Blanker removed default

[AeriaGloria]

Hello, in the last mini updates post ED indicated that they would make the “blanker removed” option for SPO-15 a ME trigger able item. This would mean SPO-15 would stay on in front hemisphere with radar on and show your radar. ““Additionally, the SPO-15 failures will be added as triggerable in ME, with the blocking failure separated from the general processing failure, to demonstrate what happens when this system fails.”

However according to limitations of SPO-15 in ED manual, once a F category HPRF/MPRF signal is identified all X category signals are ignored, and ED’s mini update indicate that the radar shows up on SPO-15 as X category ( Su-27 manual also mentions this for its radar and same model SPO). 
 

This means with radar on it would show 4th gen radars within 25 km for F-15/18 and 40 km for F-14/16!!!!!!

This would make so many people happy, please make this the default option and the ME trigger able option be to have the blanker! Or better yet a DTC option. It seems most operators did not have the blanking wire. 
 

Please! Imagine how happy people would be to realistically see F category signals on SPO with radar on!!!!!!!!!

It would still need skill to see when priority signal changes! And honestly most MiG-29 pilots seem to say that there jets flew without the “blanking” wire 

Edited Monday at 08:41 PM by AeriaGloria

[Drona]

8 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

Hello, in the last mini updates post ED indicated that they would make the “blanker removed” option for SPO-15 a ME trigger able item. This would mean SPO-15 would stay on in front hemisphere with radar on and show your radar. 
 

However according to limitations of SPO-15 in ED manual, once a F category HPRF/MPRF signal is identified all X category signals are ignored, and ED’s mini update indicate that the radar shows up on SPO-15 as X category ( Su-27 manual also mentions this for its radar and same model SPO). 
 

This means with radar on it would show 4th gen radars within 25 km for F-15/18 and 40 km for F-14/16!!!!!!

This would make so many people happy, please make this the default option and the ME trigger able option be to have the blanker! Or better yet a DTC option. It seems most operators did not have the blanking wire. 
 

Please! Imagine how happy people would be to realistically see F category signals on SPO with radar on!!!!!!!!!

It would still need skill to see when priority signal changes! 

Yes, please make it happen ED.

[Harlikwin]

Yes plz

[Kuky]

I'm all for it

[AeriaGloria]

I have never gotten so many reactions!!!!! This would be a very popular changelog item…….

ED manual page 114 “Additionally, when an HPRF type is positively identified, the continuous wave detection circuit is shut down preventing detection of actual continuous wave threats - this needs to be taken into account when operating in an environment with both 4th gen fighters and Hawk batteries present.”

Of note, the highest order of priority in DCS is tracking. But even if our own radar back lobes trigger a lock warning in search mode, the great part is F category reception completely turns off CW reception so it will go priority even in search mode provided there isn’t a higher priority emission around. It will basically completely clear up the display from our radar for as long as F category is being received. 

Edited Monday at 08:46 PM by AeriaGloria

[Dejan]

That would be great. And ME should say AeriaGloria realistic SPO

[omohat]

Another vote for "blanker removed" as the default state in the ME 

[Schmidtfire]

I hope this suggestion reach Eagle Dynamics 

[Kuky]

I was thinking about this last night as I was working...

Could it be this SPO15 not working when radar is on due to this blocking/blanking wire/circuit, that its because this blocking/blanking has been done/added afterwards (and not being part of original design) so to make pilots "less confused" when using radar and targeting because SPO15 would be giving them false warnings, and as they are/were guided by GCI anyway and not using their own radar, they would be using IR sensors which would not "freak out" their SPO15, but when radar was on, SPO15 was no longer reliable so they probably decided to "turn it off", and so we have this MiG-29 used by ED that has this done to it?

This to me makes sense because Yugoslav MiG-29's did not have this done to them as we have multiple recollections by its pilots of SPO15 working while radar was on (edit): as well as the manual not stating anything about SPO15 not working while radar was on.

Edited Tuesday at 09:24 PM by Kuky

[AeriaGloria]

If I’m wrong that for some reason this “limitation” that turns off CW with F category reception has some other technicality not mentioned that makes it not work……….. I’ll be so embarrassed. 
 

But even showing an enemy as green secondary threat marks is an improvement over nothing. I’m surprised it wasn’t designed to make a noise when secondary threats pop up. 
 

Also. SPO-15 takes sum signal of all sectors and inverts it then processes it and feeds it back into the channels as some sort of sidelobe/weak signal suppression and strengthening of strong signals. I wonder if that means it’s less sensitive to other X category threats with radar on. 
 

But it’s okay, becuase what we care about are F category emissions 

1 minute ago, Kuky said:

I was thinking about this last night as I was working...

Could it be this SPO15 not working when radar is on due to this blocking/blanking wire/circuit, that its because this blocking/blanking has been done/added afterwards (and not being part of original design) so to make pilots "less confused" when using radar and targeting because SPO15 would be giving them false warnings, and as they are/were guided by GCI anyway and not using their own radar, they would be using IR sensors which would not "freak out" their SPO15, but when radar was on, SPO15 was no longer reliable so they probably decided to "turn it off", and so we have this MiG-29 used by ED that has this done to it?

This to me makes sense because Yugoslav MiG-29's did not have this done to them as we have multiple recollections by its pilots of SPO15 working while radar was on.

In their mini updates I think they said it’s just a “defect” of later production to not have the blanking wire. But a “defect” that appears to be the large majority according to pilot accounts 

And with this information about F category still being received and kicking out X category, while I’m sure this was not a thing that the military would’ve cared about in any sort of scale outside of specific pilots personally wanting some radar warning at close range with radar on, perhaps this “defect” was no accident and production deciding that false signals were better then no signal at all. 
 

I also wonder if other X category transmissions would end up in same “bin” as your radar and be displayed as priority threat along with it lighting up a sector that wasn’t previously lit. 
 

But ED. If you hear me. You can make the radar light up all sectors in front hemisphere as a lock mode in search even for all I care, I don’t care how bad it affects SPO, as long as I get my F category at close range! 

[Dejan]

I think like this, it doesn't really matter whether the SPO gives the correct signal category. While I'm flying towards the front line, I follow the instructions from the EWR or AWACS, I position myself in a zone and wait for a good opportunity for some contact to be placed at a distance so that I can enter the fight. Then I go on the offensive, I turn on the radar, it would be enough for the SPO to show me the direction from which the enemy's beam is coming from so that I can aim exactly at it and for the SPO to signal the moment when that plane locks me. Based on the information from the EVR, I already have an idea of the distance we are at. And sometimes during that attack someone suddenly appears at 30, 40 degrees and locks me, that's a sign to be on the defensive, like this I have absolutely no information about the situation in front of me.

Edited Wednesday at 08:34 PM by Dejan

[Revor]

This thread is a very good idea ! They should really implement it in the Mig29

[AeriaGloria]

It seems this may not be possible afterall. It seems that mini updates referred to type X only for blanking not blocking.,

Apparently the own radar would show up on RWR as type F. 
 

This would mean it might only be possible to see other 4th gen radars as F category in secondary threat green lights. 
 

Su-27, either from the larger spacing or better shielding must reduce the signal the RWR sees enough to be only type X. Which gives it a pretty good advantage. 
 

I apologize for getting hopes up 

Edited yesterday at 04:51 PM by AeriaGloria

[Dejan]

3 hours ago, AeriaGloria said:

It seems this may not be possible afterall. It seems that mini updates referred to type X only for blanking not blocking.,

Apparently the own radar would show up on RWR as type F. 
 

This would mean it might only be possible to see other 4th gen radars as F category in secondary threat green lights. 
 

Su-27, either from the larger spacing or better shielding must reduce the signal the RWR sees enough to be only type X. Which gives it a pretty good advantage. 
 

I apologize for getting hopes up 

Are you giving up?

[AeriaGloria]

1 hour ago, Dejan said:

Are you giving up?

Well, hard to say what giving up might be. 
 

On Su-27 it does show as X category, likely becuase its larger antenna has smaller backlobes and SPO antenna at a larger and lower distance. So when that module comes we should get F category at close range 

For MiG-29, I think ED is right that the vast majority had issues with SPO synch. And the numbers that had working synch must’ve been very small or nonexistent. 
 

The question then becomes, where between “not working” and “working” does it fall when the blocking wire is removed but not the blanker. There is 1 scenario ED is looking at where it might not show locking radars, and if you were in lock it might not work, but it would show all radars in search mode and with false emissions on SPO, and won’t show LPRF radars. 

luckily it’s short range means we don’t get many junk secondary threats from far away, so even we have to rely on seeing secondary threats, it’s not the worst. 

One thing I learned recently, move radar to “dummy/equivalent” while locked/searching. If locked the radar will go into memory mode. Move it back to “illum” as soon as SPO tells you what’s going on. If you do this fast enough the radar should always lock back on. The memory mode lasts about 6 seconds, so don’t take too long. 
 

The question is if R-27R/ER still guides after this if you do this in the middle of its flight time. In theory it should 

Edited 21 hours ago by AeriaGloria

[Dejan]

2 hours ago, AeriaGloria said:

Well, hard to say what giving up might be. 
 

 

For MiG-29, I think ED is right that the vast majority had issues with SPO synch. And the numbers that had working synch must’ve been very small or nonexistent. 
 

 

Wait a minute, so the MiG 29 had synchronization. The SPO worked in the front hemisphere together with the radar turned on. That's how it was designed and built? Did I understand this statement correctly?
If so, then I was right when I said that the ED modeled a broken plane for us. This gives me a feeling of bitterness because it seems to me that it was done with the intention of degrading the plane itself in the simulation based on the history of using the plane in the very bad period of the collapse of the Soviet Union and other user states that used it, all in order to confirm the claim in the simulation itself that the MiG 29 is a wreck of an airplane and a clay pigeon. We all know that Germany was reunified in 1990, those planes have been questionable since then regarding their maintainability, and there is also a big question mark over whether the Soviets deliberately sabotaged the remaining weapons during their withdrawal. They were then handed over to Poland, I don't know how and in what way they maintained them, oh yes, in Germany they were immediately converted to NATO standards. Perhaps Western engineers damaged the SPO devices, trying to repair them.
As we know, the MiG-29 was modeled for DCS based on those planes and documentation. What do the Russians say? Is it known? If they are silent, why don't they take the beginning of this text and make the plane the way it was designed and intended to work?
I would like to mention the fact that in every air force, except perhaps the American one, which has an enormous budget, a smaller number of planes are fully operational, precisely because of the sensitivity of the equipment and the lack of money in the budget. So there are always some semi-functional and some under repair in the hangar.
I hope you get my point?

[Kuky]

11 minutes ago, Dejan said:

Wait a minute, so the MiG 29 had synchronization. The SPO worked in the front hemisphere together with the radar turned on. That's how it was designed and built? Did I understand this statement correctly?
If so, then I was right when I said that the ED modeled a broken plane for us. This gives me a feeling of bitterness because it seems to me that it was done with the intention of degrading the plane itself in the simulation based on the history of using the plane in the very bad period of the collapse of the Soviet Union and other user states that used it, all in order to confirm the claim in the simulation itself that the MiG 29 is a wreck of an airplane and a clay pigeon. We all know that Germany was reunified in 1990, those planes have been questionable since then regarding their maintainability, and there is also a big question mark over whether the Soviets deliberately sabotaged the remaining weapons during their withdrawal. They were then handed over to Poland, I don't know how and in what way they maintained them, oh yes, in Germany they were immediately converted to NATO standards. Perhaps Western engineers damaged the SPO devices, trying to repair them.
As we know, the MiG-29 was modeled for DCS based on those planes and documentation. What do the Russians say? Is it known? If they are silent, why don't they take the beginning of this text and make the plane the way it was designed and intended to work?
I would like to mention the fact that in every air force, except perhaps the American one, which has an enormous budget, a smaller number of planes are fully operational, precisely because of the sensitivity of the equipment and the lack of money in the budget. So there are always some semi-functional and some under repair in the hangar.
I hope you get my point?

I get your point(s) and I am thinking in the exact same way

[AeriaGloria]

2 hours ago, Dejan said:

Wait a minute, so the MiG 29 had synchronization. The SPO worked in the front hemisphere together with the radar turned on. That's how it was designed and built? Did I understand this statement correctly?
If so, then I was right when I said that the ED modeled a broken plane for us. This gives me a feeling of bitterness because it seems to me that it was done with the intention of degrading the plane itself in the simulation based on the history of using the plane in the very bad period of the collapse of the Soviet Union and other user states that used it, all in order to confirm the claim in the simulation itself that the MiG 29 is a wreck of an airplane and a clay pigeon. We all know that Germany was reunified in 1990, those planes have been questionable since then regarding their maintainability, and there is also a big question mark over whether the Soviets deliberately sabotaged the remaining weapons during their withdrawal. They were then handed over to Poland, I don't know how and in what way they maintained them, oh yes, in Germany they were immediately converted to NATO standards. Perhaps Western engineers damaged the SPO devices, trying to repair them.
As we know, the MiG-29 was modeled for DCS based on those planes and documentation. What do the Russians say? Is it known? If they are silent, why don't they take the beginning of this text and make the plane the way it was designed and intended to work?
I would like to mention the fact that in every air force, except perhaps the American one, which has an enormous budget, a smaller number of planes are fully operational, precisely because of the sensitivity of the equipment and the lack of money in the budget. So there are always some semi-functional and some under repair in the hangar.
I hope you get my point?

It is not as simple as “does it have a synchronization circuit or not.”

 

As we have discussed in the SPO-15 feedback thread, ED has given a few explanations, and their explanations are based on both Polish and Russian documents and circuitry diagrams. It is not based on German aircraft, and in fact the main reference for the DCS MiG-29 was actually a Slovakian aircraft. 
 

As ED explained in their posts, the SPO-15 synchronization circuit was not designed for MiG-29, it was designed for MiG-23, which has a LPRF radar. Thus, it is not able to handle the much higher timings of the MPRF/HPRF radar. Su-27 manual gives the same restrictions of SPO-15 showing junk in all forward sectors with radar on. 
 

In addition their explanations go into the more specific timings of the circuitry that prevent having true radar-RWR synchronization. There is a very good reason it has a “blocking wire” from the Radar to RWR designed to block the front hemisphere during emission, which is described in their explanations. And we should get option to have blocking wire removed and see this “junk” and hope we can see secondary targets, so the “wish” of the thread is still my wish I haven’t given up hope on becuase secondary threats are still useful. 
 

I don’t think they were trying to make it weak or anything. You’re free to believe what you like but its issues of SPO and radar are well documented and spoken about. A training manual mentions “chaos” on SPO from radar and multiple air forces recommend straight up turning off the SPO when radar is on. 
 

I was scared at first but I have grown used to it, seeing a Sparrow launch visually is not a difficult thing as it’s a large and very smoky missile. It is good practice anyways to always assume you are being attacked if the enemy is within range and nose hot. 
 

Apparently during development the plan was to upgrade to Pastel SPO-32 RWR as soon as possible, it started development in 1981. SPO-15 was a short term solution essentially, but becuase of fall of Soviet Union those plans were not possible. 
 

Anyways, here are ED’s explanations, look in the last post of this thread and this post

https://forum.dcs.world/topic/378017-dcs-mig-29a-fulcrum-mini-updates/

 

“As for synchronization with radar, SPO-15 features a synchronization circuit on board 51, but it was designed for older radars such Sapfir-23. The principle of operation is the same as in older SPO-10, the receivers are blocked in rhythm with own radar's pulses. It cannot handle CW or HPRF signals (which trigger CW circuits anyway, followed by them being disabled completely in all channels once HPRF is recognized), so if they are emitted the affected hemisphere is shut down completely. According to electrical schematics for the aircraft, the N019 produces a single signal wire, which is used to block forward hemisphere, so that SPO can be left on and at least the rear hemisphere remains usable. Radio equipment manual confirms this. Full synchronization would require additional signals, so even if Cartridge 51 was modernized it would also require additional changes to wiring and to radar itself. Additionally every single channel in forward hemisphere on both boards #54 would need to be modified, so only CW signals were blocked, which is not avoidable. Failure of this system would cause the device to be flooded by own radar, making it completely unusable with radar on.”

