in roadmap Enable HTS & ECM Pods

[Dragon1-1]

37 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

Or am I understanding the HTS and its function totally wrong?

You're more or less correct, but the whole trick about R7 HTS is that it can combine passive data from several aircraft. The datalink can not only be used to see radars your own system can't, but it can also use information from friendly aircraft to refine positions of those that you both see. A 2-ship SEAD flight, if positioned correctly, could provide JDAM-level accuracy.

 

ED could implement it by simply checking how many aircraft can see a given emitter, and decreasing the position error based on this. Of course, it's not like we have position error for these things in first place, but if we did, that's how it should work. 

 

Also, even if the position is inaccurate, you can slew the TGP to that point and you might be able to see some part of the site, then use this to find the radar with the TGP.

[Smoked]

I hope we get the upgraded one as well... My only word of caution though would be the same thing I mentioned about the Sniper pod in a different post.   NONE of us have any idea what agreements ED has made with places like Raytheon and Lockheed.   Further... "Circa 2007" leaves a pretty broad brush of what might be on the jet...   

 

That said... I hope we do get the newer upgraded pods/sensors.. 

[QuiGon]

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

You're more or less correct, but the whole trick about R7 HTS is that it can combine passive data from several aircraft.

 

Oh, I wasn't aware of this capability! That should make the HTS much more effective indeed.

 

The question is though: What capabilities of the real pod can ED bring to DCS. I guess we will have to wait and see.

[Ignition]

I hope ED can manage to do the R7, we already have a pretty "crippled" version of the F16. I think we should since we have the left hardpoint, unless its only for the LANTIRN which I think this version doesn't use.

 

I wonder how much time does it need to process the signals. I don't expect to have the precision and speed of the DCS phantasmagoria though.

[Furiz]

13 hours ago, Ignition said:

I hope ED can manage to do the R7, we already have a pretty "crippled" version of the F16. I think we should since we have the left hardpoint, unless its only for the LANTIRN which I think this version doesn't use.

 

I wonder how much time does it need to process the signals. I don't expect to have the precision and speed of the DCS phantasmagoria though.

 

How is it crippled?

[Ignition]

On 7/15/2021 at 1:40 AM, Furiz said:

 

How is it crippled?

 

I mean, compared with some export versions.

[Furiz]

Ah, well export versions have stuff added cause those countries dont have as much planes as US has, so US didn't have the need to add that many weapon options to the Viper, cause they have other capable planes to do the job.

 

Hornets for anti-ship missions for example, if they engage in some sea battles they will have a carrier there so why would they pay for the Viper harpoon upgrade when hornet can do that one.

[Dee-Jay]

On 5/1/2021 at 8:01 PM, Teomo said:

AN/ASQ-213 HARM Targeting System (HTS):
In early 2005, the Air Force gave the go-ahead for an upgrade to the HTS, allowing several F-16s to "network" their HTS pods over a "Link-16" digital datalink system. This upgrade was to provide enhanced accuracy -- enough to provide targeting coordinates to a GPS-guided munition -- and also greater range. Although the HTS pod was originally mounted on the right inlet stores pylon, the upgrade relocated it to the left inlet stores pylon to free up the right pylon for a targeting pod. The upgrade automatically slewed the targeting pod's imager system to the location identified by the HTS. The modernized aircraft were redesignated "F-16CM.

It can detect, identify, and target adversary radar and other emitters.

This is partially correct.

What is not said here is that the PT mode requires several a/c (HTS) to work in network following specific geometries/trajectories and needs a fair amount of time in tactical environment to get +/- accurate coordinates. That makes the PT mode highly confidential.

I would be ED (considering the past story with one of their collaborator) I would not go that way.

What is to understand here, is that OP request is not something any HTS can pprovidein standalone. And even if the PT mode can provide coordinates, it can hardly provide coordinates precise enought to pinpoint with GPS smart weapon. Considering an average precision of several tens of meters, one can expect a lot of miss.

Edited July 17, 2021 by Dee-Jay

[QuiGon]

4 hours ago, Dee-Jay said:

This is partially correct.

What is not said here is that the PT mode requires several a/c (HTS) to work in network following specific geometries/trajectories and needs a fair amount of time in tactical environment to get +/- accurate coordinates. That makes the PT mode highly confidential.

I would be ED (considering the past story with one of their collaborator) I would not go that way.

