ECM in Lock On Vs F4 - Realism question...

[SwingKid]

 

-SK

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

Starlight, what you say is true, by active jamming I am assumed you are meaning spot jamming, barrage jamming etc. Just to be pedantic, deception jamming should also be included in your overall "Active" jamming term as it involves transmission of signals as opposed to passive (non-transmission) jamming - chaff, decoys. But my understanding is that Lockon only models deception jamming - or am I wrong?

 

I thought that the Lockon Sim assumes that high power spot (single freq) and barrage (multiple freq) jamming would not be performed by the fighter aircraft it models. Maybe they will add EA-6B Prowler and equivalent aircraft for the other nations in the future and expand on the ECM side of the simulation.

 

Weta43 - in the simplest terms, you measure the target range purely from timing, ie. send a ping, wait, hear the "pong", calculate the range from the time twixt ping and pong. The received signal strength may be used for other things, signal to noise ratio, false alarm rate calculations, etc. but not range.

Not worked on such systems personally, but your figure of 5kW for jammer output sounds much too high for deception jamming.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Nautical miles is 6076 feet. Not that it would make a significant difference in burn-through range though...a little over 10 feet in this case. ;)

[Weta43]

My understanding the radar sends out a pulse of a particular "signature" waveform (signature in the sense that from it you can derive what type of radar it is, but variable enough that the radar can pick it's own return from a wingman's & one pulse from another) and from the radar reflection's delay the range can be found, the frequency (dopler) shift gives the target's speed relative to the sender and the strength of the return in conjunction with the range gives - if not the size of the object, at least an indication of the RCS (indicated on the Russian planes HUD's by the number of bars in the return.

Surely the jammer would vary each of these within the entire range of possible returns ?

So the delay would be varied such that the target is somewhere between either 0m & infinity or its actual distance & infinity (depending on whether the jammer can predict the waveform & "beat the radar to the gun" or has to receive, process & respond)

The doppler shift would vary between approaching very fast & receding very fast,

And the strenth of the signal would vary between that of a very big target up close & a small target at maximum range.

If I am at maximum range from the radar emmiter, but relatively close to a jammer that is cycling through various strengths of false returns, my guess is that some of those false returns are likely to be stronger than the radar signals that are triggering them (if my intention is to have them arrive back at the sender as strong as those of a large target up close).

In that case I think my RWR would at least for some portions of any given second see the jammer as a stronger source of radar signal than the radar the jammer is jamming, and warn me of that radar.

Which brings me back to saying that at EOS ranges a target jamming a distant radar is probably giving off a stronger signal where I am than the original radar.

(the torch in my hand shines brighter than the lighthouse on the horizon...)

[Weta43]

Swingkid - can you calculate the field strength of a radar at 100km, & then at what distance the signal from a 1kw omnidirectional emmiter = that field strength, 'cause that's the answer to the question (I'll take advice & drop the power output from 5kw to 1kw, which is the figure used above.)

[sunwolf]

I think that the noise-ECM should display on TEWS or RWR,the cheat-ECM shouldn't not.

But what type radar is the noise-ECM in TEWS's threat list?lol.

It seem that the game only sim the cheat-ECM mode.

[Brit_Radar_Dude]

Mile = 5280ft

International Nm = 6076ft

UK nautical mile = 6080ft

Data Mile = 6000ft

 

Data mile is used by the radar systems of many countries armed forces. This may be why Swingkid's diagram used 6000ft........

[Guest IguanaKing]

Roger that. Just being a smartarse. :icon_twis

[LaRata]

Hello :

 

 

For the sim Lock-On we can see the ECM " AN " in the HUD is ECM are present using the EOS system .

 

[Guest IguanaKing]

Looks more like "AP" to me. ;)

[169th_Crusty]

Mile = 5280ft

International Nm = 6076ft

UK nautical mile = 6080ft

Data Mile = 6000ft

 

Data mile is used by the radar systems of many countries armed forces. This may be why Swingkid's diagram used 6000ft........

 

Just a little footnote to this diagram. It came from the "Introduction to

Airborne Radar" - a must read. (well, it is a required reading in many places...)

[SwingKid]

Swingkid - can you calculate the field strength of a radar at 100km, & then at what distance the signal from a 1kw omnidirectional emmiter = that field strength, 'cause that's the answer to the question (I'll take advice & drop the power output from 5kw to 1kw, which is the figure used above.)

 

According to my rough calculation, for this case that you describe, the jammer should be within 4 km. Note however that the 1 kW in the problem is typical for a standoff jammer.

 

-SK

[Weta43]

Thanks swingkid.

I saw from the article that the example was actually a second plane doing the jamming, and that this was probably a fairly high power output to use, but I figured that getting a "best case" for the jammer would show whether or not this was something worth worying about..

4km is pretty close, and that's the farthest from the jammer that your RWR is going to pick the jammer over the original radar - while the radar is still a long way off.

Bring the radar closer & that range is going to keep shrinking...

So while there may be occasions where you could get the jammer showing on your RWR instead of the radar, those occasions are going to be pretty few & far between & not going to play a major tactical part in the sim.

(Except if it's deception jamming and it's your wingman that's got the jammer on, & then when he starts jamming he'll show on your RWR as a bandit... Even assuming directional jamming if you're both close & you're between him & the radar he should light up your RWR as a bandit. )

[raptorman]

I just got directed by someone to this thread, so time to add my 2 cent :)

First, the title of the article is "Using The Jammer In Falcon 4 Allied Force", so using this article to proof that Lomac is wrong won't work, unless you see Falcon as 100% realistic, which isn't true.

 

I just read the referenced part of Raptorman's article and, with all due respect to him, I'm going to have to raise the BS flag. It would seem, from what I have read so far, that he has a very simplified view of how radar works...and if that is what he is going on to write that article, well, I don't think I trust it. I like both F4 and LOMAC, they both have their pros and cons in the area of realism, but I really don't think that article should be taken too seriously.

 

You call it BS, a Prowler ECMO called the thread this article is based on required reading for all those that aspire to maximize the realism of this sim. Again keep in mind that it was never my intention to give a detailed explanation on how a radar in real life works, but to help simmers who wanted to get the most out of their F16 jammer in Falcon 4.

 

Now it's my time to ask a question. What jamming techniques are included in Lomac? Inverse gain, swept square wave jamming, velocity deception... or just generic jamming?

 

Raptorman

[GGTharos]

Just generic jamming (range jamming basically - range denial)

 

Nothing else - although the jammer does have some interesting properties that can make it effective in some MP situation (like masking other aircraft in your flight, or disrupting lock)

[golfsierra2]

you can't put your radar on standby in lomac, and ecm doesn't work like a candle in real life (it does in sims).

Well, it depends..

 

A somewhat weak self-screening built-in jammer (like in a MIg29) does not have that much power, however a dedicated jam-pod carried underwing has power to jam radars for a good 100 km. It will be 'like a candle' for radars in passive mode and -of course - it will be a perfect target for missile in HOJ mode.

 

I'm glad, we don't see any Ravens (F-111) in Lock-On - you won't be able to lock or see anything above whole Crimea....

[SwingKid]

Hi Raptorman,

 

First let me say welcome to our forum, and thanks for your article! I often visit the Frugalsworld board for a second opinion, and notwithstanding some of my earlier comments in this thread, there are many knowledgeable posters there. Even the topic I linked, that at first didn't get any replies, eventually evolved into a fascinating discussion.

 

The radar in Lock On is IMHO more complex than in Falcon 4 - there are two doppler notches modelled that vary according to fighter/radar type, and sidelobe noise that affects detection range at low altitude - realistic features I've never seen in a sim before. The ECM on the other hand is not much more realistic than in Falcon 4. It seems to be a very wide-band, low-power pure-noise jamming that is modelled, allowing bearing-only tracking and also a significant burn-through range. At least, it looks a little nicer and easier to recognize in the HUD and HDD, nice vertical strobes that you can lock onto without any range information at all. If I'm not mistaken, an ECM target co-bearing with a non-ECM target can even mask it with its own jamming - something I don't think is implemented in F4.

