Air-to-Air Missile Discussion

[Ragnarok]

I tried to explain the problem with drawing. I got the impression that you think that the technique guidance is complex. Not. It's very simple! Technology is focused on the removing disturbances. primarily ground effects, blind speed and blind corners, ECM, Chaff... The essence of guidance is very simple. Guidance SARH from Data Link provided only for long distance, but it is unstable. High probability that it will lose missile, and seeker from SARH never found a radar reflection. Look at the pictures that I drew.

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/n1r395tox8m3vum/picture%201.png

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/y9igr8xbdavqaw9/picture%202.png

 

https://www.dropbox.com/s/axm14l6wiy1t0sp/picture%203.png

 

 

[Ragnarok]

I remember it was said before that in the SPO-15, the spike warning/tone was an automatic thing as the fighter got closer. So at say 2 bars unlit, that would then give a solid tone equivalent to that we have in game as a Spike... (but IRL it may, or may not be a solid lock)

 

little off topic... within the DCS, SPO-15 shows the reality of just 4km altitude mutually, head on. In real live, if this shows two empty lamp 4km alt vs 4km alt (~40km for F-15, although radar improves), with a altitude difer. example 8km atitude vs. 2km altitude, and a big aspect, show five lights, also 40km. Modern RWR in Su-35/30 it is much more accurate, but SPO-15 is not. In DCS it is very simple.

[GGTharos]

Regarding RL RWRs and missile launch tone generation - and note, I am repeating what I heard and understood from those who work with them, and I have no access to secret data:

 

An RWR will measure, among other things:

 

- Signal Azimuth

- Sometimes signal relative elevation

- Signal frequency (within its capability. If the signal is outside of the capability, the RWR does not detect it, period)

- Signal PRF

- Signal strength

- Signal duration

- It may be able to sense other features

 

There is a limit to how many things you can sense with an RWR, because it has to process a lot of signals in a short time. Have you seen the flashing 'L' in the A-10C RWR? This represents the processing speed, among other things. If you have a LOT of emitters, it should flash slower.

 

In the game, we never have enough emitters to saturate an RWR IMHO.

 

 

In RL, an RWR will generate a missile launch warning tone if you program it to.

 

Why is this important?

 

- Some missile systems have a very blatant indication of missile launch (missile guidance radar of a particular SAM begins to track you)

- Some missile systems do not, but you program a 'lethal range' and provide a missile launch warning if radar = this and signal type (Say, STT) and strength = that. Or perhaps you generate no missile launch warning, and let the pilot decide what to do. It is a choice driven by air force philosophy.

 

Finally: Can we know which systems would generate a launch tone in RL and when?

 

Answer: We can have a good guess for some, and not for others.

 

Why are things the way they are in the game?

 

Because we don't know better, and the way it is right now is fair enough.

 

Please keep in mind that, as much as we all love simulations, this is an entertainment product.

 

What this means is that realism is a priority only up to a point. There is, unfortunately, a balance to be struck between:

 

- Realism

- Man-hours/effort to go into old code

- Game balance (some things shouldn't be balancy, some can be - again, the goal is not balance, but a nod to some sort of balance is always necessary, and not always from a game balance perspective - it just ends up being that way as a byproduct of balancing coding time/effort. This is why the represented western RWR isn't really superior to Beryoza in the game right now)

[GGTharos]

I think you are mixing up radar guidance types ... the beam width is not important for a SARH missile. It merely needs to see a reflection, the illuminator's beam width is irrelevant.

 

A beam-riding missile would need a much tighter beam. You can find examples of such a missile as well, but no modern fighter uses that type of guidance any longer for air to air, AFAIK.

 

Moment of the launch gives changes the width of the radar beam. Semi active guidance depends on distance, not on the level of missile flight. For example, if you launch the 20km, semi active seeker catches the reflection from the target while still attached to the wing. When it launches, the radar beam is introduced into a wide beam, because missile could fall from the cone beam. With a wide beam, guidance is not accurate, and therefore later narrowed the radar beam, when missile in his path stabilized.

There is one other thing that will surprise you here: SARH during their flight can be seen on the radar. Radar tracking missiles. There is also software timer for impact!

[*Rage*]

So why not allow the radar to constantly give off/trigger false missile launch warnings in the target aircraft so as to hide the real launch?

[Ragnarok]

So why not allow the radar to constantly give off/trigger false missile launch warnings in the target aircraft so as to hide the real launch?

Maybe there is something. That are sensitive and hidden information data.

[*Rage*]

Maybe there is something. That are sensitive and hidden information data.

