Rusky radar question

[Yellonet]

I am glad you brought that point as well. I am sure eveybody is aware of that imperfection in modeling ARH missiles in Lock On. We just did not think of mentioning it here.

 

Also, I did not want to talk about the bugs in Lock On. I just wanted to bring the point of ARH missiles making Su-27 useless in lock On.

Not useless, but at a disadvantage, which I think it would be in a real confrontation anyway... just not exactly like this.

The thing with the current AWACS/GCI is that it not correctly modeled, it can basically see through anything and have unlimited range... there was a small fix in 1.11 though but not a complete one.

Therefore it is likely that if the Flankers get AWACS support they will have an even greater advantage over the Eagles than they currently have over the Flankers.

But maybe you're ok with that as you're flying an Su? ;)

 

Oh, and 27>15.

[GGTharos]

In game performance of the AIM120 proves you wrong. Do a test and see for your self. Fire an AIM120 from 15 miles to a manouvering target and unlock. Watch the weapon view and see if the missile keeps tracking. :rolleyes:

 

We tested this for 1.11 - but I retested at your urging and ... no, you're still wrong. Is your target jamming? If so, the missile is tracking HoJ. Otherwise, it has to get within 7nm to acquire its own target, and even THEN the target must be inside the search pattern. Once you lose the datalink on an AMRAAM on a long range shot, you're likely to lose the AMRAAM all together.

 

On a closer shot, about 15nm, there is a much better possibility of the target being within the 120's scan zone.

[S77th-konkussion]

I have to disagree that not many people use the Flankers online, Hadjuk. I don't have photographic evidence on hand or anything, but I'm on there enough to see. If there are awacs flying on our map- it's usually not up there very long. People seem to deal with it well. In fact, having an AWACS link is more of a pleasant surprise hehheh...

[Kenan]

The ED guys already know about this, Kenan. LONG ago.

 

So why didn't they incorporate at least part of this in the existing MFD's?

For example, the aircraft icons, removing the bars etc.?

[GGTharos]

So why didn't they incorporate at least part of this in the existing MFD's?

For example, the aircraft icons, removing the bars etc.?

 

Because they saw it -after- LOMAC was released, and they don't really want to change the cockpits all that much until they can upgrade them to the new pit technology that the Ka-50 will bring. It makes sense ... why waste time on the old stuff when they'll eventually be moving to the newer and better technology?

 

Also I suspect the datalink has more functions that what is modelled right now.

 

Note: This is by no means to be taken to mean that we get new 'pits in 1.2. We don't. Only the Ka-50 does.

[Kenan]

Well, I'm sure lots of fans wouldn't mind adding those nice, but realistic touches in an upcoming addon. It would add so much to the realism, and they wouldn't have to bother figuring out the system. They would only be making changes in an appearance of the MFD. For example, why not change existing NAV disaplay to the one on the images etc.

[Trident]

To be frank, I'm not sure, I guess it's from one of these Google/Yandex.ru search sprees of me :p When I'm bored I use Google, or when I really want to know something about a Russian system I use the Russian search engines to find information on various aviation related topics.

But that's how I spend my time when I'm bored, yet not bored enough to play America's Army.

 

I guess it was some Russian site because the filenames of the pictures are in Cyrilic, but they don't make sense like: "фы.jpg", "фыффы.jpg" and "фыфы.jpg".

 

Oh, and before people like Konkussion start asking for the meaning of those, it means something like: gf.jpg, wz.jpg or tk.jpg ergo: jibberish.

 

Those 3 pics are all I got on the datalink, I don't have any high-res or other pics of it in action. :(

 

Thanks all the same. They don't seem to show more than the Su-27SK manual but a video would have been pretty interesting of course.

 

I think the desicion if the F-15C is to get a datalink should be dependant on the timeframe ED wishes their future products to have (and they ought to have atleast a loose historical context IMHO). If it is earlier then about 2000 there should be none, because JTIDS was only ever installed on an insignificant number of airframes (18 out of a total of almost 400 IIRC) while MIDS-FDL is a pretty recent addition to the Eagle fleet (2001 and beyond). The "average F-15C" in service at the time would not have had a datalink and that's how it should be in the sim.

[GGTharos]

Well, I'm sure lots of fans wouldn't mind adding those nice, but realistic touches in an upcoming addon. It would add so much to the realism, and they wouldn't have to bother figuring out the system. They would only be making changes in an appearance of the MFD. For example, why not change existing NAV disaplay to the one on the images etc.

 

Yes, and a lot of players would like other touches to be added to their aircraft, too. So until they can do it for everyone, not happening. ;)

 

AFAIK.

[TucksonSonny]

Concerning the datalink mode: Here's how it should look like

 

 

 

 

Very interesting,

And I remember that F-15 fan boys were saying that Russian AWACS data link (like god’s eye) was over modeled in lomac.

These pictures prove the opposite. Apparently in RL you got also altitude/speed data together with the symbol.

[Alfa]

Is that from the Su-27SK?

 

No, vanilla Su-27

 

Su-27S/B, the one moddled in lomac

 

Same thing guys :) .

 

Su-27SK = export designation for Su-27S.

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Trident]

Yep, if anything the Su-27SK would be downgraded in typical Soviet/Russian practise where such sensitive equipment as datalinks is concerned.

[primus_TR]

We tested this for 1.11 - but I retested at your urging and ... no, you're still wrong. Is your target jamming? If so, the missile is tracking HoJ. Otherwise, it has to get within 7nm to acquire its own target, and even THEN the target must be inside the search pattern. Once you lose the datalink on an AMRAAM on a long range shot, you're likely to lose the AMRAAM all together.

 

On a closer shot, about 15nm, there is a much better possibility of the target being within the 120's scan zone.

 

Not trying to be persistent or anything but you are wrong :) I just retested it with an F15C vs. unarmed Su27 without jammer with missile effectiveness slider in the middle. I shot the 120 at about 20 miles out and unlocked. Switched to weapon view and saw that the missile kept tracking. No jammer on the SU, so no question of HOJ. The SU was manouvring too. It was a near-miss due to loss of energy. If you like, I can record a track and send it to you so you can see for your self. Failure to carry the 120 until time-to-active should be a wasted shot. Not in LockOn tho.

 

At any rate, have a great day

[GGTharos]

I that case, what radar mode did you use?

 

I locked my target in STT, then dropped lock a few seconds after launch. The missile didn't maneuver at all.

 

Do post the track - this is a bug, and if so needs to be squashed.

 

As for

Failure to carry the 120 until time-to-active should be a wasted shot.

- it is, however the missile WILL begin a search once it loses the datalink. If you're still in its way, then it's your own fault for letting it find you ;)

[Alfa]

Yep, if anything the Su-27SK would be downgraded in typical Soviet/Russian practise where such sensitive equipment as datalinks is concerned.

 

Hi Trident,

 

Yes good point :) . I dont know if this is the case with the Su-27SK, but it was with the Su-30Ks initially purchased by India(didnt have the extended datalink capabilities of the Russian version).

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[GGTharos]

I was trying to read the SK manual but my knowledge of the Russian language hampers me.

 

Is it just an FDL or does it also link with AWACS and EWR?

[Pilotasso]

Just a quick question. Wich versions of the AIM-120 have croped wings?

I ask because usualy export AIM-120B's have the traditional wings but My countries AF have been sighted carrying the crop winged AMRAAM's.

[GGTharos]

The AIM-120C has the clipped fins. Theoretically 'there is no difference' between the B and the C save for the fins - in practice, that may even be true but I highly doubt it.

[Alfa]

I was trying to read the SK manual but my knowledge of the Russian language hampers me.

 

Me too :)

 

Is it just an FDL or does it also link with AWACS and EWR?

 

"FDL"?

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[britgliderpilot]

Me too :)

 

 

 

"FDL"?

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

 

At a guess, Fighter Data Link - between fighters rather than between a master feed from an AWACS.

[Force_Feedback]

I have the su-27 "KN" manual, so I guess it's the SK manual. But I'm too lazy to read it, and my Russian is present, but rusty. Did some research on ECM a week ago or so, but the thread got hijacked :(.

EDIT: just saw the 1st page and it reads: Su-27 CK Flight Manual in Russian :p

 

And I may have a clue where those pics come from, a site that sells russian nav equipment mfds and other fighter nav aids and computer systems, the thing is, I'm not sure if that's the source, and I forgot the link (and it's not in my browser history) :(

[GGTharos]

Force Feedback, Su-27SK manual page 190, or thereabouts.

 

See you can figure out what it says.

[Trident]

Same here with the language.

 

I think it can also display AWACS/EWR data, although it may be limited to showing only the target assigned to the fighter by the controller. That would seem like a bit of a waste of the system however.

[Force_Feedback]

I was on page 4, then glanced at page 70, where the radar altitude hold mode is explained, let me tell you a bit about it...

 

The su-27 has a rad. alt hold autopilot mode, it can be engaged when flying at 100-1000m, after it has been engaged the system comensates for changes an radar altitude automatically.

If the system fails, or is engaged below 100m or the sinkrate is more than 15 m/s, then the system automatically engges a pitch motion (pulls up) with a load of 2-4G, after the recovery the trim is reset and the "fly manually" sign lights up. I know it's not relevant to the GCI quiestion, but since I took the effort to read it, I might as well share it with you :p

 

Now, page 190-something

 

I'll be brief about the communication systems, as it is not that interesting.

