see roadmap Question about the longbow radar (terrain mapping)

[JetCat]

Hi,

I am not sure if I can ask this here or if this is classified data - but I have never seen nor used a radar like the Apache has.

Every air to ground radar does some kind of terrain mapping, showing the terrain or silhouettes of it when using the Tomcat RIO, sometimes even silhouettes of houses and stuff are possible when zooming in with the Hornet. That looks like this:

The Apacho on the other hand has a complete different system, a "millimeter radar" (to be honest I need to check on Wikipedia what this excatly is and how it differs from other AA / AG radars like for example the Tomcat or Hornet have) and this radar does not show any terrain, but it can automatically identify vehicle types, showing their position and distance on a map grid:

So the simulated Apache fire control radar is true to life and it really looks like this? Very impressive to see how authentic this simulated Apache is! But is the Apache radar also capable of mapping the terrain and it´s structures like for example the Hornet? Because camouflaged tanks (covered with branches and other stuff cloaking their geometric shape) seem to be invisible for this radar system therefore it would be awesome to also scan the terrain from above to have a visual look of what is going on down there.

 

[DD_Friar]

I am sure you can change the map display on the MFD to show slopes and levels.

the FCR is a target radar only.

[Raptor9]

31 minutes ago, JetCat said:

But is the Apache radar also capable of mapping the terrain and it´s structures like for example the Hornet?

In the AH-64D roadmap it is mentioned Air-to-Air and RMAP modes are currently in development, with a TPM mode planned for after early access. 

Just to be clear, the Ground Targeting Mode is the only mode currently implemented at this time, but here is an excerpt from the DCS AH-64D Early Access Guide:

[JetCat]

Awesome, thank you very much for the detailed explanation, unfortunately I haven´t had time to learn the fire control radar too because the trial demo is over since weekend and I only learned to fly and to use laser-Mavericks (because there was the A-10 too that took some serious time to learn).

That´s why I have only watched YouTube tutorial videos about the newly implemented radar, and that radar was a very interesting and unique on, the only radar of all planes and helicopters capable of showing me details about the target: If it´s a crawler-type vehicle, or a vehicle with wheels and other details. That´s why I wondered if that Longbow radar can do this also while at the same time showing me some terrain details, for example to see if such an uncovered vehicles is hiding behind house. As soon as this RMAP feature is implemented the Apache truly is the most exciting ultimative hunting machine of them all! And cats have a very strong natural hunting instinct they cannot resist... 

 

[jubuttib]

10 hours ago, JetCat said:

"millimeter radar" (to be honest I need to check on Wikipedia what this excatly is and how it differs from other AA / AG radars like for example the Tomcat or Hornet have)

EDIT: This is very rudimentary and lacks a <profanity>ton of nuance on purpose, but if there are any clear inaccuracies, please let me know.

Basically it just means that the radar wavelength is in the scale of millimeters to a centimeter, around 25-40 GHz, while for example the Hornet APG-65 and 73 radars operate in the 8-12 GHz region, the wavelengths being more in the few centimeters range. Theoretically the higher the frequency/shorter the wavelength, the more resolution and bandwidth the radar scan can provide (with LOTS OF CAVEATS), but tends to have lower range and penetration capabilities. (EDIT2: Once you start getting into the hundreds of terahertz range and hundreds of nanometers of wavelength, you get visible light, which as we know has pretty damn high resolution capabilities, but penetrates poorly, hehe.) This is why millimeter-wave 5G phone signals can be blocked by a piece of paper, but potentially have really fast transfer rates, while ground penetrating radars often operate in the megahertz ranges, rather than the gigahertz ranges.

Similarly early warning radars often use longer wavelengths that don't really get attenuated by the atmosphere, but their resolution isn't enough to actually guide missiles to the target, which is why tracking and guidance radars operate at higher frequencies. As a crude example the SA-10/S300 system's Big Bird early warning radar operates in the 3 GHz range, the Clam Shell target identification and tracking radar operates in the 8-10 GHz range, and the Flap Lid guidance radar operates in the 10-20 GHz range, each tending to go down in range but increasing in resolution and fidelity.

So in the Apache case the millimeter-wave radar offers enough resolution for the radar returns to contain enough data to have a decent chance of guessing WHAT the thing being targeted is. It might not know if it's an Abrams or a T-90, but it can be pretty sure it's some form of tracked, armored vehicle. Massive ranges aren't as desirable as this kind of capability to find and prioritize targets automatically.

In consumer applications millimeter radars are useful for example in scanning and mapping purposes, and can be used for example in cars to detect nearby vehicles, structures, people, etc., where they can fairly easily see through things like fog and spray that would make cameras and lasers almost useless.

Edited May 9, 2024 by jubuttib

[JetCat]

I really appreciate every word of this extremely detailed description!

[jubuttib]

1 hour ago, JetCat said:

I really appreciate every word of this extremely detailed description!

It absolutely is not detailed, it's very generalized and rudimentary. But happy to have been of assistance.

[JetCat]

It was such a great overview about different radar models, wave lenghts, mentioning that visible light the human eye can see is also just electromagnetic waves in a certain frequency spectrum, how the radar of the Tesla works that can see people at night and scan the street, and many other details. And especially how the Apache radar works and how it "sees" targets, because it´s still the only radar able to identify what it actually sees.

In one YouTube video a few months ago someone explained that the F-15 can identify a bunch of planes based on how many turbine blades the N1 has, and some Suchhoi has 35 blades and some Mig has 31 or so and because of that the radar can identify a plane. That seems to be a very unrealiable method of identifying an object by counting turbine blades turning with 7000rpm only visible from a tiny very specific sensor angle. The Apache radar is way more smart than that - it actually scans the full geometry of objects, not only one specific detail. I wonder if this smart radar technology got improved over time with more powerful processors available, really scanning an ultra high definition 3D model of tanks and vehicles and guiding the rockets to it´s weak spots which is most often the rear end where the engine and the fuel tanks sits.

[Raptor9]

1 hour ago, JetCat said:

And especially how the Apache radar works and how it "sees" targets, because it´s still the only radar able to identify what it actually sees.

I would like to dispell a common misconception here. The FCR does not actually identify anything it detects. Rather it classifies it within 6 general categories, and has no ability to determine whether it is friendly, hostile, or civilian. This is an important distinction and it is just as important to understand what the FCR does not do as it is to understand what it does do.

The FCR chapter in the DCS AH-64D Early Access Guide is your best resource to understand how this classification works in the game. But also keep in mind that the FCR's classification is not perfect; the symbol may not actually reflect what the target is.

Fortunately, the LINK mode will help with this soon. But in general, the FCR can be very useful in determining which areas of the battlefield you need to observe with the TADS first. If I see an air defense vehicle symbol, it doesn't necessarily mean it is an air defense unit, but that will certainly be the first target I slave my TADS toward to identify. Just don't let the FCR lull you into a false sense of certainty of what is or isn't out there.

[jubuttib]

Like Raptor9 said, that's not really what the radar on the Apache is doing. It's not nearly high enough resolution to do a 3d scan like that (especially multiple km away), but it does get more detailed information than your typical plane radar does, allowing it a better guess when categorising.

The "counting the number of N1 blades" is afaik also a bit wrong, technically. To my understanding it's more that the spinning compressor blades (or turbine blades if rear aspect) create a very distinct kind of signal when the radar waves reflect back from them, and it's that pattern that gets recognized. Of course the number of blades affects the return signal, but I don't think they quite "count" the blades.

That's also not quite all NCTR systems do, to an extent they also try to analyze the returns, and the shape of the plane (and the loadout on it) affects those returns. So the radar returns get analyzed and compared to known threat databases, and the computers try to make their best guess at what you're seeing, with varying certainty.

I have no doubt the longbow radar also miscategorizes stuff occasionally. How often? That's probably a military secret...

[jubuttib]

Not directly Apache related, but talks about various tricks that radars and the computers analysing their output can do to figure out what they're looking at.

 

 

Edited May 11, 2024 by jubuttib

[lee1hy]

crruent DCS AH64 has a very hard time surviving against the T-90 T-80 AT4 (5.5km) and threatening high-performance AI radar of the Avenger and human MANPAD.
There are also many covered trees
AH-64 is bad unit to use as an asset in multiplayer due to the threat of AIs targeting by piercing through trees even night time 

[Floyd1212]

4 hours ago, lee1hy said:

crruent DCS AH64 has a very hard time surviving against the T-90 T-80 AT4 (5.5km)

Which is why you engage these units at 6-8km, at which point they stand no chance.

Edit: Sorry, forgot this thread was about radar engagement.  If you only have Limas on board, and can only use your FCR for some reason, you can peak and do a scan then drop behind cover to engage those targets.

Edited September 22, 2024 by Floyd1212

[NeedzWD40]

5 hours ago, lee1hy said:

crruent DCS AH64 has a very hard time surviving against the T-90 T-80 AT4 (5.5km) and threatening high-performance AI radar of the Avenger and human MANPAD.
There are also many covered trees
AH-64 is bad unit to use as an asset in multiplayer due to the threat of AIs targeting by piercing through trees even night time 

In what way? I agree they can be a threat, but the degree of that threat varies depending on the situation. If there's no heavy SHORAD present like Gecko or Grison, then you should be well set by moving around at range and altitude, then tagging them while moving, as they can't track you easily if you're going faster than ~70 knots. On the other hand, in the presence of heavier ADA, then the terrain, conditions, your own flight, etc. dictate your options.

[shagrat]

Am 22.9.2024 um 17:39 schrieb Floyd1212:

Which is why you engage these units at 6-8km, at which point they stand no chance.

Edit: Sorry, forgot this thread was about radar engagement.  If you only have Limas on board, and can only use your FCR for some reason, you can peak and do a scan then drop behind cover to engage those targets.

 

IRL the gunner guiding the AT4 would have a very challenging job to keep the crosshair dead on the small silhouette  moving helicopter, even with zoom optics, at 5 km plus... but the AI is way better than any human being with the joystick.

[Jumper77A]

On 9/23/2024 at 1:04 PM, shagrat said:

IRL the gunner guiding the AT4 would have a very challenging job to keep the crosshair dead on the small silhouette  moving helicopter, even with zoom optics, at 5 km plus... but the AI is way better than any human being with the joystick.

IRL An AT4 is an unguided rocket, so it will be impossible to guide it. 

[Raptor9]

17 minutes ago, Jumper77A said:

IRL An AT4 is an unguided rocket, so it will be impossible to guide it. 

The M136 AT4 is indeed an unguided munition, but they are referring to the 9K111 missile (NATO reporting name of AT-4), which is a guided anti-tank missile.

[Jumper77A]

5 minutes ago, Raptor9 said:

The M136 AT4 is indeed an unguided munition, but they are referring to the 9K111 missile (NATO reporting name of AT-4), which is a guided anti-tank missile.

I stand corrected. 21 years in the Army gives me MY AT4 Bias. We always just called those "Spigots". Never heard of them reported as an AT-4 probably due to the conflicting terms despite that being the NATO name.