SPO15 feedback

[Кош]

19 минут назад, BIGNEWY сказал:

but where does -35-11 receive this signal from internally? it does not show and as far as we can tell it does not. If the claim is -35 can sync to them, it only has access to main loop sync (100 Hz) and to reference clock (2.5 MHz) none of which is of use on its own. Its worth investigating. 

thanks 
 

Yes that's the whole point. I'm translating something that may shed light.

[AeriaGloria]

One technical question 

ED has said they would add an option to remove the blanking wire since most MiG-29 seem to have been that way after early production

Now Su-27 manual says it’s radar shows up as X category 8 bars on its SPO, and I assume MiG-29 is the same as its power output is the same and placement similar. 
 

My question is this, the SPO-15 has a weakness where if it gets a CW signal, even CWI, it shuts off reception of all other CW/CWI signals. 
 

However, if a MPRF/HPRF radar is close enough for the SPO to detect the pulsed nature of it and correctly categorize it as HPRF/MPRF, it would still show it correct? And, I assume, it would show it over a weaker X signal, as the F category can only be recognized at a signal strength more powerful then X when MPRF/HPRF is recognized as flashing X. 
 

If so I would expect the removal of the blanking wire to make many people happy as it would show “F” signals within 25 km for F-15/18 and 40 km for f-14/16. For me, this is not much different then having the radar synchronization we would like! 
 

The only thing that could be better is having it be a DTC option in case the mission creator doesn’t do it

In such a situation it would still be our responsibility to check when SPO switches from showing our radar to another, unless they are in a different mode then our own radar.
 

However, if I understand the threat priority correctly, it might not show a F category in search over a X category in track. In such case, it would only show the F signal when in track mode and our radar In search if F category is truly lower priority then X (since it is said that priority goes in the order of categories left to right P Z X N F C.) In such a case it would still only show your radar as priority in track mode. In such a case, we might still be able to recognize its presence in search or track as a secondary threats in ours would only illuminate the X light and not the F light. 

Edited Thursday at 08:13 AM by AeriaGloria

[okopanja]

On 11/17/2025 at 3:29 PM, BIGNEWY said:

SME's can also be wrong, pilots from years ago can also misremember situations.

The interviews in question were given in 2008, which is just 9 years after the event. First interviews were given by Perić around 2000 or 2001 (need to look up that one), and Perić received the "hot rabbit" treatment from the Air Force, leading him to be kicked out and later reinstated in Air Force by court decision. The early interview on both sides were very vague for obvious reasons (just check Mike Shower and Rico's interviews), but 2008 interview broke the ice cover with unprecedented level of details.Therefore I would not really doubt accuracy of pilot's memories. Yes they do age like all people age, and sadly late Perić is not there to be asked.

It should be also note that these interviews were given long time before we started discussing the SPO-15 in FF 29, and that majority of the interviews I translated before already in 2024, but did not publish them all yet.

If you carefully read the ones I so far published, they provide a high level of details on their flights, such as angles, locations they flew over etc. This is what gave me the idea try to place their flights in the map. 

In fact for some of them find additional side information, which I tend to update if relevant. E.g. I will need to supplement flight of Boro Zoraja with additional source and interview, since I finally confirmed why GCI/EWR (VOJIN) support was not there when he got jumped while doing 8s at his designated zone of expectation. The only warning he had was the warning from the SPO-15 and during the fight he was relying both on his own Radar and SPO-15.

[BIGNEWY]

31 minutes ago, okopanja said:

The interviews in question were given in 2008, which is just 9 years after the event. First interviews were given by Perić around 2000 or 2001 (need to look up that one), and Perić received the "hot rabbit" treatment from the Air Force, leading him to be kicked out and later reinstated in Air Force by court decision. The early interview on both sides were very vague for obvious reasons (just check Mike Shower and Rico's interviews), but 2008 interview broke the ice cover with unprecedented level of details.Therefore I would not really doubt accuracy of pilot's memories. Yes they do age like all people age, and sadly late Perić is not there to be asked.

It should be also note that these interviews were given long time before we started discussing the SPO-15 in FF 29, and that majority of the interviews I translated before already in 2024, but did not publish them all yet.

If you carefully read the ones I so far published, they provide a high level of details on their flights, such as angles, locations they flew over etc. This is what gave me the idea try to place their flights in the map. 

In fact for some of them find additional side information, which I tend to update if relevant. E.g. I will need to supplement flight of Boro Zoraja with additional source and interview, since I finally confirmed why GCI/EWR (VOJIN) support was not there when he got jumped while doing 8s at his designated zone of expectation. The only warning he had was the warning from the SPO-15 and during the fight he was relying both on his own Radar and SPO-15.

We have modelled a very specific SPO-15 we have presented the data we have used and clearly shown why it works the way it does. 

Again I am happy to pass on any data to the team that would verify some claims being made here in this thread, but as of yet we have not seen any that would convince us it should be modelled any other way. 

thank you 

[Pavlin_33]

2 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

We have modelled a very specific SPO-15 we have presented the data we have used and clearly shown why it works the way it does. 

Again I am happy to pass on any data to the team that would verify some claims being made here in this thread, but as of yet we have not seen any that would convince us it should be modelled any other way. 

thank you 

Number of pilots that flew, at the time Yugoslav, MiG-29Bs have publicly reported a behavior that is in direct contradiction on how the current SPO is implemented. It could be that they were equipped with something that is different to what you have modeled, but if they are exact same units then there's clearly something wrong with the current implementation.

 Maybe Warsaw Pact Miggies really had this disadvantage, but the 29s flew by Yugoslav pilots definitely did not. 

[BIGNEWY]

23 minutes ago, Pavlin_33 said:

Number of pilots that flew, at the time Yugoslav, MiG-29Bs have publicly reported a behavior that is in direct contradiction on how the current SPO is implemented. It could be that they were equipped with something that is different to what you have modeled, but if they are exact same units then there's clearly something wrong with the current implementation.

 Maybe Warsaw Pact Miggies really had this disadvantage, but the 29s flew by Yugoslav pilots definitely did not. 

yes its possible they had different or modified units, this is why we are asking for data to back up the claims being made. 

[AeriaGloria]

I think I was wrong about blacker removed, I re read this section on li its limits 

It says if a MPRF/HPRF radar is positively identified as F category it shuts off all CW signals shown on display! So if it’s really like Su-27 and radar shows as X category 7-8 bars, when we get F signal it will cut out the radar signal and show F as priority provided nothing non-CW is higher in the priority ranking! 
 

This would be pretty freaking awesome becuase it would mean SPO-15 would outright show F-15/18 within 25 km and F-14/16 within 40 km with radar on! And as a priority threat possibly! 
 

Also means the yugo pilots could’ve seen F category at close range! 
 

please tell me this is true and I’m not reading it wrong or crazy or something. I am so PUMPED if this is true, 25-40 km is all we need in 80s to protect ourselves! 
 

Su-27 manual “When the RLPK and L-006LM operate simultaneously, false information may be displayed on the L-006LM indicator (displaying bearing marks 10, 30, 50, 90 from the left and right, type X, power gradation up to 8, marks B,CAPTURE).”

If true, that’s enough range to be as good as synchronized in my book! 

Please tell me I’m  not imagining things! I would be so happy

Edited Thursday at 02:14 PM by AeriaGloria

[Pavlin_33]

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

Also means the yugo pilots could’ve seen F category at close range! 

Seems to me that 29B and the one used as a reference are worlds a part. I don't think we'll be getting the Yugoslavian version.

[Logan54]

2 часа назад, AeriaGloria сказал:

Su-27 manual “When the RLPK and L-006LM operate simultaneously, false information may be displayed on the L-006LM indicator (displaying bearing marks 10, 30, 50, 90 from the left and right, type X, power gradation up to 8, marks B,CAPTURE).”

 

This is what I told 3 weeks ago, but no one noticed lol 

Source
But even 29 have same realization as 27, receivers could be closer and need to calculate possible interference from radar.

Edited Thursday at 03:51 PM by Logan54

[AeriaGloria]

2 hours ago, Logan54 said:

This is what I told 3 weeks ago, but no one noticed lol 

Source
But even 29 have same realization as 27, receivers could be closer and need to calculate possible interference from radar.

Yes. It’s one thing that non blanked SPO might be able to show other signals, but it’s another thing entirely if F category signals make it ignore its own radar completely and are shown as priority! 
 

To me and I would think for many pilots is a huge revelation about the usefulness of non blanked SPO, that it’s not just “super strong signals” but signals from 25-40 km! 
 

If this “limitation” is not a typo or a mistake, it changes the game I think quite a lot. If MiG-29 had originally launched like this, I think this thread would be much much shorter and the amount of complaints and talk about SPO much less 

Edited Thursday at 06:16 PM by AeriaGloria

[Jaku]

On 11/18/2025 at 1:02 AM, Mainstay said:

Jeez what is going on…. Just give us some extra options for the SPO15 so we can set it as legacy mode or something. 
 

Evidence of pilots is not enough, evidence of other documents is not enough but when the F-35 comes out all the the darkest secrets are implemented and that’s all fine… really ED what the hell. 

At this point ED just wants us to find the engineer behind the SPO-15 and interview him to make sure everything will be "correct as is" but i believe even that would not be enough.

9 hours ago, Logan54 said:

This is what I told 3 weeks ago, but no one noticed lol 

Source
But even 29 have same realization as 27, receivers could be closer and need to calculate possible interference from radar.

"When the RLPK and L006LM are operating simultaneously, false information may be displayed on the L006LM indicator (display of bearing marks 10, 30, 50, 90 on the left and right, type X, power gradation up to 8, marks B, H, and LOCK).

To determine the actual situation, it is necessary (if possible) during the search and target detection stages to set the IZLUCH-EKV-OTKL switch on the RLPK control panel to the OTKL position for 5-10 seconds."

This whole dispute could have just ended with those simple sentences from the Su-27SK manual, as its literally the same SPO-15LM used in the Mig-29 9.12A, not to mention the N001 radar derives from the Mig's N019 radar which should give a clue.

Edited Friday at 01:15 AM by Jaku

[Muchocracker]

This has already been addressed in the summary section of the write-up. "They're the same version" isnt a substantive argument. 
 

Quote

There’s also a description from training documents floating around the community which implies the second option, as it describes severe synchronization issues that could arise if this was attempted, and discourages the use of SPO-15 together with the RLPK completely. There could be a simpler explanation than synchronization being unreliable however, namely there’s a known manufacturing defect with the 9-12 that has been discussed by SMEs in forums before (as noted by users) where the blocking signal wire was completely missing - this would produce a similar result. It should be noted that these documents also apply to newer versions of the aircraft that we do not have wiring schematics for. The 9-12-specific training manuals do not include such passage in the SPO-15 section. Same applies to similar information about Su-27.

 

Edited Friday at 03:32 AM by Muchocracker

[Pavlin_33]

6 hours ago, Jaku said:

At this point ED just wants us to find the engineer behind the SPO-15 and interview him to make sure everything will be "correct as is" but i believe even that would not be enough.

"When the RLPK and L006LM are operating simultaneously, false information may be displayed on the L006LM indicator (display of bearing marks 10, 30, 50, 90 on the left and right, type X, power gradation up to 8, marks B, H, and LOCK).

To determine the actual situation, it is necessary (if possible) during the search and target detection stages to set the IZLUCH-EKV-OTKL switch on the RLPK control panel to the OTKL position for 5-10 seconds."

This whole dispute could have just ended with those simple sentences from the Su-27SK manual, as its literally the same SPO-15LM used in the Mig-29 9.12A, not to mention the N001 radar derives from the Mig's N019 radar which should give a clue.

