ALR-67(v) Update

Only correction, the AV-8B cannot discriminate between friend and foe. The ALR-67 is not connected to the IFF. So in your sample it is classified as Non-Lethal because it is a search radar.

Yeah, that makes sense.

RWR Update:

HUD RWR "lollypops" are ready and working.

They also follow the: Non-Lethal, Lethal, Critical signal aggregation.

• Short stem = Non Lethal,
  
• Dashed Stem = Lethal,
  
• Long Stem = Critical,
  
• Long Stem with Arrow = Radar Lock!,
  
• Flashing Long Stem with Arrow = Missile Launch!!
  

I will say that with the RWR divided into threat bands, it is easier and clearer to check for priority threats.

Also, the no sound bug was squashed.

New radar sound is working but way too low.

Only correction, the AV-8B cannot discriminate between friend and foe. The ALR-67 is not connected to the IFF. So in your sample it is classified as Non-Lethal because it is a search radar.

I'm not sure about this anymore. Look at these images I've been analyzing, you can clearly see this 'block' at the top of the lollipop every time it's a friendly emitter.

Original image with the lollipop highlighted;

You can see the 'block' at the top of the 18 RWR symbol, I think we can safely assume this is an F/A-18 and as such would be considered friendly.

And again you can see the same thing in this image for what is almost certainly an E-2 Hawkeye;

There's definitely some sort of IFF at play here. The documentation for the ALR-67(V)2 states the following;

Unknown and friendly emitters are displayed only in the non-lethal band of the display along with other non-lethal emitters.

This confirms the system is able to differentiate between friendly and non-friendly emitters, most likely through pre-programming the threat library before mission start.

I'll continue to search for more images and video with these friendly RWR symbols in.

I'm not sure about this anymore. Look at these images I've been analyzing, you can clearly see this 'block' at the top of the lollipop every time it's a friendly emitter.

 

Original image with the lollipop highlighted;

 

You can see the 'block' at the top of the 18 RWR symbol, I think we can safely assume this is an F/A-18 and as such would be considered friendly.

 

And again you can see the same thing in this image for what is almost certainly an E-2 Hawkeye;

 

There's definitely some sort of IFF at play here. The documentation for the ALR-67(V)2 states the following;

 

This confirms the system is able to differentiate between friendly and non-friendly emitters, most likely through pre-programming the threat library before mission start.

 

I'll continue to search for more images and video with these friendly RWR symbols in.

I talked with a current USMC pilot and all he was willing to say on the issue is this: The ALR-67 in the AV-8B is not connected to the IFF. Although radars can be identified with the built-in library, no contact is identified as "friendly" without IFF.

Of course, this does not apply to the F/A-18, who may have integration between the IFF and the ALR-67(v)3.

After many hours of research I think I've worked out the HUD RWR system for the AV-8B. To begin with I can say RAZBAM's simulation is 95% correct. There are 5 key points I will note below, if anyone has contesting evidence please let me know.

 

1) The HUD RWR cannot be turned off, see the RWR rotary on the right hand side of this image. With the rotary off the ECM page will not function.

 

2) HUD RWR is limited to 6 threats at once

I cannot find any documentation, imagery or video showing more than 6 threats on the HUD at any one time. All documentation shows a maximum of 6. Also EWM (Electronic Warfare Menu) page which works very similarly to HUD threat display only displays 6 threats. (see page 23-48 in the NATOPS)

 

3) The three HUD RWR symbols are as follows;

Non-lethal

Lethal

Critical

 

4) Unknown and friendly emitters always appear as Non-lethal threats. I think this is achieved by the RWR analyzing the emissions for IFF codes before going onto the HUD?

 

5) I think non-lethal threats only appear for 5 seconds on the HUD after detection. I'm not certain about this though.

Bro,

"2" is the SA-2 not the E-2. SA-2 is a threat, hence the dashed line indicating a lethal threat.

Also, the ALR-67 doesn't use IFF. Friendly emitters are just those emitter identified to friendly platforms.. (ie an emitter ID'd "18" correlates to the F/A-18 radar. IRL only friendlies use that radar and so its left in the non-lethal area.)

However, I'd argue that if the U.S. pilots knew that enemies were flying the F-18, they'd allow "18" indications move into lethal and critical (the ALR-67 is re-programmable). That being said in DCS the enemy can have 18s. Thus they should be allowed into the lethal and critical bands IMO.