Edited 16 hours ago by AeriaGloria

[Dejan]

I have used chat gpt several times to investigate these claims. The conclusion would be that ED is misinterpreting a lot of it. In the Service Manual, let's say there is a drawing that shows an additional ground strap on the SPO 15 cable duct, It is not a wire that blocks RF it is a ground braid, reducing electromagnetic penetration. There is a lot more, but it is pointless to waste time writing.

"That ED statement is incorrect or at least extremely misinterpreted. There is a phenomenon of interference with one's own radar, but not in the form of "chaos", not with "blocking the front hemisphere" and not with some wire that shuts down the sector. That is a misreading of a service note about grounding the cable line."

Edited 11 hours ago by Dejan

[Vakarian]

6 minutes ago, Dejan said:

I have used chat gpt several times to investigate these claims.

This basically kills all the credibility you had

[BIGNEWY]

11 minutes ago, Dejan said:

I have used chat gpt several times to investigate these claims. The conclusion would be that ED is misinterpreting a lot of it. In the Service Manual, let's say there is a drawing that shows an additional ground strap on the SPO 15 cable duct, It is not a wire that blocks RF it is a ground braid, reducing electromagnetic penetration. There is a lot more, but it is pointless to waste time writing.

"That ED statement is incorrect or at least extremely misinterpreted. There is a phenomenon of interference with one's own radar, but not in the form of "chaos", not with "blocking the front hemisphere" and not with some wire that shuts down the sector. That is a misreading of a service note about grounding the cable line."

As mentioned before my inbox is open, when someone has evidence I am happy to share it with the team. 

Chat GPT isnt going to help here. 

thank you 

[AeriaGloria]

2 hours ago, Dejan said:

I have used chat gpt several times to investigate these claims. The conclusion would be that ED is misinterpreting a lot of it. In the Service Manual, let's say there is a drawing that shows an additional ground strap on the SPO 15 cable duct, It is not a wire that blocks RF it is a ground braid, reducing electromagnetic penetration. There is a lot more, but it is pointless to waste time writing.

"That ED statement is incorrect or at least extremely misinterpreted. There is a phenomenon of interference with one's own radar, but not in the form of "chaos", not with "blocking the front hemisphere" and not with some wire that shuts down the sector. That is a misreading of a service note about grounding the cable line."

I have talked to multiple pilots who mentioned the SPO-15 being filled with junk when the radar was on. You can see circuitry diagrams ED posted with Polish and German descriptions showing a direct connection between different Radar/CPU blocks and RWR blocks. They are not unconnected braids. 
 

It is clear that if synching did work, it must’ve been a small amount of aircraft and a temporary period. For those that have own radar interference, there is likely even plenty variation between airframes with some showing more or less radar interference then others. And ED might still model one of these examples that had the blocking wire removed (or imperfect blanking) that while not perfect still allows you to get some use from SPO if you ignore false readings. 
 

I believe that you can still kick ass in the Fulcrum, it just takes some practice and getting used to. 

[Dača]

AI can only summerize information from forums and publicly available data. It is not SME, has no real world experience and relies on good documentation. It is very good tool, but it does not create. It manipulates data better. This is where it should be used. In DCS we need real SMEs. But not aircraft geek, but actual pilots, engineers, ground crew... Without those guys no one can claim that "they" are legit source.

[Kuky]

One must always use common sense too

[Dača]

1 hour ago, Kuky said:

One must always use common sense too

Common sense of course, but it does not generate aircraft production technology. In this case.