how to know which plane is locking you up...

[fitness88]

If several planes are in a close area is there a way to know which is locking you up?

 

Thank you.

[Ziptie]

Indicated on RWR by HAFU (semi circle) below RWR contact. Often times, it will be above and below the contact. And you can select the OFFSET option to assist in a busy environment, to make less contacts “stack” with each other.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

[fitness88]

Indicated on RWR by HAFU (semi circle) below RWR contact. Often times, it will be above and below the contact. And you can select the OFFSET option to assist in a busy environment, to make less contacts “stack” with each other.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

 

Are you saying there is a distinct HAFU symbol representing the plane locking you up?

[Larkis]

Whwn you put the RWR on the HUD you see a line from the RWR Marker to the center of the hud which indicates the lock from that radar.

 

[fitness88]

Whwn you put the RWR on the HUD you see a line from the RWR Marker to the center of the hud which indicates the lock from that radar.

 

 

In your photo I see 2 dotted and 3 solid RWR lines [nails]. I believe these lines are just showing radar emitters not necessarily locking me up.

[Larkis]

In your photo I see 2 dotted and 3 solid RWR lines [nails]. I believe these lines are just showing radar emitters not necessarily locking me up.

 

The small continuous lines are contacts from the rwr. The karge dodded line is a normal lock. A large continous line us a lock with an active weapon.

 

For example a sam:

Small continuous line: the sam could see you on the radar.

Large dodded line: the sam locked you.

Large continuous line: the sam fired the missile and keep look to guide it.

[Ziptie]

Are you saying there is a distinct HAFU symbol representing the plane locking you up?

 

Yes. If I were at home base, I’d do a quick video / screen shot for you.

 

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

[Ziptie]

Are you saying there is a distinct HAFU symbol representing the plane locking you up?

 

Forgive me regarding the photo, but it’s a screen shot of one of my YouTube videos. It might not be clear on here - as I am using my phone to view the photo it might be different on the forums... but here ya go: It is the threat located on the RWR scope, closest to the inside of the middle threat ring, and has HAFU below the identifier (aircraft type) on RWR scope, and with a continuous dotted line leading from the velocity vector to the identifier (aircraft type) on the HUD. When I get back in the next few days, will try to get you a better image.

 

 

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

Edited November 5, 2019 by Ziptie

[Ziptie]

Are you saying there is a distinct HAFU symbol representing the plane locking you up?

 

Credit to Chuck. Page 271 of his Hornet guide. The only credit I get is searching at midnight.

 

While these particular emitters are ground based, it is the same lower HAFU displayed when it is an air based emitter locking you.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

[fitness88]

I will give a study on both RWR and HUD symbology and get back, thanks all.

[CypherS]

I think one of the largest testaments to how incorrectly the RWR is modeled is that it is showing lock status in two ways. The lower HAFU on the spike indicating a lock and the fact that the lethal zone in the Hornet's RWR only shows contacts that have a lock.

 

Elaboration: A target in the lethal zone should be according to any article you read online on the Hornet's RWR (or the Tomcat or Harrier's, which are the same) is a target that the RWR identifies as capable of attaining a lock(or a TWS track) and firing. However, in DCS the lethal zone is just an indication that that target has locked you. So, if you have an F-14 10nm away (which is obviously capable of firing on you) and using TWS our RWR will just say that spike is from a non-lethal target and you will only know that you are in danger when the fired missile goes active...

[fitness88]

I think one of the largest testaments to how incorrectly the RWR is modeled is that it is showing lock status in two ways. The lower HAFU on the spike indicating a lock and the fact that the lethal zone in the Hornet's RWR only shows contacts that have a lock.

 

Elaboration: A target in the lethal zone should be according to any article you read online on the Hornet's RWR (or the Tomcat or Harrier's, which are the same) is a target that the RWR identifies as capable of attaining a lock(or a TWS track) and firing. However, in DCS the lethal zone is just an indication that that target has locked you. So, if you have an F-14 10nm away (which is obviously capable of firing on you) and using TWS our RWR will just say that spike is from a non-lethal target and you will only know that you are in danger when the fired missile goes active...

 

 

I would really appreciate a breakdown of the entire symbology and zones of the RWR and what exactly lethal vs. critical implies.

I've read both manuals and still am confused.

[Ziptie]

I would really appreciate a breakdown of the entire symbology and zones of the RWR and what exactly lethal vs. critical implies.

I've read both manuals and still am confused.

 

You can also choose which RWR contacts to display, critical, critical lethal, etc. via the SA Page. You can download the NATOPS manual, pretty good resource..

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

[Harker]

I would really appreciate a breakdown of the entire symbology and zones of the RWR and what exactly lethal vs. critical implies.

