Is there any reason to fire the PH in PD-STT?

[WelshZeCorgi]

So if I understand correctly, the PH does not go active if you lose the lock, and if you lock up and fire on a target in PD-STT, the target will get launch warning on the RWR and will have plenty of time going into the notch and breaking lock. 

 

It seems like this is a sure-fire way to waste a missile. Is there any benefit to firing the PH using PD-STT?

Edited April 12, 2021 by WelshZeCorgi

[TLTeo]

TWS in the AWG-9 it not particularly good at keeping track of a target that's maneuvering heavily, which makes sense seeing as it's the first system of its type and it was completely analogue. In STT you may warn your target that a Phoenix is on the way, but it's much harder for them to avoid that Phoenix.

[Noctrach]

You also do not expect every single missile to hit, and frequently lock stability is a greater concern than setting off RHAW gear. PD-STT has a couple advantages compared to TWS:

• Good range resolution, it allows sorting in most conditions.
• Ability to support multiple shots at the same target (TWS is limited to 1 missile per track until time-out). The target will not know when you fired follow-up missiles, so has to remain defensive until lock is broken.
• More flexibility with MLC. In TWS a sweep picking up a mountain peak in its volume will overloard the computer with ground returns, breaking the track. PD-STT is much more hardy against this happening, since you're tracking a much smaller volume of sky.

TWS has a "silent" launch but the radar lock itself is much more fragile, even on modern fighters.

Most doctrines expect STT inside certain ranges, once moving from sanitization to sorted. E.g. the Navy training intercept timeline for AMRAAM platforms still expects STT within 10 miles to ensure lock stability through the final conversion turn if I recall correctly.

In fact, by supporting active missiles like the AIM-120 in STT you make notching virtually impossible, since the aircraft and seeker will be at different angles to the target.

 

In the end, it's always about geometry and tactical considerations.

Edited April 13, 2021 by Noctrach

[Karon]

38 minutes ago, Noctrach said:

You also do not expect every single missile to hit, and frequently lock stability is a greater concern than setting off RHAW gear. PD-STT has a couple advantages compared to TWS:

• Good range resolution, it allows sorting in most conditions.
• Ability to support multiple shots at the same target (TWS is limited to 1 missile per track until time-out). The target will not know when you fired follow-up missiles, so has to remain defensive until lock is broken.
• More flexibility with MLC. In TWS a sweep picking up a mountain peak in its volume will overloard the computer with ground returns, breaking the track. PD-STT is much more hardy against this happening, since you're tracking a much smaller volume of sky.

TWS has a "silent" launch but the radar lock itself is much more fragile, even on modern fighters.

Most doctrines expect STT inside certain ranges, once moving from sanitization to sorted. E.g. the Navy training intercept timeline for AMRAAM platforms still expects STT within 10 miles to ensure lock stability through the final conversion turn if I recall correctly.

In fact, by supporting active missiles like the AIM-120 in STT you make notching virtually impossible, since the aircraft and seeker will be at different angles to the target.

 

In the end, it's always about geometry and tactical considerations.

 

Yep, IRL STT is much more used than in a videogame because it is more reliable and stable as Mr @Noctrachcorrectly said. The doctrine (initial / IQT level) use STT pretty much everywhere to gain more info about the target, to sort (TWS lead, STT wingman) and so on. Until the overhaul of the WCS it was quite pointless (besides PSTT, that mode was amazing to re-steer a notched missile onto the target) but now it is a much more important mode.

 

Also, @WelshZeCorgi, although it is correct that the AIM-54 should go active in certain conditions even when the radar lock is lost, it is guided towards a dead track and the actual contact may be quite far from such point. The seeker may not be able to see it anymore; meaning, missile thrashed.

 

Imo it all comes down to the usual SA. Simplifying, if the target is not aware, you can use TWS but if it knows you are there and reacts to your manoeuvres, then STT increase the odds of landing the AIM-54.

[Ddg1500]

true experience: you could , but it would lost lock more easily than STT, so better switch back to the almighty and easily TWS AUTO

[Karon]

4 hours ago, grumman f14 said:

true experience: you could , but it would lost lock more easily than STT, so better switch back to the almighty and easily TWS AUTO

Apologies, but I do not understand your reply. Which one is worse in your opinion? The first part of your sentence suggests the TWS, the second part STT.

 

That being said, it depends on how RIO is good at doing its job. Defeating ZDF and notching is quite simple and once you do that, there aren't many ways out for the target.

[Ddg1500]

PD STT and STT are different modes, me personally would use PD STT more for just IFF only, STT for locking targets ranged below 20 miles, and TWS AUTO for bvr, PD STT could said  is only design for iff only based off my experience as rio, and it's biggest advantage is it could ensure the enemy's rwr to not recognize as STT aka spike, as if you STT that target , the target's rwr could find the source the lock and do a evade, PD STT could make sure that is not going to happen as it doesn't present an fixed lock on than target, it's an more narrow search wave than an fixed line, which is shown in Tid, by way if your can't see anything on the DDD, that means the radar haven't see any target, then you certainly can't radar lock anything

Edited April 13, 2021 by grumman f14

[WelshZeCorgi]

Is STT = hooking a track on the TID?