Could it be that the SPO that ED modeled, is some sort of "dummed down" export version, compared to Soviet A and Yugoslav B versions?

[Logan54]

6 часов назад, Jaku сказал:

At this point ED just wants us to find the engineer behind the SPO-15 and interview him to make sure everything will be "correct as is" but i believe even that would not be enough.

If I understood correctly, the SPO-15 article on the Su-27 mentions possible interference to the SPO-15 receivers from the radar, but there is no mention that the radar can completely block the SPO-15. But this is an implementation on the Su-27. Unfortunately, I have no idea how this is supposed to work with 29.
If they work in same way, moving radar left/center/right also can move radar antenna radiation pattern. So, SPO-15 receiver diagram pattern (that should receive enemy radar signal) can have some background noise by the 29`s radar. This can be but can also not to be.
The most interesting part of this is mention about too many "background noise" on SPO from different aspects.
IMO this is result of different interference of radar radiation on SPO during controling the radar (moving left/right/up and down)
I will try to explain. For example we have solar panels, that should receive sunlight, but if we have flashlight that pointed to the sun pannels` side, they can register additional power, but also can not register anything. This depends on aspect between flashlight and sunpannels.
So, in radiation scenario should be same thing. For understand real radiation influence from radar onboard, someone should find real radar antenna radiation pattern, also to find real SPO-15` radiation receivers pattern. Then you able to overlay one on one and see where you can have "background noise" on SPO. You should do this for 3 positions of the radar(left, center, right), and also to check vertical plane (radar can move up and down).
This is just my theory of how can this work (according to the Su-27 implementation), I don`t know how irl.

[okopanja]

28 minutes ago, Pavlin_33 said:

Could it be that the SPO that ED modeled, is some sort of "dummed down" export version, compared to Soviet A and Yugoslav B versions?

I doubt this. Why would Yugoslavia - a non-aligned country, and potential target for Warsaw Pact, receive a better version than Warsaw Pact members?

Yugoslavia had excellent relations with both West and East(at least on surface), and was developing own weapon systems, but also bought from both West and East , but why would Soviets sell as anything better?

Besides for the larger part of Cold War we were actually more on the guard against Warsaw pact than against NATO. 

The only thing I can think of is better quality control on customer side, which would imply better quality of production or better later care for a more demanding customer than Warsaw pact countries bound to their treaty. Back in the time Soviet/Yugoslav trade exchange was strongly on the side of Yugoslavia, with former even owing debts.

Edited Friday at 08:28 AM by okopanja

[Flyout]

1 hour ago, okopanja said:

I doubt this. Why would Yugoslavia - a non-aligned country, and potential target for Warsaw Pact, receive a better version than Warsaw Pact members?

Yugoslavia had excellent relations with both West and East(at least on surface), and was developing own weapon systems, but also bought from both West and East , but why would Soviets sell as anything better?

Besides for the larger part of Cold War we were actually more on the guard against Warsaw pact than against NATO. 

The only thing I can think of is better quality control on customer side, which would imply better quality of production or better later care for a more demanding customer than Warsaw pact countries bound to their treaty. Back in the time Soviet/Yugoslav trade exchange was strongly on the side of Yugoslavia, with former even owing debts.

I understand that as the author of interviews with Yugoslav pilots, you don't want to think about this, but I'd rather assume the pilots' words and recollections are inaccurate.
People sometimes make mistakes or make things up for public interest.

[FoxAlfa]

10 minutes ago, Flyout said:

I understand that as the author of interviews with Yugoslav pilots, you don't want to think about this, but I'd rather assume the pilots' words and recollections are inaccurate.
People sometimes make mistakes or make things up for public interest.

Ok, we can talk about different units and changes to the Yugo SPOs like hot wiring and even changing of modules which is a fact can be discussed.

But lets not calling recollection inaccurate since 'surviving being hit by a missile since SPO went off'  isn't exactly a 'color of the napkins on your first date',
you remember that for the whole of your life and probably relive it more times that you would like too. 

