What version of the Su-30 is in DCS?

[henshao]

today I had an interesting experience with an AI Su-30 remaining in guidance mode on me while it was firing an R-77 at my wingman, which makes me curious what version of the Su-30 we have in game

[Tholozor]

According to this: Su-30KN.

[henshao]

7 minutes ago, Tholozor said:

According to this: Su-30KN.

thank you

 

do you know if -30kn has phased array radar to guide SARH missile while attacking another aircraft?

[Tholozor]

My best guess is that it's equipped with (at least) the N001VE or VEP, which would be necessary for R-77 compatibility. I believe those models are classified as phased array.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html#mozTocId526550

Edited December 13, 2020 by Tholozor

[Northstar98]

Personally, no idea - this is why having the display name be the exact variant is important (a certain other sim had full names, which made things much easier).

Edited December 13, 2020 by Northstar98

[Seaeagle]

7 hours ago, henshao said:

thank you

 

do you know if -30kn has phased array radar to guide SARH missile while attacking another aircraft?

 

It doesn't. The Su-30KN upgrade involved an upgraded version of the original N001 radar(called N001VEP) with added air-to-ground modes and compatibility with the R-77.

[Seaeagle]

7 hours ago, Tholozor said:

My best guess is that it's equipped with (at least) the N001VE or VEP, which would be necessary for R-77 compatibility.

 

I believe those models are classified as phased array.

http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Flanker-Radars.html#mozTocId526550

Yes but the N001VEP is not a phased array set - it retained the cassegrain antenna of the original N001. However, there was a possibility to further upgrade it with a phased array antenna(called "Pero") developed specifically for the purpose.

 

 

 

Edited December 13, 2020 by Seaeagle

[henshao]

So DCS Su-30 should not have the ability to guide SARH missile while attacking a second aircraft? I don't think I saved the track file but it should be possible to replicate that event

[Seaeagle]

2 hours ago, henshao said:

So DCS Su-30 should not have the ability to guide SARH missile while attacking a second aircraft? I don't think I saved the track file but it should be possible to replicate that event

 

No not if the Su-30 variant is the -KN.

 

Besides, I am sceptical whether this should be the case for any Su-30 version including those that have an actual phased array radar(N011M Bars). As far as I can gather, the more modern Russian radars have the RVV-AE missile as the primary AA weapon with the operation modes "built around" it, while support for the earlier R-27R/ER missiles is provided as a back-up feature by including a separate deployment mode/routine imported directly from the previous generation of radars - i.e. sort of the reversed of how the RVV-AE was back-fitted to those.

 

[henshao]

13 minutes ago, Seaeagle said:

 

No not if the Su-30 variant is the -KN.

 

Besides, I am sceptical whether this should be the case for any Su-30 version including those that have an actual phased array radar(N011M Bars). As far as I can gather, the more modern Russian radars have the RVV-AE missile as the primary AA weapon with the operation modes "built around" it, while support for the earlier R-27R/ER missiles is provided as a back-up feature by including a separate deployment mode/routine imported directly from the previous generation of radars - i.e. sort of the reversed of how the RVV-AE was back-fitted to those.

 

 

I know the Mig-31 has the capability to guide multiple R-33s at once, I was thinking maybe it was something similar. But if what you say is true then the Mig-31 radar most definitely is built around the R-33

[Seaeagle]

12 minutes ago, henshao said:

 

I know the Mig-31 has the capability to guide multiple R-33s at once, I was thinking maybe it was something similar. But if what you say is true then the Mig-31 radar most definitely is built around the R-33

It most definitely is - and from what I remember having read about the Zaslon/R-33 combination, its a rather strange mix of technological solutions. 

 

Anyway, I am not saying that "multi targeting" with R-27 SARH missiles couldn't be achieved with a phased array radar, just that it doesn't look like it was pursued - perhaps simply because these missiles are considered obsolete and the feature is provided with the RVV-AE anyway.

Edited December 13, 2020 by Seaeagle

[BlackPixxel]

Su-30 with BARS PESA radar can engage two targets at the same time with R-27R/ER.

 

The R-27R/ER was designed from the beginning with dual target engagement capability, and the Su-30 with BARS can provide the required illumination.

Launching two R-27 at different targets is not much different to launching them on the same target, because in both cases they will receive independend radio correction commands, and in both cases missile 1 will only look target illumination in "time slot 1", and missile 2 in "time slot 2".

It is barely any additional complexity for the radar, so why would you even think that the engineers would not implement such feature into the radar?

 

With R-77 it BARS engage 4 targets at the same time, and it can even do a solid STT lock on those 4 targets at the same time.

 

And considering how often Su-30 are seen with R-27 compared to R-77 variants, I would say that the R-27 was still its primary weapon for quite a long time.

Edited December 14, 2020 by BlackPixxel

[TotenDead]

9 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

It most definitely is - and from what I remember having read about the Zaslon/R-33 combination, its a rather strange mix of technological solutions. 

 

 

Actually, on the contrary. PESA allowed to use a cheap long range missile effectively while F-14 required FOX-3s to achieve same results

[Fri13]

On 12/13/2020 at 11:22 AM, henshao said:

thank you

 

do you know if -30kn has phased array radar to guide SARH missile while attacking another aircraft?

 

AESA/PESA is not required to guide two or more SARH missiles.

 

The Su-27S we have in flyable condition is limited to guide single SARH missile at single target in STT mode because original N001 radar.

The N001V allowed tracking 10 target same time as engaging one of them.

The next N001VE version allowed to guide two R-27 missiles at two of 10 tracked targets-

With the more newer radar, it eventually did get up to 4 of R-27 missiles, and with PESA/AESA there is no limitation. 

 

With mechanically steered radars the limitation is similar as with TWS mode, you do not get updates of all targets between sweeps and if target change radically position between sweeps it can get dropped as target, or at least missile will fly past as it has no data where exactly to fly. Why you should prefer a STT lock on all mechanically steered radars, and anyways with active seeker missiles until missiles itself achieve a lock. That is just to increase intercept probability as missile knows all the time where target moves. 

[BlackPixxel]

1 hour ago, Fri13 said:

With the more newer radar, it eventually did get up to 4 of R-27 missiles, and with PESA/AESA there is no limitation. 

 

R-27R/ER, at least without a hypothetical modification, can only be used against two different targets, not more.

[Seaeagle]

14 hours ago, BlackPixxel said:

Su-30 with BARS PESA radar can engage two targets at the same time with R-27R/ER.

Source?

Quote

 

The R-27R/ER was designed from the beginning with dual target engagement capability, and the Su-30 with BARS can provide the required illumination.

No the launching system was designed from the beginning to be able to control two missiles in flight against the same target for increased PK(something you also often find with SAM systems). Why would the missile itself need any particular "dual engagement capability? - the seeker unit is simply tuned to a particular frequency set.

 

 

Quote

Launching two R-27 at different targets is not much different to launching them on the same target, because in both cases they will receive independend radio correction commands, and in both cases missile 1 will only look target illumination in "time slot 1", and missile 2 in "time slot 2".

Exactly - a channel separation which is provided, so the first launched missile can recieve target illumination support on one frequency as it closes within seeker acquistion range, while the second in-flight missile gets radio correction on a different frequency . This is necessary because each M-link channel can only provide one type of support at a time - i.e. either radio command or target illuminaton.

 

The R-27R/ER were designed specifically for the N019 and N001 radars, for which the entire targeting procedure ends up in single target track mode for missile engagement, so "why would you even think" that "dual targeting capability" was a thing?

Quote

It is barely any additional complexity for the radar, so why would you even think that the engineers would not implement such feature into the radar?

I already answered that question in my previous post. What makes you think that it was... other than "it makes sense because it is possible"?. I have not seen such a feature mentioned in connection with the Bars radar.

Quote

 

With R-77 it BARS engage 4 targets at the same time, and it can even do a solid STT lock on those 4 targets at the same time.

Conjecture - you are again jumping to the conclusion that multi-engagement with SARH missiles is a fearure of the Bars radar, because a phased array radar could potentially do it.

Quote

 

And considering how often Su-30 are seen with R-27 compared to R-77 variants, I would say that the R-27 was still its primary weapon for quite a long time.

 

Irellevant. The N011M Bars radar was a further phased array development of the N011(slotted array) for which the R-77 was the primary A/A weapon - the fact that the Russian airforce didn't procure the R-77/RVV-AE and thus had to make do with the old R-27 missiles until recently has nothing to do with how the radar was designed. Besides, the N011M Bars only reached operational status in connection with the Su-30MKI export order for india(which also involved the RVV-AE missile).

Edited December 14, 2020 by Seaeagle

[Seaeagle]

5 hours ago, Fri13 said:

 

AESA/PESA is not required to guide two or more SARH missiles.

Yes it is.

Quote

 

The Su-27S we have in flyable condition is limited to guide single SARH missile at single target in STT mode because original N001 radar.

No its limited to engaging a single target in STT mode with one or two missiles.

Quote

The N001V allowed tracking 10 target same time as engaging one of them.

No. Any N001 radar can track up to 10 targets at a time in TWS mode and engage a single one of in STT. What the N001V provided, was a separate TWS mode specifically for the RVV-AE misssile, where missile engagement can be performed directly from this(without transition to STT). Interestingly it turns out that the "default" setup of this mode only supports engagement of a single target at a time, but can be expanded to "dual engagement" capability if the customers so desires.

 

 

Quote

The next N001VE version allowed to guide two R-27 missiles at two of 10 tracked targets-

No as mentioned above, the added TWS mode can be expanded for simultaneous engagement of two targets with RVV-AE missiles.

 

Quote

With the more newer radar, it eventually did get up to 4 of R-27 missiles, and with PESA/AESA there is no limitation. 

Hogwash

Quote

 

With mechanically steered radars the limitation is similar as with TWS mode, you do not get updates of all targets between sweeps and if target change radically position between sweeps it can get dropped as target, or at least missile will fly past as it has no data where exactly to fly. Why you should prefer a STT lock on all mechanically steered radars, and anyways with active seeker missiles until missiles itself achieve a lock. That is just to increase intercept probability as missile knows all the time where target moves. 

What?

 

The limitation of mechanically steered radars is that they cannot scan quickly enough between targets to provide illumination for missiles' terminal SARH operation - hence the need for STT. ARH missiles do not need terminal target illumination, since they have their own onboard emitter and only need to be guided into the general direction of the target while this is outside seeker acquisition range - and for this TWS mode is adequate.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Seaeagle

[henshao]

yes I am not sure how a mechanical array would guide two SARH at the same time on different targets. one after the other MAYBE but not the same time unless the targets were close enough to fit into what would be effectively a "Flood" area, or the radar has multiple arrays. a PESA or AESA has enough beam speed to sweep multiple targets at basically its pulse repetition frequency, that is to say from the missile's seeker perspective it is just a HPRF STT even if the electronically scanned radar is actually in TWS

Edited December 14, 2020 by henshao

[BlackPixxel]

8 hours ago, Seaeagle said:

The R-27R/ER were designed specifically for the N019 and N001 radars, for which the entire targeting procedure ends up in single target track mode for missile engagement, so "why would you even think" that "dual targeting capability" was a thing?

 

Because MIG-29 manual say so.

 

"ракете предусмотрена работа с уменьшенной вдвое частотой повторения импульсов подсвета цели РЛПК, что позволит осуществить одновременное наведение двух ракет на две цели. Однако в СУВ-29 одновременное наведение двух ракет по двум целям в настоящее время не реализовано."

 

Also, target illumination / radio correction for the two missiles is time multiplexed, not (just?) by frequency. Before the R-27 leaves the rail, one of the commands that the missile receives is which one of the two alternating time slots for radio correction and illumination it should read.

 

You can even find a HUD photo of an export Su-30 firing R-27ER while having two targets locked. So clearly the engineers did not just do the bare minimum R-27 implementation of pure STT on one single target.

 

Quote

No its limited to engaging a single target in STT mode with one or two missiles.

It can fire all of its missiles, but only the first two will receive radio correction. The others will fly to the target with pure INS until the radar starts the illumination.

Edited December 15, 2020 by BlackPixxel

[BlackPixxel]

On top of that, the original plan for the Su-27 was to have a radar capable of attacking multiple targets, and its main armament, the R-27, was created with this idea in mind.

I don't know if the idea at first was to go full PESA, like on the MiG-31, but then the plan was to have hybrid radar, with mechanical scanning in azimuth and electronical scanning in elevation.

 

Even with such a mixed scanning the tracking and illumination of two targets for SARH missiles is possible by rotating the radar on the roll gimbal so that its electronically scanned axis is aligned with the targets.

 

Now we have the PESA on the Su-30's, perfectly capable of tracking and painting multiple targets.

But it is russian, so it must be bad. Obviously it cannot have this feature 

Edited December 16, 2020 by BlackPixxel

[Seaeagle]

On 12/15/2020 at 2:21 AM, BlackPixxel said:

 

Because MIG-29 manual say so.

 

"ракете предусмотрена работа с уменьшенной вдвое частотой повторения импульсов подсвета цели РЛПК, что позволит осуществить одновременное наведение двух ракет на две цели. Однако в СУВ-29 одновременное наведение двух ракет по двум целям в настоящее время не реализовано."

Yes I have read this before in advertising material for the R-27 missiles, but you must admit that it sounds odd to mention such a potential use in the MiG-29 manual and then immedeatly after acknowledge that the SUV in question(which the missile was designed for) "currently" doesn't support it. Not least when indications are, that the basic radar design is poorly suited even for "dual engagement" with the R-77/RVV-AE. I will maintain that the actual reason for this dual channel setup in the SUV-29 and -27, is for controlling two missiles against the same target.

 

 

On 12/15/2020 at 2:21 AM, BlackPixxel said:

 

Also, target illumination / radio correction for the two missiles is time multiplexed, not (just?) by frequency. Before the R-27 leaves the rail, one of the commands that the missile receives is which one of the two alternating time slots for radio correction and illumination it should read.

 

The whole thing is time multiplexed - the radar also needs to "time share" its emission between "own" target tracking and missile support(radio correction and target illumination), since there is only the same PD emitter for the purpose. So of course this must also be the case for the two M-link channels. But I don't see how the in-flight missile could know which "time slot" it is "reading" unless they are separated by transmission frequency. 

 

On 12/15/2020 at 2:21 AM, BlackPixxel said:

 

You can even find a HUD photo of an export Su-30 firing R-27ER while having two targets locked. So clearly the engineers did not just do the bare minimum R-27 implementation of pure STT on one single target.

Interesting find - not sure what exactly to make of the symbology, but I will admit that does indeed look like two targets being displayed.  

On 12/15/2020 at 2:21 AM, BlackPixxel said:

It can fire all of its missiles, but only the first two will receive radio correction. The others will fly to the target with pure INS until the radar starts the illumination.

How would that work though?

[BlackPixxel]

Quote

But I don't see how the in-flight missile could know which "time slot" it is "reading" unless they are separated by transmission frequency. 

Before launch the missile receives commands. One of these commands is whether it is "missile 1" or "missile 2", so whether it has to listen to radio correction / illumination of time slot 1 or time slot 2. The missile can keep track of the timing because it knows the time diagram. (20 ms radar operation, 30 ms time slot 1, 20 ms radar operation, 30 ms time slot 2 and the cycle repeats)

 

Quote

Yes I have read this before in advertising material for the R-27 missiles, but you must admit that it sounds odd to mention such a potential use in the MiG-29 manual and then immedeatly after acknowledge that the SUV in question(which the missile was designed for) "currently" doesn't support it.

Why is it odd to mention the dual target engagement in the manual? It is in the section about the R-27, so it is not wrong to mention its technical capabilities.

 

Quote

not sure what exactly to make of the symbology, but I will admit that does indeed look like two targets being displayed. 

And about the HUD symbology: In one of the Combat Approved videos (which of course have to be taken with a grain of salt) an engagement in a simulator was shown, and it was said that the cross within the target symbol means that it has been engaged.

 

Quote

How would that work though?

Here is what the Su-27SK manual says about launching more than two R-27:

После схода 2-х ракет с РГС в режиме ОДИН (двух серий в режиме ЧАСТЬ), пущенных по одной цели двумя нажатиями гашетки П, в зависимости от условий пуска, символ ДР может скачком переместиться на меньшую дальность, максимально, примерно, на 0,5 первоначальной дальности. Если осуществлять пуск третьей ракеты с РГС (до достижения первой ракетой цели), то она пойдет на цель без радиокоррекции.

 

The sudden reduction of the permitted launch range mark (DR) could be explained by the aircraft not allowing the following missiles to be launched until the radar has switched to illumination for the first missile or something similar related to reducing the maximum permitted launch range of the following missiles due to the absence of radio correction.

Edited December 16, 2020 by BlackPixxel

[Seaeagle]

6 minutes ago, BlackPixxel said:

On top of that, the original plan for the Su-27 was to have a radar capable of attacking multiple targets, and its main armament, the R-27, was created with this idea in mind.

I don't know if the idea at first was to go full PESA, like on the MiG-31, but then the plan was to have hybrid radar, with mechanical scanning in azimuth and electronical scanning in elevation.

 

I kind of doubt that the R-27 was developed for a radar design that didn't exist at the time. Its possible that the initial ambition was to have a PESA for the Su-27, but the hybrid design you mention was the very N011, which was introduced with the Su-27M(Su-35) in the late eighties(and in turn is the basis for the N011M "Bars"). A similar design(N010 "Zhuk") was developed by NiiR for the MiG-29M(and -K).

 

 

6 minutes ago, BlackPixxel said:

 

Even with such a mixed scanning the tracking and illumination of two targets for SARH missiles is possible by rotating the radar on the roll gimbal so that its electronically scanned axis is aligned with the targets.

 

Sounds a little theoretical. But anyway, what I wrote earlier:

 

[quote]Besides, I am sceptical whether this should be the case for any Su-30 version including those that have an actual phased array radar(N011M Bars). As far as I can gather, the more modern Russian radars have the RVV-AE missile as the primary AA weapon with the operation modes "built around" it, while support for the earlier R-27R/ER missiles is provided as a back-up feature by including a separate deployment mode/routine imported directly from the previous generation of radars - i.e. sort of the reversed of how the RVV-AE was back-fitted to those. [/quote]

 

..was exactly based on what I have read about the N010 and N011 radars. Since the "Bars" is based on the latter(mounting a PESA directly on its hydro-mechanical drive) and otherwise doesn't seem to have undergone much re-development for the purpose(unlike with the newer Irbis) - e.g. retained the max number of simultaneously tracked and engaged targets of 12 and 4 respectively, I got the impression that the control system was pretty much retained from the N011. 

 

6 minutes ago, BlackPixxel said:

 

Now we have the PESA on the Su-30's, perfectly capable of tracking and painting multiple targets.

But it is russian, so it must be bad. Obviously it cannot have this feature 

 

Wrong address mate.

[BlackPixxel]

Quote

Sounds a little theoretical.

Yes, purely hypothetical, but it would certainly work against bombers.

 

The "original" N011, is it just a purely mechanical scanned slotted array, or does it have the electronic scanning in elevation while being purely mechanical in azimuth?

 

 

This is the video (with timestamp) where some of the HUD symbology is shown, on a Su-57 though.

The narrator says that a target with the X mark is a target that is being engaged. Look how at first target 1 was engaged, later target 1 is no longer there (destroyed) and target 4 gets engaged.

 

In the HUD photo above, both targets have the X mark. Also, there the targets are marked with circle and diamond, which is the same symbology the MiG-29S uses in DCS for its SNP2 mode.

 

I like how the symbology in that Su-57 video is still similar to what the pilots are used to. Even the target marks look like they have the velocity line that also shows the direction and the altitude line, as we know it from our datalink screen in DCS.

Edited December 16, 2020 by BlackPixxel

[Coxy_99]

11 minutes ago, BlackPixxel said:

Yes, purely hypothetical, but it would certainly work against bombers.

 

The "original" N011, is it just a purely mechanical scanned slotted array, or does it have the electronic scanning in elevation while being purely mechanical in azimuth?

 

 

This is the video (with timestamp) where some of the HUD symbology is shown, on a Su-57 though.

The narrator says that a target with the X mark is a target that is being engaged. Look how at first target 1 was engaged, later target 1 is no longer there (destroyed) and target 4 gets engaged.

 

In the HUD photo above, both targets have the X mark. Also, there the targets are marked with circle and diamond, which is the same symbology the MiG-29S uses in DCS for its SNP2 mode.

 

I like how the symbology in that Su-57 video is still similar to what the pilots are used to. Even the target marks look like they have the velocity line that also shows the direction and the altitude line, as we know it from our datalink screen in DCS.

 

 

Interesting to see that the missiles are fired 160km shots, Could you imagine the crying. Obviously its newer tech etc but just shows how dumbed down R family is in DCS lol