 

My personal gripe is that we often get requests for ECCM features that lack a solid understanding of ECM in the first place. I would love to see the ECM in Lock On improved so that you could no longer make lofted-missile attacks on ECM targets, and so that you would need to use triangulation maneuvering to compute the range to an ECM emitter, but if there is a 25-nm burn-through range as exists in other sims, none of that ECCM stuff is ever going to make sense. Sometimes people seem to want to carry over their favourite features from their own imagination, or from their other favourite sims - like "picking up ECM targets in Standby mode".

 

From your post it sounds like in addition to a detailed review of Falcon 4, you've also done some research of real-world techniques. Have you seen Stimson's "Introduction to Airborne Radar"? There are many interesting details in that book. I don't know why more sim makers don't try to use it, instead of inventing their own "abstract" ECM that is never quite realistic. It blows away a lot of the veil of official secrecy from the topic, and seems to be just waiting to be discovered and used by an enterprising team of programmers.

 

Thanks for interest,

 

-SK

[SwingKid]

What jamming techniques are included in Lomac? Inverse gain, swept square wave jamming, velocity deception... or just generic jamming?

 

Note that inverse gain and velocity deception are pretty useless against monopulse radars and seekers with AOJ and HOJ capability. I think something between a blinking noise jammer and a repeater is the best you can do in modern warfare, short of terrain-bounce and towed decoys.

 

-SK

[Yellonet]

Just generic jamming (range jamming basically - range denial)

 

Nothing else - although the jammer does have some interesting properties that can make it effective in some MP situation (like masking other aircraft in your flight, or disrupting lock)

Is this jammer (somewhat) realistic?

[raptorman]

Note that inverse gain and velocity deception are pretty useless against monopulse radars and seekers with AOJ and HOJ capability. I think something between a blinking noise jammer and a repeater is the best you can do in modern warfare, short of terrain-bounce and towed decoys.

 

-SK

 

Isn't inverse gain jamming quite effective against conical radars like AAA uses? I know it can be countered with CSORO or LORO, but even that can be countered again by the jammer.

[SwingKid]

Isn't inverse gain jamming quite effective against conical radars like AAA uses? I know it can be countered with CSORO or LORO, but even that can be countered again by the jammer.

 

That's why I think conical scan is obsolete. ZSU-23-4 Shilka now relies on backup optical tracking against slow-moving targets, or is retained for anti-infantry work, while Vulcans have been removed from US inventory altogether. AFAIK modern systems like Tunguska can no longer employ conical scan.

 

Of course, they still can in our sims, because our ECM is dumbed-down... ;)

 

-SK

[Guest IguanaKing]

Hi Raptorman,

 

I guess I took your article out of its intended context. :icon_redf It was seemingly being referenced here as conclusive proof that Falcon 4 was an accurate representation of reality, but I guess it wasn't you who drew that conclusion. Man...I've really got to tell myself that this is just a game. I had forgotten about this thread, but I did kinda stick my foot in my mouth there. My apologies to you, sir. :D

 

IK

[SUBS17]

Janes F/A-18s manual has some good descriptions on ECM. The types modeled in lockon and Falcon 4 are only limited to one area of ECM. ECM in F/A-18 covers more aspects of this.

NOISE Jamming

Basically what both lockon and F4 feature, produces noise and makes obtaining a lock harder until burnthrough is reached. Also is like a beacon as it reveals the presence and location of the jammer. Can be standoff or internal self protection. Jammers such as EA6B and EF111 use this to effect radars in a specific direction or area.

Gate Stealers

Effects mainly STT by sending back false radar returns in order to break lock by sending the gate into clutter.

Decoys

By using chaff and evasive manouvres can break a radar lock on the aircraft. The other type is towed decoys.

 

Just a few ideas here but why people choose to only compare lockon to F4 when Janes F/A-18 is still the one sim which models the most aspects of ECM.

[GGTharos]

LOMAC models decoys fairly well though - better than F4.

[SUBS17]

Which aircraft is carrying towed decoys?:o