 

The datalink system can receive data from the following systems: SAO-30, SPK-75, SPK-68, ALM-1, ALM-4.

The decoding and reformatting (converting) of control commands and target designation in signals, intended for presentation on on-board systems of the fighter-interceptor.

 

*here is some explanation about the number of channels per system and other communication related stuff, that the system switches between different encoding types automatically, not really important stuff*

 

 

I'll continue tomorrow, as my brain is shutting down, and I have a hard time understanding how the whole procedure of interrogation and decoding of GCI signals works. It's quite a complicated story, and I have yet to read how a pilot actually would use it (thus far the manual describes the workings of the various subsystems designed to automatically interrogate and decode information). So I hope I'll understand it better tomorrow :p

 

So tomorrow: Part Deux :D

[GGTharos]

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=42239&page=48&pp=30

 

 

I hope my credentials on Russian avionics are known. I've recently translated sections from the Su-27SK technical manuals on its datalink (basically almost the same as the MiG-31 datalink), and the datalink technology is indeed pretty good. For 1990, given the state of the USSR's electronics industry.

 

The MiG-31 and Su-27 datalinks are made of several different components. There is a GCI command link, which can be the old Lazur-M or the newer Biryuza. Biryuza tied in to the IFF system to encrypt transmissions and prevent them from being decoded and spoofed, and gave a few additional commands over the old Lazur. Then there is a datalink, which can be the older SPK-68 or the newer SPK-75 (Raduga-Bort), which allows the bidirectional transmission of data, including a GCI supplied "tactical display". This tactical display was not a "gods eye" view of the battlefield; that didn't accord with Soviet tactics. Rather, it primarily showed the pilot his position, the position of friendlies, and his assigned target. The SPK-68/75 also allowed transmission of IFF information from ground IFF stations, which helped with situational awareness. The respective inflight datalinks allows the flight leader's Su-27 or MiG-31 pilot to select one of his 10 tracked targets by priority number (1-10), and then press a button (1-4) to send that target to the appropriate member of his flight. Surely a useful system, but it hardly compares to an AWACS, or MIDS.

 

The use of a laser rangefinder and IRST was at least partly to compensate for ranging inaccuracies in Soviet radar technology. The MiG-23 had issues in close combat for this reason. The MiG-31 IRST is a low technology device, nothing like the F-14D's IRST for example.

 

The Shchel-3UM HMS is squarely based on the VTAS design. VTAS wasn't thought to be sufficiently useful to be worth the cost and weight; Bulgarian MiG-29 pilots rarely found a use for their Shchel-3UM.

 

The R-73 was not especially "revolutionary". In general terms, it gave parity with the AIM-9L, with some specific advantages in higher off-boresight capability. The US and the UK had both developed new generation missiles earlier than Russia; both went with improved AIM-9 on cost effectiveness grounds. In this respect, yes, the Soviets stole a march, in actually producing a new missile rather than continuing to refine their K-13 Sidewinder clone.

[Force_Feedback]

Ok, I deceided to skip the boring parts, where they explain how the system interrogates other transmitters receivers (both ground as plane to plane and airgroup) with the different automatic procedures and stuff.

 

Instead I translated the fact sheet on page 132, which has all specific information on how many channels and frequencies the system uses.

 

It's about the GCI/IFF system

 

Page 132:

 

The number of varying frequencies in flight:

 

In mode 1 ("ALM-1") 40

In mode 2 ("SPK-68") 20

In mode 3 ("SPK-75") 31

In mode 4 ("ALM-4") 20

 

Number of frequencies of interrogation of channel "SAZO" 1

Number of pairs of interrogation codes of channel SAZO 3

Quantity of key address codes in mode 2 1000

Quantity of addresses of interrogation signals in mode 3 100000

Number of *spreads* in mode 4 8

Number of cyphers in mode 4 3

 

Size of received information

(dual discharges)

In mode 1 ("ALM-1") 120

In mode 2 ("SPK-68") 45

In mode 3 ("SPK-75") 112

In mode 4 ("ALM-4") 54

 

Receiving speed of commands:

In modes 1,2,3 seconds 5,10,20

In mode 4 seconds 1.5, 3.0, 4.5

 

Time of readiness for operation:

In modes 1 and 4, minutes, not more than 5

In modes 2 and 3, minutes, not more than 1

 

Time of uninterrupted operation, hours

from AC 380-420Hz, (115 +-6)

from DC current (27 +-3)

 

Power, needed for *contraption* (Izdelie, refers to the whole comples)

From 115 V, 400Hz, VA, not more than 20

From 27V, Watt, not more than 110

 

Mass of complex (without cables), kg 20

 

/END OF PAGE 132-133

 

More to come, when I actually get to the datalink section