There's definitely some sort of IFF at play here. The documentation for the ALR-67(V)2 states the following;

 

This confirms the system is able to differentiate between friendly and non-friendly emitters, most likely through pre-programming the threat library before mission start.

 

I'll continue to search for more images and video with these friendly RWR symbols in.

Please check these images you sent me:

https://imgur.com/a/E7yLw1k

This is an AV-8B during an air refueling. You can see a RWR contact that is being identified as lethal. I seriously doubt that pilot would be calmly taking fuel if he really had an enemy lethal radar contact in his RWR.

I'm quite sure this is a friendly radar that is being identified as lethal due to signal strength.

3) The three HUD RWR symbols are as follows;

Non-lethal

Lethal

Critical

This is not in agreement with the documentation I have:

1. Critical Threats: Long Stems (1.5 X normal length).

2. Lethal Threats: Dashed Stems (normal length).

3. Non Lethal Threats: Short Stems (0.5 X normal length).

With your logic this threat:

Is being considered lethal.

With the documented logic, it is a non-lethal contact (short stem).

This is not in agreement with the documentation I have:

 

1. Critical Threats: Long Stems (1.5 X normal length).

2. Lethal Threats: Dashed Stems (normal length).

3. Non Lethal Threats: Short Stems (0.5 X normal length).

The documents I have on the ALR-67(v2) for the Hornet concur with yours.

Zeus,

I did notice something in the RAZBAM update video that I didn't understand.

I keep hearing the "status change" tone playing when nothing is happening.

I know you're working the ALR-67(v) for the Harrier, but the (v2) cant be all too different. In the (v2), status change tones happen when

1. an emitter appears (unless its a fighter radar, in-which it plays a waterfall tone instead)

2. an emitter moves up in threat (ie from non-lethal to lethal, or from lethal to critical)

Bro,

 

"2" is the SA-2 not the E-2. SA-2 is a threat, hence the dashed line indicating a lethal threat.

I don't think the "2" is an SA-2 for a number of good reasons. Namely if we assume this is a hostile SA-2 why would the pilot be mucking about filming it in the middle of a combat mission? Furthermore if we assume the 'block' means friendly then you'd have to believe the SA-2 is marked as friendly in the ALR-67's threat library!

However if the Harrier was operating in a naval exercise, which it almost certainly was, it's not unreasonable to believe it's an E-2 Hawkeye, the naval AWACS.

I should mention when I say "some sort of IFF at play" I don't mean a literal wired connection between the IFF system and the EW suite. I'm talking a more generalized 'in the style of IFF', i.e. identified via threat library.

Please check these images you sent me:

https://imgur.com/a/E7yLw1k

 

 

This is an AV-8B during an air refueling. You can see a RWR contact that is being identified as lethal. I seriously doubt that pilot would be calmly taking fuel if he really had an enemy lethal radar contact in his RWR.

This is one of the reasons why I marked the dashed stem as non-lethal in post #25. I don't believe the dashed stem represents a lethal threat but I can't prove it.

The documentation for HUD RWR in the Hornet says a dashed is lethal but every piece of reference material I have suggests a dash is a non-lethal (in the Harrier).

This is not in agreement with the documentation I have:

 

1. Critical Threats: Long Stems (1.5 X normal length).

2. Lethal Threats: Dashed Stems (normal length).

3. Non Lethal Threats: Short Stems (0.5 X normal length).

The problem with this is I am yet to see a short stem on a Harrier's HUD or EW display. I've read every manual that's available to the public, I've got numerous references images and I've watched more than a dozen hours of footage. I've never seen a short stem. If anyone has an image / video of one I'd really like to see it, post it here or PM it to me if you think it's super classified.

I will continue to search for any more material I can get my hands on, I'll try and find some ex-RAF Harrier pilots as well. I think ultimately only they will know the truth short of us getting hold of the documentation.

I don't think the "2" is an SA-2 for a number of good reasons. Namely if we assume this is a hostile SA-2 why would the pilot be mucking about filming it in the middle of a combat mission? Furthermore if we assume the 'block' means friendly then you'd have to believe the SA-2 is marked as friendly in the ALR-67's threat library!

 

However if the Harrier was operating in a naval exercise, which it almost certainly was, it's not unreasonable to believe it's an E-2 Hawkeye, the naval AWACS.

1. They clearly go over land to blow stuff up.

2. SAM simulators mimic threat waveforms for RWRs http://leonardodrs.com/air-combat-training-systems/products/electronic-warfare-simulators/

3. The pilot is clearly showing alot of sensor footage while in a live fire event. Its not a big deal to show a SA-2 simulator. The F-20 Tigershark sales video shows a bunch of SAM simulators on its RWR.

4. The ALR-67 likely cant even pick up the E-2's radar IRL due to its low frequency. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=192936

5. After closer inspection of the indication, it may in fact be a "Z" not a "2". The "Z" may be an indication of the ZSU-23 on IRL rwrs.

6. I can guarantee that the SA-2 radar is indicated by a "2" on the ALR-67. Not as "FS" (Fan Song). Either way, "2" or "Z", neither of these is a E-2 radar indication.

This is one of the reasons why I marked the dashed stem as non-lethal in post #25. I don't believe the dashed stem represents a lethal threat but I can't prove it.

 

The documentation for HUD RWR in the Hornet says a dashed is lethal but every piece of reference material I have suggests a dash is a non-lethal (in the Harrier).

You've misinterpreted the video footage. The all the docs indicate that the dashed line is a lethal threat.

The problem with this is I am yet to see a short stem on a Harrier's HUD or EW display. I've read every manual that's available to the public, I've got numerous references images and I've watched more than a dozen hours of footage. I've never seen a short stem. If anyone has an image / video of one I'd really like to see it, post it here or PM it to me if you think it's super classified.

You mean this one?

The stems above are short and solid.

Finally, you dont know what the brick on the stem means. For all we know it could indicate that you're jamming it or it could represent an emitter about to age-out.

Please check these images you sent me:

https://imgur.com/a/E7yLw1k

 

 

This is an AV-8B during an air refueling. You can see a RWR contact that is being identified as lethal. I seriously doubt that pilot would be calmly taking fuel if he really had an enemy lethal radar contact in his RWR.

 

 

I'm quite sure this is a friendly radar that is being identified as lethal due to signal strength.

This is incorrect.

That IS a SA-3 being identified as lethal because its an SA-3. Its likely a SAM simulator and poses no real threat between practice runs.

If it was a friendly radar it wouldn't be identified as a lethal threat.

To further emphasize my point. You can also see a lethal indication for a AAA radar while he's refueling (indicated by the "A" symbol) and he doesn't seem to care. (its probably a simulator as well)

He's also seen making a bombing run on a ground target with the "A" indication. Furthering the point that it is indeed a simulated AAA threat.

https://imgur.com/a/E7yLw1k

Zeus,

 

I did notice something in the RAZBAM update video that I didn't understand.

 

I keep hearing the "status change" tone playing when nothing is happening.

 

I know you're working the ALR-67(v) for the Harrier, but the (v2) cant be all too different. In the (v2), status change tones happen when

 

1. an emitter appears (unless its a fighter radar, in-which it plays a waterfall tone instead)

2. an emitter moves up in threat (ie from non-lethal to lethal, or from lethal to critical)

There are a couple of bugs with status change and new threat tones.

4. The ALR-67 likely cant even pick up the E-2's radar IRL due to its low frequency. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=192936

 

5. After closer inspection of the indication, it may in fact be a "Z" not a "2". The "Z" may be an indication of the ZSU-23 on IRL rwrs.

#4 is the key point I previously wasn't aware of. That really mixes things up for the stem 'block'. If we assume the 'block' means friendly emitter then this is most confusing. If this is an SA-2 symbol then the 'block' almost certainly doesn't represent a friendly.

#5 is a possibility.

You've misinterpreted the video footage. The all the docs indicate that the dashed line is a lethal threat.

On the Hornet with the ALR-67(V)2, yes absolutely.

On the Harrier with the ALR-67(V) this isn't the case. I am yet to see one Harrier manual (or ALR-67(V)) manual explain the meaning of each style of lollipop. Just because the Hornet's manual says it's dashed, doesn't mean the Harrier's is too.

You mean this one?

 

 

The stems above are short and solid.

?

They're clearly not. They're the same size as a critical threat cue with the F/A-18 emitter cue having the 'block'.

Finally, you don't know what the brick on the stem means. For all we know it could indicate that you're jamming it or it could represent an emitter about to age-out.