 

Hence the need to program the RWR. It seems logical to degrade your opponents SA/panic by doing that. Hence the necessity for RWRs to give off a launch warning when STT locked.

[TAW_Blaze]

Hence the need to program the RWR. It seems logical to degrade your opponents SA/panic by doing that. Hence the necessity for RWRs to give off a launch warning when STT locked.

 

How do you know how the enemy's RWR is programmed? How do you tell what gives them a launch warning, or a fake launch warning?

[Ragnarok]

How do you know how the enemy's RWR is programmed? How do you tell what gives them a launch warning' date=' or a fake launch warning?[/quote']

History has shown that in practice, the real war revealed something that was not known before.

I know of some examples. When the USAF was surprised at the strong side lobes on the radar Germans MiG-29A, and later had to design the next curtain jamming, and targeted jamming to!

[Bimbac]

GGTharos: do you have any information if DCS World currently supports Mid-course guidance for AMRAAM and/or R-27? I know that T versions are not datalink capable. Anyway, Western RWR systems in DCS are already better than SPO-15, although the advantage sometimes cannot be seen right away. At least, SPO-15 shows you a Type of threat only, but not the type of platform, it makes no difference between F-15 or F-4.

 

For the rest of people here: contemporary SARH missiles use Proportional navigation along with different seeker modes, the radar beam width has no effect on them. When the SARH seeker goes active, it is completely passive - it's just a receiver, thus it doesn't emit anything. Only way how RWR system could detect a missile launch of that type of missile would be the ability to detect signals from Datalink, and I'm not sure if systems currently in use have such capability.

[GGTharos]

Then why use AMRAAM with TWS?

 

Why use LPI radars?

 

Hence the need to program the RWR. It seems logical to degrade your opponents SA/panic by doing that. Hence the necessity for RWRs to give off a launch warning when STT locked.

[GGTharos]

GGTharos: do you have any information if DCS World currently supports Mid-course guidance for AMRAAM and/or R-27?

 

Yes and no. There is a sort of datalink, but no INS. More specifically ...

You get a datalink if you have the target locked. If you lose the target, the datalink goes away (in the APG-63 at least, the M-link would continue to be transmitted).

 

Note that the problems you see in the game are a combination of how the m-link is modeled, AND how the missile is modeled.

 

Anyway, Western RWR systems in DCS are already better than SPO-15, although the advantage sometimes cannot be seen right away. At least, SPO-15 shows you a Type of threat only, but not the type of platform, it makes no difference between F-15 or F-4.

 

Bimbac, what you should be seeing, at minimum, in western RWR:

- Dimmer symbols for search radars

- Bright symbols for STT radars

- Bright, blinking symbols for missile launch warning radars

- Symbol deconfliction in AZ (it's a button you push)

- Relatively accurate threat indication (in lethal zone or not)

- Missile evasion aid

- Symbol connected with a line to ... this is where I stop talking.

 

More F-15 specific (because I am just a little more familiar with it):

 

- The jamming 'X' in the RWR should appear on the symbol that is being jammed.

- You know where the PACS is diplayed? We should have a SIT display, and TEWS should be sticking a 'ghost' contact from the RWR at the range it believes that contact to be at.

 

 

Not all of these may apply to the same RWR, but it's a very general survey of capabilities, and it should also be generally accurate, IMHO of course.

 

For the rest of people here: contemporary SARH missiles use Proportional navigation along with different seeker modes, the radar beam width has no effect on them. When the SARH seeker goes active, it is completely passive - it's just a receiver, thus it doesn't emit anything. Only way how RWR system could detect a missile launch of that type of missile would be the ability to detect signals from Datalink, and I'm not sure if systems currently in use have such capability.

 

Yep, that is always an interesting question, and those who know ain't talking. However, having heard certain things ...

 

there is the possibility that a western RWR can decode the m-link and connect the threat symbol to its target with a line

[Bimbac]

Yes and no. There is a sort of datalink, but no INS. More specifically ...

You get a datalink if you have the target locked. If you lose the target, the datalink goes away (in the APG-63 at least, the M-link would continue to be transmitted).

 

Note that the problems you see in the game are a combination of how the m-link is modeled, AND how the missile is modeled.

 

Now I know what I was doing wrong. I tried to fly an F-15 in DCS like it is supposed to work IRL.

 

The M-link should also cooperate with Memory Track.

 

- The jamming 'X' in the RWR should appear on the symbol that is being jammed.

 

I'm not sure if understood correctly: if the contact on RWR is jammed by SPJ, there is an 'X' symbol over it?

 

Yep, that is always an interesting question, and those who know ain't talking. However, having heard certain things ...

 

Check my signature :v: Anyway, thanks a lot for your answers. Any chance that anything you mentioned gets implemented into DCS in a near future?

[lunaticfringe]

I'm not sure if understood correctly: if the contact on RWR is jammed by SPJ, there is an 'X' symbol over it?

 

Yes.

[GGTharos]

Now I know what I was doing wrong. I tried to fly an F-15 in DCS like it is supposed to work IRL.

 

The M-link should also cooperate with Memory Track.

 

And it does! You will notice that in STT, all radars will go into a memory mode when the target drops into the notch. It's very short, only 4 sec but you won't lose a bandit that's weaving in and out of the notch. BUT! No r-mem for TWS... basically, no radar tracks at all :(

 

I'm not sure if understood correctly: if the contact on RWR is jammed by SPJ, there is an 'X' symbol over it?[/quite]

 

Yes. If the RWR isn't what it's jamming, then it goes where you see it in game.

 

Check my signature :v: Anyway, thanks a lot for your answers. Any chance that anything you mentioned gets implemented into DCS in a near future?

 

Maybe :) I know missiles will have another round of improvement, for radar functions etc, the aircraft needs to be ASM.

[karambiatos]

DCS: F-15C should be pretty fun, if it ever happens.

[*Rage*]

Then why use AMRAAM with TWS?

 

Why use LPI radars?

 

There are obvious reasons for those. What I'm saying though is in the absence of TWS and LPI you may still try and mitigate your disadvantage. I think you understand my point. If not I can clarify.

[GGTharos]

Why wouldn't you shoot if you can? An RWR that knows you're outside lethal range won't generate a launch warning. What's the point of not shooting once you're in lethal range? Like I said, it isn't that it can't happen, but the utility is rather dubious.

 

So how exactly are you mitigating a disadvantage in this case - since you are at disadvantage, shouldn't you be the first one panicking?

 

Ok, now I'm the one off the reservation - this is pretty OT.

 

The fact is, someone has noticed that something is up with missiles.

 

There are obvious reasons for those. What I'm saying though is in the absence of TWS and LPI you may still try and mitigate your disadvantage. I think you understand my point. If not I can clarify.

[Cali]

No matter what, one side will cry about the missiles and both sides have valid points, it's a never-ending battle.

[Weta43]

What's the point of not shooting once you're in lethal range?

 

You're within lethal range for an R-27ER shot, but the only missile you have left is an R-73 - & you'd like them to stop pointing their weapons at you till you get to the merge :) ?

[GGTharos]

If you're a real pilot? You turn around and leave, because all you're going to do is ensure that they know where you are and that they'll send something your way.

 

And that's pretty much going to be the deal when missiles get better in DCS as well.

 

You're within lethal range for an R-27ER shot, but the only missile you have left is an R-73 - & you'd like them to stop pointing their weapons at you till you get to the merge :) ?

[Weta43]

..You turn around and leave, because all you're going to do is ensure that they know where you are and that they'll send something your way.

Obviously if that's the option you have to take, that's a better option.

No argument there :).

 

It's not always going to be there to take - particularly if they already know where you are, are heading your way, and already show every sign of being about to send something your way.

 

If it were the case that your opponent couldn't tell whether once in STT you have launched, or just might be about to, then inside the lethal range of say an R-27ER, if you put your radar into STT on them, they would have to react to a lock as if it were a launch, and if you only had an R-73, getting them to go defensive might just be what you need to stay alive.

 

If I'm unarmed & a man with a knife wants to kill me, going out of my way to meet him is probably not the sensible thing to do.

 

If he's standing looking at me and is already coming to get me, even temporarily fooling him into thinking that I have a gun might just buy enough time to try something else - or even make him lose his nerve before he discovers the trick ...

[Bimbac]

You are both right. Going into the Merge with just close-quarter weapons is not a good idea in general, until you absolutely have to. But, locking a bandit in STT, pretending an SARH launch is a real tactics employed to either scare the adversary and force him to defensive, or to make him to bug out. As I stated before, when locked in STT by enemy aircraft, there is a possibility that missile is already inbound and you are supposed to act accordingly. I really miss this basic aspect of modern aerial warfare in DCS.

[Kuky]

I can think of another example where it would be beneficial to make enemy think you have fired at him... and this is when you have numbers advantage and have multiple groups approaching from different directions... you might want to have one group getting the STT lock and bait... while secondary is approaching with real missile inbound or about to be fired.

 

And as Weta already said, sometimes all you want is enemy to go defensive and abort.

[=Pedro=]

You scare nobody here. Please respect each other, you are not a dictator here to push us to decide what we should wish.

 

 

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol::lol: