Aries144 Posted May 14, 2017 Share Posted May 14, 2017 I've noticed that a radar locking onto the F-5 is only visible on the RWR by turning Search mode off. This results in having to cycle search mode on and off frequently to ensure no radar is locked onto the aircraft. Is this realistic behavior? It seems a vast difference from all other American RWR systems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team BillyCrusher Posted May 15, 2017 ED Team Share Posted May 15, 2017 See attached doc. "You become responsible, forever, for what you have tamed.” ― Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, The Little Prince. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 21, 2017 Share Posted May 21, 2017 Is this realistic behavior? No. I guess it's a case of either limitations of DCS and/or that BST have incorrectly interpreted/misunderstood the data they've found. I suspect a bit of both as the same issue affects other aircraft, it's just less noticeable as their RWRs are even more simplified. At present in the F-5 TTRs are not shown at all unless they're actively tracking you, even if they're emitting DCS just knows that you're not the target and therefore doesn't bother to display anything. This issue is evident when you look at aircraft, air intercept RADARs are TTRs, they shouldn't show up at all in "Search" mode, as they are considered TTRs. The only RADARs that should be filtered out without the "search" filter selected (using the logic BST has used, which isn't quite right) are EWRs and target acquisition RADARs (RADARs that are not involved in guiding a weapon on you). TTRs should be shown regardless of whether they are actively tracking you or not. The symbology is also off (SA-6 being show as "06" rather than "6" for example), as is threat prioritisation. Audio is also greatly simplified, but that's been true for all DCS aircraft so far. The F-5 as modelled now is an improvement over other aircraft in some areas, but still not presenting the information the pilot should get. Spoiler Intel 13900K (5Ghz), 64Gb 6400Mhz, MSi RTX 3090, Schiit Modi/Magi DAC/AMP, ASUS PG43UQ, Hotas Warthog, RealSimulator FSSB3, 2x TM MFDs + DCS MFDs, MFG Crosswinds, Elgato Steamdeck XL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team cofcorpse Posted May 21, 2017 ED Team Share Posted May 21, 2017 The F-5 as modelled now is an improvement over other aircraft in some areas, but still not presenting the information the pilot should get. There are some interesting notes that we could really miss. But the first thing I want to ask you is you compare our implementation and real work of this particular device or with common logic in RWRs? I'm asking this because it is modeled how we understood mentioned above description. And we, of course, can be wrong. This also concerns audio, because it is really simple - 5 different sounds and that's all. If you have some information, could you share it with us so we could improve further, please? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FNU LNU Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 The SEARCH pushbutton should enable the display of search and acquisition radars that are otherwise suppressed from the azimuth display. Suppression of search radars declutters the azimuth display and is the default state. Selecting the SEARCH mode adds search and acquisition radars symbols to the display, up the maximum allowable number of symbols. For audio, there is: 1) Threat audio. Threat audio for the emitter under the diamond is played continuously in the headset. The audio is created using the emitter's characteristics, e.g., PRF, scan pattern, scan volume, signal strength, etc. A rotating surveillance radar sounds very different than a conical scan or staring fire control radar. The audio directly correlates to the RF energy received at the aircraft, so the audio is the best indictator whether a lock has been broken. For emitters with PRFs outside the human audible range, synthetic digital audio is used. See here for how it's done: 2) New Guy audio. Three tones in 1.5 seconds at the emitter's PRF. 3) Missile Launch audio. 7 tones in 1.5 seconds at 1kHz. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team cofcorpse Posted May 22, 2017 ED Team Share Posted May 22, 2017 I see, that in SEARCH there are two groups that are mutually exclusive. And according your description they are not. 1) There are no words about this type of sound. 2) No. "It consists of two equal tones within 1 second that are used for various emitter classes of different sound levels (frequencies)." Two tones, not three. 3) It is done, but it works only if threat symbol is present (not excluded). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsay Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 (edited) 1) There are no words about this type of sound. As the RWR system is classified, the absence of written documentation is not surprising, however the presence of threat audio (PRF to audio) is confirmed in many publicly available cockpit video and audio tapes. I've always assumed the lack proper RWR audio in DCS was due to politics - how to include "classified" audio, that's blocked by a NDA but available on the internet ? Rather than a lack of information. I'd didn't find audio from a F-5 but there is an example from Criag Baker's F-105 Thunderchief site and which AFAIK had a similar AN/ALR-46 RWR system. http://www.burrusspta.org/audiopage.html Note: Audio No. 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 contain sounds of the Vietnam era RWR with the sounds of "tracking radar" and "locked radar" indications (Fan Song). Audio 10-11 sound like they includes some synthetic RWR tones which DCS does model, mixed with the "threat audio" but the beeps might be a stall warning or similar. No doubt, there are better examples on the internet, including in DCS's own A-10C user files. General description of RWR signal processing AN/ALR-169 general RWR description (A-10 thread) Edited May 22, 2017 by Ramsay i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team cofcorpse Posted May 22, 2017 ED Team Share Posted May 22, 2017 I don't think that F-105 could be viable example how to proper implement RWR, just because it has different RWR, I assume. Such devices greatly vary from one model to other in small things, though may be similar in general. One thing that could be wrong is SEARCH filter, but there is still uncertainty. I may missed important information though and sorry if this is the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ramsay Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 (edited) The AN/ALR-46 was a digital replacement for the analogue AN/APR-36 and AN/APR-26. There's an old training film for the APR-26 It demonstrates threat audio tones and the general features missing from the DCS F-5E AN/ALR-46 RWR but obviously the newer system differs in sensitivity, RWR symbology, etc. Threat audio tones could modelled at a basic level, perhaps as in the Viggen (through game values) but I admit to preferring the Battlespace Sim Inc. approach of using public (wiki/google) sweep and PFR rates with side-lobe modelling to generate 'realistic' synthetic RWR audio tones (that don't run fowl of NDA's, etc.). I don't think that F-105 could be viable example how to proper implement RWR, just because it has different RWR AFAIK the F-105G carried the AN/ALR-46 RWR, however I believe you are correct, not all F-105's carried the same RWR equipment and the tones heard in the flight recordings may be from a different system. Edited May 23, 2017 by Ramsay Add comment on F-105 RWR i9 9900K @4.7GHz, 64GB DDR4, RTX4070 12GB, 1+2TB NVMe, 6+4TB HD, 4+1TB SSD, Winwing Orion 2 F-15EX Throttle + F-16EX Stick, TPR Pedals, TIR5, Win 10 Pro x64, 1920X1080 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted May 22, 2017 Share Posted May 22, 2017 I would suggest that the 'search' filter is a declutter option, and there are two possibilities: 1. ON - Shows SEARCH radars (RWRs and other non-threat) in addition to symbols when search is off 2. ON - Shows ANY radar in search mode in addition to symbols when search is off However, it would still prioritize threats and display them normally. The purpose of leaving search radars in "OFF" is to display fewer things on the RWR, not to display ONLY radars in search mode. IMHO. This is all about either clutter and/or processing power. Most likely it is about clutter. I don't think that F-105 could be viable example how to proper implement RWR, just because it has different RWR, I assume. Such devices greatly vary from one model to other in small things, though may be similar in general. One thing that could be wrong is SEARCH filter, but there is still uncertainty. I may missed important information though and sorry if this is the case. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team cofcorpse Posted May 24, 2017 ED Team Share Posted May 24, 2017 The AN/ALR-46 missing from the DCS F-5E AN/ALR-46 RWR We don't have ALR-46, we have ALR-87. Threat audio tones could modelled at a basic level, perhaps as in the Viggen (through game values) but I admit to preferring the Battlespace Sim Inc. approach of using public (wiki/google) sweep and PFR rates with side-lobe modelling to generate 'realistic' synthetic RWR audio tones (that don't run fowl of NDA's, etc.). We have strict description of audio tones, their number and frequences. I don't understand why do you think they are modeled simplified. I would suggest that the 'search' filter is a declutter option, and there are two possibilities: I mainly agree with this opinion, but above there is a quote from Manual that states a bit different. "Emitter symbols of defined radar systems are displayed exclusively (no fire control radars!)." Do I understand this part incorrect? About "No fire control radars". As I think that "fiore control radars" are threats. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted May 24, 2017 Share Posted May 24, 2017 Do you have more text/context for this that you could share? Is there a document I could read? :) The reason I am surprised is that the RWR's #1 job is to protect whoever's using it. Here is what I understand from what you posted, and I agree with you: The 'Search' Filter does not show 'radars in search mode' It shows radars 'in a defined list'. This is hugely important - this list is probably programmable by the user. Search 'off' shows any threat radar (FCR) operating in any mode - search or otherwise. I haven't checked the implementation of the RWR close enough to see if this is the case ... :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FNU LNU Posted May 25, 2017 Share Posted May 25, 2017 Sorry, since the F-5 is using the IP-1310 display and the control head is identical, I assumed it was the ALR-69 which is the current standard. The ALR-69 behaves as I described. I don't know anything about the ALR-87... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 (edited) We have strict description of audio tones, their number and frequences. I don't understand why do you think they are modeled simplified. The sounds you have are correct I'm sure. However what's missing are the threat specific tones, usually direct audio of the RADAR signal (freq/PRF). These have been present in pretty much every western RWR since for decades. Its actually the primary method by which threat information is fed to the pilot (audio is faster than visual). In US systems typically audio is only heard for the priority threat (shown under the diamond on the IP-1310). Although no DCS aircraft has this audio, the ability for it is there in the lua files is there. While I've got no first hand experience with the ALR-87, I do find it difficult to believe that it has lesser capability than earlier systems, and systems since. I mainly agree with this opinion, but above there is a quote from Manual that states a bit different. "Emitter symbols of defined radar systems are displayed exclusively (no fire control radars!)." What manual specifically did this come from? The language doesn't sound like any tach manual I've ever read (and certainly not the way we write them) so I'd like to see the surrounding context. Edited May 27, 2017 by Eddie Spoiler Intel 13900K (5Ghz), 64Gb 6400Mhz, MSi RTX 3090, Schiit Modi/Magi DAC/AMP, ASUS PG43UQ, Hotas Warthog, RealSimulator FSSB3, 2x TM MFDs + DCS MFDs, MFG Crosswinds, Elgato Steamdeck XL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 The reason I am surprised is that the RWR's #1 job is to protect whoever's using it. Indeed. This is one of the main rubs with the way DCS in general has modelled these systems. They don't really give the kind of information they should, due to a couple of small but important differences from their real world counterparts. Specifically threat prioritisation and filtering. The 'Search' Filter does not show 'radars in search mode' It shows radars 'in a defined list'. This is hugely important - this list is probably programmable by the user. Very much an important point. Threat library data, it's this data that determines is a given signal is identifiable, as what, where is sits in the priority hierarchy, and what filters affect it (low alt/ship/search/"others"). Now of course, specific threat library data is highly sensitive, so it needs to be entirely fictional in a sim. But the logic used is very simple, and anyone who understands threat systems and what a pilot needs to know about them should be able to come up with a good facsimile. Search 'off' shows any threat radar (FCR) operating in any mode - search or otherwise. Indeed. This is the key point, threat RADAR. An early warning/air traffic/approach RADAR is never a threat to the aircraft. Therefore in most cases the pilot does not need to know about them, however in some cases they may find that information useful (it may allude to a threat systems location, or help determine if you're well masked. etc.). Spoiler Intel 13900K (5Ghz), 64Gb 6400Mhz, MSi RTX 3090, Schiit Modi/Magi DAC/AMP, ASUS PG43UQ, Hotas Warthog, RealSimulator FSSB3, 2x TM MFDs + DCS MFDs, MFG Crosswinds, Elgato Steamdeck XL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eddie Posted May 27, 2017 Share Posted May 27, 2017 If you have some information, could you share it with us so we could improve further, please? I would love to, however I'm afraid most documents covering this subject are either export controlled or otherwise sensitive. All I can do is, very carefully, try and guide people to reasonable conclusions via my own written word (unless I can find the information already in the public domain). Spoiler Intel 13900K (5Ghz), 64Gb 6400Mhz, MSi RTX 3090, Schiit Modi/Magi DAC/AMP, ASUS PG43UQ, Hotas Warthog, RealSimulator FSSB3, 2x TM MFDs + DCS MFDs, MFG Crosswinds, Elgato Steamdeck XL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beamscanner Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 We don't have ALR-46, we have ALR-87. We have strict description of audio tones, their number and frequences. I don't understand why do you think they are modeled simplified. You have the synthetic tones of the ALR-87. But you do not have the "real" sounds of the radars themselves. Here is a great example of "real" radar audio the radar audio and synthetic audio combined is what the pilot hears. Synthetic tones are unqiue to RWRs (ALR-X vs. ALR-Y). But radar audio is not.. It doesn't matter if you are using the ALR-87 or ALR-46. Radar audio is dependent on the radars illuminating you. (the audio is generated from the radars PRF and scan) Now a mod was made awhile ago for the DCS A-10C RWR that adds radar audio to the system. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=110840 Perhaps you guys can make your RWR compatible with this mod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beamscanner Posted June 22, 2017 Share Posted June 22, 2017 (edited) If you have some information, could you share it with us so we could improve further, please? Electronic Warfare Fundamentals, 17-9, RWR Audio http://falcon.blu3wolf.com/Docs/Electronic-Warfare-Fundamentals.pdf "In addition to generating threat symbols for each identified threat, the signal processor also generates threat audio. Threat audio first alerts the aircrew to the detection of a threat system. This RWR audio is generally referred to as “new guy” alert audio. The signal processor can also present constant audio from a selected threat. The aircrew controls this function through the interface control unit. The constant audio provided by an RWR system can be either “real” or synthetic. “Real” audio is normally based on the actual pulse repetition frequency (PRF) of the threat system radar whether the signal processor has identified it or not. Synthetic audio is based on the classification of the threat (SAM, Al, etc.) as determined by the signal processor. The signal processor also generates a launch warning audio when the signal characteristics of the threat indicate a missile launch condition exists." So there are 3 main types of RWR audio. 1. New guy audio (synthetic) 2. Constant Audio (usually "real" audio generated from the threat radar's PRF.. Unique to the radar not the RWR) 3. Launch Warning Audio (synthetic.. generated when the RWR detects a waveform associated with a missile launch) You guys have 1 and 3.. But not 2. And because of that your RWR is very quiet. Edited June 23, 2017 by Beamscanner 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beamscanner Posted June 23, 2017 Share Posted June 23, 2017 (edited) Finally, The "search" button acts as a de-clutter switch, removing non-threat emitters from the display. It does not act as a only fire control or only search radar filter. Threat emitters will be displayed at all times. Meaning that: Search Mode selected (green) = Displays "S" emitters and threat emitters Search Mode not selected (not green) = Only displays threat emitters (search mode switch will flash if the is a "S" emitter being received but is not being displayed. You must realize that in order for the RWR to determine if a signal is emitted from a search or fire control radar, it must have already identified the signal. So why would the RWR not show a threat emitter, if its already processed the signal? Obviously the RWR would not hide a threat emitter if the pilot had "search" selected. And while proper documentation is obviously difficult to come by, we do have footage of a similar RWR in action. Notice the SA-2 and SA-6 threat emitters being displayed while the "search" mode switch is selected. Not only that, but there's a launch warning on the same panel with the search mode selected. As such, search mode does not hide threat emitters. Also, target acquisition emitters, such as the SA-6 acquisition radar do not count as "search" radars. Only emitters identified as "S" are "search" radars. (such as low band early warning, ATCR, etc.) TLDR the ALR-87 (and all ALR-XX) should present threat emitters no matter what. The only emitters that may not be displayed are "S" emitters (low band early warning/ATCR) if the "search" button is not selected. That being said, currently the DCS ALR-87 only shows threats if search mode is not selected. Also you guys apparently linked SAM acquisition emitters, such as the SA-6, to "search" emitters. This should not be the case. Only emitters identified as "S" should be in the "search" radar pool. Edited June 23, 2017 by Beamscanner 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vatikus Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 (edited) We don't have ALR-46, we have ALR-87. ALR-87 is virtually ALR-46 build for Swiss AF. And ALR-46 is digital version of APR-36/37 where the main change from analogue brother was its digital processor. All primary UX/UI functionality should be in the same ballpark. The following patent shows logic behind search switch: http://www.google.com/patents/US4176468 "The SEARCH switch allows for the display of search-type threat and airborne threats. If a missile activity of missile launch is decoded by the processor, the system will automatically return to the OPEN mode." Edited July 27, 2017 by Vatikus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt109 Posted July 27, 2017 Share Posted July 27, 2017 ALR-87 is virtually ALR-46 build for Swiss AF. And ALR-46 is digital version of APR-36/37 where the main change from analogue brother was its digital processor. All primary UX/UI functionality should be in the same ballpark. The following patent shows logic behind search switch: http://www.google.com/patents/US4176468 "The SEARCH switch allows for the display of search-type threat and airborne threats. If a missile activity of missile launch is decoded by the processor, the system will automatically return to the OPEN mode." That link is a great read. Some very good documentation. Now to test this and see how closely the in-game RWR behaves... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beamscanner Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 ALR-87 is virtually ALR-46 build for Swiss AF. And ALR-46 is digital version of APR-36/37 where the main change from analogue brother was its digital processor. All primary UX/UI functionality should be in the same ballpark. The following patent shows logic behind search switch: http://www.google.com/patents/US4176468 "The SEARCH switch allows for the display of search-type threat and airborne threats. If a missile activity of missile launch is decoded by the processor, the system will automatically return to the OPEN mode." The video I linked shows either an ALR-46 or an ALR-87 in action.(whichever one they intended to export with the F-20 tigershark) In the short scene you see an SA-6 and SA-2 locking the pilot up, while the search mode button is lit green. Also, you can hear constant RWR audio from the radars.. Not just the 2 synthetic beeps indicating 'new guy'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vatikus Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 Beamscanner, I am with you on this topic. I think correcting rwr on f5 means we get correct rwr on f4 later on. I am pasting here also a link to B52 EWO manual. It clearly describes audio and how it is constantly on except if you turn it off... great read: http://www.avialogs.com/index.php/aircraft/usa/boeing/b-52stratofortress/t-o-1b52h-1-13-electronic-warfare-officer-s-manual-b-52h.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBot Posted August 1, 2017 Share Posted August 1, 2017 I think correcting rwr on f5 means we get correct rwr on f4 later on. I would like to add my support for getting this right for both the F-5 and F-4 later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cicimicikiller Posted August 11, 2017 Share Posted August 11, 2017 I would like to know at least the status of this "bug" from the devs. Are you working on it? Are you trying to find some relevant info? Will this stay as it is? This is still one of this biggest problems with the F-5 module. Smash 1-1 | Hawk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts