[ALREADY REPORTED]Incorrect ranges of DCS MiG-29 radar

[FoxAlfa]

 

37 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

Because the SPO-15 was originally capable of detecting up to 10Ghz frequencies, while the 120 radar begins at 12Ghz.

For the strength, I figure a mere change in PRF might throw the estimate out but I could be wrong.   I'm not saying that it should fail to show signal strength, just that it shouldn't be so reliable for range estimation.

Similar reliability can be applied to R-27 launch detection at higher range, since DL for it is projected by side lobes which are much weaker signal by default then main lobe stuff...

All in all, all RWR leave a lot to be desired in DCS.... they are too perfect in range estimation, identification, target separation, clutter and saturation elimination, angle separation, jammer noise elimination, etc.... but hopeful ED will get to spend more time on them in the future.... getting them on the level of HB Tomcat would be great start.  

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

8 hours ago, GGTharos said:

You're right, the SPO-15s in game should be mostly blind to 120s and also overwhelmed and unable to show reliable information once the shooting started.   As well, they shouldn't be able to show reliable ranges to emitters especially as radar modes change.  But that would lead to massive complaining, not to mention it's hard to simulate so may as well leave it as it is.

You do get different signal strength from tomcats depending if he's in PD or Pulse in game atm iirc.

About the SPO-15 not detecting detecting 120s seems like an odd claim, it proved decent at keeping planes safe from both AIM-54A and C even some 120Cs in AF.

 

Given how much technology is shared and both of them being made by Hughes wouldn't be a stretch to say the C and 120 are in the same band.

[Skysurfer]

14 hours ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

You do get different signal strength from tomcats depending if he's in PD or Pulse in game atm iirc.

About the SPO-15 not detecting detecting 120s seems like an odd claim, it proved decent at keeping planes safe from both AIM-54A and C even some 120Cs in AF.

 

Given how much technology is shared and both of them being made by Hughes wouldn't be a stretch to say the C and 120 are in the same band.

 

Wrong. This was actually confirmed by the 29 pilot on here in the russian section. The SPO-15 was next to useless in combat. 

Edited April 30, 2021 by Skysurfer

[XPACT]

As I understand there were revisions of SPO-15, as far as we know he might be talking about earlier version

[GGTharos]

14 hours ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

About the SPO-15 not detecting detecting 120s seems like an odd claim, it proved decent at keeping planes safe from both AIM-54A and C even some 120Cs in AF.

 

What AIM-54?  I don't recall any of those being launched in AF at all.  No one has ever said anything about 120Cs and RWRs that I know of (but hey, I don't know everything) - there weren't that many shots taken and many of them hit.  Most comments were about how MiG-29s had non-functioning equipment, and any of those who mentioned that they received warnings don't say what exactly was detected, which may have been the APG-63 going STT + launch on them.

 

14 hours ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

Given how much technology is shared and both of them being made by Hughes wouldn't be a stretch to say the C and 120 are in the same band.

 

Yes it would be.  The size of the dish dictates the bands that you can use, following this is which bands you want to use.  The AIM-54 is an X-band radar, the 120 is not.  The SPO-15 wasn't configured to physically detect anything above X-Band at first.  We don't know if there were upgrades and when they may have happened.

2 minutes ago, XPACT said:

As I understand there were revisions of SPO-15, as far as we know he might be talking about earlier version

 

Yep, there are always revisions, we simply don't know who did and didn't have them, and when.

[XPACT]

3 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

Most comments were about how MiG-29s had non-functioning equipment, and any of those who mentioned that they received warnings don't say what exactly was detected, which may have been the APG-63 going STT + launch on them.

 

If you are talking about NATO campaign against Yugoslavia in 1999, yes almost all of the MiG-29s had some kind of failure in flight usually radar or rwr (radar wouldn't be of much use anyway) they were all hoping to get close enough for WVR and use R-73s, equipment was working on paper but in combat conditions proved to be unreliable. Now all those jets were to be, I don't know the right word for it, refurbished and modernized in 1996 but due to no funding because of sanctions and what not that was skipped. I must re watch the documentary but there was one pilot which had everything working. I will actually try to transcript his whole flight once. Long story short first time when he didn't have any info on the enemy at one point RWR was immediately in beeping and flashing mode signalizing missile launch he started doing avoidance maneuvers with high G turns left and right while climbing up since he was pretty low when that happened, missile/s missed I guess AIM 120C?, and after RWR stopped beeping and flashing he started "free hunt" since ground wasn't responding to his calls, spotted 3 targets on HUD and locked closest one in STT successfully, (now at some point he mentions it that while you have STT lock on someone RWR is not operational, the way he said it doesn't conclude if whole RWR doesn't work or just missile launch warning), now he knew their altitude and speed but at distance of around 30km his radar drops from STT, immediately continuous beep was heard form RWR and then shortly after flashing and beeping again, he evaded those also and when he turned back to previous bearing they were now going cold (3 targets on his HUD) so he put radar in D (dagon) and started chasing after but at some point close to Bulgarian border they split up, two went left and right and remaining one continued at same course that was the point he decided to RTB, that was longest flight and it lasted 40mins

 

From his story I am led to believe that SPO-15 managed to pick up those missile launches

 

Anyways documentary seems very good and most importantly there is no biased BS that I could detect khmm (like in many western reconstructions of various events)

[Skysurfer]

This also checks out with the test and evalutions from the German Airforce and their 29 ops. At BVR the 29 was pretty inferior to that era western platforms, both in pure performance and pilot-machine interface, once in WVR however it was pretty much an even fight often times with a slight edge in favor of the 29. 

[GGTharos]

13 minutes ago, XPACT said:

I will actually try to transcript his whole flight once. Long story short first time when he didn't have any info on the enemy at one point RWR was immediately in beeping and flashing mode signalizing missile launch he started doing avoidance maneuvers with high G turns left and right while climbing up since he was pretty low when that happened, missile/s missed I guess AIM 120C?

 

Not sure if there are reports regarding the actual missiles used.  120B very likely, possibly C as the first versions of it would have been available them.  Can you get enough information to match up with NATO pilot reports (date, for example?) - that should get us some information regarding how many launches occurred and with what weapon.

 

As well, reading some of the reports on the forums apparently there was no missile warning, your warning was 'STT' ... I guess?  I may be misunderstanding what I am reading.

[XPACT]

10 minutes ago, GGTharos said:

(date, for example?)

 

I think I can actually, even hour.

Hmm, he very clearly said that it was beeping (in his helmet) and flashing on panel and then explained what that means by saying that missile was at that point already launched at him and that he has very low amount of time to do something about it.

 

Btw here are all MiG-29s at that time in Yugoslav Army Airforce inventory with their serials and dates of manufacture

 

18101 manufactured 29.11.1987 (serial number 3402),
18102 manufactured 24.11.1987 (3403),
18103 manufactured 28.11.1987 (3404),
18104 manufactured 04.12.1987 (3405),
18105 manufactured 05.12.1987 (3406),
18106 manufactured 07.12.1987 (3407),
18107 manufactured 08.12.1987 (3408),
18108 manufactured 07.12.1987 (3409),
18109 manufactured 11.12.1987 (3410),
18110 manufactured 14.12.1987 (3411),
18111 manufactured 10.03.1988 (3510),
18112 manufactured 11.03.1988 (3511),
18113 manufactured 16.03.1988. (3512) and 18114 manufactured 18.03.1988 (3513).

Doubleseater 18301 manufactured je 13.08.1987. dok je 18302 manufactured 01.09.1987.

 

Last four single seaters were from different "batch"

 

EDIT: @GGTharos That flight happened at DD/MM/YYYY 07/04/1999 at around 23:00 local time

Edited April 30, 2021 by XPACT

[GGTharos]

Thanks, I'll cross-check the date against other reports.

 

Regarding the missile warning etc - there are some concerns I have about it - ie. he was evasive but when the went on attack he had contacts beyond 30km.  This is already sort of long for a high-to-low shot (and I mean really low, like the MiG supposedly was) but not unheard of (15nm shots in gulf war F-15s with AIm-7 vs MiG-23s flying low and trying to escape).  But this suggests that shots were taken from well beyond that range, which makes the entire thing suspect with respect to specific details of what happened and when.   That's why a cross-check would be good.

 

I'm looking for sources now but it's a little dry for that date.

[XPACT]

First time he was at lower altitude, after first evasion he ended up at 8000m, at the point he found them with his radar he was at 6000m and they were showing on heading between 130-140 (with that info I can try to find their actual position), on last evasion I don't know where he ended up but I guess low again, he sadly didn't say their altitude and speed when he first managed to STT closest one but I guess they were at least co altitude or higher but he did say distance and it was 35km. He also said they were going very fast towards each other and that he flipped/switched something on the stick to get ready for missile launch, don't know how to exactly translate that part in English.

[GGTharos]

Don't worry about that part, it's really the distances and locations that are important.   Right now I can't find a single air to air engagement report for April 7, 1999.   It's possible that he was engaged by his own SAMs (this sort of mistake did happen in AF) as well but everything is pure speculation now.   Basically, for him to climb to 8000m and and find them 35km away would imply that they somehow took a very, very long shot IF a shot was taken at all.   Or there was another aircraft closer which did not press the attack (possibly to stay out of SAM WEZ) ... there's basically lots of reasons but here's what we can't resolve right at this moment without more information:

 

1) If a shot was really taken

2) Who took it

3) What the RWR warning was really about

[GGTharos]

17 hours ago, FoxAlfa said:

Similar reliability can be applied to R-27 launch detection at higher range, since DL for it is projected by side lobes which are much weaker signal by default then main lobe stuff...

 

It's in the mainlobe too.  You don't get to choose which lobe you transmit it on these things simply exist simultaneously and are a feature of any RF antenna.  The constant mentioning of sidelobes is strictly to point out that this power is enough for the missile to receive the information, ie. it does not need to ride the mainlobe beam.  Since STT is required to guide the R-27, you're going to pick all of it up.

[XPACT]

Yeah own SAMs shooting at him is possibility it did happen before, also confirmed with one MiG-29 that was taken down by air defense while he was about to land at Nis airport...

Communication was very troublesome it seems and airforce was deployed in chaotic manner without good intel

 

Now there were many fake targets appearing due to EW usage, other pilot in the documentary talked about it, don't think that was the case here because 3 of them first going very fast hot then something shot at him and then they were cold running away and at last that split near border seems like to much

[GGTharos]

I don't think they were running away, just keeping station.   There's no reason to chase if they saw him go cold etc.  There were also some AWACS and battle management issues on the 'blue' side which could have caused some confusion.  In any case, we know that the RWR reacted to something and that's it.

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

6 hours ago, Skysurfer said:

 

Wrong. This was actually confirmed by the 29 pilot on here in the russian section. The SPO-15 was next to useless in combat.

Dependent upon generation and modification of the receiver (In this case SPO-15LM). The RuAF Flanker pilot if I recall said that his experience with it was not like that in the Su-27UB https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/236399-su-27-otvety-lyotchikov/?do=findComment&comment=4637943

And this is backed up by text from EA Fedosov stating the SPO-15 on the MiG-31 and Su-27 are of another generation with expanded capability

 

 

Snippet taken form Overscan's translation

Spoiler

Different modifications SPO- M reflected improvements in the station in the part of a increase in the sensitivity of receivers, introduction of the digital modules of selection of targets and decrease of the mass of equipment. The sensitivity of the receivers SPO of last modifications makes it possible to reveal the contemporary radio-electronic systems of enemy at the distance, which exceeds the range of active detection of the protected aircraft. Such SPO- M in the lightened performance (“B”) are established on the aircraft MiG-31 and Su-27.

The application SPO in the complex information field is hindered because of the use of tuned radio receivers without the selection in the carrier emission frequency. Partially deficiency is removed by the introduction of the specialized processor for processing of a large quantity of current data, that come from receivers SPO. For radical resolution of this question it is necessary to additionally use a selection in the emission frequency, that ensures, in particular, the superheterodyne reception the new concept of the construction of equipment of the station of warning e connected with it.

The at the end 80th of years it was created and past the laboratory finalizing SPO of superheterodyne reception with pulse reconstruction of the carrier frequency. Realization on board the new generation SPO brought domestic developments closer to the best world models of the receivers of the systems of electronic reconnaissance. Appeared the possibility of designing of the contemporary domestic station of electronic reconnaissance for the destroyers, according to the mass-and-size characteristics of close one to SPO of the first generations.

So it would be wrong to model all FC3 RWRs like the MiG-29 9.12's.

6 hours ago, GGTharos said:

 

What AIM-54?  I don't recall any of those being launched in AF at all.  No one has ever said anything about 120Cs and RWRs that I know of (but hey, I don't know everything) - there weren't that many shots taken and many of them hit.  Most comments were about how MiG-29s had non-functioning equipment, and any of those who mentioned that they received warnings don't say what exactly was detected, which may have been the APG-63 going STT + launch on them.

 

 

Yes it would be.  The size of the dish dictates the bands that you can use, following this is which bands you want to use.  The AIM-54 is an X-band radar, the 120 is not.  The SPO-15 wasn't configured to physically detect anything above X-Band at first.  We don't know if there were upgrades and when they may have happened.

 

Yep, there are always revisions, we simply don't know who did and didn't have them, and when.

Southern watch September 9th 1999 MiG-23 evades long AIM-54C shot and runs home.

I say 120Cs not in reference to the C5 but early Cs as all but one Yugo MiG-29 was killed by one iirc

[Skysurfer]

30 minutes ago, TaxDollarsAtWork said:

Dependent upon generation and modification of the receiver (In this case SPO-15LM). The RuAF Flanker pilot if I recall said that his experience with it was not like that in the Su-27UB https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/236399-su-27-otvety-lyotchikov/?do=findComment&comment=4637943

And this is backed up by text from EA Fedosov stating the SPO-15 on the MiG-31 and Su-27 are of another generation with expanded capability

 

 

Snippet taken form Overscan's translation

  Hide contents

Different modifications SPO- M reflected improvements in the station in the part of a increase in the sensitivity of receivers, introduction of the digital modules of selection of targets and decrease of the mass of equipment. The sensitivity of the receivers SPO of last modifications makes it possible to reveal the contemporary radio-electronic systems of enemy at the distance, which exceeds the range of active detection of the protected aircraft. Such SPO- M in the lightened performance (“B”) are established on the aircraft MiG-31 and Su-27.

The application SPO in the complex information field is hindered because of the use of tuned radio receivers without the selection in the carrier emission frequency. Partially deficiency is removed by the introduction of the specialized processor for processing of a large quantity of current data, that come from receivers SPO. For radical resolution of this question it is necessary to additionally use a selection in the emission frequency, that ensures, in particular, the superheterodyne reception the new concept of the construction of equipment of the station of warning e connected with it.

The at the end 80th of years it was created and past the laboratory finalizing SPO of superheterodyne reception with pulse reconstruction of the carrier frequency. Realization on board the new generation SPO brought domestic developments closer to the best world models of the receivers of the systems of electronic reconnaissance. Appeared the possibility of designing of the contemporary domestic station of electronic reconnaissance for the destroyers, according to the mass-and-size characteristics of close one to SPO of the first generations.

So it would be wrong to model all FC3 RWRs like the MiG-29 9.12's.

Southern watch September 9th 1999 MiG-23 evades long AIM-54C shot and runs home.

I say 120Cs not in reference to the C5 but early Cs as all but one Yugo MiG-29 was killed by one iirc

 

Afaik he flew the SM, which might be a much newer version of the 15. Said behavior from the 29 is described in the S/SK manual so I don't know what you mean by this. In the thread you linked he further qualifies how it worked and that when locked up by an S-300 you get the usual steady lock tone + indications. The UB is essentially an S. 

What the SPO-15 (no matter what version) essentially does is put different signal types into a bucket that fits and spit out the relative signal strenght, rough direction and assigned subtype. It also works nothing like you are used to from DCS by the way.  But we are getting pretty off topic at this point.

 

Edited April 30, 2021 by Skysurfer

[TotenDead]

6 часов назад, Skysurfer сказал:

This also checks out with the test and evalutions from the German Airforce and their 29 ops. At BVR the 29 was pretty inferior to that era western platforms, both in pure performance and pilot-machine interface, once in WVR however it was pretty much an even fight often times with a slight edge in favor of the 29. 

Aha, they Compared stock, non-modernised earliest-of-all export 9.12A with mid 90s AMRAAM carriers. It's like to compare an F-15 with aim-7s with Eurofighter with aim-120. What a surprise that MiG-29 was inferior. 

 

BTW, i don't really get how "with hms and archer i'm unbeatable" means "a slight edge in favour of the 29"

[TaxDollarsAtWork]

36 minutes ago, Skysurfer said:

 

Afaik he flew the SM, which might be a much newer version of the 15. Said behavior from the 29 is described in the S/SK manual so I don't know what you mean by this. In the thread you linked he further qualifies how it worked and that when locked up by an S-300 you get the usual steady lock tone + indications. The UB is essentially an S. 

What the SPO-15 (no matter what version) essentially does is put different signal types into a bucket that fits and spit out the relative signal strenght, rough direction and assigned subtype. It also works nothing like you are used to from DCS by the way.  But we are getting pretty off topic at this point.

 

 

He flew many Flankers, in that specific post he says in his UB he had no such issues.

What this means is that there is a large difference in SPO-15 behaviour based on generation of the system and this is a real world account of how much it varies.

SM is irrelevant to the discussion it has a Pastel.

If you meant to say there is no missile launch indication that is wrong, how it operates is briefly summarized here

 

Edited April 30, 2021 by TaxDollarsAtWork

[Skysurfer]

17 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

Aha, they Compared stock, non-modernised earliest-of-all export 9.12A with mid 90s AMRAAM carriers. It's like to compare an F-15 with aim-7s with Eurofighter with aim-120. What a surprise that MiG-29 was inferior. 

 

BTW, i don't really get how "with hms and archer i'm unbeatable" means "a slight edge in favour of the 29"

 

Well, go ask the Canadians and Americans who flew against them as well as the various HUD tapes. It wasn't seal clubbing by any means in the visual arena. nd of course we are going to compare the 9.12 - even the 9.13 wasn't much different apart from electronics upgrades and ECM.

Edited April 30, 2021 by Skysurfer

[GGTharos]

1 hour ago, TotenDead said:

BTW, i don't really get how "with hms and archer i'm unbeatable" means "a slight edge in favour of the 29"

 

Do you know what 'Within 8nm the AMRAAM is a death ray' means?   It means if you get within 8nm of an AMRAAM carrier you should eject, right?  But it's not like that in DCS.  Still want to hang on to pilot's quotes like that?

[TotenDead]

9 часов назад, GGTharos сказал:

 

Do you know what 'Within 8nm the AMRAAM is a death ray' means?   It means if you get within 8nm of an AMRAAM carrier you should eject, right?  But it's not like that in DCS.  Still want to hang on to pilot's quotes like that?

Well, AMRAAM is defenitely better than AIM-9X in WVR in real combat, that's for sure

[Seaeagle]

17 hours ago, Skysurfer said:

 

Afaik he flew the SM, which might be a much newer version of the 15.

The Su-27SM doesn't use the SPO-15 at all - as part of the upgrade package, it got the L150 "Pastel" RWS instead.

[Skysurfer]

16 hours ago, GGTharos said:

 

Do you know what 'Within 8nm the AMRAAM is a death ray' means?   It means if you get within 8nm of an AMRAAM carrier you should eject, right?  But it's not like that in DCS.  Still want to hang on to pilot's quotes like that?

 

It's ok, he's just doing what everyone likes to do and cherry picks quotes and "data" to fit his narrative. Like I said above, you can listen to both sides and different accounts to get a much broader and more accurate picure. Not to mention that historically the 9.12 and limited 9.13's are the only 29 variants that were available up until the early 2000's - even 9.17 (SMT's) are fairly limited in numbers these days and most went to export. 

20 minutes ago, Seaeagle said:

The Su-27SM doesn't use the SPO-15 at all - as part of the upgrade package, it got the L150 "Pastel" RWS instead.

 

I am aware. Hence the confusion with someone who mostly flew that thing.

[dundun92]

7 hours ago, TotenDead said:

Well, AMRAAM is defenitely better than AIM-9X in WVR in real combat, that's for sure

It isnt in DCS or IRL.