S77th-konkussion Posted August 26, 2005 Share Posted August 26, 2005 You're both right. The cannon method of IFF does work in 1.02, and it does NOT in 1.1. :) [sIGPIC]http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=43337&d=1287169113[/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 As it has been said already, IFF will be limited by your aircraft's radar gimbals. IFF antennae are, many times, mounted directly on the plate (around the perimeter of the plate) of the interrogator aircraft. IFF interrogations will produce an RWR warning...heh...but I guess that ground has already been covered. ;) Many times, the interrogator actually requires a primary contact in order to radiate interrogation pulses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Asterix28573 Posted August 27, 2005 Author Share Posted August 27, 2005 As it has been said already, IFF will be limited by your aircraft's radar gimbals. IFF antennae are, many times, mounted directly on the plate (around the perimeter of the plate) of the interrogator aircraft. IFF interrogations will produce an RWR warning...heh...but I guess that ground has already been covered. ;) Many times, the interrogator actually requires a primary contact in order to radiate interrogation pulses. Hi, Thanks a lot. This is all I wanna know when I started the thread :D. Cheers, Asterix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUBS17 Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 As it has been said already, IFF will be limited by your aircraft's radar gimbals. IFF antennae are, many times, mounted directly on the plate (around the perimeter of the plate) of the interrogator aircraft. IFF interrogations will produce an RWR warning...heh...but I guess that ground has already been covered. ;) Many times, the interrogator actually requires a primary contact in order to radiate interrogation pulses. In other words you have to let the IFF know where the aircraft is to squak it, eg paint it with radar, but with EOS thats a passive lock so you have to rely on aircraft recognition and markings to id. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 It'll be really cool when the military starts using something similar to Capstone for target ID. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prophet_169th Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 Really??? I have got to test it! What does it have to do with missile type? It shouldnt, but I havent tried with an ER, and I have heard that trying this with an ER produces a lock warning. Might have something to do with the slaving of the missle to the radar? Not sure, since its not supposed to work that way anyways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
169th_Crusty Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 In other words you have to let the IFF know where the aircraft is to squak it, eg paint it with radar, but with EOS thats a passive lock so you have to rely on aircraft recognition and markings to id. Yes, it`s always good to know where your target is but the IFF interrogator can also work with the radar off or in standby (Line of Sight or Full Scan modes). Even with the EMCON switch on (total emmission silence) the pilot can operate the interrogator part of the IFF "manually", however all other transponder functions are inhibited. Nobody can ID you. And...getting back to already "covered ground"... the target will know he`s being interrogated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted August 27, 2005 Share Posted August 27, 2005 I would think that the radar would at least have to be in Standby for a manual interrogation, otherwise the plate and its IFF antennae would be stationary. I could be wrong though. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit_Radar_Dude Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 IRL, you can set up your cockpit IFF panel to respond/inhibit for each Mode. When a shooting war kicks off, likely SOP for pilots would be to only respond to Mode 4 interrogations as these are encrypted and hence the bad guys have a slim chance of making your transponder reply. The only responses you would give would be to the interrogations from friendlies and SOP is for Mode 4 to be used sparingly. The usual design on ground radars (can't speak on airborne radars, not my field) is for the radar not to interrogate Mode 4, except when the operator presses a button or designates a particular aircraft or sector of the sky to be interrogated for a single scan. Some systems, once he replies friendly, then as long as the system continually tracks him, it will remember he is a friendly. Mode 4 is a 1950's / 1960's era technology and whilst it has a measure of encryption and security, it is rather long in the tooth. Here is an annotated pic of a Lockon A-10 IFF panel, indicating the individual Mode enable switches. Chose A-10 as it is a bit embarrassing for ED if I show the F-15 IFF panel - it has a Mode 3/A value of 0083..... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Sorry Death, you lose! It was Professor Plum.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted August 28, 2005 Share Posted August 28, 2005 Cool! :cool: SSRs my thing too (actually...I work on the transponder end of things), I have never done any IRL work with IFF transponders though, just the usual ATCRBS. :beer: Some of the new stuff coming on-line is pretty impressive, like TIS and Capstone, although those capabilities don't rely on L-band. Heh...BTW...I owe my life to TCAS, literally. :eek: Just so everyone knows, Mode C in BRD's post refers to encoded altitude information transmitted by the transponder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts