AGM-114L and acquisition points

[LorenLuke]

With the tutorial and announcement of the Lima Hellfire, one thing left ne wondering about its possible employment in non-LOS, LOAL situations.

The tutorial in the post describes lasing the target until the 'Target Data?' prompt disappears so as to establish accurate target position data to cue the missile accurately to the same point in space as the target, as well as a 'LOBL lockout' mode to prevent LOBL launches.

Given both of these, since a waypoint/hazard, control measure, or lased-and-stored target point are simply saved points in space, could one simply set those as acquisition sources, and slave the missile to it in a LOBL lockout, no laser range (or even line of sight) required? 

[hotrod525]

Yeah, i'm also curious to know if we can lob missile at acq point behind cover, i guess we will be able. As i understand the video, the lasing only provide a "location to fly to" to the missile memory. I guess that IRL there is alot more involve, but DCS wise, i suspect the missile will automactly engage any vehicle IVO the acq on its own.

Real issue is missile might all engage the same vehicle if your attacking a group at a said "acq".

[NeedzWD40]

Without the FCR and datalink, the only option is for direct TADS lasing. Points don't provide enough information for the missile to properly track a target. It's a bit more involved than just coordinates alone.

[hotrod525]

1 hour ago, NeedzWD40 said:

Without the FCR and datalink, the only option is for direct TADS lasing. Points don't provide enough information for the missile to properly track a target. It's a bit more involved than just coordinates alone.

Then what ? i mean, the laser can only provide an accurate grid, just like a map would, aircraft already know where it is. Any more "in depth info" ?

[LorenLuke]

1 hour ago, NeedzWD40 said:

Without the FCR and datalink, the only option is for direct TADS lasing. Points don't provide enough information for the missile to properly track a target. It's a bit more involved than just coordinates alone.

I mean, it's good enough to project a waypoint and get distance and bearing relative to the aircraft. Obviously a map point wouldn't be able to be used for moving targets, granted, but for a stationary target at the particular point in space, what data would be lacking other than flying straight for that point?

[dedlike.]

im abit confused as to how a waypoint wouldnt be enought aswell considering the missile uses LOAL in some cases anyways wich means the TADS (in theory) shouldnt realy be able to tell "what" to look for, only where, i would get it if the agm114l ONLY worked in LOBL with the tads.. but that doesnt seem to be the case

[NeedzWD40]

27 minutes ago, hotrod525 said:

Then what ? i mean, the laser can only provide an accurate grid, just like a map would, aircraft already know where it is. Any more "in depth info" ?

3 minutes ago, LorenLuke said:

I mean, it's good enough to project a waypoint and get distance and bearing relative to the aircraft. Obviously a map point wouldn't be able to be used for moving targets, granted, but for a stationary target at the particular point in space, what data would be lacking other than flying straight for that point?

Off the top of my head: identifier, air/ground target, target velocity, and timing are the major ones. It's more like how the DBS radar modes work in the F-16 and F-18, so the missile needs much more contextual information than can be provided with a simple waypoint. Now, in theory one could guesstimate and fudge these values, but doing so adds great risk when you're sending live ordnance downrange to a position that you have little/no confirmation of what may be there. The missile will fall back to straight INS coordinates if it can't find anything with its radar, but it doesn't make for good optics to blow up the wrong thing like friendlies, a home, playground, etc. that might potentially be in the vicinity. Thus every form of data that the missile requires has someone, somewhere providing actual confirmation that there is a bad guy there, whether it's the ownship via TADS or FCR or another aircraft using a FCR with RFHO.

[TheGhostOfDefi]

So my takeaway is the following:

The laser provides the missile not with a point-to-go but rather with geometrik data and distances. Lets not forget how "precise" the stored positions are (10m x 10m). With the laser and angel it knows the position of the target with a precision of ~1m.

So the 114L may not work like a JDAM that knows where it is on the world and where to go instead it wants a target position related to its own (AC) position.

May the Launch-On-Position is a own mode, may it does not exist...

 

I remember said function just from ArmA 2 ACE. Maybe someone here knows more?

[AvroLanc]

This is all to do with precision. The TADS, FCR and IDM received data (which itself comes from wingman FCR) are the only location sources precise enough. 

Waypoints and other points location precision will be determined by the aircrafts own navigation quality. The INUs can drift and the GPS may not have been considered when these things were designed in the late 80’s/early 90’s. 

There are 3 ways FCR TADS IDM to get the missile targeted. This will be plenty. The FCR scan can store 16 priority targets in its short term memory (and a bunch more…256…on TSD, you can only shoot those on FCR page though) and you can shoot at all of them from out of LOS just fine. 

And also, as pointed out above, it's to do with active target identification. RF Hellfire were designed for the cold war gone hot scenario. Hordes of red army tanks pouring over West Germany. In that target rich and very dynamic scenario you can't afford to waste missiles firing against a location were there may or not be a target....he may have moved, even if there a minute ago. You can't fire them preemptively. Every missile needs to count so you use FCR and TADS and wingman FCR (IDM) to actively locate targets before engaging.

Edited May 15, 2023 by AvroLanc

[Floyd1212]

So, if I understand correctly, with the initial implementation of RF Hellfires we will be able to unmask and lase a stationary target until the 'Target Data?' prompt disappears, then mask again and fire the missile LOAL and remain masked?

[hotrod525]

11 hours ago, AvroLanc said:

This is all to do with precision. The TADS, FCR and IDM received data (which itself comes from wingman FCR) are the only location sources precise enough. 

Waypoints and other points location precision will be determined by the aircrafts own navigation quality. The INUs can drift and the GPS may not have been considered when these things were designed in the late 80’s/early 90’s. 

There are 3 ways FCR TADS IDM to get the missile targeted. This will be plenty. The FCR scan can store 16 priority targets in its short term memory (and a bunch more…256…on TSD, you can only shoot those on FCR page though) and you can shoot at all of them from out of LOS just fine. 

And also, as pointed out above, it's to do with active target identification. RF Hellfire were designed for the cold war gone hot scenario. Hordes of red army tanks pouring over West Germany. In that target rich and very dynamic scenario you can't afford to waste missiles firing against a location were there may or not be a target....he may have moved, even if there a minute ago. You can't fire them preemptively. Every missile needs to count so you use FCR and TADS and wingman FCR (IDM) to actively locate targets before engaging.

 

 

If you lase and store a target, aircraft keep a 8 digit grid. So unless the system provide a 10 or 12 digit grid to the missile, i can hardly see how me reading a map and telling the missile to go to 12 A BC  1234 5678 is in anyway different from the TADS telling the missile the exact same thing.  Regarding the INU's drift and GPS spoofing, laser would only provide a bearing and range wich may differ from what we would got in the other systems, i give you that. But i still dont get why one would make the other "impossible". MMWR range is roughtly 2500m (according to WAGS in the video, this most likely not reflect real life as many things move around IRL compare to what DCS-coded-sensor "pick up" as "something". ) lasing a target a 7500m would still not allow the MMWR to pickup, no ?  Or it is that "active ID" is only to not lob missiles for the "sake of it" <<hoping>> it dosent pick up any civilian truck ? Cause technicly, as you throw something that can pick-up, lock and destroy on its own, that's a risk in urban / crowded envrionement, being it in 1994 or 2023.

PS : This is not on an arguing tone, it is more on the "i clearly dont get it" one.

 

[NeedzWD40]

2 hours ago, Floyd1212 said:

So, if I understand correctly, with the initial implementation of RF Hellfires we will be able to unmask and lase a stationary target until the 'Target Data?' prompt disappears, then mask again and fire the missile LOAL and remain masked?

Negative, you'll need to keep the laser steady until missile launch. Once it's launched, then you can forget about it. The only way to fire masked would be from a RFHO from a datalink.

1 hour ago, hotrod525 said:

 

If you lase and store a target, aircraft keep a 8 digit grid. So unless the system provide a 10 or 12 digit grid to the missile, i can hardly see how me reading a map and telling the missile to go to 12 A BC  1234 5678 is in anyway different from the TADS telling the missile the exact same thing.  Regarding the INU's drift and GPS spoofing, laser would only provide a bearing and range wich may differ from what we would got in the other systems, i give you that. But i still dont get why one would make the other "impossible". MMWR range is roughtly 2500m (according to WAGS in the video, this most likely not reflect real life as many things move around IRL compare to what DCS-coded-sensor "pick up" as "something". ) lasing a target a 7500m would still not allow the MMWR to pickup, no ?  Or it is that "active ID" is only to not lob missiles for the "sake of it" <<hoping>> it dosent pick up any civilian truck ? Cause technicly, as you throw something that can pick-up, lock and destroy on its own, that's a risk in urban / crowded envrionement, being it in 1994 or 2023.

