Air to Ground Radar Update?

[Archaic]

Big roll of the dice here, but I was wondering if it would be possible to get a small update on the status of AG Radar. For some of the most popular aircraft like the F18 and F16 it's a critical feature that will allow the airframes to be used authentically.

 

There hasn't been a lot of info to leak out about the state of its development. Wondering if ED could throw us a bone with this?

[BIGNEWY]

Hi

 

When we are ready we will share news, I can not give you a time line currently, but the teams are actively working on the hornet and viper

 

thanks

[Archaic]

I tried :)

[Harlikwin]

If you want a preview, check out the JF17. It has basic AGR, and I'm pretty sure no one uses it.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

Yes I also think that the A/G radar will end up not being used that much, except for perhaps terrain mapping to help with navigation, or in SEA-mode for the Hornet.

[RustBelt]

They have......scans of fists......that's a type of A/G radar right?

[Jackjack171]

If you want a preview, check out the JF17. It has basic AGR, and I'm pretty sure no one uses it.

Word!

[jasonbirder]

Yes I also think that the A/G radar will end up not being used that much, except for perhaps terrain mapping to help with navigation, or in SEA-mode for the Hornet.

 

 

Yes I also think that the A/G radar will end up not being used that much in the perfect weather/perfect visability scenarios that populate DCS Servers...

In the real world it rains (alot)

[Harlikwin]

Yes I also think that the A/G radar will end up not being used that much in the perfect weather/perfect visability scenarios that populate DCS Servers...

In the real world it rains (alot)

 

You are correct, and only the basic real beam modes on the JF17 are modeled, so it mostly sucks. SEA mode does too, at least on the servers I use it on ships are used as static sam sites (yay server owners). And of course its always sunny in DCS.

 

When the Hornet actually gets its SAR modes it should be "ok" to use in bad weather.

[Notso]

The reality is that the fighters being modeled here are rarely using their air to ground radar modes much by the mid 2000s with the advent of GPS Nav and GPS guided munitions. Even with SAR, it’s likely rarely used except to kill mobile targets in bad weather. The A/G radars are not used for LL nav or terrain following. They might be used on occasion to avoid a thunderstorm at night using the real beam modes. But beyond that, A/G modes are just not needed that much. Also they are VERY task intensive to use in a single pilot aircraft.

 

So yeah while it would be nice to have for the realism of the aircraft in DCS, I would put it very low on the priority list that ED should concentrate on, IMHO.

[RustBelt]

You're forgetting things like Nap-of-the-Earth autopilot. Synthetic Aperture Recon. And also the fact that not everything planned in the future will be, or isn't even now, a post 2000 aircraft.

 

Also Why Wouldn't you want to kill moving targets in bad weather?

Edited March 7, 2020 by RustBelt

[KlarSnow]

Nap of the earth autopilot is a different radar functionality (and usually a different radar entirely) than the ground mapping radars. Nothing in DCS has this capability (even the viggens is not, its just a mode of ground mapping not linked to an autopilot and not doing predictive flight). The F-16 variant we have doesn’t do TFR, Nor does the Harrier, the hornet may be capable of it with the Navflir pod, but its not something the navy does or trains to hardly at all anymore. The only platform in the USAF/USN that does any of this kind of stuff on a regular basis is the strike eagle.

 

SAR or synthetic aperture radar while more useful than RBM modes for targeting again is a very user intensive process that requires interpretation of the display, it does not just highlight targets, it just makes a higher resolution image that then requires you to find the targets on the scope. it will be a good tool when it arrives but its only useful against stationary things and things that you have a plan to find. I wouldn’t count on being able to pick a tank out of a city using it.

 

You may be able to find moving targets with the GMTI modes of the radar, but you won’t be able to accurately drop anything on them. To kill movers you will still need to get a TGP and a LGB on the target in order to have any hope of accuracy.

 

In most of the current use cases for the current aircraft in DCS A/G radar is just not a particularly useful or high priority function.

 

The only aircraft currently planned or being worked on for DCS where it would be astonishing if it wasn’t included at an early state would be the strike eagle. Everything else its kinda just extra.

[RustBelt]

Nap of the earth autopilot is a different radar functionality (and usually a different radar entirely) than the ground mapping radars.

 

In real life sure, in DCS you're talking about their whole system to get the ground mesh and the radar model behaving together. That involves every radar to ground interaction. And don't say radar altimeter, because that's totally a fake of Aircraft model Z height minus Terrain elevation.

 

Nothing in DCS has this capability (even the viggens is not, its just a mode of ground mapping not linked to an autopilot and not doing predictive flight). The F-16 variant we have doesn’t do TFR, Nor does the Harrier, the hornet may be capable of it with the Navflir pod, but its not something the navy does or trains to hardly at all anymore. The only platform in the USAF/USN that does any of this kind of stuff on a regular basis is the strike eagle.

 

You mean the Strike Eagle Razbam is literally working on right now, (in theory presumably)?

 

And then there's the "Secret" plane, which if it isn't the Tornado, oh who are we kidding, it will probably be another esoteric trainer nobody wants.

 

And also better modeling of cruse missiles, and hey maybe even air to air missiles that don't just magically fly through mountains.

[Notso]

Nap of the earth autopilot is a different radar functionality (and usually a different radar entirely) than the ground mapping radars. Nothing in DCS has this capability (even the viggens is not, its just a mode of ground mapping not linked to an autopilot and not doing predictive flight). The F-16 variant we have doesn’t do TFR, Nor does the Harrier, the hornet may be capable of it with the Navflir pod, but its not something the navy does or trains to hardly at all anymore. The only platform in the USAF/USN that does any of this kind of stuff on a regular basis is the strike eagle.

 

SAR or synthetic aperture radar while more useful than RBM modes for targeting again is a very user intensive process that requires interpretation of the display, it does not just highlight targets, it just makes a higher resolution image that then requires you to find the targets on the scope. it will be a good tool when it arrives but its only useful against stationary things and things that you have a plan to find. I wouldn’t count on being able to pick a tank out of a city using it.

 

You may be able to find moving targets with the GMTI modes of the radar, but you won’t be able to accurately drop anything on them. To kill movers you will still need to get a TGP and a LGB on the target in order to have any hope of accuracy.

 

In most of the current use cases for the current aircraft in DCS A/G radar is just not a particularly useful or high priority function.

 

The only aircraft currently planned or being worked on for DCS where it would be astonishing if it wasn’t included at an early state would be the strike eagle. Everything else its kinda just extra.

 

Ding ding ding!!

[jasonbirder]

The reality is that the fighters being modeled here are rarely using their air to ground radar modes much by the mid 2000s with the advent of GPS Nav and GPS guided munitions.

 

 

Given that any TGP doesn't work through saturated atmospheric conditions (principally rain, but I have also heard there can be difficulties with fog/low cloud) are you really suggesting that USAAF/USN/USMC/RAF etc tactics against a peer level adversary (IE: None/degraded GPS) is...go home?

 

 

Not every post-cold war scenario will be slinging the odd JDAM/Paveway in a CAS situation in the dry air of the desert with complete air dominance...

[Notso]

Given that any TGP doesn't work through saturated atmospheric conditions (principally rain, but I have also heard there can be difficulties with fog/low cloud) are you really suggesting that USAAF/USN/USMC/RAF etc tactics against a peer level adversary (IE: None/degraded GPS) is...go home?

 

 

Not every post-cold war scenario will be slinging the odd JDAM/Paveway in a CAS situation in the dry air of the desert with complete air dominance...

 

No, I didn't say that they would "never" be used, I said rarely. And in a totally degraded GPS environment where both Nav and weapons delivery were degraded to the point of unusable - YES they would just go home until they could overcome the issue. That is the reality of today's tech. That's why most militaries have dumped Billions of $$ into anti-jamming, anti-spoofing tech so they can continue to fight in a degraded GPS environment. Its very unlikely we would be going back to low level Nav using a RBM and slinging MK-84s off a radar fix. They just don't train to that anymore. Even by the mid-2000s, that was a skill that was rarely used if ever in single seat fighters like the F-16/18 etc. Even the Mudhen by that point was not often using its amazing SAR radar capability for targeting much or training to a low level TFR ingress in IMC.

 

Just saying.

[jasonbirder]

YES they would just go home until they could overcome the issue. That is the reality of today's tech.

 

 

Jesus! I didn't realise it was that bad...given there's only 1 spare satellite in each orbital plane...does any adversary merely need to sling a few ASATs and then walk over whichever conflict it chooses to engage in?

[iborg]

No, I didn't say that they would "never" be used, I said rarely. And in a totally degraded GPS environment where both Nav and weapons delivery were degraded to the point of unusable - YES they would just go home until they could overcome the issue. That is the reality of today's tech. That's why most militaries have dumped Billions of $$ into anti-jamming, anti-spoofing tech so they can continue to fight in a degraded GPS environment. Its very unlikely we would be going back to low level Nav using a RBM and slinging MK-84s off a radar fix. They just don't train to that anymore. Even by the mid-2000s, that was a skill that was rarely used if ever in single seat fighters like the F-16/18 etc. Even the Mudhen by that point was not often using its amazing SAR radar capability for targeting much or training to a low level TFR ingress in IMC.

 

 

 

Just saying.

 

 

 

Maybe the USAF doesn’t train for it. Other air forces still do. For eg I’m quite sure the French Air Force specifically doesn’t rely on GPS guidance for the nuclear deterrent mission (which incidentally also involves nap of the earth, TFR flight). Different philosophies. It would be nice to have the Mirage 2000D in DCS... which is a two seater, spreading the workload, like the Strike Eagle.

[Krippz]

I would much rather the dev focus be on the A2A Radar. Klarsnow is a real world operator and if he’s telling you in so many words that A2G Radar is over hyped and not the killer app you think it is you might want to listen to him.

[jasonbirder]

I would much rather the dev focus be on the A2A Radar. Klarsnow is a real world operator and if he’s telling you in so many words that A2G Radar is over hyped and not the killer app you think it is you might want to listen to him.

Its not that I think its a "killer ap" its just I'm from North-West Europe, and as a "gamer" rather than a RL Tactical Aviator...what I'm interested in is peer level conflicts (a la Red Storm Rising or Arclight) in "clagged in" European Weather rather than circling an IP then dropping a JDAM on an accurate co-ordinate against toothless opposition in zero humidity conditions.

 

 

I always imagined in that scenario - exacly what we used to do in Falcon 4 BMS/Janes Strike Eagle/Super Hornet - things like loft attacks from low-level with LGBs or laydown attacks with CBUs - guided by A2G radar, Interdiction/Strike Missions on "deep" targets etc etc

 

 

 

I certainly didn't imagine western airforces would just "go-home" if it rains (assuming a no/degraded GPS environment)

 

 

 

In fact...thinking about it - forget my simulated fun...that thought is more than scary enough in the real world!

[KlarSnow]

Yes in the strike eagle you do practice finding locating and killing targets using the A/G radar or in a GPS denied environment. Every platform practices denied ops and how to continue to operate effectively when all our cool toys are gone. You still aren't going to be dropping on movers without getting a TGP and an LGB on the target so yes, weather is going to significantly hinder the ability to hit moving targets.

 

I can't talk to specifics for the F-16 or 18, but from talking with their operators (confirmed on this forum if you look enough because this topic comesup over and over again) They see the A/G radar usually once or twice when they are learning the jet, and then never use it or even look at its capabilities again. It's just not in the missions or useful enough for what those jets do.

 

If you are talking big air war this is why the "precision all weather strike" is still a mission set that the strike eagle does and trains to. With GPS and precise coordinates anythign that can carry a JDAM can then perform it but not in the old school sense.

 

Any brochure or video you have seen out there about A/G radar is either exaggerated for the "cools" or is trying to sell the feature and capability so usually supremely optimistic.

 

There is exactly 1 video I've found on youtube that is of actual use of A/G radar in a combat scenario, not something that the manufacturer or the documentary , or the brochure is trying to use to show you how "cool" it is

 

 

Watch that from 3:39 onwards and you will see a pretty typical use of a really Good A/G radar in a strike eagle. Finding a SAM site in a pretty benign environment (the desert). That is what it actually looks like in practice most of the time.

[Tippis]

That raises a question I've had ever since ye olde sim-that-must-not-be-mentioned days: never mind the guidance on target, how good are AG radars for simply finding something? You might still need to use the TGP (or just visual landmarks) to spot, identify, mark target, or guide weapons, but to what extent does it help you in figuring out what patch of trees to look at to begin with?

[KlarSnow]

Much like any kind of targeting, you will probly have to know to look there or have an idea of where the target is. Things that are stationary do not get highlighted in any mapping mode, they are just returns on the display. So if you don’t know what or where you are looking for something, a/g radar is just as useful or useless as looking around with your eyeballs or slewing the TGP around randomly.

 

We always say interpreting SAR maps is as much an art as it is a skill. There’s a reason the only fighter platform in the US that still uses it as a significant part of its mission set has two crew members.

 

Most use of the a/g radar for targeting is for preplanned specific targets. Not CAS, not vehicles, not random targeting. You usually have a specific target (weapons warehouse, bunker, storage, building of some sort) that you know generally where it is, and have imagery of it already. You then use the A/G radar to locate it and target it, but you are cueing the radar in the area of the target to begin with.

 

Where this comes in is when you consider INS drift, if your system was perfect (EGI) then your radar would cue up on the exact spot in the real world where you had coordinates to every time. But if there is INS drift of some sort, it will be off in some random direction by a random amount relative to your drift. Say a mile or so away from the target. You then use your target study to find the target area, and make your designation. Again, you have been cued into the target area.

 

You aren’t going to do any better or worse than just running around with the TGP and slewing it to each cluster of trees to see if there is something in it with A/G radar. In fact you might do worse through the weather because you have no visual of the target and IDing it is going to be nebulous at best without some other cueing or intel that that particular blob is actually a tank/bad guy thing instead of just somebody’s hunting shed.

Edited March 7, 2020 by KlarSnow

[jasonbirder]

Not CAS, not vehicles, not random targeting. You usually have a specific target (weapons warehouse, bunker, storage, building of some sort) that you know generally where it is, and have imagery of it already. You then use the A/G radar to locate it and target it, but you are cueing the radar in the area of the target to begin with.

 

 

BUT (barring DCS) CAS isn't the only game in town...against a peer level adversary (or in a game sense) on a "proper" sized map wouldn't you be spending alot of time going after Bridges/Rail Junctions/Fuel Depots/Maintanance Repair yards/Road junctions etc etc rather than merely chucking Mavericks/JDAMs against the odd BMP/BTR ?

 

Which would then bring AG radar back to prominence....

 

 

I don't have any professional experience so could be way off beam...but wasn't the doctrine that you couldn't kill enough Tank/Motor Rifle Units quickly enough to make a difference by engaging them at the FLOT and that the only way to slow them down sufficiently was to degrade their ability to reach/operate at the front with deeper strikes on transportation/rear echelon targets

(And presumably a doctrine that applied vs Warsaw Pact numbers in the 80's applies doubly so vs Chinese numbers in the 21st Century)

[KlarSnow]

Preplanned precision strikes done by things like the f-111, f-15e, a-6, etc... are what did this stuff all weather up until the f-111/a-6 were retired. The f-16/18, were daylight visual bombers primarily until the advent of JDAM. While they had a/g mapping and targeting it has never been their role for that kind of targeting until GPS/JDAM arrived. Their systems do not provide the fidelity, nor is it easy for a single seat aircraft to effectively do this. This is part of why the f-15E exists, its really the only thing that does this anymore.

 

Keep in mind per the earlier post, it’s not like you just roll around with the a/g radar and find bridges or weapons depots. There is targeting, planning, and intel that goes in before you go use this stuff. IE you already have a target specifically and have studied the target area and know what you are looking for. If you have precision coordinates to something like a bridge, and JDAM, ( and GPS is working) why do you need A/G radar. If GPS. Is denied, bring the specialists (F-15E) in and they will hit the target. F-16’s and f-18’s will have other jobs that they are the specialists at (SEAD, boat/naval things).

Edited March 8, 2020 by KlarSnow