Notching and cranking

[stenji]

Are the same manouvre with different names? What are the differences between the two of them?

[KittyVCAW-1]

Notching would be placing a threat at your 3 or 9 o clock position and holding it there. Cranking would be typically your f-pole maneuver or a series of right and left turns at certain timing intervals. Use of chaff and flares increases effectiveness. Notching should typically be done as soon as RWR starts yelling at you. A crank is pretty important to get the timing down right it happens a lot slower than you would think. You just gotta stay cool and wait for the right time. I myself am a strong believer in the f-pole for missile avoidance and the notch just to hide from radar. But it can depend on the situation like weapon types, airspeed, altitude or whatever. There are lots of good tutorials on each tactic on youtube I really suggest watching some they go into really good detail.

Edited September 1, 2019 by Jonnie2Bad

[stenji]

Notching would be placing a threat at your 3 or 9 o clock position and holding it there. Cranking would be typically your f-pole maneuver or a series of right and left turns at certain timing intervals. Use of chaff and flares increases effectiveness. Notching should typically be done as soon as RWR starts yelling at you. A crank is pretty important to get the timing down right it happens a lot slower than you would think. You just gotta stay cool and wait for the right time. I myself am a strong believer in the f-pole for missile avoidance and the notch just to hide from radar. But it can depend on the situation like weapon types, airspeed, altitude or whatever. There are lots of good tutorials on each tactic on youtube I really suggest watching some they go into really good detail.

Thank you Jonnie2Bad. That's a kinda good explanation.

[sk000tch]

I'm assuming by the question you aren't looking for the complicated answer or a bunch of acronyms; but fyi f-pole is unrelated,

 

To answer your question a little radar theory is necessary, I am simplifying this so just realize there's more to it. The AA radar we use exploit the fact that intercept targets are generally traveling at a high rate of speed. If the emitter is above you (thus the picture of you it takes has a background with ground rather than air), the radar must filter out ground clutter. The simple explanation for this is that objects moving within a certain band (there are angular variations and myriad complexities but again, simple), defined by the speed of the emitter/bandit, is filtered out. So if the bandit is doing 500 kts, the ground is moving at 500 kts relative to the radar right?

 

Unfortunately, fighter combat is all geometry, so there's a couple concepts that are unavoidably methy. You're going to hear/read different ways to describe the relative position of aircraft. Target Aspect is particularly important, and is defined as the position of your aircraft in degrees from the bandits tail. Head on its 180, if you're on his six its zeo. Angle Off or Angle Of Tail is similar, but more useful for weapons employment. AOT is the angular position of your fuselage to the bandits tail (usually in a pursuit scenario where you are hot). The difference is that if you turn, aspect doesn't change, but AOT does. AOT directly affects whether the bandit is within your weapons envelope.

 

There are a couple dozen terms to describe geometry, many of which are confusing; but bandit bearing is the simplest of all. It is the bearing to the bandit if you look up and out the window. It is independent of your heading or the bandit's heading, just what what directly do you have to look to see him.

 

So if you are head on and turn 90 degrees, bandit bearing with move from 12 o'clock to 3/9. You're now beaming. Note that Target Aspect hasn't changed, just your heading relative to the bandits position. You were hot (11-1), and you turned to beam (3/9). If you continued that turn to put the bandit aft of your 4 or 8 o'clock, now your dragging. The area between hot and beam is flanking, but more on that later.

 

Beaming a radar is a defensive maneuver used to evade radar lock. If you are told to jump in his notch, turn to beam. The idea is to hide in the doppler clutter notch. Note that vertical separation is important here, this won't work well if you're at 40k and attacker is at 25k (remember the background). (Vertical separation is another concept that matters).

 

Cranking is different. Cranking minimizes the bandit's weapon envelope and slows closure. It is turning to flank after employment, putting your radar at or near its gimbal limit. It's a simple concept 1v1, just shoot and turn. In section BVR with follow on groups it gets a lot more interesting. But again, 1v1, all we are talking about is shooting then turning to gimbal limit to slow closure and manage enemy WEZ.

 

After you crank is the more challenging part. It is not always easy to tell if you are winning or losing. A good hint is whether you're locked up or not (if in a flight and your wingman is 10kft below you headed in the opposite direction that is also a bad sign). Conversely, if the bandit is dragging you and causing you to turn hot to maintain lock, its a pretty good sign you are winning... just watch for the SAM trap.

Edited September 2, 2019 by sk000tch

[QuiGon]

Can someone explain me the difference between cranking and F-Pole-Maneuver? I know what cranking is, but I'm not sure about the exact definition of F-Pole?

 

@sk000tch: Pete Bonanni, is that you? :D

[AvroLanc]

Can someone explain me the difference between cranking and F-Pole-Maneuver? I know what cranking is, but I'm not sure about the exact definition of F-Pole?

 

@sk000tch: Pete Bonanni, is that you? :D

 

My understanding is that F-pole is simply the distance between you and target aircraft at time of missile impact. For a SARH missile.

 

Likewise A-Pole is for a ARH missile, the distance between you and target at missile pitbull.

 

The idea of cranking is to increase the range between shooter and target at missile impact. A crank is a maneuver designed to increase your F-pole. I was a little confused when sk000tch says they're unrelated?

[Rescue]

My understanding is that F-pole is simply the distance between you and target aircraft at time of missile impact.

 

No.

