IFF

[GGTharos]

So what happens if battle damage takes out your IFF?

[cichlidfan]

So what happens if battle damage takes out your IFF?

 

You get to practice your 'startup procedure' again. :D

[Weta43]

My opinion is that you should write the code for this and see how easy or hard it is for yourself.

It's not easy to code full physics flight models & in depth modelling of fuel, hydralic and electrical systems - E.D. did that. Sure there are 'wrinkles', but that's what E.D. do for a living - deliver good solutions to difficult problems.

 

Imperfect suggestion off the cuff -

 

An alternative might be to extend & use the ROE system & IFF for AI that already exists - & have 3 states of transponder status - friendly (all friendly AI + any human with the correct IFF transponder code), unknown (essentially humans that forget to turn on the IFF transponder) and Enemy (Opposing AI & Opposing human with IFF on)

 

Have a trigger that lets you toggle IA IFF on / off (for the confusing of human players)

 

 

New base ROE:

Infantry and Armour will 'use visual ID' - you could default to if they can detect an air unit, they can tell which side it is.

Airborne & BVR AI will ignore friendlies with IFF transponder on (AI or human).

 

For Airborne & BVR AI detecting humans with their IFF off, and enemy AI : the detecting AI (planes, ATC, SAM radar) that have detected Humans with IFF off could use the guard channel (where the module has one) or the ATC channel for FC3 to request an ID, and the player could then turn on their IFF to avoid future confusion & use a sub menu in the radio to give an appropriate response. If the player doesn't respond appropriately within a time / range limit, or he locks a 'friendly' unit, the AI fires.

If the human isn't monitoring the channel, or ignores the request - bad luck.

If the AI detects enemy AI - just assume they were asked nicely to say who they were as they entered detection range, and engage at will once in range :-)

 

If a human player detects an aircraft with it's IFF off, or that doesn't respond because it's hostile (AI or Human) - lock them, hail on the guard channel through that new menu. If they're human (& monitoring the guard channel) - they'll respond. If they're friendly AI, have then turn the IFF on long enough to re-assure the player. If they don't respond at all (cause they're human and not listening, or enemy AI - you don't know which) then it's the player's call...

 

ROE state 2 : For more aggressive action, have a ROE that can be set for hot areas where anyone without a friendly IFF on will be attacked by AI.

Edited January 25, 2013 by Weta43

[Cali]

So what happens if battle damage takes out your IFF?

 

You get to practice your 'startup procedure' again. :D

 

 

LMAO, I'm crying over here! :megalol:

[Kaiza]

All that is required for DCS is 4 digit codes for mode 4 thats all nothing else.

 

Well that's not how mode 4 works in reality so I am not sure why they would model it this way? How would players load codes? This isn't done in the control head.

 

Same problem with singcars, havequick, cypher, etc

Edited January 25, 2013 by Kaiza

[SUBS17]

All the player has to do is change the number thats all thats required nothing else is needed in the A-10C you can change those numbers but its yet to affect the sim enviroment. BTW HAVEQUICK could be modelled like TARs for Teamspeak.

 

So what happens if battle damage takes out your IFF?

 

You can have the mission scripted to react to the loss of IFF so that can involve calling the AWACs and then informing them could give a temporary friendly for the AI. Or aircraft recognition so a visual ID confirms a friendly response but BVR you could still get shot down. There is alot of options in the ME as to how something like that could be handled.

[Eddie]

The "numbers" you keep referencing are mode 1, 2 & 3, mode 4 codes however which are what really matter when it comes to determining an interrogated contact is friendly or unknown are loaded by ground crew and pilots can't change them from the cockpit. The most they can do is flick the wrong switch and either switch off the system and/or erase the codes altogether. And once they are gone, they are gone.

 

Also, what does TARS have to do with HaveQuick? Don't really get that point.

[SUBS17]

The "numbers" you keep referencing are mode 1, 2 & 3, mode 4 codes however which are what really matter when it comes to determining an interrogated contact is friendly or unknown are loaded by ground crew and pilots can't change them from the cockpit. The most they can do is flick the wrong switch and either switch off the system and/or erase the codes altogether. And once they are gone, they are gone.

 

Also, what does TARS have to do with HaveQuick? Don't really get that point.

 

Mode 4 codes are changable by the pilot either code group A or code group B

so if the ME were to have coalition IFF code red A, red B and Blue A and Blue B would make Mode 4 usable within the DCS enviroment. A and B are switched based on time/location etc so in the sim you could have this and then later expand it to the other modes depending on how detailed ED wants to make it but for now red A, red B, blue A, blue B would do the job and everyone would be quite happy with that IMO.:thumbup:

As for HAVQUICK that could be modeled into TARS if anyone wanted to add something like that and basically it would function similar to whats in the IFF except it would effect TARs and AI. So both would require a dtc setup in the mission planner and it would have to be on the mission briefing for this stuff to work.

[Eddie]

HaveQuick would be totally pointless in DCS, given that communications jamming isn't in DCS either. And without comms jamming, why model anti jamming.

 

Not to mention that fact that nobody (well very few) are going to want to have to worry about setting up HaveQuick ToD and WoD every time they fly.

[SUBS17]

HaveQuick would be totally pointless in DCS, given that communications jamming isn't in DCS either. And without comms jamming, why model anti jamming.