PS : This is not on an arguing tone, it is more on the "i clearly dont get it" one.

 

Storing a target point is a bit different from generating the target handover data. IIRC it doesn't even use our standard coordinate system, so MGRS/LL are completely worthless to it (I want to say it uses NED). The TADS passes other info like angular rate data which isn't tracked within the ownship INU. Remember, we're talking about a relatively tiny little missile with light energy potential, so getting it to the right point is important for both its sensors and trajectory. As I noted before, there's a lot of things you could technically fudge or assume, but by doing so you add in a lot of complications in addition to lowering your PK.

As to why the US Army and Rockwell/Lockheed/Boeing/Marietta/et al didn't add the capability, you'd likely have to find someone from the program office willing to talk about it. I'd guess they likely aren't allowed to speak about it, so we can only assume based on known factors like properly ID'ing targets before shooting.

[Floyd1212]

31 minutes ago, NeedzWD40 said:

Negative, you'll need to keep the laser steady until missile launch. Once it's launched, then you can forget about it. The only way to fire masked would be from a RFHO from a datalink.

Gotcha. Thanks!

[macedk]

I might be thick here. 
Loal: dosen 't that mean, missile away and then look for source ?. Isn't that how buddy lasing normally works ?. 
And yes within reasons of the hellfire seeker limits of course. 

The hole Kiowa/Apache thing to me was about Apache being masked. 

I gladly stand corrected

 

[NeedzWD40]

8 minutes ago, macedk said:

Loal: dosen 't that mean, missile away and then look for source ?. Isn't that how buddy lasing normally works ?.

For LOAL, it basically means the missile has to run a different mechanism to build a picture. Certain data is passed to the missile to enable it to build this picture, like the velocity of the target at launch and thus the potential position of the target when the missile goes terminal. A static target might require the missile to climb left or right to build a radar picture of the area and pick the closest likely target to the position given, and so on. It's an autonomous routine based upon a number of parameters instead of the raw spot homing you see with SAL missiles.

[jubuttib]

On 5/15/2023 at 11:40 PM, NeedzWD40 said:

Negative, you'll need to keep the laser steady until missile launch.

FWIW in the video Wags stopped firing the laser, waited about 5 seconds (while talking), and only then fired the missile. So clearly the laser didn't need to be kept steadily on anything after initial designation (i.e. until the "TARGET DATA?" text disappeared), but I don't know if there would be any limitations to the helicopter drifting around between that and the launch. The helicopter in the video was drifting a tiny bit sideways, but not much.

[Floyd1212]

After doing some testing just now, it looks like once you have the TARGET DATA? locked in, you can mask and launch.  We tried it only once, and the missile found its target, so unless this was a fluke, it seems to work.

[SloppyDog]

On 5/14/2023 at 7:20 PM, NeedzWD40 said:

Off the top of my head: identifier, air/ground target, target velocity, and timing are the major ones. It's more like how the DBS radar modes work in the F-16 and F-18, so the missile needs much more contextual information than can be provided with a simple waypoint. Now, in theory one could guesstimate and fudge these values, but doing so adds great risk when you're sending live ordnance downrange to a position that you have little/no confirmation of what may be there. The missile will fall back to straight INS coordinates if it can't find anything with its radar, but it doesn't make for good optics to blow up the wrong thing like friendlies, a home, playground, etc. that might potentially be in the vicinity. Thus every form of data that the missile requires has someone, somewhere providing actual confirmation that there is a bad guy there, whether it's the ownship via TADS or FCR or another aircraft using a FCR with RFHO.

I have this mission in Nevada, where you attack an SA-10 site on the runway of Area 51. The whole scenario is that the SA-10 is disrupting aerial operations in the area. so the Apache has to fly very low, on the western part of the desert, get to a waypoint on the west part of the Papoose Mountain Range and contact a JTAC located atop of the range who then passes the targets to the Apache. I made this mission to test/demonstrate the LOAL/HIGH Trajectory capabilities of Laser Hellfires. As everyone in here< I was hoping to do the same with the Radar Hellfires.

The JTAC atop the mountain lases the target beautifully during the day, during the night it doesn't but it is an age old problem with DCS' JTACs that they can't see/mark nothing at night. So, for night mission I use Ciribob's Jtac CTLD script, but I digress.

It is a thing of beauty seeing the Kilo Hellfires being launched, going over the mountain, detecting the laser spot and engaging the targets.

