.

 

I'm not sure about the mode 4 switch. I just thought we had to ensure IFF on the UFC was turned on.

[hungoverpilot]

To identify a contact by yourself, without donors, currently you need a Mode 4 and a NCTR print. You get the latter by locking the target up in STT.

 

There's a bug currently with LTWS though, that will allow you to IFF by simply making the contact the L&S target.

 

Thanks Harker. Looking at Matt's video, that doesn't seem to be the case though. He doesn't have a target locked to achieve that:

Edited March 30, 2019 by hungoverpilot

[atazar]

Without a donor, we do not receive information for up to 24 miles: /

 

At that distance the enemies have already broken our souls.

[Jak525]

Thanks Harker. Looking at Matt's video, that doesn't seem to be the case though. He doesn't have a target locked to achieve that:

This is the case. That video is outdated with respect to the hostile identification criteria. It was changed this most recent update.

[hungoverpilot]

This is the case. That video is outdated with respect to the hostile identification criteria. It was changed this most recent update.

 

 

Thank you. Lost a couple of hours on this one :-(

[atazar]

We are falling like flies in the multiplayer mode, someone knocked down the awacs and the hornets looked like bats, blind flying without IFF. :(

 

 

All contacts are unknown to more than 25 miles.

Edited March 30, 2019 by atazar

[Harker]

We are falling like flies in the multiplayer mode, someone knocked down the awacs and the hornets looked like bats, blind flying without IFF. :(

 

 

All contacts are unknown to more than 25 miles.

Well, MP needs to become more realistic in that regard. An AWACS is an asset that should be protected at almost all costs. It needs an escort, but most people don't want to do that.

 

But once you have a donor, even an F/F, identifying the target as hostile, you can IFF only with Mode 4, no need for NCTR, I think. Just takes one player to use Mode 4 + NCTR and then pull back and serve as an AWACS.

Edited March 30, 2019 by Harker

[atazar]

Well, MP needs to become more realistic in that regard. An AWACS is an asset that should be protected at almost all costs. It needs an escort, but most people don't want to do that.

 

But once you have a donor, even an F/F, identifying the target as hostile, you can IFF only with Mode 4, no need for NCTR, I think. Just takes one player to use Mode 4 + NCTR and then pull back and serve as an AWACS.

 

I agree, but we simply need a system of autonomous identification, as they have the M2K or the F-15, systems that identify from the passive radar or from the designator, in the case of the Mirage 2000, it is only necessary to interrogate and it is a system agile and effective. Obviously I do not want something that is not realistic, but I do not want to depend on third parties either.

 

If I have to wait 25 miles to see if the contact in front of me is hostile, I do not think it has many possibilities, the Su-27 attack 30 miles.

 

If you add to this dependence that flying blind, the AACQ blocks everything you catch 99 miles on the flank and does not block what you have at 20 miles at 12, the situation is very frustrating. I want to think that all this is temporary.

Edited March 30, 2019 by atazar

[aaron886]

It's realistic, and that's good, but it doesn't fit in well with the air quake Flaming Cliffs jets and their oversimplified sensors. It's the same old story... Individual aircraft models in DCS are exquisite, but they come together as patchwork in an environment that doesn't generate realistic action. Falcon 4 is still closer, all these years later.

[Ahmed]

It's realistic, and that's good, but it doesn't fit in well with the air quake Flaming Cliffs jets and their oversimplified sensors. It's the same old story... Individual aircraft models in DCS are exquisite, but they come together as patchwork in an environment that doesn't generate realistic action. Falcon 4 is still closer, all these years later.

 

A ROE matrix is way more complex than just interrogating your target.

 

Some modules (FC3, M2000) may have an advantage with a magic IFF implementation, but you still should have enough SA to declare a contact as hostile based on other criteria. Lets say that, if he is screaming towards you at M1.5 and you are spiked... you don't really need an IFF interrogation. 1+1.

 

Actually I don't see any advantage on those modules. IFF only tells you that a contact is not replying with a friendly code. It does not confirm that it is hostile by itself.

 

I'm not a big fan of the current "double interrogation = hostile" implementation of L16 either.