 

Not to mention that fact that nobody (well very few) are going to want to have to worry about setting up HaveQuick ToD and WoD every time they fly.

 

It depends maybe its a feature that could be added someday to add more to the sim its not as big a deal as it sounds.(which is why I mentioned TARs) You're not trying to model anti-jamming its just to make the aircraft look like everything is modelled. Same goes for the IFF although IFF is more practical and necessary for the sim.

[Xeno426]

If the AI detects enemy AI - just assume they were asked nicely to say who they were as they entered detection range, and engage at will once in range :-)

I prefer to think they issued a batchall. :D

Edited January 29, 2013 by Xeno426
added link

[howie87]

Cool description of exactly what IFF does and how it works on an F-15 here http://www.f-15e.info/joomla/technology/avionics/66-iff-system

 

Seems like the actual function of IFF could be simulated in DCS. Looks like only the codes themselves are classified.

Edited December 4, 2013 by howie87

[GGTharos]

They don't describe mode S or 5 in there: http://telinstrument.com/avionics-news/industry-articles/101-iff-and-mode-5-past-present-and-future.html

 

There are certainly a lot of details missing, and there is nothing said about possible IFF failure modes which could give you a friend for an enemy or enemy for a friend.

[Revan]

It seems that everyone here is complaining that the actual IFF codes are classified, so just make the blue teams code like 1234, and Red teams code like 5678?

 

wouldn't that work? or have i totally missed the way IFF works?

[SUBS17]

Theres more to it than just red/blue there is also squak codes etc (mode 3C) but it would be very cool to have IFF work in DCS. :thumbup:

[towsim]

http://ariescon.com/changeLog.pdf

[Eddie]

or have i totally missed the way IFF works?

 

You've totally missed the way IFF works.

 

Military aircraft use all 7 (or 5 depending on the age of aircraft) modes, so they all need to be modelled. Even aircraft without interrogators (most of them) need the transponder functions modelled, to enable them to be interrogated by others. Then you have to decide how to handle things for the FC3 level aircraft.

 

The big hurdle isn't simply enabling the cockpit controls, but designing and developing a systems for the AI (both air and surface) to use IFF in a tactical sense.

 

There is nothing preventing IFF being modelled from a security classification point of view, what it does and even how it does it is no secret. And there is no need whatsoever to know the protected aspects in order to model it in a sim. The only hurdle really is development resources.

[howie87]

But surely the AI 'knows' when aircraft are friendly? I guess the issue is getting the AI units to interrogate player controlled aircraft and fail to identify you as friendly if your IFF isn't set up correctly?

[Eddie]

But surely the AI 'knows' when aircraft are friendly?

 

Exactly, and that is the problem.

 

You need a system where the AI goes through the process of classifying and identifying unknown contacts. As well as what to do should a contact not be classified friendly.

 

The big thing to think about is something that many forget (or don't know in the first place) IFF can only ever confirm friendly, it cannot, and does not determine someone is hostile.

 

You need to have a set of conditions, which can classify a contact as hostile, depending on a chosen RoE.

 

For example., how do you handle a friendly aircraft with an IFF transponder failure, what do you do to prevent it being fired on by its own side's GBAD or CAP?

[GGTharos]

I will point out that while this would be great for -some- players, it would be a feature just like bird strikes: People turn it off because they don't want to have to deal with friendlies shooting at them 'cause they didn't know the corridor/speed/whatever to fly etc.

 

Not only that, but now very complex ID methods would have to be programmed - things that seem simple to us, but are not so simple in programming a game. Not that they can't be done, but it's a huge amount of effort for this specific feature.

 

IMHO, IFF should come only after AI is very thoroughly revamped.

[Supersheep]

One of my professors often says "The world is stochastic.". True, especially here. Or not, which is the problem.

[howie87]

IMHO, IFF should come only after AI is very thoroughly revamped.

 

I think we'll need it when we have a high fidelity fighter. The FC3 aircraft should have a simple system though. Even one that's always 100% accurate at identifying friendlies (from a reasonable range). It would make air combat less confusing.

[GGTharos]

No, you won't need it when you have a high fidelity fighter, and it is not useful until the AI is revamped to deal with it.

 

And what's this about a reasonable range? It's a radio transponder, if you see it on radar you can reach it with the interrogator.

 

I think we'll need it when we have a high fidelity fighter. The FC3 aircraft should have a simple system though. Even one that's always 100% accurate at identifying friendlies (from a reasonable range). It would make air combat less confusing.

[howie87]

No, you won't need it when you have a high fidelity fighter, and it is not useful until the AI is revamped to deal with it.

 

And what's this about a reasonable range? It's a radio transponder, if you see it on radar you can reach it with the interrogator.

 

It is useful because you could identify friendly aircraft. How can you possibly say that's not useful?!

 

Instead of a reasonable range how about a delay of a few seconds between a target appearing on radar and it being interrogated automatically? That would suffice for FC3. The AI already knows anyway so why shouldn't we?

[GGTharos]

I think you're confused.

 

People here are talking about implementing a realistic IFF system with all that this entails, as opposed to the 'all knowing' system already in place.

 

Also, why a delay? Stop making stuff up :P