Allow fighters to act as AWACS

[Exorcet]

This would probably require some overhaul of the AWACS system in game, but that's needed anyway. The idea is for fighters, especially those with powerful radar (F-14, F-15, MiG-31 / F-4, MiG-25 for earlier time periods), to be able to provide guidance to other fighters nearby, serving essentially as localized AWACS of sorts.

This has been done in real life and even if a fighter isn't trying to be an AWACS, there tends to be some coordination of radar usage between fighters so that firstly, not everyone is scanning the same airspace, and secondly, no one is leaving a particular azimuth/altitude unchecked which may allows enemy aircraft to sneak by.

[BomberEW]

This doesn't make much since.  When it comes to radars and power antenna size is everything.  Large antennas require large amounts of power.  The difference in size, mechanics, and power gives the radar of the E-3 coverage over hundreds of miles vs maybe 100 NM or slightly more in a modern fighter.  Older fighters of gen 3 flavor like the MiG-25 would be awful AWACS given the level of tech in an old pulsed radar. I think a better move would be added functionality for players with the current AWACS or newer AWACS systems like the wedgetail.

[Exorcet]

3 minutes ago, BomberEW said:

This doesn't make much since.  When it comes to radars and power antenna size is everything.

It's many things, but it's not everything. One easy way to trump a bigger radar is to be closer to the target than it. AWACS can't fly on the front lines, they are too vulnerable. A fighter however, can operate even in contested territory.

3 minutes ago, BomberEW said:

Large antennas require large amounts of power.  The difference in size, mechanics, and power gives the radar of the E-3 coverage over hundreds of miles vs maybe 100 NM or slightly more in a modern fighter.

Sure, but what if your air force does not have an AWACS, or doesn't have an AWACS in a given theater? A fighter radar watching the sky would be better than nothing.

3 minutes ago, BomberEW said:

Older fighters of gen 3 flavor like the MiG-25 would be awful AWACS given the level of tech in an old pulsed radar.

F-14's and F-15's have served the role in real life.

3 minutes ago, BomberEW said:

I think a better move would be added functionality for players with the current AWACS or newer AWACS systems like the wedgetail.

This is certainly something that can also be added, the two ideas aren't in conflict. Part of the drive behind my idea though isn't purely AWACS related, but trying to get some better coordination between player and AI, especially in single player. If you are flying something like a F-5 and there are F-4's nearby, they would have a much better picture of what is going on than you and they would certainly rely info to you because having your assistance is only going to improve their own chances of survival. The AI does make callouts on bandits and such, but not with any real purpose or priority. I'd like to see them at least try to coordinate with the player and I think some kind of AWACS like functionality would play into that.

[BomberEW]

AWACS has always been designed to operate from stand off distances due to its vulnerabilities.  Yes some fighters have done it temporarily but it was more of a mission commander role versus a battle management role for a large strike package.  That is why the US is replacing the E-3 with the E-7.  The requirement is still there and can never be done well by even something like the F-22.  I think one thing DCS is missing is that GCI style assistance thats far more common since its much cheaper than operating a fleet of AWACS aircraft.  That would free up fighters to do fighter things and not trying to do a mission they weren't designed for.  And yes the AI needs tweaking.  You are right about its very basic functions.  I just think the solution is better AI, increased functionality for players interested in doing that sort of thing, and GCI direction for legacy style flying or more realistic simulation for a given country. Imagine how awesome it would be to takeoff, tune a GCI frequency, and get constant and realistic vectors for an intercept.  That GCI would also be a lucrative target for guys like me that play with a large group in a milsim style server.

[upyr1]

For AI sa

14 hours ago, BomberEW said:

AWACS has always been designed to operate from stand off distances due to its vulnerabilities.  Yes some fighters have done it temporarily but it was more of a mission commander role versus a battle management role for a large strike package.  That is why the US is replacing the E-3 with the E-7.  The requirement is still there and can never be done well by even something like the F-22.  I think one thing DCS is missing is that GCI style assistance thats far more common since its much cheaper than operating a fleet of AWACS aircraft.  That would free up fighters to do fighter things and not trying to do a mission they weren't designed for.  And yes the AI needs tweaking.  You are right about its very basic functions.  I just think the solution is better AI, increased functionality for players interested in doing that sort of thing, and GCI direction for legacy style flying or more realistic simulation for a given country. Imagine how awesome it would be to takeoff, tune a GCI frequency, and get constant and realistic vectors for an intercept.  That GCI would also be a lucrative target for guys like me that play with a large group in a milsim style server.

I think the EW needs to be over hauled. We need ground based systems as you suggested as well as the option to assign fighters the mission. I just think the role could be labeled as command or the like. CnC is important in real life