Edited Friday at 10:33 AM by FoxAlfa

[BIGNEWY]

folks its not something to take personal, we just can not take word and mouth as fact. We need to see evidence that we can verify. Its that simple. 

 

[okopanja]

6 minutes ago, Flyout said:

I understand that as the author of interviews with Yugoslav pilots, you don't want to think about this, but I'd rather assume the pilots' words and recollections are inaccurate.
People sometimes make mistakes or make things up for public interest.

I would say pilots among other things are not known as generally weak-minded people.

[AeriaGloria]

51 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

folks its not something to take personal, we just can not take word and mouth as fact. We need to see evidence that we can verify. Its that simple. 

 

I would love to hear from developers or someone about  when the front hemisphere blanker is removed as an option as was said in the most recent SPO-15 post,

IF the device may still show F category signals at less then 25-40 Km ranges with radar on becuase of the limitation where once correctly identified as HPRF/MPRF all CW signals are excluded, and Su-27 radar shows on SPO-15LM as 7-8 signal bars of X category (since Su-27 radar has same power output as MiG-29 radar and SPO antenna placement isn’t too different) so would thus be excluded when F category (MPRF/HPRF) signals are found, since 4th gen fighters go from X category (CW) to being correctly identified as F category (MPRF/HPRF) at 25 km (F-15/18) or 40 km (F-14/16), and the ED manual lists this as one of SPO-15LM’s limitations to ignore CW when MPRF/HPRF is correctly identified. 
 

This would mean the option of the blanker removed is nearly a perfect middle ground for all users and perfectly realistic 

Edited Friday at 11:30 AM by AeriaGloria

[Pavlin_33]

32 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

folks its not something to take personal, we just can not take word and mouth as fact. We need to see evidence that we can verify. Its that simple. 

 

Well if that's the policy, then I guess there's not much we can do here. Thanks for having a look in any case.

[Logan54]

The best way is to find poland 9-12 with SPO-15 installed and ask pilot how does it work irl, probably someone can do this.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

1 hour ago, Logan54 said:

The best way is to find poland 9-12 with SPO-15 installed and ask pilot how does it work irl, probably someone can do this.

Yes, but you’d think ED have already done that

[Dejan]

9 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

folks its not something to take personal, we just can not take word and mouth as fact. We need to see evidence that we can verify. Its that simple. 

 

OK, how much evidence do you have besides this Polish one? Why would you believe Western pilots who tested the unmaintained German MiG 9 and not believe Serbian pilots who were the only ones who had combat flights. Do you in the West consider Serbs to be primitive, uneducated people?
Do you think we are fat here? Human memory is not reliable of course, Boro Zoraj does not remember whether he pulled the plane to the left or right, how long he maneuvered to get out of the lock, but he certainly has a deep memory of why he did it.
From experience and conversations with people who have done business with you, I know for sure that you are a group of arrogant businessmen who pretend to be the smartest in the world. If someone were to bring you the engineer who made the SPO 15, you would say that Putin made him say something different from yours.
There are several people on this topic who are very well-versed in technical knowledge, so you don't dare to replicate them.
When you were building the F-8, external sources, such as former pilots on that plane, were relevant to you because you didn't have technical documentation for everything, so it was only important to you to know how everything behaved. And that was OK for you then, but here you are clinging to something like a drunkard to a fence.

[Dejan]

8 hours ago, Logan54 said:

The best way is to find poland 9-12 with SPO-15 installed and ask pilot how does it work irl, probably someone can do this.

I already wrote that a friend who knows Serbian pilots who flew in 1999 and some who fly now asked about SPO 15 and that they said that ED did not really understand the essence, SPO has degraded capabilities when the radar is working but by no means does it not work at all.
In Serbia, the MiG 29 is still used, technical instructions for both active pilots and maintenance people and even the word is almost impossible to get for the public. There are only Instructions for the use of the L-18 aircraft from the era of the former Yugoslavia that surfaced in some troubled times of war.