Question regarding Chaff/ALQ

[112th_Rossi]

Scenario:

 

I am approaching an enemy target area. There is a radar guided sam site near by. It starts tracking me, so I drop chaff. Is this the right thing to do? Is chaff only usefull for trying to evade an incomming radar missile or breaking a lock or both? How does the ALQ ECM react to these situations and do I need to do anything to make it more effective?

 

At the moment, as soon as I hear a radar has locked on to me I start dropping chaff and turn away and put the threat on my six, unless I am close enough to the target to risk an attack.

[badger66]

Chaff confuses the rader image of your aircraft , so in theory makes it more difficult for the enemy radar to get a lock .

 

Its not the issue that your close enough for the radar to track you , its issue is weather your close enough to launch ..... you can be tracked by their AWACS , and theres nothing you can really do about that except try and mask yourself with local terrain .

[112th_Rossi]

Would dropping chaff delay the ability for a SAM to launch its missiles or once I am being tracked is it too late?

[Jona33]

Would dropping chaff delay the ability for a SAM to launch its missiles or once I am being tracked is it too late?

 

It may be able to help, in Strike Eagle (a book) one aircraft was egressing and a Mig locked them. Everytime they dropped Chaff the mig lost lock and then had to lock them again. More sophisticated SAM's probably won't be fooled as easily but it might help.

[Razor5-1]

I'm not 100% if it's modeled but chaff should disrupt a radar. This would work best on something like a shilka. Larger more powerful radars will simply burn through the chaff and the ECM pod.

[Supersheep]

There is a thread around somewhere that found out that pre-launch dropping of chaff/flare is not useful, but enabling the jammer is a good way to delay the radar lock.

 

Keep in mind that a jammer will shut off after a time (and overheat, not sure of the in-sim behaviour).

 

 

Super-

[xxJohnxx]

Doesn't it only shut of, if the radar lock brakes for more than 15 seconds?

[Jona33]

Doesn't it only shut of, if the radar lock brakes for more than 15 seconds?

 

In auto mode yes but personally but I prefer manual mode.

[112th_Rossi]

There is a thread around somewhere that found out that pre-launch dropping of chaff/flare is not useful, but enabling the jammer is a good way to delay the radar lock.

 

Keep in mind that a jammer will shut off after a time (and overheat, not sure of the in-sim behaviour).

 

 

Super-

 

I was under the impression it was passive? So I need to switch it on?

[Razor5-1]

Yes it's the minus key by default. It will only turn on when a launch is detected in auto.

[112th_Rossi]

Oh right

 

myKnowledge += 1

 

Thanks

[Corrigan]

Yeah, press down CMS on the Warthog.

[112th_Rossi]

Ok I was doing that. It dumps chaff too right?

[Razor5-1]

No that is CMS forward, 7 on the keyboard by default. Depending on the program too. Might only be flare or vice versa

[Supersheep]

Jammer on = DMS in (press whole hat down, not the funtion down like on the TMS).

 

 

Super-

[badger66]

I'm not 100% if it's modeled but chaff should disrupt a radar. This would work best on something like a shilka. Larger more powerful radars will simply burn through the chaff and the ECM pod.

 

The closer you are to the emitting radar , the greater the chance of bruning through , I guess as their signal would be then stronger .

[Corrigan]

Jammer on = DMS in (press whole hat down, not the funtion down like on the TMS).

 

 

Super-

 

CMS*

[WildBillKelsoe]

CMS IN (push inside stick) to activate ALQ-131

[Ironhand]

I had a few minutes and was looking through some of the topics and saw this. For what it's worth, chaff alone isn't going to do much against Doppler radars. They have little trouble separating the chaff from the aircraft in most instances. The time to use it, if at all, is after you have been launched on. Chaff will be most effective, when used in conjunction with ECM and maneuver. You are trying to confuse the issue for those fractions of a second that will close the window on the SAM. If you happen to decoy the missile completely, so much the better.

 

I haven't spent much time with the A-10 and I don't know much about the modeling of its systems--not even how to use most of them--ECM and chaff/flares among the latter. I do know that, in the hour or so, I spent dancing with SAMs (Tunguskas and Osas and, I believe a Tor) I didn't use chaff or flares. I don't know if the ALQ was on. I didn't turn it on but it might be on by default when you start a flight in the air. At any rate, out of 20 or so launches, none tagged me.

 

The point of this is not to brag but, rather, to say that's it's all about time. The more of it you have, the safer you are. Once a launch occurs, the clock starts ticking. The SAM has so many seconds to reach you before it won't have enough energy to ever reach you. With enough time, you can neuter any SAM. That's why I was practicing against radar-guided SAMs. For the most part, they engage you with enough range that, unless you ignore them, you can escape.