It's called F-Pole maneuver.

Here are some nice Vids about it.

 

Growing Sidewinder:

 

Jabbers:

[DD_Fenrir]

F-pole is an ACM tactic of which the crank is an element.

 

It is designed to combine both offensive and defensive actions, derived primarily from the realisation that in the SARH environment two opposing aircraft with broadly similar capabilities would each fire a Fox-1 and if both maintain collision courses to maintain a lock then each would wipe the other out; essentially a zero sum game, which ultimately favours the side with the greater numbers of aircraft to lose. Given the USSRs supremacy in numbers during the cold war, not a battle the West was going to win.

 

It comprises a sequence of launch/missile defense manoeuvre/re-engage manoeuvre.

 

The crank is the first two parts of that sequence. Note that the "launch" is not mandatory but is generally advised to persuade the bandit to go defensive and break his lock allowing you to return offensive more quickly.

[AvroLanc]

No.

It's called F-Pole maneuver.

Here are some nice Vids about it.

 

Growing Sidewinder:

 

Jabbers:

 

No.

My definition of F-pole is correct.

The F-pole maneuver referred to in those vids is 'cranking'.

[DD_Fenrir]

I suspect that, whilst AvroLanc is correct by using F-pole in it's strictest sense, that the "F-pole manoeuvre" name is derived (and a partial contraction) from "a manoeuvre to increase your F-pole" so you are both correct.

 

And I have always inferred that the F-pole is indeed a crank but the with offensive re-engagement to both bleed the opponents missile of energy and enable the "cranker" a second missile shot with a higher PK.

Edited September 3, 2019 by DD_Fenrir

[Ziptie]

..... and enable the "cranker" a second missile shot with a higher PK.

 

And if you don’t know what PK means in his reference, it is an acronym for Probability of Kill.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

[sk000tch]

Can someone explain me the difference between cranking and F-Pole-Maneuver? I know what cranking is, but I'm not sure about the exact definition of F-Pole?

 

@sk000tch: Pete Bonanni, is that you? :D

 

hah sorry, i am wordy... in fairness, half the posts here are "how do i use autopilot?" so I try to explain things clearly. I will try to be less Bonanni-ish

 

So, ironically, I think everyone is right. F-pole is just shooter to target range at weapon impact. F-pole maneuver is a thing I see on sim forums that describes a maneuver useful in a 1v1 head on engagement, of which cranking is a key element.

 

DCS BVR is far too frequently 1v1 head on at 30nm. For various reasons (risk tolerance and mission design being foremost), these encounters generally proceed with both aircraft heading straight for each other, employing weapons, perhaps one for effect and another in range, with various attempts to evade. In RL, the other side has a mission and usually prefers not to engage you (dropping something that blows up). Similarly, if you're CAP or escort, you commit as a section, evaluate the intercept and maneuver to employ your weapons from outside bandits WEZ, to the extent you have time to do so. Tactical intercept is a far more interesting topic in these circumstances, but when that is not the case and you are a Navy of one, you've got the f-pole maneuver.

 

As I have seen it is used here, it involves turning to increase Antenna Train Angle (ATA) to near max. Vc will decrease, and, if bandit turns to pursue, aspect will stay at or near 0. Change course as necessary are maintain ATA. You should have designated a L&S so you can monitor aspect (*tip - the points of the star represent different aspect angles, you should be able to quickly estimate to within 10 degrees). If target aspect increases then pause go read up on lateral separation and try to grab 40k or so, at 10-15nm change course to collision bearing (read about that too) and shoot.

 

However, assuming he did turn, there are several videos describing how to do it in DCS better that I can write out. A quick search on youtube comes up with several examples, Jabbers has one

.

[QuiGon]

So if I understand coccrectly the F-pole-maneuver and cranking are the same thing: A turn to attain near max ATA in order to extend the F-Pole.

[GGTharos]

There is no F-pole maneuver. F-pole is a distance, specifically the distance from your aircraft to the target aircraft at the time of missile impact.

 

Cranking is one common and successful way of maximizing this distance in BVR.

 

You want to maximize THE ENEMY F-pole and minimize yours.

[QuiGon]

There is no F-pole maneuver. F-pole is a distance, specifically the distance from your aircraft to the target aircraft at the time of missile impact.

 

Cranking is one common and successful way of maximizing this distance in BVR.

 

You want to maximize THE ENEMY F-pole and minimize yours.

Alright, that's pretty much what I initially thought. :thumbup:

[ravenzino]

Can anyone explain the name "F-pole"?

[QuiGon]

Can anyone explain the name "F-pole"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air-to-air_missile#Performance

[ravenzino]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air-to-air_missile#Performance

 

I failed to make myself clear... Not its definition, but more of why it is called "F-pole", where did this name come from...

[QuiGon]

I failed to make myself clear... Not its definition, but more of why it is called "F-pole", where did this name come from...

Oh, I see. Good question, unfortunately I'm not a mathematician :dunno:

[AG-51_Sabot]

I failed to make myself clear... Not its definition, but more of why it is called "F-pole", where did this name come from...

 

Maybe from here....:pilotfly:

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2T4ph-SxAIo

[Ironhand]

I failed to make myself clear... Not its definition, but more of why it is called "F-pole", where did this name come from...

 

Not sure about the "Pole" part but, I believe, "F"=Fox, since I've read that A-Pole = Autonomous-Pole.