 

I've read both manuals and still am confused.

It's normal to be confused. The DCS F-18 manual and the RWR in the game are contradicting each other.

Anyway, the ALR-67 RWR categorizes radar contacts into 3 categories.

Non-lethal: threats that either can't fire (e.g. AWACS aircraft, surveillance radars) or are too far away to represent a threat (enemy Su-27 100 NM away). Friendly radars are also shown here.

Lethal: they are in a position to engage and fire at you, but are not actively engaging you. That covers enemy aircraft and SAM systems in weapons range that aren't actively tracking (locking) your aircraft.

Critical: aircraft and SAM systems that are in weapons range and are actively tracking (locking) your aircraft. Threats that are tracking you have a bottom semicircle symbol. If they're supporting a launched weapon, the threat symbol will be flashing and a stem will extend from it towards the center.

IRL, the RWR determines the class of a threat from the radar type and the emitter strength, based on an internally stored database.

On the DCS Hornet on the other hand, any threat that doesn't lock you stays in the non-lethal band, even if the threat is right next to you (and thus the emitter strength is high, meaning that the RWR should realize that this is a lethal threat). This makes the RWR pretty much useless for situational awareness most of the time and completely useless against TWS-equipped aircraft, as CypherS says, since TWS doesn't generate a lock warning. It's only useful for azimuth, not lethality.

Example: me in a Hornet against a hostile F-15C. He happily stays in the non-lethal band, well within 30 NM, until he fires his AMRAAM at me, from 15 NM away.

[Ziptie]

Example: me in a Hornet against a hostile F-15C. He happily stays in the non-lethal band, well within 30 NM, until he fires his AMRAAM at me, from 15 NM away.

 

Just happened to me today in MP.

 

Had a short notice defensive requirement and ended up getting a maneuver kill on him in the mountains. But exactly this, he was at 22 miles (I had him STT lock), but showed in the outer threat ring.

 

As soon as he sent a fox 3 at me, his contact on RWR jumped to the inner threat ring. Still ended well for me, but was certainly an assist from Mr. Scott in terms of warp capacity on the RWR system. See what I did there? :music_whistling:

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

[Harker]

Just happened to me today in MP.

 

 

 

Had a short notice defensive requirement and ended up getting a maneuver kill on him in the mountains. But exactly this, he was at 22 miles (I had him STT lock), but showed in the outer threat ring.

 

 

 

As soon as he sent a fox 3 at me, his contact on RWR jumped to the inner threat ring. Still ended well for me, but was certainly an assist from Mr. Scott in terms of warp capacity on the RWR system. See what I did there? :music_whistling:

 

 

 

 

 

Cheers,

 

 

 

Don

More of a Star Wars guy myself .

 

Btw, there is also a weird thing with the Hornet's RWR reaction to TWS launches. His contact shouldn't be moving to the critical band, since he's not locking you in STT. Only the AMRAAM's radar should go to the critical band. Check out this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=253901

[Ziptie]

More of a Star Wars guy myself .

 

Btw, there is also a weird thing with the Hornet's RWR reaction to TWS launches. His contact shouldn't be moving to the critical band, since he's not locking you in STT. Only the AMRAAM's radar should go to the critical band. Check out this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=253901

 

Was subscribed to that one until it was closed as 'already known via discussion with Wags'

 

Certainly seems an issue, no doubt to the early access status of the Hornet eh? Time will tell.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

[CypherS]

Was subscribed to that one until it was closed as 'already known via discussion with Wags'

 

Certainly seems an issue, no doubt to the early access status of the Hornet eh? Time will tell.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Don

 

According to ED, the Hornet's RWR is complete. So I think they know this is an issue but it is being kept there on purpose as one of those necessary limitations. (Again this is just conjecture on my part). I highly doubt anything in the RWR will get changed.

 

Many members including me and most notably Beamscanner have shown ED proof and provided arguments that the RWR is in dire need of an overhaul for the DCS Hornet to be in line with its real-life counterpart.

 

Hopefully, the F-16 gets those changes.

[AvroLanc]

According to ED, the Hornet's RWR is complete. So I think they know this is an issue but it is being kept there on purpose as one of those necessary limitations. (Again this is just conjecture on my part). I highly doubt anything in the RWR will get changed.

 

Many members including me and most notably Beamscanner have shown ED proof and provided arguments that the RWR is in dire need of an overhaul for the DCS Hornet to be in line with its real-life counterpart.

 

Hopefully, the F-16 gets those changes.

 

I think you're right about ED knowing it's wrong. There's still elements of the RWR and defensive systems to add though and I'm hopeful that maybe ED might relent to common sense and change the behaviour. Afterall it's a massive part of the combat experience and a major knock to SA at present.

