AN/ALQ - 126 DECM

[lucky-hendrix]

Hi guys

 

I have trouble with the DECM : http://www.heatblur.se/F-14Manual/general.html?highlight=decm#an-alq-126-decm

 

Manual says that in "Rec" mode RIO should hear audio corresponding to the threat illuminating the AC (A bit like the Viggen RWR, I gues) I could never get this to work ?

[lucky-hendrix]

Really? no one knows ? is this system even implemented?

[QuiGon]

Really? no one knows ? is this system even implemented?

That's what I wondering too. To me it looks like there is no EW functionality implemented in the Tomcat. The Tomcats DECM jammer doesn't seem to do anything, nor do jammers from other aircraft affect the Tomcat.

[Super Grover]

The jammer works as for any other DCS aircraft. The only thing missing is the audio output - we're still working on it, and it will be added at a later time.

[QuiGon]

The jammer works as for any other DCS aircraft. The only thing missing is the audio output - we're still working on it, and it will be added at a later time.

So it reduces lock on range for enemy AI units and denies enemy player aircraft radar range and IFF identification at longer ranges?

I will test that again then.

 

How about the Tomcat itself? How does it react to being jammed?

[AeriaGloria]

I can affirm that many tomcats have jammed me

[QuiGon]

I can affirm that many tomcats have jammed me

That's good to know! So the Tomcat can actually jam indeed.

 

Still, the question remains if the Tomcat can be jammed as well, and if so, what are the effects?

[Istari6]

(Thread, arise!)

Just learning the ALQ-126 DECM here in 2022.  Is there a reason why a Tomcat crew wouldn't automatically switch to XMIT on Fence In?  It seems the DECM is not just a barrage jammer, but is selective, waiting for incoming radar signals and then determining the appropriate response.  So why wouldn't you turn it on automatically on entering enemy territory?  Particularly given that with the massive AWG-9 radiating at 10,000 W, you're not exactly operating stealth otherwise.

[The_Tau]

16 hours ago, Istari6 said:

(Thread, arise!)

Just learning the ALQ-126 DECM here in 2022.  Is there a reason why a Tomcat crew wouldn't automatically switch to XMIT on Fence In?  It seems the DECM is not just a barrage jammer, but is selective, waiting for incoming radar signals and then determining the appropriate response.  So why wouldn't you turn it on automatically on entering enemy territory?  Particularly given that with the massive AWG-9 radiating at 10,000 W, you're not exactly operating stealth otherwise.

 

Idk about RL, but in DCS some missiles can home on jam and I had situation that I was fighting another F-14, he fired at me 54 in PDSTT. I go to notch (my ECM was on all time), I break lock, I turn back hot again at him, he is still like 25- 30 nm out, I launch my 54 in TWS aaaand I explode. No warning, no rwr, no nothing. In tacview that STT 54 lost lock but then it REAQUIRED in home-on-jam and bloody hit me. 

So in DCS while F-14 can be really powerful in theory as it can fire missiles well beyond its ECM burn through range (especially vs Flankers), so enemy has no idea how far you are, enemy air2air missiles can still track you in home-on-jam mode. So  I try to turn off ECM when fight is approaching 15-20nm

[Istari6]

That's interesting.  If Home-on-Jam is that good, than what use are jammers at all in DCS?  Seems like an enemy missile has guidance either way - either with traditional lock without jamming, or follow the jamming once that begins. 

Also, I thought the DECM was pretty sophisticated (1990s tech) so that it's only jamming occasionally as needed to break lock, not a continuous barrage jamming.

[_Hoss]

Out of the 20 years I worked on DECM gear in the Navy, (77-97) I never repaired an AN/ALQ-126A to be installed into an F-14, they all carried AN/ALQ-100s. AN/ALQ-126Bs went into F/A-18s. You would of been briefed when to switch your Countermeasures from Receive to Repeat or Xmit..... The ALQ will along with the RWR gear will detect, and display all RADARS on its display. But, it will not respond/xmit until the input signal strength has exceeded a predetermined level (range). And then on a pulse for pulse basis. DECM is designed to keep breaking lock long enough for you to get in and get out. 

Hoss

[LanceCriminal86]

ALQ-126 was first added to F-14 161168 which hit its first squadron in April 1984, and continued to be added to all later blocks including the last ones built or rebuilt through '86-'87 [Block 60/65 jets were rebuilt to -135 during this time including the DECM]. And the A+ were equipped as well with them in '87-'88 or so when those started hitting squadrons. Not necessarily 90s tech. The ALR-67 on the other hand didn't get added to most As until the 00s, most of those being later block jets that had the ALQ-126 and LANTIRN.

 

The one exception I have found so far in terms of old jets that didn't have ALQ-126 originally but got it later {excluding the 60/65 to 135 rebuilds} was 159824, VF-211's CAG jet around 200-2002 timeframe. It went to VF-101 from VF-202 and 201 around 19916, without the upgrades, and was photographed at Pt Mugu in 1998 with ALQ-126 (and later LANTIRN). Why it got the upgrades and no other older jets, I have no idea other than what was suggested being low hours. But that jet was one of the second batches, a -75 jet from VF-14 in '74. Maybe it was to test feasibility, maybe to try and get more LANTIRN/updated jets for RAG use, I just don't know and no solid answers from the Tomcat Assn folks either. Would have to track down the Grumman St. Augustine folks or some Oceana guys from '96 or so, maybe they can remember.

 

[Northstar98]

20 hours ago, Istari6 said:

(Thread, arise!)

Just learning the ALQ-126 DECM here in 2022.  Is there a reason why a Tomcat crew wouldn't automatically switch to XMIT on Fence In?  It seems the DECM is not just a barrage jammer, but is selective, waiting for incoming radar signals and then determining the appropriate response.  So why wouldn't you turn it on automatically on entering enemy territory?  Particularly given that with the massive AWG-9 radiating at 10,000 W, you're not exactly operating stealth otherwise.

AFAIK, IRL, the DECM sets in the Tomcat (either the AN/ALQ-100 or the AN/ALQ-126A) have track breaking modes (this video is probably the best general overview of basic techniques employed). These only transmit when a radar in a track or fire-control mode is detected, or when the seeker of an ARH missile is detected. Once it has succesfully broken the lock, it stops transmitting.

This wouldn't compromise the Tomcat's visibility, because it'll only transmit when a radar has already acquired you.

4 hours ago, The_Tau said:

Idk about RL, but in DCS some missiles can home on jam and I had situation that I was fighting another F-14, he fired at me 54 in PDSTT. I go to notch (my ECM was on all time), I break lock, I turn back hot again at him, he is still like 25- 30 nm out, I launch my 54 in TWS aaaand I explode. No warning, no rwr, no nothing. In tacview that STT 54 lost lock but then it REAQUIRED in home-on-jam and bloody hit me.

So in DCS while F-14 can be really powerful in theory as it can fire missiles well beyond its ECM burn through range (especially vs Flankers), so enemy has no idea how far you are, enemy air2air missiles can still track you in home-on-jam mode. So  I try to turn off ECM when fight is approaching 15-20nm

This shouldn't really work on the Tomcat if the ECM system works as described in HB's manual.

The jamming in the Tomcat is the same basic ECM flag = on/off setup everything else in DCS has, but it should follow the track-breaking logic employed by the real AN/ALQ-100 and -126A - i.e they should only transmit (i.e set the ECM flag to on) when a radar in a track (i.e STT) or fire-control mode is detected and should stop transmitting (turn the flag back off) when one isn't detected.

This should be pretty resistant to HOJ missiles - if a radar in a track/fire-control mode is detected, it's likely said radar can or is guiding a weapon. If one isn't detected, it should stop transmitting and so a missile in a HOJ mode wouldn't have anything to home in on.

1 hour ago, Istari6 said:

That's interesting.  If Home-on-Jam is that good, than what use are jammers at all in DCS?

Right now only the F-16 and F/A-18 attempt to emulate a more realistic setup with their jammers (as in they actually emulate track-breaking). I'm not sure how it works under the hood (I'm guessing some RNG going on within some range of time), but if a radar in a track/fire-control mode is detected, they transmit. So long as you're past the burn-through range of the radar there's some probability for the lock to be broken.

1 hour ago, Istari6 said:

 Seems like an enemy missile has guidance either way - either with traditional lock without jamming, or follow the jamming once that begins.

Yeah, shouldn't really work like that - the jammer only transmits when it detects a 'traditional lock'. Once that's been broken and no longer detected, the jamming should stop.

1 hour ago, Istari6 said:

Also, I thought the DECM was pretty sophisticated (1990s tech) so that it's only jamming occasionally as needed to break lock, not a continuous barrage jamming.

They've been around a lot longer than that, AFAIK angle deception and RGPO dates as far back to WWII, the video linked above is from 1962.