What is to understand here, is that OP request is not something any HTS can pprovidein standalone. And even if the PT mode can provide coordinates, it can hardly provide coordinates precise enought to pinpoint with GPS smart weapon. Considering an average precision of several tens of meters, one can expect a lot of miss.

 

Thanks, that sounds more like what I would have expected the system is able to do.

Getting precise coordinates (JDAM quality) from a passive sensor would have been a bit odd.

Edited July 17, 2021 by QuiGon

[Dee-Jay]

5 hours ago, QuiGon said:

Getting precise coordinates (JDAM quality) from a passive sensor would have been a bit odd.

Absolutely. Can you image having a 10m accuracy on goniometic shots even by using three or more HTS!?!

Even coordinates on TGP are sometimes not precise enough for GPS weapon targeting (bad telemetry, elevation accuracy, angle ... etc ...)

[Donglr]

On 7/17/2021 at 9:15 AM, Dee-Jay said:

What is to understand here, is that OP request is not something any HTS can pprovidein standalone. And even if the PT mode can provide coordinates, it can hardly provide coordinates precise enought to pinpoint with GPS smart weapon. Considering an average precision of several tens of meters, one can expect a lot of miss.

 

 

I actually never expected the HTS to give smart weapon levels of coordinate precision. Simply having a box on the HUD giving me a clue on where to slew my TGP to to look for the target would be a great improvement already. Right now I basically have to wait for a SAM launch to see where it is coming from. Not the preferred way of operation for someone who wants to keep his virtual life. Very "wild weasely", thoughy

[Dee-Jay]

9 hours ago, Donglr said:

 

I actually never expected the HTS to give smart weapon levels of coordinate precision. Simply having a box on the HUD giving me a clue on where to slew my TGP to to look for the target would be a great improvement already. Right now I basically have to wait for a SAM launch to see where it is coming from. Not the preferred way of operation for someone who wants to keep his virtual life. Very "wild weasely", thoughy

Such box on the HUD do not exist. Where have you seen this?

Edited July 20, 2021 by Dee-Jay

[Bananabrai]

It all depends on the warhead size what you call "JDAM accuarte", #MOAB 

 

Jokes aside, I don't know the accuracy of the HTS, I just know the ones of the Tornado ELS (& digital ELS)

Even if you fly right towards the emitter, the ranging gets pretty good eventually, jaw dropping good if you have an angle.

Also depends on the emitter of course, SA-6 is different from SA-8 etc.

Easily accurate enough I perosnally would use an AGM-154A for that, debatable wether a GBU-31 would do the job.

 

Apart from that, if it is still emitting, in my eyes it is not feasable to drop a GBU-31 on it, as it porbably is still protected or is a threat itself and the release conditions for a GBU-31 are pretty foreseeable.

So JSOW accuracy would be fine for me, even a 100m+ accuary would give us whole new ELINT capabilites, and a new mission set for the Viper, including it beeing light years more accuarte than the Viggen ELINT.

 

 

[notproplayer3]

50 minutes ago, Dee-Jay said:

Such box on the HUD do not exist. Where have you see this?

 

I believe he is referring to the hornet. 

[skywalker22]

Are we talking about AN/ALQ-131 ECM pod - active jamming for other radars?

Would be really awesome.

[Donglr]

On 7/20/2021 at 1:15 PM, notproplayer3 said:

I believe he is referring to the hornet. 

correct

[Furiz]

On 7/23/2021 at 3:53 PM, skywalker22 said:

Are we talking about AN/ALQ-131 ECM pod - active jamming for other radars?

Would be really awesome.

 

 

 

[skywalker22]

 

 AN/ALQ-131 ECM pod  

They said 2yrs ago "core sysems include", but there is still no sign of it. Maybe one day.

[Smoked]

6 hours ago, skywalker22 said:

 

 AN/ALQ-131 ECM pod  

They said 2yrs ago "core sysems include", but there is still no sign of it. Maybe one day.

 

This is the super frustrating part...   

[Northstar98]

Only thing with the ECM, is that it's still in its absolute infancy, the Hornet is the only aircraft so far to replicate DECM track-breaking, though I'm unsure what capabilities the AN/ALQ-131 and 184 pods are capable of (presumably at least track breaking in at least the IEEE S and X band (NATO E/F and I bands), though C:MANO mentions IEEE S, C, X and Ku bands (NATO E, F, G, H, I, J bands) but who knows, maybe it can do multiple target repition (though that would require modelling sidelobes for azimuth deception) or OECM (think noise/barrage jamming).