 

That's one of the things that makes manpads and other IR platforms so dangerous. They are, by nature, short-range and have enough giddyup to reach you in a hurry. And they don't broadcast their presence with a search radar.

 

 

Rich

[xxJohnxx]

Hopfully, in some time, it won't be so easy to detect such SAMs (Tunguska, Tor, etc.) with your RWR, as maybe one day when an IADS simulation will come in DCS, they start going on air with their radar when you are 3 to 4 clicks out. :thumbup:

 

Back to topic:

Pre launch dropped chaff is probably pretty usless, especially if you don't manuver.

Pre launch the Jammer may is able to reduce the range at which the SAM fires at you, but better stay away anyways.

Continusly jamming is probably, even without a radar lock, is proably the stupiedst thing to do. Sombody once wrote, here in this forums, I fell free to quote him right here:

 

If you are in the jungle and nobody should see you, do you really want to scream, continuslly?

 

As the jammer gives away your position very easily, and every radar operator who wasn't able to spot you on his screen, will do so right then.

And, you may not ignore the fact that even old russian SAM systems, like the SA-5 where able to engage a jamming target at normal range. The only thing they needed was your altitude, often not mattering if it was inacurate like 2 or 3 clicks. As they had an altitude, the system calculates the distance from you to the missile, and once you were within range, the missile could be fired. And if your MWS didn't pick it up, you won't even notice it, until it arrives obviously. ;)

Because the SA-5 missile carried a guidance radar, which made it possible to home on a jammer.

Also systems like the SA-3 have the ability to shoot you, altough you are jamming. The first is, again dependend on your altitude or range. If the operator could gatter one of the two (range or altitude), you are toast, or at least you get serious trubble. And again, you won't notice that the radar is tracking you, as it doesn't has to emmit, just to recive your jamming is enough to track you, without you noticing.

However, even the SA-3 operator can't get any altitude or range information from anybody, he is still not lost. As you get closer to the radar, the reflected electromagneticall waves, which the radar uses to find your position, are stronger than your jammer, as your ALQ does not have the same power as a tracking radar has, and even if lot's of power is lost, at one point the reflections will be stronger than the signals sended out by the jammer. When minding the size of the A-10, you have to be close to the SA-3, unfortunatly you are probably so close that the missile will have it's rocket motor still burning when it hits you. Bad for you, as you have to defend a missile with maximum cinetic energy, and not one just creeping slowly trough the air, at maximum range. Your jammer won't help you anymore, as it can't overpower the radar at that position, it maybe even makes it worse, and you have to do some good flying to defeat that SAM with Chaff.

Then again, you probably get Toast (at least in the A-10).

Up to now, I have written about old SAM systems, imagine that there are lot's of newer systems with even better performance against you.

 

But back to DCS A-10

 

The best use of jamming probably is after the SAM launched the missile. Then you should concentrate to move yourself to a position where the SAM can't hit you, behind a hill if there is any, or try to get in a position where you can defeat the missile shortly before it impacts.

A good tactic is to put it on your 3 or 9 o'clock, with help of the RWR and MWS and then try to spot it.

Once you see it, try to wait until it get's close and then roll to one side, and fly a tight courve, if possible away from the missile and especially the SAM. Start dropping chaff when you start your turn, as if you drop it earlier, it is just wasted, as you won't spoof any radar.

The manuver, the jammer and dropping chaff, altogether may breaks the radar lock, or makes the missile to fly past you, as it is out of energy or it may chases a chaff.

However, there is always a chance that you get hit. It is probably better to just turn arround once you get an RWR spike or to call in SEAD. :smilewink:

 

But always keep in mind, even if you can defend the missile of a long range SAM, a medium range SAM, or a Tunguska, Tor, OSA, whatever, there is always somebody sitting arround on a rooftop, waiting the whole week for an aircraft to fly by, who will be happy if you fly arround 200 feet above him, trying to mask the SAM's radar, shooting an Igla right in your face.

You may not even be able to pick the right CMS programm at all. Just keep that in mind. :thumbup:

Every SA-10 operator will be happy if he just made you dive to the ground, even if his missiles never get anywhere close to you. He knows that there is just some little sucker sitting arround with his Igla ready to take the shoot and finish the SA-10's work.

 

I may recommend this things to get into the whole missile defeating technics:

 

video shows the tactic I have described, which works pretty well in DCSW at the momment (and probably will until AI is capable of using an IADS :D)

 

This simulator shows the other "side" of the missile. If you use it correctly and invest some time in it, it will show you what to do if you have a missile coming and what better not to do. :smilewink:

It is regularly update, and new systems are added now and then.

At the momment it simulates SA-2 (2 versions), SA-3, SA-4 and SA-5, you have various (realistic) szenarios and you can even shoot Nukes at those nasty bugs in the sky. :music_whistling:

And not to forget, it is completly free! Thanks for that Hpasp! :thumbup:

 

I hope I was able to help you a little bit.