Edited June 21, 2022 by Northstar98

[_Hoss]

When I say it Transmits deception techniques on a pulse for pulse basis means as long as you leave it in Xmit/Repeat.... everytime a Fire Control RADAR xmits a pulse the deception repeater will recieve that pulse, determine if it's a threat, choose a technique, amplify the return pulse to bury the actual pulse in noise, and continue to do that while it's in the threats engagement envelope. It only stops once it's outside said envelope. As for Tomcats using the A model ALQ, there were never any techs on the boat from NAS Miramar to repair ALQ-126s (they had to provide techs, and NAS Miramar had no AN/ALM-106, which is the repair bench for 126As), they only came from NAS Lemoore, (A-7s, F/A-18s) NAS Whidbey Is. (A-6, EA-6B, E/A-18). As stated before, I repaired all the DECM that went in Naval Aircraft. The ECM shop (W/C 64B) was for ALQ-99s and is in the vans hanging from the overhead in hanger bay one. ECM, DECM, is not modeled with any accuracy in this "Sim", arguing about it is pointless. But I do get a chuckle or two reading them. 

[The_Tau]

19 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

 

This shouldn't really work on the Tomcat if the ECM system works as described in HB's manual.

The jamming in the Tomcat is the same basic ECM flag = on/off setup everything else in DCS has, but it should follow the track-breaking logic employed by the real AN/ALQ-100 and -126A - i.e they should only transmit (i.e set the ECM flag to on) when a radar in a track (i.e STT) or fire-control mode is detected and should stop transmitting (turn the flag back off) when one isn't detected.

This should be pretty resistant to HOJ missiles - if a radar in a track/fire-control mode is detected, it's likely said radar can or is guiding a weapon. If one isn't detected, it should stop transmitting and so a missile in a HOJ mode wouldn't have anything to home in on.

 

 

Thats definitely not how it works now in DCS for F-14, when I fly MiG29 and there is F-14 on my scope, I see jammer strobe even though I am not locking him up, simple RWS. Right now it seems that F-14 turn jammer on as soon it detects any radar signal, in practice turning jam on when on repeat. 

But F-14 jammer is absolutely capable of breaking 29/27 radar locks when they are outside burn through range. So it kinda works as intended in that regard? 

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, The_Tau said:

Thats definitely not how it works now in DCS for F-14, when I fly MiG29 and there is F-14 on my scope, I see jammer strobe even though I am not locking him up, simple RWS. Right now it seems that F-14 turn jammer on as soon it detects any radar signal, in practice turning jam on when on repeat. 

In the manual it says "when a threat is detected" but the modes described are all track breaking modes (only one I'm unsure of is mainlobe blanking though I assume that's a noise jamming mode). To my understanding, these should only transmit (i.e set the ECM flag on) when a radar in a track or fire-control mode is detected, or the seeker head of an ARH missile is detected.

1 hour ago, The_Tau said:

But F-14 jammer is absolutely capable of breaking 29/27 radar locks when they are outside burn through range. So it kinda works as intended in that regard? 

What seems to be happening in that case though isn't a DECM track breaking technique being emulated per se. What's seems to be happening is that the MiG-29/Su-27 radar is establishing a range gate over the target in order to track it, however, when noise jamming overcomes the skin return, the range gate cannot function properly and so the radar drops its track.

What you can do with the MiG-29/Su-27 though is establish an angle-only track with no ranging (which you can do by locking up the strobe), which will still permit weapons guidance. DCS' ECM doesn't support angle deception jamming, so in that case all the F-14's jammer is doing is presenting a nice juicy target for any HOJ missile.

Edited June 22, 2022 by Northstar98

[Istari6]

Great discussion, thanks for all the new information. 

Some questions:

21 hours ago, 352nd_Hoss said:

As for Tomcats using the A model ALQ, there were never any techs on the boat from NAS Miramar to repair ALQ-126s (they had to provide techs, and NAS Miramar had no AN/ALM-106, which is the repair bench for 126As), they only came from NAS Lemoore, (A-7s, F/A-18s) NAS Whidbey Is. (A-6, EA-6B, E/A-18). As stated before, I repaired all the DECM that went in Naval Aircraft. The ECM shop (W/C 64B) was for ALQ-99s and is in the vans hanging from the overhead in hanger bay one

1. I thought the ALQ-126 DECM was installed as part of the mid-late 1990s upgrades that added the ALR-67.  Sounds like it was installed as standard in F/A-18s in the 1980s, then added to some F-14s in the late 1980s/early 1990s?  Right now, I'm learning the F-14A and trying to fly it as it was in the late 1970s to mid-1980s, using AIM-7F, AIM-9L, AIM-54A and fighting MiG-21, MIG-23, MiG-25.  So for a circa 1985-1986 Tomcat, assume that DECM wasn't available? 

2. If I wanted to simulate the weaker ALQ-100, is it better just to leave jammers off?  I'm just starting to fight MiG-23s, and trying to figure out BVR tactics.  With DECM, it seems relatively easy to break the MiG-23s lock at longer ranges.  But I'm trying to learn how real F-14A pilots at the time engaged the Flogger, and I've heard that that ALQ-100 was quite a bit less effective.  

4 hours ago, The_Tau said:

Thats definitely not how it works now in DCS for F-14, when I fly MiG29 and there is F-14 on my scope, I see jammer strobe even though I am not locking him up, simple RWS. Right now it seems that F-14 turn jammer on as soon it detects any radar signal, in practice turning jam on when on repeat

3. So if I'm following, then the real ALQ-126 is selective and only transmits the minimum necessary to break lock, then goes quiet again.  So HOJ should have a hard time in the real-world.  Yet in DCS, it works much more like a barrage noise jammer and makes the Tomcat more vulnerable to HOJ missiles?  

If so, what DECM tactics do people use inside DCS?  Do you not turn on XMIT for Fence In, and only wait until there's an actual lock?  

Edited June 22, 2022 by Istari6

[_Hoss]

You need to understand the ALQ-100 is not weaker, the freq range it covered was not as high. Power out and freq range of RADAR & DECM systems are the same. The difference between the ALQ-126A (Delta Mod) and the B version is a higher freq range and newer state of the art components. C/D Hornets right now are very hard to repair because of parts, (Avionics systems) obsolescence is a big problem, they just don't make them anymore. You need to remember the A-7, A-6, E/A-6B, carried the ALQ-126A too. The Intruder & Prowler could carry two of them, but usually used only one and used steal plates in the Turtleback for CoG purposes. VA-22 & 94 made the last cruises with A-7s at NAS Lemoore in 88. I thought the ALQ-126A & B the AN/ALM-106, AN/USM-458 Test benches. This was from Nov 89 to July 93, I never had a student from NAS Miramar. 

[Istari6]

So if I'm following, ALQ-100 was as strong as the ALQ-126 in terms of power.  Yet the ALQ-126 had multiple versions, with progressively higher frequency ranges and modernized components.  Hornet C/D received ALQ-126 from the start, while it was retrofitted to Tomcats later? 

[_Hoss]

Quote From Istari6

1. I thought the ALQ-126 DECM was installed as part of the mid-late 1990s upgrades that added the ALR-67.  Sounds like it was installed as standard in F/A-18s in the 1980s, then added to some F-14s in the late 1980s/early 1990s?  Right now, I'm learning the F-14A and trying to fly it as it was in the late 1970s to mid-1980s, using AIM-7F, AIM-9L, AIM-54A and fighting MiG-21, MIG-23, MiG-25.  So for a circa 1985-1986 Tomcat, assume that DECM wasn't available? 

A: In the late 70's to mid 80's the Tomcat had the AN/ALQ-100 in it.  The techs from NAS Miramar were using the OQ-10 Test Bench in the shop to repair them.

2. If I wanted to simulate the weaker ALQ-100, is it better just to leave jammers off?  I'm just starting to fight MiG-23s, and trying to figure out BVR tactics.  With DECM, it seems relatively easy to break the MiG-23s lock at longer ranges.  But I'm trying to learn how real F-14A pilots at the time engaged the Flogger, and I've heard that that ALQ-100 was quite a bit less effective.  

A: You could leave it off, since you are dogfighting, and not attacking a target where you need to fly straight at a target. Less effective if you look at it in the late 70's, early 80's, it was old stuff, and getting obsolete on getting parts.  So, F-14 pilots are not trying to ingress to a target, look at their MFD's and select ordnance, and look for the target, like the A-7, A-6 pilots would of been at the time.  That's why at a determined waypoint (IP) they would of turned their DECM from Receive to Repeat and not worried about it again until they were safely outside the threat envelop. Taking time to only listen to the AN/ALR-45/50/45F and the RWR indicator to see where the threats are. There could of been an A-6 with a AN/ALE-41 Chaff Pod laying down a chaff corridor, or an EA-6B jamming their communications systems with the ALQ-99 to make it hard to relay orders to engage. A-7's could of launched Shrike back then (SEAD).  An F-14 is an aggressor not a vulnerable attack aircraft.  He's going after the airborne threats, and stays out of the target area.

As I can only state on my experience in the USN from 77-97, I never once repaired a 126A for a F-14, (Every repair MAF has a Job Control Num or JCN, the first three Alpha numerics tell you what organization it comes from i.e. PE7 would of been like VA-94 on the Big E) when I was a DECM instructor at Lemoore NAMTRAGRUDET from 89-93 I never taught a ALQ-126, or USM-458 class to a Tech from NAS Miramar. The A-6 and EA-6B could carry two 126A's but they usually only carried one, and replaced the other with steel plates in the rack where the one went in the Turtle-back. By the time I did my twilight tour on the USS Abraham Lincoln there were no more F-14s only four squadrons of F/A-18's,

3. So if I'm following, then the real ALQ-126 is selective and only transmits the minimum necessary to break lock, then goes quiet again.  So HOJ should have a hard time in the real-world.  Yet in DCS, it works much more like a barrage noise jammer and makes the Tomcat more vulnerable to HOJ missiles?  

A: No, do not look at it as minimum or maximum. (And for every pulse that hits the plane it will transmit and deception pulse if you are in the envelop) The amplitude of the received signal from the SAM's RADAR will have a certain amplitude when it hits the ALR-67 antennas or the 45/50/45F, lets say 29dbm, we will transmit a pulse back a bit stronger to bury the actual echo return in the SAM RADAR's receiver noise. the closer we get the stronger the signal and the stronger signal we send back. As you get closer he will be able to burn through your techniques, but hopefully you have dropped your ordnance by then. Now, one of the circuit cards in the ALR-67 and 45F have EPROMS (programmable) on it with the KNOWN RADAR Threat Library (RADAR fingerprints).  It knows each RADAR by its Carrier Freq, PRF, and PW of the Transmitted data.  It recognizes it, determines its range, bearing, threat level, and how to display it on the RWR indicator. The ALQ-126 is also programmable for the Threat library as well. So if there is a RADAR out there we don't know of or have a technique for it will transmit a Square Wave Modulated signal...(We called it SWIM). NOISE!

I'm always worried about saying too much, that may be still classified, but knowing what to look for I have determined since this is on the internet its okay

Design Features. The ALQ-126B is internally mounted on the F/A-18C/D and CF-18 and pod-mounted on the AV-8B. The system features a digital instantaneous frequency measurement receiver, distributed microprocessors, large-scale integrated circuits, and solid-state microwave amplifiers. It incorporates a varied antenna system. There is a set of high-band antennas just aft of the radome, a set of mid-band and low-band antennas on either side of the aircraft just ahead of and just behind the wings on both sides of the aircraft, and a high-band antenna on top of the left tail. The ALQ-126A was a vast improvement over the older ALQ-100(V); still, development was begun on an enhanced version with a distributed microprocessor control system in 1978. The ALQ-126B can be reprogrammed to counter changing threats. Advances in signal processing technology were incorporated into the new unit. Microprocessors prioritize jammer action to manage available power in a multiple threat environment. Improved software processing allows the ALQ-126B to interface with the ALR-67(V) warning receiver.

Operational Characteristics.

Jamming techniques are developed in response to the identification of received signals based on a user data file carried in an onboard library of threat characteristics. The ALQ-126B system was designed to employ various jamming techniques, including:

• Inverse Conical Scanning (ICS)
• Range Gate Pull Off (RGPO)
• Velocity Gate Pull Off (VGPO)
• Swept Square Wave (SSW)
• Main Lobe Blanking (MLB)

The ALQ-126(V) can operate independently, but the system is also interoperable with APR-43(V), ALR-45F, ALR-67(V), and ALQ-162(V), and the HARM, Sparrow, Phoenix, and AMRAAM missiles. Don't forget the Interference Blanker Unit to keep them from stepping on each others signals....

Variants/Upgrades ALQ-126A. This original version is no longer in production. ALQ-164(V). A podded version of the ALQ-126B, designated the ALQ-164, can be carried by the AV-8B Harrier II. The ALQ-164(V) also contains a Northrop ALQ-162(V) continuous wave (CW) (NOISE) jammer as part of the pod design.

Forecast Rationale The ALQ-126B was the first multimode, power-managed, reprogrammable defensive ECM system used by the US Navy and Marine Corps. It is a capable, flexible, supportable system that met Navy needs, but is older technology and will not be installed on next-generation aircraft. Originally, plans were to use ALQ-126Bs for EW on the first F/A-18E/Fs to come off the production line because the IDECM system would not be ready in time. Plans changed, however, and the Navy decided to use in-stock ALQ-165(V) ASPJ units as the onboard jammer and the ALE-50(V) towed decoy as the Block I IDECM system. Block II would incorporate the planned ALQ-214(V) onboard system. The ALQ-126B performed adequately in Persian Gulf combat, but weaknesses in the Navy’s reprogramming capability diminished what could have been better performance. Coupled with the loss of three F/A-18C/ Ds in the Gulf, it was difficult for the ALQ-126B to claim superior performance in combat.

Competitors took advantage of that fact to make inroads into potential markets. A 1997 GAO report cited the value of towed decoys for protection, and noted that suites such as the IDECM are more operationally effective than onboard equipment. The GAO even recommended adding the off-the-shelf ALE-50(V)s to operational F/A-18C/Ds. The Navy decided against this because of aerodynamic problems. This eliminated any chance of significant further US production of the ALQ-126B. The last USN orders were funded in FY89, and surge production to support the Persian Gulf War allowed the company to complete the contract ahead of schedule. Production covered both F/A-18C/D and AV-8B (ALQ-164(V)) requirements. An adequate supply is on hand to support near-term F/A-18 production. Production of spare/replacement parts continues to support systems in the field. Follow-on repair of systems in the active inventory will continue.

I'd start screaming for the AN/ALE-50 for the F/A-18 and the AN/ALE-41 Chaff Pods for the A-6. An AN/DLQ-3B to counter AWG-9 RADARS in IIRAF F-14s, on our F-14s.

One thing they could of done is remove the DECM from the Tomcat and installed weights, with the RHAW equip still installed. Fighter pilots are too cocky to use DECM anyway... their ego will defeat the threat all by itself.. LOL

 

Don't know it this helps or confuses, the game does not do it correct justice, so I would not worry too much about it. They do need to work on Sensitivity and Snapdown of the signals and how they react to the DECM/RWR receivers. i.e. when the Q is supposed to turn on and off (Sens and Snap) in Repeat as you go in and out of a threat environment.

Cheers

Hoss    

 

Edited June 27, 2022 by 352nd_Hoss

[AG-51_Sabot]

I think we carried 2 of them on the EA6A's at Whidbey when I was in 309.  But then again I was just a P/C and had no idea what was hanging on the stations and why.  (Pretty easy in the A7 or F4 squadrons to figure out what was on the rails.).  I remember seeing the Canoes off a couple of them so the shop could PM them

[Karon]

10 hours ago, 352nd_Hoss said:

Quote From Istari6

1. I thought the ALQ-126 DECM was installed as part of the mid-late 1990s upgrades that added the ALR-67.  Sounds like it was installed as standard in F/A-18s in the 1980s, then added to some F-14s in the late 1980s/early 1990s?  Right now, I'm learning the F-14A and trying to fly it as it was in the late 1970s to mid-1980s, using AIM-7F, AIM-9L, AIM-54A and fighting MiG-21, MIG-23, MiG-25.  So for a circa 1985-1986 Tomcat, assume that DECM wasn't available? 

A: In the late 70's to mid 80's the Tomcat had the AN/ALQ-100 in it.  The techs from NAS Miramar were using the OQ-10 Test Bench in the shop to repair them.

2. If I wanted to simulate the weaker ALQ-100, is it better just to leave jammers off?  I'm just starting to fight MiG-23s, and trying to figure out BVR tactics.  With DECM, it seems relatively easy to break the MiG-23s lock at longer ranges.  But I'm trying to learn how real F-14A pilots at the time engaged the Flogger, and I've heard that that ALQ-100 was quite a bit less effective.  

A: You could leave it off, since you are dogfighting, and not attacking a target where you need to fly straight at a target. Less effective if you look at it in the late 70's, early 80's, it was old stuff, and getting obsolete on getting parts.  So, F-14 pilots are not trying to ingress to a target, look at their MFD's and select ordnance, and look for the target, like the A-7, A-6 pilots would of been at the time.  That's why at a determined waypoint (IP) they would of turned their DECM from Receive to Repeat and not worried about it again until they were safely outside the threat envelop. Taking time to only listen to the AN/ALR-45/50/45F and the RWR indicator to see where the threats are. There could of been an A-6 with a AN/ALE-41 Chaff Pod laying down a chaff corridor, or an EA-6B jamming their communications systems with the ALQ-99 to make it hard to relay orders to engage. A-7's could of launched Shrike back then (SEAD).  An F-14 is an aggressor not a vulnerable attack aircraft.  He's going after the airborne threats, and stays out of the target area.

As I can only state on my experience in the USN from 77-97, I never once repaired a 126A for a F-14, (Every repair MAF has a Job Control Num or JCN, the first three Alpha numerics tell you what organization it comes from i.e. PE7 would of been like VA-94 on the Big E) when I was a DECM instructor at Lemoore NAMTRAGRUDET from 89-93 I never taught a ALQ-126, or USM-458 class to a Tech from NAS Miramar. The A-6 and EA-6B could carry two 126A's but they usually only carried one, and replaced the other with steel plates in the rack where the one went in the Turtle-back. By the time I did my twilight tour on the USS Abraham Lincoln there were no more F-14s only four squadrons of F/A-18's,

3. So if I'm following, then the real ALQ-126 is selective and only transmits the minimum necessary to break lock, then goes quiet again.  So HOJ should have a hard time in the real-world.  Yet in DCS, it works much more like a barrage noise jammer and makes the Tomcat more vulnerable to HOJ missiles?  

A: No, do not look at it as minimum or maximum. (And for every pulse that hits the plane it will transmit and deception pulse if you are in the envelop) The amplitude of the received signal from the SAM's RADAR will have a certain amplitude when it hits the ALR-67 antennas or the 45/50/45F, lets say 29dbm, we will transmit a pulse back a bit stronger to bury the actual echo return in the SAM RADAR's receiver noise. the closer we get the stronger the signal and the stronger signal we send back. As you get closer he will be able to burn through your techniques, but hopefully you have dropped your ordnance by then. Now, one of the circuit cards in the ALR-67 and 45F have EPROMS (programmable) on it with the KNOWN RADAR Threat Library (RADAR fingerprints).  It knows each RADAR by its Carrier Freq, PRF, and PW of the Transmitted data.  It recognizes it, determines its range, bearing, threat level, and how to display it on the RWR indicator. The ALQ-126 is also programmable for the Threat library as well. So if there is a RADAR out there we don't know of or have a technique for it will transmit a Square Wave Modulated signal...(We called it SWIM). NOISE!

I'm always worried about saying too much, that may be still classified, but knowing what to look for I have determined since this is on the internet its okay

Design Features. The ALQ-126B is internally mounted on the F/A-18C/D and CF-18 and pod-mounted on the AV-8B. The system features a digital instantaneous frequency measurement receiver, distributed microprocessors, large-scale integrated circuits, and solid-state microwave amplifiers. It incorporates a varied antenna system. There is a set of high-band antennas just aft of the radome, a set of mid-band and low-band antennas on either side of the aircraft just ahead of and just behind the wings on both sides of the aircraft, and a high-band antenna on top of the left tail. The ALQ-126A was a vast improvement over the older ALQ-100(V); still, development was begun on an enhanced version with a distributed microprocessor control system in 1978. The ALQ-126B can be reprogrammed to counter changing threats. Advances in signal processing technology were incorporated into the new unit. Microprocessors prioritize jammer action to manage available power in a multiple threat environment. Improved software processing allows the ALQ-126B to interface with the ALR-67(V) warning receiver.

Operational Characteristics.

Jamming techniques are developed in response to the identification of received signals based on a user data file carried in an onboard library of threat characteristics. The ALQ-126B system was designed to employ various jamming techniques, including:

• Inverse Conical Scanning (ICS)
• Range Gate Pull Off (RGPO)
• Velocity Gate Pull Off (VGPO)
• Swept Square Wave (SSW)
• Main Lobe Blanking (MLB)

The ALQ-126(V) can operate independently, but the system is also interoperable with APR-43(V), ALR-45F, ALR-67(V), and ALQ-162(V), and the HARM, Sparrow, Phoenix, and AMRAAM missiles. Don't forget the Interference Blanker Unit to keep them from stepping on each others signals....

Variants/Upgrades ALQ-126A. This original version is no longer in production. ALQ-164(V). A podded version of the ALQ-126B, designated the ALQ-164, can be carried by the AV-8B Harrier II. The ALQ-164(V) also contains a Northrop ALQ-162(V) continuous wave (CW) (NOISE) jammer as part of the pod design.