 

Probably the best solution for DCS would be for ED to create an IFF API to be used by all modules the same. Introducing IFF transponder failures into the damage model or random failures would also steer the usage of IFF towards its real one, instead of a mental "master arm" switch.

[Harker]

IFF depends on the ROE. Right now, solo, we need M4 + NCTR. Later, we might be able to have M4 only. It comes down to the fact that the new IFF system is pushing DCS towards a more realistic direction and that will need to be taken into account in MP matches.

 

IRL, the loss of all C&C elements (in our case, we only have the one AWACS) would mean that fighters perform a tactical retreat, they don't continue engaging targets while blind.

 

If you think about it, it's like the F-15C, the M2000C etc operate under different ROE, where a negative M4 response is enough to declare the target hostile and they can auto-M4.

 

AFAIK, the F-18C's AN/APG-73 radar has auto-M4 IRL, so that, along with the implementation of different ROEs, will even the field in the future.

 

Besides, making a contact the L&S target runs an M4 interrogation automatically on it, so if we can get the ability to change the ROE to negative M4 for the Hornet's radar, we're good.

 

But the best solution here would be to bring the other modules' IFF systems at the same level/requirements as the Hornet's, not the other way around.

Edited March 30, 2019 by Harker

[atazar]

IFF depends on the ROE. Right now, solo, we need M4 + NCTR. Later, we might be able to have M4 only. It comes down to the fact that the new IFF system is pushing DCS towards a more realistic direction and that will need to be taken into account in MP matches.

 

IRL, the loss of all C&C elements (in our case, we only have the one AWACS) would mean that fighters perform a tactical retreat, they don't continue engaging targets while blind.

 

If you think about it, it's like the F-15C, the M2000C etc operate under different ROE, where a negative M4 response is enough to declare the target hostile and they can auto-M4.

 

AFAIK, the F-18C's AN/APG-73 radar has auto-M4 IRL, so that, along with the implementation of different ROEs, will even the field in the future.

 

Besides, making a contact the L&S target runs an M4 interrogation automatically on it, so if we can get the ability to change the ROE to negative M4 for the Hornet's radar, we're good.

 

But the best solution here would be to bring the other modules' IFF systems at the same level/requirements as the Hornet's, not the other way around.

 

 

I agree on all the points, but ... So, we consider closed that a real Hornet, can only identify autonomously less than 24 miles? That's how it is? In that case, when you want to identify an F-14, your missile will have already reached you and an F-14 is not an FC3.

 

Another problem that we have flying blindly, is that the AACQ does not block the nearest target and blocks targets 99 miles on the flank, that way, we are in inferiority.

 

I have faith in this platform and the Hornet I love it. Maybe some ED member could guide us on this matter.

[Harker]

I agree on all the points, but ... So, we consider closed that a real Hornet, can only identify autonomously less than 24 miles? That's how it is? In that case, when you want to identify an F-14, your missile will have already reached you and an F-14 is not an FC3.

 

Another problem that we have flying blindly, is that the AACQ does not block the nearest target and blocks targets 99 miles on the flank, that way, we are in inferiority.

 

I have faith in this platform and the Hornet I love it. Maybe some ED member could guide us on this matter.

If the ROE is set up so that you need a negative M4 response + an NCTR print, then yes, you need to get 24-25 nm from the target.

 

The thing is that you wouldn't normally be operating without AWACS or equivalent C&C support. If you didn't have any C&C support and you were in a clearly hostile environment, without neutral targets, you would have a different ROE that required only a negative M4 response and/or rely on your F/F network.

 

That F-14 is going to be subject to the same operational limitations, assuming the enemy is implementing the same ROE and its going to have a more powerful but less sophisticated radar as well.

[atazar]

Well, MP needs to become more realistic in that regard. An AWACS is an asset that should be protected at almost all costs. It needs an escort, but most people don't want to do that.

 

But once you have a donor, even an F/F, identifying the target as hostile, you can IFF only with Mode 4, no need for NCTR, I think. Just takes one player to use Mode 4 + NCTR and then pull back and serve as an AWACS.

 

 

:thumbup: