Question regarding IFF and Datalink

[cmbaviator]

There is somethign i don't understand.

 

on the HSD, i got contact as Ambiguous but when i press IFF, it goes Green so its firendly but as soon as i release the IFF button, it goes back to ambiguous ? how come those friendly contact are shown as ambiguous but my inboard IFF reconize them as firendly. Giving the fact that on PvP server, those contacts have been scanned by mulitple frienldy, shoudn't the datalink with the link 16 be able to gathered all the differents if interrogation and update them ?

 

What i mean is if my HSD display and ambiguous contact and after using my inboard IFF returns as firendly, shouldn't it stay green on my HSD and update it on ther network so the players in my coalition get the information on that particular contact is friendly and not ambigous ? seems to be only on the JEFF that kind of behaviour, never seens that on other module.

 

SO when playing on the GS server with like 60+ players and you have like 5+ ambiguous contacts but in reality most of them are firendlies....

 

 

Besides, when you lock in SAM or TWS those ambiguous contact, they immediately turn green but when i cancel the lock, they revert back ambiguous. they should remained as friendly as the IFF interrogation fro the lock has identified the contact as friendly

Edited September 1, 2022 by cmbaviator

[Napillo]

3 hours ago, cmbaviator said:

should

but they don't

[cmbaviator]

4 hours ago, Napillo said:

but they don't

?

[AeriaGloria]

7 hours ago, cmbaviator said:

There is somethign i don't understand.

 

on the HSD, i got contact as Ambiguous but when i press IFF, it goes Green so its firendly but as soon as i release the IFF button, it goes back to ambiguous ? how come those friendly contact are shown as ambiguous but my inboard IFF reconize them as firendly. Giving the fact that on PvP server, those contacts have been scanned by mulitple frienldy, shoudn't the datalink with the link 16 be able to gathered all the differents if interrogation and update them ?

 

What i mean is if my HSD display and ambiguous contact and after using my inboard IFF returns as firendly, shouldn't it stay green on my HSD and update it on ther network so the players in my coalition get the information on that particular contact is friendly and not ambigous ? seems to be only on the JEFF that kind of behaviour, never seens that on other module.

 

SO when playing on the GS server with like 60+ players and you have like 5+ ambiguous contacts but in reality most of them are firendlies....

 

 

Besides, when you lock in SAM or TWS those ambiguous contact, they immediately turn green but when i cancel the lock, they revert back ambiguous. they should remained as friendly as the IFF interrogation fro the lock has identified the contact as friendly

 

Hitting the IFF button doesn’t permanently turn on IFF. Nor does once your radar see a contact and IFF it, can it stay IFF’d becuase the radar can’t be certian this new contact is same as the old one. With a track it might be that the contact is still being predicted. 
 

This has multiple uses in reality, what if they change their IFF code? What if your IFF made a mistake and you need to verify it with multiple interrogations? It could be a problem if it registered as friendly once and tricked your system. For example with Jeff by changing modes of IFF you can essentially interrogate a target in multiple different ways. Wouldn’t it be a shame if you interrogated in mode 3, and then switch to mode 6 and don’t know what it is becuase it permanently showed as green after a mode 3 interrogation? 
 

And remember the IFF and Radar are pretty separate systems to an extent. You are intended to hit IFF only to know a contact and remember it. In addition, your radar talks to datalink but datalink doesn’t talk back to radar. The radar can’t know the previous interrogation of a target, perhaps multiple friendlies have different IFF settings; and having multiple planes interrogate the same contact is more safe anyways. Safety and being 100% sure in the moment wins over convenience here 
 

What I do is assign my IFF button to a switch, then just keep that switch flicked forward: that way my IFF is constantly on and it re-interrogates a radar contact for every single sweep. 

[Mike_Romeo]

8 hours ago, cmbaviator said:

how come those friendly contact are shown as ambiguous but my inboard IFF reconize them as firendly.

I would explain it so that the aircraft systems wont safe the IFF status of a detect aircraft. Once you press the IFF button, your aircraft will ask if the other is friendly or not and will get a answer that will be displayed to you but once you let the button go, the aircraft stops to ask and so the other aircraft wont answer and so you wont get a indication if he is friendly or not.

8 hours ago, cmbaviator said:

shoudn't the datalink with the link 16 be able to gathered all the differents if interrogation and update them ?

No because the JF-17 is using Link-17 that isnt compatible with Link-16 and actually it should only see datalinks of other JF-17's.
 

[AeriaGloria]

1 hour ago, Mike_Romeo said:

I would explain it so that the aircraft systems wont safe the IFF status of a detect aircraft. Once you press the IFF button, your aircraft will ask if the other is friendly or not and will get a answer that will be displayed to you but once you let the button go, the aircraft stops to ask and so the other aircraft wont answer and so you wont get a indication if he is friendly or not.

No because the JF-17 is using Link-17 that isnt compatible with Link-16 and actually it should only see datalinks of other JF-17's.
 

Isn’t that how it is? You only see contacts seen by other JF-17 or AWACS. It’s just becuase of DCS technical limitation it has to use the wrong AWACS

[Napillo]

1 hour ago, Mike_Romeo said:

using Link-17 that isnt compatible with Link-16

I've heard that it is, or it can be tied into the same systems as Link-16. PAF does run F-16s and JF-17.

Edited September 1, 2022 by Napillo

[Dragon1-1]

Link-17 is not a thing, whatever is the actual name for the JF-17's datalink, an AWACS should be able to act as a gateway, just like it can for SADL and Link-16.

[Foogle]

1 hour ago, Dragon1-1 said:

Link-17 is not a thing, whatever is the actual name for the JF-17's datalink, an AWACS should be able to act as a gateway, just like it can for SADL and Link-16.

Link 17 is the name that the PAF uses when referring to their indigenous datalink, so I don't know what you mean by it "not being a thing"

Edited September 1, 2022 by Foogle

[AeriaGloria]

The picture here that is widely circulated, says link-17 on it. It appears to be a term Pakistan came up with for their use of the Chinese data links https://quwa.org/2016/04/05/link-17-pakistans-homegrown-data-link-system/

Pakistan has a hard on for “let’s pretend like it’s a western jet” with their “it’s JF-17 becuase it’s a Joint fighter we got after F-16 which was not a joint fighter.” But I can’t blame them, it makes it easy to understand, anyone familiar with link-16 will infer what link-17 is. And the JF-17 does have many western components, and was originally supposed to have an Italian radar and European weapons. So equating it to western platforms makes sense. I just wonder, what other platforms are networked into this link -17? 

Edited September 2, 2022 by AeriaGloria

[Napillo]

21 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

Pakistan has a hard on for

I don't get why you keep downplaying Pakistan's technology - they developed their own Link-17, China certainly didn't do it. It grew out of project Rose, and Pakistan saved a lot of money by developing it themselves.

[Dragon1-1]

10 hours ago, Foogle said:

Link 17 is the name that the PAF uses when referring to their indigenous datalink, so I don't know what you mean by it "not being a thing"

Ah, I get it. I was looking at the list of US "Link" nomenclature, but it seems like Pakistanis weren't particularly creative with the name.  

7 hours ago, Napillo said:

I don't get why you keep downplaying Pakistan's technology - they developed their own Link-17, China certainly didn't do it. It grew out of project Rose, and Pakistan saved a lot of money by developing it themselves.

It's less about technology, and more about certain patterns they seem to be stuck in. There's no reason for an indigenous technology to misuse a US datalink system naming convention. JF-17 is a lot like the Viper, now this happens to be a good thing because the Viper is very well designed, but some things make me wonder whether there's a reason for them besides "it's done that way in the Viper."

[AeriaGloria]

14 hours ago, Napillo said:

I don't get why you keep downplaying Pakistan's technology - they developed their own Link-17, China certainly didn't do it. It grew out of project Rose, and Pakistan saved a lot of money by developing it themselves.

I did not know the Mirage ROSE program also included link-17. Is there any information about it? I see the article I linked mentioned that the ROSE also was part of link-17 in some way, but not sure what that is based on. Since the ROSE program ended in 2003 I would think highly unlikely it has a state of the art data link. I would appreciate any information you have 

I don’t mean to downplay Pakistan’s military complex, but I also want to avoid over stating it. Link-17 seems to be a reference to JF-17, and the radios that perform the datalink themselves are German. So perhaps I was wrong to state that it was a Chinese datalink. 
 

   But outside of that one article, I cannot find any references of Mirage ROSE and Link-17 being integrated together. 

[cmbaviator]

When Playing on Pvp Server with the JF, is it better to use mode 1 or Mode 6 ?

 

[Mike_Romeo]

6 minutes ago, cmbaviator said:

When Playing on Pvp Server with the JF, is it better to use mode 1 or Mode 6 ?

 

If Magic_IFF is enabled, any mode will work. I always use Mode 1 for MP

[Napillo]

6 hours ago, cmbaviator said:

is it better to use mode 1 or Mode 6

it's better to use mode 6, but you can't always use it and there's some issues with that.