Biryuza Data Link

[AeriaGloria]

Please go beyond FC3 and model the Beryuza data link system. It is so wonderfully integrated with the HUD, would make an awesome feature to entice buyers, and gives it a unique and very dynamic ability to target with exterior guidance. Being able to have intercept path shown to you, radar/KOLS scan automatically and lock, and tell you when to fire. Being able to change the over 20 channels to select different targets. Being a radio link also brings the side effects of flying low and with obstructions from valleys/mountains. Opens up more team play allowing people to assign different targets to wingmen.
 

Thank you!!   

Edited January 12, 2024 by AeriaGloria

[Gierasimov]

The only thing I found in the - I think forbidden - manual is referencing E502-20 “Biryuza” system as part of the 9.12 avionics. According to the manual, the pilot receives flight cues regarding target location and intercept course on the HUD/HDD. Autopilot section of the manual does not say anything about 9.12 flying itself to those cues or maybe I misinterpreted it?

[okopanja]

7 hours ago, AeriaGloria said:

Being a radio link also brings the side effects of flying low and with obstructions from valleys/mountains.

Not sure if DCS is able to model the effects of Tropospheric/Ionospheric reflections. Depending on the radio type used this may bring the signal further even without direct line of sight.

27 minutes ago, Gierasimov said:

The only thing I found in the - I think forbidden - manual is referencing E502-20 “Biryuza” system as part of the 9.12 avionics. According to the manual, the pilot receives flight cues regarding target location and intercept course on the HUD/HDD. Autopilot section of the manual does not say anything about 9.12 flying itself to those cues or maybe I misinterpreted it?

I think it's pilot's task to do that.

[Gierasimov]

1 hour ago, okopanja said:

I think it's pilot's task to do that.

I just went through the manuals again and no mention of automation between SAU-451 and E502-20, now thinking more about the Biryuza I am inclined to believe it would pose a technical challenge in late 70s' early 80s' to design a reliable way of remote controlling a fighter jet from the ground, nor it would make much of a sense anyways. 

Still, receiving cues on the HUD will bring interesting gameplay, however I do see that DCS has to develop the EWR concept / technology to be in position to integrate Biryuza within Fulcrum-A module, so hopefully at least after initial Early Access it will happen.  

[okopanja]

16 minutes ago, Gierasimov said:

I just went through the manuals again and no mention of automation between SAU-451 and E502-20, now thinking more about the Biryuza I am inclined to believe it would pose a technical challenge in late 70s' early 80s' to design a reliable way of remote controlling a fighter jet from the ground, nor it would make much of a sense anyways. 

Rumors were around that the GCI could directly control the aircraft, but I have not found solid proof of that. Biryuza E502-20 is used frequently along Lazur/Lazur-M names, I have a feeling that they not describe the same things. I have a book where both are mentioned, so I will check exact formulations and context.

17 minutes ago, Gierasimov said:

Still, receiving cues on the HUD will bring interesting gameplay, however I do see that DCS has to develop the EWR concept / technology to be in position to integrate Biryuza within Fulcrum-A module, so hopefully at least after initial Early Access it will happen.  

Mig-23 is in the works as well as Mig-29, and they by shear coincidence share a piece of tech.

 

[Gierasimov]

1 hour ago, okopanja said:

Rumors were around that the GCI could directly control the aircraft, but I have not found solid proof of that. Biryuza E502-20 is used frequently along Lazur/Lazur-M names, I have a feeling that they not describe the same things.

Mig-23 is in the works as well as Mig-29, and they by shear coincidence share a piece of tech.

So far I was only able to confirm "lazur" name with relation to either MiG-21 (-M) or MiG-23 (here it was already Lazur-SM) 

Quote

Since 1965, the MiG-21S fighter (product 95), the next modification of the aircraft, began to arrive in combat units. The fighter received a new radar RP-22 “Sapphire” (it was the first letter “S” from the name of the station that was included in the designation of the aircraft). In addition, a new autopilot and Lazur-M guidance equipment were installed. “Lazur” remotely controlled two arrows on the flight instrument in the pilot’s cabin. One arrow indicated to the pilot the need to change altitude, and the other to indicate the need to turn in the desired direction. Thus, the pilot could fly directly to the target without seeing it. When the target distance was reduced to several kilometers, the pilot took control and used the weapon.

 

[AeriaGloria]

7 hours ago, Gierasimov said:

I just went through the manuals again and no mention of automation between SAU-451 and E502-20, now thinking more about the Biryuza I am inclined to believe it would pose a technical challenge in late 70s' early 80s' to design a reliable way of remote controlling a fighter jet from the ground, nor it would make much of a sense anyways. 

Still, receiving cues on the HUD will bring interesting gameplay, however I do see that DCS has to develop the EWR concept / technology to be in position to integrate Biryuza within Fulcrum-A module, so hopefully at least after initial Early Access it will happen.  

