DMAS Version autonomous self lasing - Pave Spike / Pave Tack

[Kirk66]

On 2/17/2022 at 3:16 PM, mkellytx said:

Would love to hear your take on low level deliveries with either pod.

Doable - see the Eldorado Canyon F-111 attacks for Pave Tack use at low alt - but the problem with low alt LGBs is you really need a vertical target, and then you get "podium effect" where you fly around the target and the weapon loses the laser spot as it is coming in from one direction while you are lazing from the other side.

In the F-4 with Spike you could do a pop attack and toss the GBU-12, and use delayed lazing to wait until the GBU was on the way down; then basically float the pop up until weapon impact. Not good if there was any serious SAMs or AAA. SA-6/8s and ZSU-23-4s would eat you alive...

And you really need GBU-24s that are designed for low alt deliveries; GBU-10s and 12s lose too much energy due to their "bang-bang" guidance. More of an F-15E kind of thing...

Somewhere I've probably got some old tactics manuals that describe how to do it; I'll have to dig around and see if I can find them.

Vulture

[mkellytx]

On 2/18/2022 at 4:59 PM, Kirk66 said:

Doable - see the Eldorado Canyon F-111 attacks for Pave Tack use at low alt - but the problem with low alt LGBs is you really need a vertical target, and then you get "podium effect" where you fly around the target and the weapon loses the laser spot as it is coming in from one direction while you are lazing from the other side.

In the F-4 with Spike you could do a pop attack and toss the GBU-12, and use delayed lazing to wait until the GBU was on the way down; then basically float the pop up until weapon impact. Not good if there was any serious SAMs or AAA. SA-6/8s and ZSU-23-4s would eat you alive...

And you really need GBU-24s that are designed for low alt deliveries; GBU-10s and 12s lose too much energy due to their "bang-bang" guidance. More of an F-15E kind of thing...

Somewhere I've probably got some old tactics manuals that describe how to do it; I'll have to dig around and see if I can find them.

Vulture

Thanks Vulture.  Sounds about right, forgot the book but I was reading something recently about the F-111 that stated as much.  There was some good ODS footage from Varks low level lofting LGB's, but I think they were -24's which kind of proves your point.  A ways back I saw something from a Block 40 Viper manual that had a GBU-24 delivery profile, but can't remember if I saved it.

Based on your reply we shouldn't expect syllabus rides described in Sierra Hotel to be normal fare for line crews in a regular squadron, unless of course they're the gray patch crowd.

SKÖT

[Northstar98]

On 2/18/2022 at 10:47 PM, Harlikwin said:

Do you guys know what the actual laseable ranges/alts were with Pave Tac and Pave spike? Or is it just gonna be the standard cheezy 8 mile or whatever it is limit in DCS like everything else?

At least according to the C:MO database (so take with a mountain range of salt):

For both of them, 10 nmi range and up to 12k ft altitude.

But it'll probably just be DCS' generic laser limits.

[mkellytx]

10 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

At least according to the C:MO database (so take with a mountain range of salt):

For both of them, 10 nmi range and up to 12k ft altitude.

But it'll probably just be DCS' generic laser limits.

See below from the Dash 34-1-1 for Pave Spike, 66,000 ft. is 10.86 nm.  No comment on the newer pods, as I've been around both Sniper and Litening IRL.

 

[Northstar98]

7 hours ago, mkellytx said:

See below from the Dash 34-1-1 for Pave Spike, 66,000 ft. is 10.86 nm.  No comment on the newer pods, as I've been around both Sniper and Litening IRL.

 

Hmmm, apologies if I'm being stupid, but looking at this, it seems more like some LOS positioning limitation, and not necessarily what the laser itself is rated for.

[Kirk66]

On 2/19/2022 at 10:21 PM, mkellytx said:

Thanks Vulture.  Sounds about right, forgot the book but I was reading something recently about the F-111 that stated as much.  There was some good ODS footage from Varks low level lofting LGB's, but I think they were -24's which kind of proves your point.  A ways back I saw something from a Block 40 Viper manual that had a GBU-24 delivery profile, but can't remember if I saved it.

Based on your reply we shouldn't expect syllabus rides described in Sierra Hotel to be normal fare for line crews in a regular squadron, unless of course they're the gray patch crowd.

SKÖT

While a lot of the stuff the patch wearers developed was passed down to the operational crews (which was the whole point of FWIC), some of the tactics were just a bit too sketchy - F-16 LANTIRN low altitude LGB deliveries being a perfect example. This was pre-NVG, using the LANTIRN FLIR in the HUD and the targeting pod to do a popup self-designated LGB delivery at night. Run in low & fast using the LANTIRN FLIR HUD, pop straight ahead at about 4 miles, acquire the target in the TPOD, track and lase, drop the weapon in CCRP, fly a designation turn away from the target while lasing until impact, and also descending back down to low altitude for egress. Needless to say, they lost a few pilots doing this at night - including a classmate of mine from the zoo... At the time I was running ACCs fighter simulator certification program (SIMCERT) and had the opportunity to not only fly a low level LANTIRN night sortie to the range in the back seat of a Block 40 D at Luke (it was a brand new jet - and we brought it back Code 3 after a birdstrike during the low level; left a hole on the OUTSIDE of the intake!) which included night pop-up attacks dropping BDU-33s (pretty scary when doing it from the pit, my pilot had more confidence in me than I would have had!) - but also fly the F-16 sims a lot. I tried to duplicate my classmates accident, and succeeded - it was just too hard to run the targeting pod and perform a slicing turn back to low level at night using only the HUD for reference... That particular weapon delivery was quickly dropped for the F-16, being better suited for the F-15E (two man crew, etc.).

Vulture

[mkellytx]

11 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Hmmm, apologies if I'm being stupid, but looking at this, it seems more like some LOS positioning limitation, and not necessarily what the laser itself is rated for.

Doesn't matter how far the laser goes if you can't position it accurately, or if the beam disperses too much or if the angular accuracy breaks down past a certain distance...  The point being I did a quick search of the Dash 34 and there's a limitation very close to the 10 nm you brought up in the earlier post, your mileage may vary.  Given the level of technology, 10 nm seems reasonable.  Perhaps Vulture will correct or confirm, but I've only played with T-pods with 30 years more technological advancement, so can't offer more than a literature search.

[Northstar98]

15 hours ago, mkellytx said:

Doesn't matter how far the laser goes if you can't position it accurately, or if the beam disperses too much or if the angular accuracy breaks down past a certain distance...  The point being I did a quick search of the Dash 34 and there's a limitation very close to the 10 nm you brought up in the earlier post, your mileage may vary.  Given the level of technology, 10 nm seems reasonable.  Perhaps Vulture will correct or confirm, but I've only played with T-pods with 30 years more technological advancement, so can't offer more than a literature search.

Yep, I certainly was being stupid! Of course it doesn't really matter what the specifications of the laser are if you can't point it accurately (or at least, as accurately).

Though it seems this limitation is specifically when cueing the pod via a WRCS offset.

I'll have a look in the -34-1-1-2 for the Pave Tack's figure.

Looks like the maximum instrumented range is 262,100 ft or approx. 43 nmi, which seems fairly excessive, then again, it's only the maximum number that can be displayed on the CLI, and not necessarily a property of the laser - it seems that this is more of a maximum computed range from the DMAS and pod LOS angle that.

Edited February 22, 2022 by Northstar98

[mkellytx]

5 hours ago, Kirk66 said:

While a lot of the stuff the patch wearers developed was passed down to the operational crews (which was the whole point of FWIC), some of the tactics were just a bit too sketchy - F-16 LANTIRN low altitude LGB deliveries being a perfect example. This was pre-NVG, using the LANTIRN FLIR in the HUD and the targeting pod to do a popup self-designated LGB delivery at night. Run in low & fast using the LANTIRN FLIR HUD, pop straight ahead at about 4 miles, acquire the target in the TPOD, track and lase, drop the weapon in CCRP, fly a designation turn away from the target while lasing until impact, and also descending back down to low altitude for egress. Needless to say, they lost a few pilots doing this at night - including a classmate of mine from the zoo... At the time I was running ACCs fighter simulator certification program (SIMCERT) and had the opportunity to not only fly a low level LANTIRN night sortie to the range in the back seat of a Block 40 D at Luke (it was a brand new jet - and we brought it back Code 3 after a birdstrike during the low level; left a hole on the OUTSIDE of the intake!) which included night pop-up attacks dropping BDU-33s (pretty scary when doing it from the pit, my pilot had more confidence in me than I would have had!) - but also fly the F-16 sims a lot. I tried to duplicate my classmates accident, and succeeded - it was just too hard to run the targeting pod and perform a slicing turn back to low level at night using only the HUD for reference... That particular weapon delivery was quickly dropped for the F-16, being better suited for the F-15E (two man crew, etc.).

Vulture

Thanks Vulture, good/scary/eye opening stuff. 

[mkellytx]

4 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Yep, I certainly was being stupid!

And thanks, yes it doesn't matter what the specs of the laser are if it can't be positioned accurately for whatever reason.

I'll have a look in the -34-1-1-2 for the Pave Tack's figure.

Looks like the maximum instrumented range is 262,100 ft or approx. 43 nmi, which seems fairly excessive, then again, it's only the maximum number that can be displayed on the CLI,

Good your gut feels the same about that number as mine.  It feels excessive, but who knows?  A really clear day against a really big target maybe...  

[Kirk66]

On 2/21/2022 at 4:09 PM, mkellytx said:

Doesn't matter how far the laser goes if you can't position it accurately, or if the beam disperses too much or if the angular accuracy breaks down past a certain distance...  The point being I did a quick search of the Dash 34 and there's a limitation very close to the 10 nm you brought up in the earlier post, your mileage may vary.  Given the level of technology, 10 nm seems reasonable.  Perhaps Vulture will correct or confirm, but I've only played with T-pods with 30 years more technological advancement, so can't offer more than a literature search.

Max range of the pod was never a limitation, the limits were in acquiring the target with the optics of the day, and the range of the LGBs. With Spike, you could cue the pod in front of the jet on the run in and look around until you found the target, then hang on to it until weapon impact; or select 12 acquire and have the nose gunner point the jet at the target so you could find it.  Trickier was 9 Acq, where the pilot put a grease pencil mark on the left canopy off his shoulder and used that to "aim" the pod at a target at 9 o'clock. Yeah, it was as crude as that!

Pave Tack was better, you could definitely cue the pod to a preplanned target area, and then refine your search until you found what you wanted to hit. No problem from medium altitude; was fun sightseeng from 10k ft or so; you could make out chickens in peoples back yards, and tell how much fuel was in oil storage tanks by the heat signature. All low-threat stuff, of course.

Vulture

[mkellytx]

1 hour ago, Kirk66 said:

Max range of the pod was never a limitation, the limits were in acquiring the target with the optics of the day, and the range of the LGBs. With Spike, you could cue the pod in front of the jet on the run in and look around until you found the target, then hang on to it until weapon impact; or select 12 acquire and have the nose gunner point the jet at the target so you could find it.  Trickier was 9 Acq, where the pilot put a grease pencil mark on the left canopy off his shoulder and used that to "aim" the pod at a target at 9 o'clock. Yeah, it was as crude as that!

Pave Tack was better, you could definitely cue the pod to a preplanned target area, and then refine your search until you found what you wanted to hit. No problem from medium altitude; was fun sightseeng from 10k ft or so; you could make out chickens in peoples back yards, and tell how much fuel was in oil storage tanks by the heat signature. All low-threat stuff, of course.

Vulture

Thanks Vulture for the explanation.  BTW, no knock on grease pencil marks here, it was the difference for me between dynamic aircraft  behavior and almost getting killed.  The golden hand used the grease mark to control the yaw when we stall tested an Iraqi aircraft.  The Marine used the turn slip ball, the Marine got us into a 5 turn fully developed flat spin.  The golden had recovered the aircraft on the 4th attempt with pro spin control inputs, while arguing with the Marine...  Yeah, grease marks work great!

Edited February 23, 2022 by mkellytx

[Kirk66]

4 hours ago, mkellytx said:

Thanks Vulture for the explanation.  BTW, no knock on grease pencil marks here, it was the difference for me between dynamic aircraft  behavior and almost getting killed.  The golden hand used the grease mark to control the yaw when we stall tested an Iraqi aircraft.  The Marine used the turn slip ball, the Marine got us into a 5 turn fully developed flat spin.  The golden had recovered the aircraft on the 4th attempt with pro spin control inputs, while arguing with the Marine...  Yeah, grease marks work great!

 

That is really interesting! Can you reveal what type of aircraft it was?

Yaw strings are way better than slip balls anyway - of course the F-4 (and F-14, among others) was designed to have one - even had a special hole in front of the canopy for the string, and a place inside to tie it off. Some jets had a black line painted to make the white string easier to see... but I rarely saw one on a USAF F-4, unless it was just out of Depot. On the 1-300 YouTube channel you can see them on all the beautiful F-4EJs up until the very end. As a glider guy, I have a lot of time pushing a string around; the joke is that the best way to make the glider fly straight is to tape down both ends of the string, or put it on the inside of the canopy...

Cheers,

Vulture

[Harlikwin]

On 2/21/2022 at 3:09 PM, mkellytx said:

Doesn't matter how far the laser goes if you can't position it accurately, or if the beam disperses too much or if the angular accuracy breaks down past a certain distance...  The point being I did a quick search of the Dash 34 and there's a limitation very close to the 10 nm you brought up in the earlier post, your mileage may vary.  Given the level of technology, 10 nm seems reasonable.  Perhaps Vulture will correct or confirm, but I've only played with T-pods with 30 years more technological advancement, so can't offer more than a literature search.

There are bunch of IRL limitations and issues with lasing, so "range" is one of those funny numbers that tends to get debatable. The major advancements from the early lasers were less about the laser itself (though altitude limits were related to HV/dielectric issues with "thin" air) and then overall laser power. But it was mainly things like spot jitter, dispersion, collimation that were major players in how effectively you could lase. Then there are things like spillover and then environmental stuff like dust, smoke, humidity that all impact how good or bad your spot actually looks on target. And of course none of this modeled in DCS, though some of it would be pretty hard. I do think HB modeled the alt restriction on the Lantirn at least.

Edited February 23, 2022 by Harlikwin

[Dragon1-1]

Yup, the yaw string had served me well when trying to trap an F-14 with a dead engine in the sim. Unforgettable experience. Trap was ugly, but I got home in one piece, and that's what counts.

Fun fact: when flying on one engine, only the yaw string shows whether the aircraft is in trim. The slip ball outright lies. I don't remember where I learned this, but I do remember this being related to a civ sim and a small twin prop, of a sort on which a pilot would get qualified for multiengine aircraft. It's amazing how that knowledge just kind of stayed in the back of my head until the precise moment I needed it.  Good training gets you far, but more importantly, it gets you back home.

[mkellytx]

15 hours ago, Kirk66 said:

That is really interesting! Can you reveal what type of aircraft it was?

Yaw strings are way better than slip balls anyway - of course the F-4 (and F-14, among others) was designed to have one - even had a special hole in front of the canopy for the string, and a place inside to tie it off. Some jets had a black line painted to make the white string easier to see... but I rarely saw one on a USAF F-4, unless it was just out of Depot. On the 1-300 YouTube channel you can see them on all the beautiful F-4EJs up until the very end. As a glider guy, I have a lot of time pushing a string around; the joke is that the best way to make the glider fly straight is to tape down both ends of the string, or put it on the inside of the canopy...

Cheers,

Vulture

Sure, it was a Comp Air 7SLX, kit built airplane that the UAE gifted to the Iraqi's after OIF.  We got involved after 5 folks got killed flying one in 2005, thought we fixed the gremlins in the  plane and then deployed to Kirkuk summer of 2006 to fix the rest.  AFFTC wrote up an official history of the project, mentioned me once, and I wrote the test and safety plans and was the only FTE that deployed to test the aircraft in theater.  Then again one of the project golden hands was Virgin Galactic's test pilot for Spaceship One when he retired, another is in the latest NASA video for X-59 as one of it's golden hands and one of the other FTE's went on to be the US astronaut on that aborted Soyuz launch in 2018... Just saying...

Here's a picture of the thing:

Yaw strings work great when there's no prop!  The school house syllabus does a bunch of work up at Tehachapi on gliders, I never got a patch, but I did attend quite a few syllabus blocks where I got to do the glider rides. 

[Kirk66]

3 hours ago, mkellytx said:

Sure, it was a Comp Air 7SLX, kit built airplane that the UAE gifted to the Iraqi's after OIF.  We got involved after 5 folks got killed flying one in 2005, thought we fixed the gremlins in the  plane and then deployed to Kirkuk summer of 2006 to fix the rest.  AFFTC wrote up an official history of the project, mentioned me once, and I wrote the test and safety plans and was the only FTE that deployed to test the aircraft in theater.  Then again one of the project golden hands was Virgin Galactic's test pilot for Spaceship One when he retired, another is in the latest NASA video for X-59 as one of it's golden hands and one of the other FTE's went on to be the US astronaut on that aborted Soyuz launch in 2018... Just saying...

Here's a picture of the thing:

Yaw strings work great when there's no prop!  The school house syllabus does a bunch of work up at Tehachapi on gliders, I never got a patch, but I did attend quite a few syllabus blocks where I got to do the glider rides. 

Fascinating. I just found the test report by Stephanie Smith. Haven't read it yet, but just looking at the thing it sure looks like the vertical tail volume is a bit small...

 

[mkellytx]

3 hours ago, Kirk66 said:

Fascinating. I just found the test report by Stephanie Smith. Haven't read it yet, but just looking at the thing it sure looks like the vertical tail volume is a bit small...

 

You don't say...  Originally that was a tail dragger with a 300 hp piston that swung a 82 in prop.  What could go wrong with a nose gear, 700 hp Walter turboprop and a 100+ in prop? Power on stall recovery with flaps: break angle of attack, continue torque roll to wings level, recover from resulting dive.

Dr. Smith's book is the one, more of an official history and does a pretty good job of telling the story, raising the issues of conducting DT flight test in a combat zone, the ending is more how leadership wanted things to be remembered,  but that's far too off topic to discuss here.

[HEXO]

On 2/3/2022 at 8:44 PM, Super Grover said:

Both versions will be DSCG, but as far as I know, TISEO wasn't retrofitted to blocks 36-45. And the DMAS? I hate how the TISEO camera looks, but I guess we would never forgive ourselves if we didn't attach that ugly cylinder to the left wing.

 

well that ugly cylinder is very useful since there is no iff 

[Northstar98]

On 3/2/2022 at 5:24 PM, HEXO said:

well that ugly cylinder is very useful since there is no iff 

Phantom has IFF, both an interrogator and a transponder.

[HEXO]

10 hours ago, Northstar98 said:

Phantom has IFF, both an interrogator and a transponder.

can you show me where please?

[Kirk66]

Standard USAF Mode 1-4 transponder in front cockpit. AN/APX-81 interrogator (both friendly and hostile) in back seat, controls were just to the left of the radar scope.  Interrogation returns were on the radar display.

Very useful in peacetime to find your tanker (via specific Mode 3 code) or VFR traffic in a MOA (using the Mode 3/1200 code).  It did not give altitude info, but rough altitude cuts could be obtained by taking advantage of the systems narrow vertical beam and interrogating while in a 90 degree bank (with the radar "stab-out").

Vulture

[HEXO]

On 3/31/2022 at 7:35 PM, Kirk66 said:

Standard USAF Mode 1-4 transponder in front cockpit. AN/APX-81 interrogator (both friendly and hostile) in back seat, controls were just to the left of the radar scope.  Interrogation returns were on the radar display.

Very useful in peacetime to find your tanker (via specific Mode 3 code) or VFR traffic in a MOA (using the Mode 3/1200 code).  It did not give altitude info, but rough altitude cuts could be obtained by taking advantage of the systems narrow vertical beam and interrogating while in a 90 degree bank (with the radar "stab-out").

Vulture

Yes someone else gave me an explanation for it thanks tho

[HEXO]

On 2/3/2022 at 8:44 PM, Super Grover said:

Both versions will be DSCG, but as far as I know, TISEO wasn't retrofitted to blocks 36-45. And the DMAS? I hate how the TISEO camera looks, but I guess we would never forgive ourselves if we didn't attach that ugly cylinder to the left wing.

the TISEO was Retrofitted to Block 48 and above, which is the same block as DMAS. so it was on the DMAS version only [:

Edited April 2, 2022 by HEXO

[Chipwich]

It's been a while since my dad passed, but from memory of the discussions we had about his flying F-4Es out of Ubon in '72-'73 (335th and 336th TFS), the Knife pod was buddy lased and the Spike was WSO lased.  They used both Knife and Spike to great effect.  I see photos of airplanes with and without slats.  None with TISEO though.  I'll keep looking.