Forecast Rationale The ALQ-126B was the first multimode, power-managed, reprogrammable defensive ECM system used by the US Navy and Marine Corps. It is a capable, flexible, supportable system that met Navy needs, but is older technology and will not be installed on next-generation aircraft. Originally, plans were to use ALQ-126Bs for EW on the first F/A-18E/Fs to come off the production line because the IDECM system would not be ready in time. Plans changed, however, and the Navy decided to use in-stock ALQ-165(V) ASPJ units as the onboard jammer and the ALE-50(V) towed decoy as the Block I IDECM system. Block II would incorporate the planned ALQ-214(V) onboard system. The ALQ-126B performed adequately in Persian Gulf combat, but weaknesses in the Navy’s reprogramming capability diminished what could have been better performance. Coupled with the loss of three F/A-18C/ Ds in the Gulf, it was difficult for the ALQ-126B to claim superior performance in combat.

Competitors took advantage of that fact to make inroads into potential markets. A 1997 GAO report cited the value of towed decoys for protection, and noted that suites such as the IDECM are more operationally effective than onboard equipment. The GAO even recommended adding the off-the-shelf ALE-50(V)s to operational F/A-18C/Ds. The Navy decided against this because of aerodynamic problems. This eliminated any chance of significant further US production of the ALQ-126B. The last USN orders were funded in FY89, and surge production to support the Persian Gulf War allowed the company to complete the contract ahead of schedule. Production covered both F/A-18C/D and AV-8B (ALQ-164(V)) requirements. An adequate supply is on hand to support near-term F/A-18 production. Production of spare/replacement parts continues to support systems in the field. Follow-on repair of systems in the active inventory will continue.

I'd start screaming for the AN/ALE-50 for the F/A-18 and the AN/ALE-41 Chaff Pods for the A-6. An AN/DLQ-3B to counter AWG-9 RADARS in IIRAF F-14s, on our F-14s.

One thing they could of done is remove the DECM from the Tomcat and installed weights, with the RHAW equip still installed. Fighter pilots are too cocky to use DECM anyway... their ego will defeat the threat all by itself.. LOL

 

Don't know it this helps or confuses, the game does not do it correct justice, so I would not worry too much about it. They do need to work on Sensitivity and Snapdown of the signals and how they react to the DECM/RWR receivers. i.e. when the Q is supposed to turn on and off (Sens and Snap) in Repeat as you go in and out of a threat environment.

Cheers

Hoss    

 

 

I'd read these sorts of posts for days.

Thank you, Sir!

[_Hoss]

15 hours ago, AG-51_Sabot said:

I think we carried 2 of them on the EA6A's at Whidbey when I was in 309.  But then again I was just a P/C and had no idea what was hanging on the stations and why.  (Pretty easy in the A7 or F4 squadrons to figure out what was on the rails.).  I remember seeing the Canoes off a couple of them so the shop could PM them

Those things on the wings were ALQ-99s, Those went to the guys in the ECM Van's hanging in hangerbay one. (Their shop at Whidbey is lead lined) The 126s were behind the cockpit in the turtleback (dangerous to get in and out, could damage the plane) and another in the back near the doghouse. The 126 weighed 198lbs..... not easy to carry around the boat to and from the plane. They liked to split the two decks to make it easier to carry, but that nullified its "Ready for Issue" status..... and they would break the interdeck RF hardlines, and cables, or self test it on the flight deck and fry the input crystals. I caught one squadie with the lower deck sliding it down the ladder, bent the hell out of the front of it. 

[_Hoss]

On 6/27/2022 at 6:01 PM, AG-51_Sabot said:

I think we carried 2 of them on the EA6A's at Whidbey when I was in 309.  But then again I was just a P/C and had no idea what was hanging on the stations and why.  (Pretty easy in the A7 or F4 squadrons to figure out what was on the rails.).  I remember seeing the Canoes off a couple of them so the shop could PM them

Yes, the Intruder and Prowler could carry two 126s.... but the Prowler just carried weights in both stations.... the Intruder carried weights in the Turtle back.... behind the cockpit.... and the 126s in what I remember calling the dog house. Qs weighed 199 lbs. 

[Blaze1]

On 11/27/2023 at 4:35 PM, _Hoss said:

Yes, the Intruder and Prowler could carry two 126s.... but the Prowler just carried weights in both stations.... the Intruder carried weights in the Turtle back.... behind the cockpit.... and the 126s in what I remember calling the dog house. Qs weighed 199 lbs. 

_Hoss, did you ever work on the interim fuzzbuster A-6's and the ALQ-167?