The MiG-23ML does accomplish, pretty amazing. I was confusing it with this aircraft, I should rename the thread “Biryuza”

[draconus]

12 hours ago, Gierasimov said:

I am inclined to believe it would pose a technical challenge in late 70s' early 80s' to design a reliable way of remote controlling a fighter jet from the ground

Tomcat also had possibility of DL remote control, btw.

[AKarhu]

For what I have read of cold war era ground-controlled intercept scheme using data links, sometimes a bit wrong picture seems to get conveyed because of the ambiguity over the word 'control'. Sometimes the scheme is described as if the interceptors were flown ("controlled") directly by the ground control, as if they were drones of sorts. Whereas I read the word 'control' with meaning more similar to that in the context of air traffic control: now fly that way to intercept, to simplify.

Obviously, it would not have been a huge technical leap from there to data link the vector directly to the aircraft's heading bug, so to say, and couple the autopilot to follow the vectors automatically, if so desired. Whether or not this would classify as fully automated, ground controlled intercept from pilot's perspective, I guess, anybody could argue one way or another, depending on one's point-of-view.

[draconus]

56 minutes ago, AKarhu said:

For what I have read of cold war era ground-controlled intercept scheme using data links, sometimes a bit wrong picture seems to get conveyed because of the ambiguity over the word 'control'.

NATOPS doesn't leave that to interpretation in F-14 case. It's the autopilot function that takes control of the aircraft roll/pitch axis.

[JetFighterGirl]

26 minutes ago, draconus said:

NATOPS doesn't leave that to interpretation in F-14 case. It's the autopilot function that takes control of the aircraft roll/pitch axis.

Is it implemented with DCS Tomcat?

 

[draconus]

1 minute ago, JetFighterGirl said:

Is it implemented with DCS Tomcat?

No. We don't have GCI.

[JetFighterGirl]

11 hours ago, Gierasimov said:

So far I was only able to confirm "lazur" name with relation to either MiG-21 (-M) or MiG-23 (here it was already Lazur-SM) 

 

The MiG-29 Lazur Data Link System:

The Lazur Data link System is a two-way system, GCI-to-Fighter and Fighter-to-GCI. It is composed of the SAU-451-04 automatic control system, the E502-20/04 airborne guidance system, the R-862 radio, A-611 marker radio receiver, SO-69 ATC responder with the UNN block/K-42E kit, the ARK-19 radio compass, the TESTER-UZ/LK flight data recorder, and the ALMAZ-UP information reporting system.

Transmitted target information is displayed on the HUD display. The "GUIDANCE" switch on the Air-to-Ground Panel must be "ON". A Data Link Frequency needs to be selected and a Data Link Mode selected from the "GCI SITE", "AIR TRAFFIC", or "TERMINAL" options. The system operates in the VHF frequency band and is effectively line-of-sight limited.

Just now, draconus said:

No. We don't have GCI.

It seems then ED has got some coding to do in the first place and GCI is not related to a particular aircraft, or there is not enough informtion (public + verified) to make it happen.

I wonder how Razbam is going to do it for MLA, as I understood they said it is coming with MiG-23?

[Northstar98]

1 hour ago, draconus said:

No. We don't have GCI.

It is however implemented with ACLS, using the same functions.

As for the OP, absolutely +1.

Edited January 12, 2024 by Northstar98

[okopanja]

3 hours ago, JetFighterGirl said:

The MiG-29 Lazur Data Link System:

The Lazur Data link System is a two-way system, GCI-to-Fighter and Fighter-to-GCI. It is composed of the SAU-451-04 automatic control system, the E502-20/04 airborne guidance system, the R-862 radio, A-611 marker radio receiver, SO-69 ATC responder with the UNN block/K-42E kit, the ARK-19 radio compass, the TESTER-UZ/LK flight data recorder, and the ALMAZ-UP information reporting system.

Transmitted target information is displayed on the HUD display. The "GUIDANCE" switch on the Air-to-Ground Panel must be "ON". A Data Link Frequency needs to be selected and a Data Link Mode selected from the "GCI SITE", "AIR TRAFFIC", or "TERMINAL" options. The system operates in the VHF frequency band and is effectively line-of-sight limited

According to this book: https://www.vojnaknjizara.com/shop/esalon-istorija-razvoja-sovjetskih-i-ruskih-radara-komandno-informacionih-sistema-i-sistema-automatizacije/

The development of Radars, C3I systems and data links initially occurred within requirements of PVO of territory (Воздушна ПВО), where frontal aviation/troop PVO (Сухопутни) were usually receiving the older stuff from former. The requirements of the first often collided with realities of the later who needed more flexibility and mobility. The book criticizes the concepts forced by the first (richer and more influential group), since reality showed that second group was more pragmatic and often developed better solutions when given freedom and resources. It should not surprise you that second group received often equipment from first after several years.

The book specifies the following connectivity paths:

Воздух --> Каскад --> Лазур (moved slowly to front aviation)

Воздух1М --> Каскад --> Лазур-М (over the time moved to front aviation)

Воздух1М -->  Каскад --> Бирјуза (only for PVO)

Вектор-2 --> Каштан --> Радуга 68 (at early and in Вектор form with Лазур-М)

Сењеж --> Каштан --> Радуга 75 (based on the needs combined with Лазур-М)

Рубеж-1 --> Рубеж-2 --> Радуга 75 (based on the needs combined with Бирјуза)

Еталон --> Сплав (was used only within front aviation and not in PVO)

Постскриптум --> Вертикал --> Горизонт

In addition the authors state that e.g. Lazur-Birjuza are omnidirectional, while Raduga has directed antennas.

It should be noted that authors intentionally removed operational details, so frequency, coding, etc are not available. In some cases it specifies the capacity of the targets tracking, but this is as detailed as it gets. Also, parts of the book are written in a rather difficult to read language.

3 hours ago, JetFighterGirl said:

It seems then ED has got some coding to do in the first place and GCI is not related to a particular aircraft, or there is not enough informtion (public + verified) to make it happen.

Well from my point of view I would prefer not the generic solution, but more accurate GCI for each specific type and/or even SAM types with multiple seats in future.

[Silver_Dragon]

8 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Well from my point of view I would prefer not the generic solution, but more accurate GCI for each specific type and/or even SAM types with multiple seats in future.

ED require build a CGI API, no only to build a propper Soviet/Russian system, and the NATO, Others. We need expected see what comming. Other aircrafts as the Mig-23 will require some similar and incoming Century interceptors will SAGE.

[AeriaGloria]

11 hours ago, JetFighterGirl said:

The MiG-29 Lazur Data Link System:

The Lazur Data link System is a two-way system, GCI-to-Fighter and Fighter-to-GCI. It is composed of the SAU-451-04 automatic control system, the E502-20/04 airborne guidance system, the R-862 radio, A-611 marker radio receiver, SO-69 ATC responder with the UNN block/K-42E kit, the ARK-19 radio compass, the TESTER-UZ/LK flight data recorder, and the ALMAZ-UP information reporting system.

Transmitted target information is displayed on the HUD display. The "GUIDANCE" switch on the Air-to-Ground Panel must be "ON". A Data Link Frequency needs to be selected and a Data Link Mode selected from the "GCI SITE", "AIR TRAFFIC", or "TERMINAL" options. The system operates in the VHF frequency band and is effectively line-of-sight limited.

It seems then ED has got some coding to do in the first place and GCI is not related to a particular aircraft, or there is not enough informtion (public + verified) to make it happen.

I wonder how Razbam is going to do it for MLA, as I understood they said it is coming with MiG-23?

Where did you get this 29-Lazur info from? 

Lower right corner of the cockpit? Around where we see transponder frequency controls for IFF? 

Edited January 12, 2024 by AeriaGloria

[JetFighterGirl]

On 1/12/2024 at 9:47 PM, AeriaGloria said:

Where did you get this 29-Lazur info from? 

Lower right corner of the cockpit? Around where we see transponder frequency controls for IFF? 

 

Some book written in Russian that had its part translated to English by on another military aviation forum.

Here are the pics:

null

[AeriaGloria]

On 1/15/2024 at 7:51 AM, JetFighterGirl said:

Some book written in Russian that had its part translated to English by on another military aviation forum.

Here are the pics:

null

Thank you! In a document I did find one line “

There is equipment for command radio control line (CRU) 3502-20 "Turquoise", which ensures interaction with ground-based automated guidance systems and the automatic control system

of the SAU-454.”

Another section on radar use seemed to indicate that guidance by Ground control could be coupled to SAU autopilot in elevation, but azimuth control must still be manually done by pilot. Which I find odd, I would expect it to be the opposite. 

Edited January 16, 2024 by AeriaGloria

[Viper33]

On 1/11/2024 at 6:10 PM, okopanja said:

Not sure if DCS is able to model the effects of Tropospheric/Ionospheric reflections. Depending on the radio type used this may bring the signal further even without direct line of sight.

It should be VHF so LOS only.

[AeriaGloria]

2 hours ago, Viper33 said:

It should be VHF so LOS only.

I actually looked up the range of the R-862 radio that the Beryuza relies on, 

At 1,000m you have at least 120 km range 

5,000m it is 250 km at least 

And at 10,000m at least 350 km range 

But I have heard that Chizh confirmed on Russian forums that ED MiG-29 “A” will not have the data link, so big sad  

[okopanja]

15 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

But I have heard that Chizh confirmed on Russian forums that ED MiG-29 “A” will not have the data link, so big sad  

Well, in that case it would not be Mig-29A.

I do not believe they would leave it like that.

[AeriaGloria]

6 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Well, in that case it would not be Mig-29A.

I do not believe they would leave it like that.

Sometimes 3rd parties doing certain features has led to ED prioritizing an in house equivalent. Fingers crossed for when MiG-23MLA is tested by ED and they see how much the users like the Lazur GCI system on it