 

Stuff still to add:

Display filters for EW page (AI, F, N, AAA etc)

Control page for CM's (CM Bingo settings etc, D LOW Advisory)

Correct flare numbers

EW in the Helmet

All of the Jammer functionality, however simplified

 

Hopefully when they get round to implementing some of this, they may relook at threat rings.

[Harker]

The RWR on the Hornet can't be complete and there are no necessary limitations. Everything we talk about here is on the public domain and clearly presented on either freely available scientific papers or even product info sheets. There's no reason to not incorporate it, especially since Heatblur has included a lot of functions on their own RWR model.

 

The DCS F-14B uses the same RWR (maybe the V1 instead of the V2 of the Hornet) and the lethal band works there (kinda wrong as well, as it classifies an F-15 at 80 NM as lethal, but still better than how it works in the Hornet). The different filters also work in the F-14B. The F filter is especially important, since you can filter out friendly contacts and have them not clutter your RWR.

 

Then there is the issue of coupling the RWR to the INS to enable the threat azimuth to change according to ownship maneuvers without having to wait for a new RWR update. This was one of the advertised features of the ALR-67(V)2. As it is right now, the RWR displays wrong azimuth information during maneuvering, until its next update. The RWR should note the azimuth of the threat and move the symbol around according to its azimuth, not waiting for a new update. (ex. You turn 40 degrees left, the threat symbol should turn 40 degrees right on the scope, at the same speed as the HSI compass changes, without a new update being necessary).

 

I'd be extremely disappointed if the current version is considered final.

[Harker]

According to ED, the Hornet's RWR is complete. So I think they know this is an issue but it is being kept there on purpose as one of those necessary limitations. (Again this is just conjecture on my part). I highly doubt anything in the RWR will get changed.

 

Many members including me and most notably Beamscanner have shown ED proof and provided arguments that the RWR is in dire need of an overhaul for the DCS Hornet to be in line with its real-life counterpart.

 

Hopefully, the F-16 gets those changes.

Have either Wags or NL/BN said that it's complete? Where did you read that? (Please don't go into the trouble of finding the exact link, just a general direction is enough)

[CypherS]

The RWR on the Hornet can't be complete and there are no necessary limitations. Everything we talk about here is on the public domain and clearly presented on either freely available scientific papers or even product info sheets. There's no reason to not incorporate it, especially since Heatblur has included a lot of functions on their own RWR model.

 

The DCS F-14B uses the same RWR (maybe the V1 instead of the V2 of the Hornet) and the lethal band works there (kinda wrong as well, as it classifies an F-15 at 80 NM as lethal, but still better than how it works in the Hornet). The different filters also work in the F-14B. The F filter is especially important, since you can filter out friendly contacts and have them not clutter your RWR.

 

Then there is the issue of coupling the RWR to the INS to enable the threat azimuth to change according to ownship maneuvers without having to wait for a new RWR update. This was one of the advertised features of the ALR-67(V)2. As it is right now, the RWR displays wrong azimuth information during maneuvering, until its next update. The RWR should note the azimuth of the threat and move the symbol around according to its azimuth, not waiting for a new update. (ex. You turn 40 degrees left, the threat symbol should turn 40 degrees right on the scope, at the same speed as the HSI compass changes, without a new update being necessary).

 

I'd be extremely disappointed if the current version is considered final.

 

 

Sorry for my wording. I meant to say that the RWR is "correct as is"; I'm not sure we will be getting all the features mentioned by AvroLanc since the EW stuff is classified. When it comes to the RWR threat detection and classification I think the RWR will not be modified as you can see in ED's reply to the subject of this thread https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=235510

[majapahit]

In message list the bot will tell you

 

what locked you up and killed you.

[AvroLanc]

Have either Wags or NL/BN said that it's complete? Where did you read that? (Please don't go into the trouble of finding the exact link, just a general direction is enough)

 

I remember Wag's using the phrase 'CORRECT AS IS' tag at some point. Can't find the link. This was pretty much the only reference Wag's / ED has made.

 

And it was a while ago, so maybe there's hope.

 

 

I think the problem is that ED have to be able to prove that all data they use is in the public domain, and specific to the Hornet. They can't / won't mix and match data, like F-14's RWR etc in case they get their collars felt again. Maybe I'm wrong.

[Harker]

Sorry for my wording. I meant to say that the RWR is "correct as is"; I'm not sure we will be getting all the features mentioned by AvroLanc since the EW stuff is classified. When it comes to the RWR threat detection and classification I think the RWR will not be modified as you can see in ED's reply to the subject of this thread https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=235510

Thanks for the link. :thumbup: I sure hope they reconsider their position on this; the RWR is offering very little in terms of SA right now. It even makes things more dangerous, if you expect it to work like the real thing.