I thought the same could be done with the Kilo missiles. But in the Weapons page there is no options for HIGH/LOAL trajectory, and even if the ACQ source is a target coordinate, the TADS will ask for the Weapon Data.

So, I believe @NeedzWD40 answer is right: there maybe some limitation with the technology, but it is more of a question of someone having eyes on target before engaging. With Laser Hellfires you always need someone to lase it, even if I don't see it, flying blind from the other side of the Papoose Range. But the JTAC has eyes on, so he will guide the weapon in. He or other asset, like a Predator or a TPOD in a jet.

So, regarding the Kilo missile, it may be possible that in the future we will be able to fire it blindly through Data Link, because someone else will have its sensors, be it TADS or FCR, on the target.  

In the end, in my opinion, it all comes down to Rules of Engagement.

 

 

Edited May 19, 2023 by SloppyDog

[NeedzWD40]

20 minutes ago, SloppyDog said:

So, regarding the Kilo missile, it may be possible that in the future we will be able to fire it blindly through Data Link, because someone else will have its sensors, be it TADS or FCR, on the target.

So, something else this brings to mind: when using the FCR as a sensor, 114L is range limited to ~6km when engaging static targets. The FCR can't detect static targets beyond this range, though it can see moving ones. This means that using the datalink will be extremely useful because one aircraft can fly closer with an FCR, bob up and run a sweep, then send the targets back to other aircraft with a RFHO. The firing aircraft can remain masked and from maximum range, thus enabling an alternative mechanism in this scenario's case.

Overall, it once again proves that both seekers have their place and carrying a mix is ideal.

For the record, the 114L flies to a certain altitude based on range to the target, so at maximum range it will climb to ~3km above the launch point. It can also potentially shift left or right by up to a kilometer. This can be handy if you're dealing with certain threats like SA-15, where you might put him on the left for the first shot, then on the right for the second, allowing two missiles to approach from opposite directions.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

I tested with unlimited radar HFs at many targets and I find the hit rate quite erratic - can't quite figure it out. You can stop lasing (after Target Data is acquired) before firing but it seems if you move the crosshairs away you might miss the target. Then again, sometimes you'll hit the target. (Did not use IAT.) With buildings it's even worse - it just hits the next building or somewhere else. If you have multiple, say vehicle targets next to each other, it's a hit and miss situation - sometimes it hits a nearby target you did not lase and sometimes it hits the one you lased. Also, within 2500m, sometimes it says LOBL but gives me the small square - might be an unlimited ammo bug? It's an early version so it's probably WIP.    

[LorenLuke]

57 minutes ago, GrEaSeLiTeNiN said:

I tested with unlimited radar HFs at many targets and I find the hit rate quite erratic - can't quite figure it out. You can stop lasing (after Target Data is acquired) before firing but it seems if you move the crosshairs away you might miss the target. Then again, sometimes you'll hit the target. (Did not use IAT.) With buildings it's even worse - it just hits the next building or somewhere else. If you have multiple, say vehicle targets next to each other, it's a hit and miss situation - sometimes it hits a nearby target you did not lase and sometimes it hits the one you lased. Also, within 2500m, sometimes it says LOBL but gives me the small square - might be an unlimited ammo bug? It's an early version so it's probably WIP.    

IIRC, you don't get big box with the Radar Hellfires.

[admiki]

5 hours ago, Floyd1212 said:

After doing some testing just now, it looks like once you have the TARGET DATA? locked in, you can mask and launch.  We tried it only once, and the missile found its target, so unless this was a fluke, it seems to work.

I tried it too.

Out of 8 RF missiles, only one hit different target in a group, when I did a 360 descent to mask. All others, where I masked with nose on target, hit designated targets.

[jubuttib]

1 hour ago, LorenLuke said:

IIRC, you don't get big box with the Radar Hellfires.

You can, if you're close enough. I didn't get any big boxes when shooting at targets about 5-6 km away, but I did when shooting at ones about 1-2 km away.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

Yup, Wags mentioned LOBL as the default for moving targets and stationary targets under 2.5km. Have to wait a sec or two though for the small box to become big.  

[CallsignFrosty]

I'm not sure why people are saying that a 10m x 10m resolution grid isn't a high enough resolution for a 114L to be able to find a tank, bearing in mind that is the resolution of data provided by the TADs laser in the first place and that works just fine.

Anyone able to expand upon this thinking?

Edited May 19, 2023 by CallsignFrosty