Airborne jammers

[Vekkinho]

Well soon we'll get some A2A superiority fighters in DCS and I hope tactics shall change compared to a LOFC A2A missions.

 

If we're trying to go along with RL battlefield modernization then we should introduce some powerful ECM and ECCM birds to DCS. I'm hoping for a garbled radar scope when I fly A2A missions and I hope I'll see not only self protecting ECM payloads on fighter and strat bombers but also flights of ECM/ECCM/ELINT birds that would make your Super Flanker radar go berserk.

 

Is there any chance of it happening in future DCS addons?!

[GGTharos]

That's an interesting suggestion, but do you actually think people will accept such a degradation of BVR?

 

Further, what happens if one side ends up sporting older equipment than the other? You're flying blind and then ... boom. ;)

[sobek]

That's an interesting suggestion, but do you actually think people will accept such a degradation of BVR?

 

If they want realism, they are going to have to ;-). I always thought that US never allowed BVR engagements anyway due to the strict visual ID regulations.

[GGTharos]

Although there often can be VID restrictions, certain aircraft have an EID matrix (most notably F-15, F-18E, not to mention F-22's and F-35's) that permit them to engage BVR.

 

They also carry significant ECM/ECCM capability - so now we get into a huge argument of whose ECM/ECCM is better, eh? ;)

 

If they want realism, they are going to have to ;-). I always thought that US never allowed BVR engagements anyway due to the strict visual ID regulations.

[sobek]

EID matrix

 

Do you mean IFF interrogation capability? A premise would be that exact jamming capabilities were known so as to not spawn this foolish 'mines bigger' sort of discussion.

[GGTharos]

There's more than IFF interrogation that factors into it. Everything from knowing what airfrield you took off from, the direction you're coming from to IFF and NCTR.

 

Exact jamming capabilities being known is really not very realistic. I could come up with a useable and probably somewhat representative ECM/ECCM scheme, but if you flew anything soviet you'd end up being clubbed since your radar would show nothing, and the other guy's radar would just be degraded. ;) (Yeah yeah, I know, I'm biased :P )

[EinsteinEP]

I could come up with a useable and probably somewhat representative ECM/ECCM scheme' date=' but if you flew anything soviet you'd end up being clubbed since your radar would show nothing, and the other guy's radar would just be degraded.[/quote']And that would factor heavily into which tactics/strategy would be successful in an engagement, adding a fantastic level of depth to the game. I'm all for it. Mission designers could always opt to tweak the ECM/ECCM available to each side in a tradeoff between gameplay balance and realism, if it's really that lopsided (have no reason to doubt that it is), but I say give that decision to the gamers!

Edited September 29, 2009 by EinsteinEP
replace omitted statement

[GGTharos]

Yes, you could have a deliberately set up 'today this side's ECCM is working' condition, or just let it be random (With some parameters to define who is the more likely winner of the electronic struggle, etc) but I guarantee you that what you'll see is people whining that they have to use tactics, 'cause darnit, a MiG-29A should be able to take on an F-15C head on without having to do sneaky things like set up ambushes and whatnot.

 

People don't /want/ to use these planes like they would have been used in reality. They just want their favorite plane to win (Admittedly, I'm somewhat with them).

 

Most people won't realize that if you have a situation where you're facing off MiG-29A's v F-15C's, or F-16s v Su-27's, you really need to be working numbers and notches in those small aircraft, because the oppositions radar and BVR capabilities are completely overwhelming.

 

Your only hope is to effective sneak someone into the more advanced fighter's formation and start helmet-slinging them. This is what the SHLEM was made for - but will most people employ such tactics? No. As usual, in online play there will be no cohesion, just running head first into a bandit and then crying when you get our burner cans handed to you :)

[Boberro]

As usual, in online play there will be no cohesion, just running head first into a bandit and then crying when you get our burner cans handed to you :)

 

Of course it is too popular tactic to fly 1500 km\h, lock & fire 6 missiles within 2 seconds then run away 1800 km\h :D

[Vekkinho]

That's an interesting suggestion, but do you actually think people will accept such a degradation of BVR?

 

Further, what happens if one side ends up sporting older equipment than the other? You're flying blind and then ... boom. ;)

 

That's life, RL!

 

There's plenty servers out there, missions rotating, some of them servers might go for full realism missions with ECM clutter if they add some AI jammer aircraft in the map. On the other hand some missions in rotation should have none of it for weekend warriors.

[Vekkinho]

I could come up with a useable and probably somewhat representative ECM/ECCM scheme, but if you flew anything soviet you'd end up being clubbed since your radar would show nothing, and the other guy's radar would just be degraded. ;) (Yeah yeah, I know, I'm biased :P )

 

Come up with what you've got on it, provide your sources and noone should call you biased...on the other hand bear in mind there's more Red than Blue fliers in today's LOFC-MP club so "technology vs numbers" is a equation that might prevent all of Reds getting clubbed. Heh, it's a real East meets West picture!

[GGTharos]

Come up with what you've got on it, provide your sources and noone should call you biased...

 

There exist NO sources. ALL you might get about ECM/ECCM performance is and will be hearsay, period. NO SOURCES whatsoever. None. Zip, zilch, squat, nada. It's best guess and stuff you've heard.

You can make an educated guess about what a certain ecm technique will look like on a radar scope, generically. You can even reasonably guess that some ECM techniques are more effective vs. certain types of radars. And then, there's the ones you know nothing about.

In some cases, we can know which techniques a specific jammer uses.

In most, we're clueless.

 

on the other hand bear in mind there's more Red than Blue fliers in today's LOFC-MP club so "technology vs numbers" is a equation that might prevent all of Reds getting clubbed. Heh, it's a real East meets West picture!

 

Again, think deeper; there's no cohesion (on either side) so that F-15 4-ship you've set aside will end up as 4 separate ships doing their own thing. You put in fewer f-15's because they're 'better'. Okay, cool - I come in with my suqad to fly a 4-ship, but it's taken up. (But, but, fly another plane GG! No, thank you! )

 

What I'm trying to say is that 'the answer is obvious' but the problem itself is complex, because it involves people.

 

Best of all, it usually involves people whose clues about realistic combat flights are non-existent or misinterpreted or made up, or incomplete (or they just don't care).

 

The above is the real problem. Otherwise what you said would be exactly right.

[Vekkinho]

People don't /want/ to use these planes like they would have been used in reality. They just want their favorite plane to win (Admittedly, I'm somewhat with them).

 

Most people won't realize that if you have a situation where you're facing off MiG-29A's v F-15C's, or F-16s v Su-27's, you really need to be working numbers and notches in those small aircraft, because the oppositions radar and BVR capabilities are completely overwhelming.

 

Your only hope is to effective sneak someone into the more advanced fighter's formation and start helmet-slinging them. This is what the SHLEM was made for - but will most people employ such tactics? No. As usual, in online play there will be no cohesion, just running head first into a bandit and then crying when you get our burner cans handed to you :)

 

I said it before, that's the modern picture up there in the sky these days or lately, if one can't stand it one can choose a less demanding (less tactical) server.

 

I said "tech vs nr" shall be the case in MP as it was/is/should be IRL too. So both sides can learn from it and not from the Holywood movies being forced violently into their LOS! Learning curve would go steeper than it is ATM and the game won't be a game anymore but more interesting simulator asking for more attention and stick time than it does today.

 

Personally, I find more demanding things more interesting and interest doesn't wear out so quickly!

[Duke49th]

T As usual, in online play there will be no cohesion, just running head first into a bandit and then crying when you get our burner cans handed to you :)

 

 

Of course it is too popular tactic to fly 1500 km\h, lock & fire 6 missiles within 2 seconds then run away 1800 km\h :D

 

 

Not for us FALCON Pilots:music_whistling: NO chance for such a tactic, if you want to succesfull win the mission/campaign. (No matter if against Human or AI)

 

We are using different tactics.

Example:

Our(Squadron's) most popular tactic is, to counter rotating. 1&2 and 3&4 perform counter rotated attacks. 1&2 engaging, firing their (single) Missile, cranking left/right, then, after it is Pitbull, they go back and let 3&4 (which are 10-15 miles behind) advancing and shoot their missiles, if necessary. This is a good tactic against AI in Falcon.

 

But, we are also using some other tactics.;)

 

 

With a good simulation(with good simulated avionics, radar etc.), it is absolutley possible to see many server with people, using advanced BVR tactics. Why not?

[GGTharos]

Because it doesn't happen. That's all there is to it. And 'Not for us Falcon Pilots' ... hah. That's what you think :D

[th3flyboy]

I would actually prefer to see jamming like this, as DCS is about REALISM, so why not go for the maximum realism possible.

[GGTharos]

Okay. Find data on real jammers, see how far you get.

 

I would actually prefer to see jamming like this, as DCS is about REALISM, so why not go for the maximum realism possible.

[26-J39]

OMG... it aint to hard to figure out..... You can't have realism if you don't know what reality is!!!!

[Lava]

Okay, for anyone who's not getting what GGTharos is saying... ECM, ECCM, jamming, and radar systems in general are CLASSIFIED. They are black boxes, and I've read about pilots who don't even know what goes on in them, let alone software developers in another country.

 

They are considered prized secrets and anyone who told ED about them would most likely be arrested. Sheesh. We'll have to make do with whatever substitute ED can come up with, and it'll be quite usable and 'fun'. It won't however have the exact characteristics of the real thing!

(edit)

On the upside, you can all whine about how it's not 'balanced' and 'unrealistic' in an effort to get your MiG a bit better jamming capabilities ;-) I can hear it already!

Edited September 30, 2009 by Lava

[Vekkinho]

Okay, for anyone who's not getting what GGTharos is saying... ECM, ECCM, jamming, and radar systems in general are CLASSIFIED. They are black boxes, and I've read about pilots who don't even know what goes on in them, let alone software developers in another country.

 

They are considered prized secrets and anyone who told ED about them would most likely be arrested. Sheesh. We'll have to make do with whatever substitute ED can come up with, and it'll be quite usable and 'fun'. It won't however have the exact characteristics of the real thing!

(edit)

On the upside, you can all whine about how it's not 'balanced' and 'unrealistic' in an effort to get your MiG a bit better jamming capabilities ;-) I can hear it already!

 

If it's a MiG-29A than it's a MiG-29A, Guerilla fighter! Up against the odds!

[ericinexile]

Nice discussion. But this is what caught my attention...

 

Well soon we'll get some A2A superiority fighters in DCS...

 

That must mean soon on a geological scale.

 

Smokin' Hole

[GGTharos]

... of a conquerable planet in your favourite RTS?

 

That must mean soon on a geological scale.

 

Smokin' Hole