 

Best regards,

 

John

Edited August 19, 2012 by xxJohnxx

[Ironhand]

Hopfully, in some time, it won't be so easy to detect such SAMs with your RWR, as maybe one day when an IADS simulution will come, they start going on air with their radar when you maybe 3 to 4 clicks out.

:) True enough. But, until then, we can "fly" in a much less threatening environment.

 

 

Rich

[xxJohnxx]

:) True enough. But, until then, we can "fly" in a much less threatening environment.

 

Yeah absolutly true!

BTW: I didn't want to post that post as you quoted me, I accidently hit the wrong button. I have added a few lines. :smilewink:

[Ironhand]

Yeah absolutly true!

BTW: I didn't want to post that post as you quoted me, I accidently hit the wrong button. I have added a few lines. :smilewink:

More than a few lines... :) An accurate threat environment would certainly be far more complex than it is now. OTOH, an accurate threat environment would make the sim far less enjoyable (for me) as well, if missions went with the Full Monte.

 

 

Rich

[xxJohnxx]

Yeah,

 

If it would change lot's of things, especially how, we the virtual pilots, have to fly. In the A-10 it seems to get worse, however keeping in mind that the next DCS Module (from ED) maybe is a figther with SEAD capabilities it would make it really more exiting.

Imagine, after we launched our HARM against the nasty SA-11, it would shut it's radar down, and maybe the HARM will miss.

Or, like engaging an SA-10. You know it is there, however the SA-10 also knows that you don't come to have a nice cup of tea/coffee/cola. So maybe, the SA-10 is not allone, and as you try to fire your HARM against it maybe, suddedenly a Tor will pop up, whilst you are very close to it.

Or the AI maybe plays some games with you. Imagin beeing pinged by several SAMs, however only one at a time.

 

In a fighter capable of SEAD this would add lot's of fun and challenges. Especially for multiplayer flights.

 

However, I don't think it would change for the A-10 too much, as I would expect for the mission designers to adapt, or to create multiplayermissions, where F-18s (just for instance) flown by your mates destroy any enemy radar SAM and you go in behind them to mess arround with armor and infantry. :smilewink:

 

I don't think it would be worse if a IADS would be simulated, especially, as I think there would be an option for the mission designer to disable it, like to simulate that the country hasn't one, or maybe that an important part of that system has been destroyed, and it is not operational anymore. :)

 

I don't think it won't be as fun as it is now in the A-10, I can imagine that it is more challaging for us, the virtual pilots, which won't be too worse, won't it? :pilotfly:

[Ironhand]

Yeah,

 

If it would change lot's of things, especially how, we the virtual pilots, have to fly. In the A-10 it seems to get worse, however keeping in mind that the next DCS Module (from ED) maybe is a figther with SEAD capabilities it would make it really more exiting.

Imagine, after we launched our HARM against the nasty SA-11, it would shut it's radar down, and maybe the HARM will miss.

Or, like engaging an SA-10. You know it is there, however the SA-10 also knows that you don't come to have a nice cup of tea/coffee/cola. So maybe, the SA-10 is not allone, and as you try to fire your HARM against it maybe, suddedenly a Tor will pop up, whilst you are very close to it.

Or the AI maybe plays some games with you. Imagin beeing pinged by several SAMs, however only one at a time.

 

In a fighter capable of SEAD this would add lot's of fun and challenges. Especially for multiplayer flights.

That would all be very interesting and engaging and something I would love to see. But it would require a major reworking of the AI and how it functions. As currently structured, there can be no SEAD in this sim (or any of its predecessors nor anyone else's that I can think of). The only concept available is DEAD--"destruction" instead of "suppression". So a lot would have to be altered and I'm not sure the work required would have a high priority...or that it should

 

However, I don't think it would change for the A-10 too much, as I would expect for the mission designers to adapt, or to create multiplayermissions, where F-18s (just for instance) flown by your mates destroy any enemy radar SAM and you go in behind them to mess arround with armor and infantry. :smilewink:

True. A lot depends on mission design and the amount of time someone is willing to spend fine tuning it.

 

I don't think it would be worse if a IADS would be simulated, especially, as I think there would be an option for the mission designer to disable it, like to simulate that the country hasn't one, or maybe that an important part of that system has been destroyed, and it is not operational anymore. :)

One potential problem with an IADS modeling in a sim is that the level of AI "intelligence" would have to be increased in order to deal with it, too. In SP missions, it's the AI that would be doing the SEAD for you. :)

 

I don't think it won't be as fun as it is now in the A-10, I can imagine that it is more challaging for us, the virtual pilots, which won't be too worse, won't it? :pilotfly:

Definitely more challenging. :)

 

 

Rich