[Love_Beam]

1 hour ago, WelshZeCorgi said:

Is STT = hooking a track on the TID?

No, STT is single target track. Hooking a track does not STT that track, you have to press one of the STT buttons to do that.

[Katj]

Is STT = hooking a track on the TID?

No, but you can hook a target and then press the P/PD-STT buttons on the right side of the DDD.

[GGTharos]

4 hours ago, grumman f14 said:

PD STT and STT are different modes, me personally would use PD STT more for just IFF only, STT for locking targets ranged below 20 miles, and TWS AUTO for bvr, PD STT could said  is only design for iff only based off my experience as rio, and it's biggest advantage is it could ensure the enemy's rwr to not recognize as STT aka spike, as if you STT that target , the target's rwr could find the source the lock and do a evade, PD STT could make sure that is not going to happen as it doesn't present an fixed lock on than target, it's an more narrow search wave than an fixed line, which is shown in Tid, by way if your can't see anything on the DDD, that means the radar haven't see any target, then you certainly can't radar lock anything

 

Except for PDSTT and STT being different, the RWR theory-crafting is completely wrong.

[Karon]

4 hours ago, grumman f14 said:

PD STT and STT are different modes, me personally would use PD STT more for just IFF only, STT for locking targets ranged below 20 miles, and TWS AUTO for bvr, PD STT could said  is only design for iff only based off my experience as rio, and it's biggest advantage is it could ensure the enemy's rwr to not recognize as STT aka spike, as if you STT that target , the target's rwr could find the source the lock and do a evade, PD STT could make sure that is not going to happen as it doesn't present an fixed lock on than target, it's an more narrow search wave than an fixed line, which is shown in Tid, by way if your can't see anything on the DDD, that means the radar haven't see any target, then you certainly can't radar lock anything

 

Apologies again, but I'm having quite a hard time following you. Let's step back for a moment and clarify a couple of things, shall we?

STT and TWS describe how the radar operates. STT is Single Target Track, TWS is Track While Scan. Intuitively, the former is focused on the tracking of a single target, the latter tracks a number of targets, plus scans for others. Then, you can decide, for some radar modes, what "technology" you are using: the more modern High PRF Pulse Doppler or the older Low PRF Pulse (PRF = Pulse Repetition Frequency). The radar modes that support both or, better said, the radar modes that provide similar information for both "technologies" are STT and SEARCH. Therefore, we have:

• Pulse Doppler STT and Pulse STT;
• Pulse Doppler SEARCH and Pulse SEARCH.

On the other hand, RWS (Range While Search) is available only in PD mode.

Now, back to my answer above, clearly I was referring to PDSTT and TWS, not PSTT as this mode cannot be used to guide AIM-54s. I took for granted that the difference was known to everyone but next time I will be more precise.

 

As GGTharos said, the RWR part you described is confusing, that's not how it works. Did you mean that TWS can be used to IFF without alarming the target perhaps? Moreover, having the target knowing you are targeting him is often a good thing: imagine I'm CAPping and covering my area, if the hostiles run away after a simple STT lock well, I'm successfully completing my mission without even wasting fuel or ammo! That's a big win in my book!

 

The part about the TID and the DDD is incorrect: the DDD shows radar returns in every mode, IFF included. It's the TID that does not show anything in PSRCH. As a matter of fact, you can zero the brightness of the TID and perform a complete "old style" intercept using Pulse mode to evaluate parameters such as the ATA (the relative bearing from your nose to the target) and Drift and using the AIC/GCI to fill in the information you do not have.

The part you mentioned targets displayed on the TID with no actual radar return makes me think you are talking about the LINK4?

[draconus]

On 4/12/2021 at 10:10 PM, WelshZeCorgi said:

So if I understand correctly, the PH does not go active if you lose the lock, and if you lock up and fire on a target in PD-STT, the target will get launch warning on the RWR and will have plenty of time going into the notch and breaking lock.

What's the difference with TWS launch? Target don't know the exact moment but still get you on their RWR and should be smart enough to expect a missile (even the AI do that). Where's the surprise then?

 

In DCS you'll probably won't hit a good player with 54. For the less experienced it probably won't matter what method you choose. For the AI I use TWS with good success.

[near_blind]

2 minutes ago, draconus said:

What's the difference with TWS launch?

A TWS launched AIM-54 with a correlated track has a small chance of achieving a kill.

A PD-STT launched AIM-54 with a broken lock has no chance of achieving a kill. 

[draconus]

2 minutes ago, near_blind said:

A PD-STT launched AIM-54 with a broken lock has no chance of achieving a kill. 

Same with the broken track in TWS before going active. 

[near_blind]

3 minutes ago, draconus said:

Same with the broken track in TWS before going active. 

A correlated track will still receive the active signal if it's supported. The target might be out of the acquisition basket, it might not, it all depends on how early the track was lost and how violently the target maneuvered, but the there is always a chance, however small, that the missile will find something. A lost PD-STT Phoenix will never hit a target.