This is true. Until we get actual documentation on this particular system the best we can do is extrapolate from what we see.

Found more HUD RWR footage, this time from RAF Harrier's. Look at the top you'll see the RWR lines but not the symbols. 2 of them will be the Goalkeeper CIWS and one will be the Type 1022 search radar. There's a goalkeeper on the bow and another on the stern but below deck level.

Some more, this time from the Spanish. This video has some excellent footage of RWR page.

2:25 - First threat appears

2:41 - Flies over a friendly airbase and you see the threat move about the display

Found another HUD RWR image as well, this time with an 'F'

And another one with a '16'

On the Hornet with the ALR-67(V)2, yes absolutely.

 

On the Harrier with the ALR-67(V) this isn't the case. I am yet to see one Harrier manual (or ALR-67(V)) manual explain the meaning of each style of lollipop. Just because the Hornet's manual says it's dashed doesn't mean the Harrier's is too.

 

I am not so sure that you can't extrapolate from the F/A-18C version... If we think logical, why for the love of god would you switch the meaning of symbology between different versions of the same device?

It would be like having traffic lights that depending on build and type use red for "stop" and green for "drive", where in older version it is green for "stop" and yellow for "drive", red is not explained and can mean anything?!

I am sure we can safely assume, the general logic between the RWR on the Hornet and AV-8B is similar. So if we have a detailed description from the Hornet manuals, I would rather assume it is the same than guessing around from pictures and videos...

Keep in mind the pilots life depends on split second reaction to some of these threat indications, so they likely are consistent and logical. You would not want to be the engineer explaining the loss of an aircraft and crew is related to you tweaking around with a well established symbology just because you could. ;)

I am not so sure that you can't extrapolate from the F/A-18C version... If we think logical, why for the love of god would you switch the meaning of symbology between different versions of the same device?

 

This is also for the ALR-67, notice how the bands are in reverse. You're asking me a question that I myself would like to know the answer to. The thing is it happens.

I am sure we can safely assume, the general logic between the RWR on the Hornet and AV-8B is similar. So if we have a detailed description from the Hornet manuals, I would rather assume it is the same than guessing around from pictures and videos...

Why assume? Why not put in the research, get in touch with people who know the answer and get a correct simulation?

This is also for the ALR-67, notice how the bands are in reverse. You're asking me a question that I myself would like to know the answer to. The thing is it happens.

That is interesting, though I rather suspect a typo/switch error... Every western RWR I ever heard of shows threats from low to high, lowest outer ring, high inner, flashing if it guides/fired a missile.

I may be wrong, but if I am wrong the engineers behind that switch the way it works just to make it deliberately hard for a pilot to learn to survive. :D

Why assume? Why not put in the research, get in touch with people who know the answer and get a correct simulation?

Of course that would be the perfect solution! Seems that stuff is pretty restricted, as there are not much details around.

I'll take a clear statement from a fighter pilot that have flown the thing anytime over any video or pic, though.

This is also for the ALR-67, notice how the bands are in reverse. You're asking me a question that I myself would like to know the answer to. The thing is it happens.

 

 

 

Why assume? Why not put in the research, get in touch with people who know the answer and get a correct simulation?

On the initial ALR-67 version , lethality was Out. Non-Lethal was inner, Lethal was middle and Critical was outer. In the specific case of the F-14 this must be the version it used until its retirement.

Current ALR-67 version, including the those in the AV-8B, have their lethality reversed: Non-Lethal is outer, Lethal is middle and Critical is inner. I checked and rechecked this and have documents confirming this.

The reason for the change eludes me but probably it had to do with keeping everybody working in the same way.

Found more HUD RWR footage, this time from RAF Harrier's. Look at the top you'll see the RWR lines but not the symbols. 2 of them will be the Goalkeeper CIWS and one will be the Type 1022 search radar. There's a goalkeeper on the bow and another on the stern but below deck level.

 

Britsh G.R. Harriers use a different, more advanced and still HIGHLY classified, RWR system, not the ALR-67.

Britsh G.R. Harriers use a different, more advanced and still HIGHLY classified, RWR system, not the ALR-67.

Sort of. The system you're referring to is called the ARI. 23333, or as it's better known - Zeus. The main differences between it and the ALR-67 was the automatic countermeasure system and the MAWS. Only Zeus had those. Aside from that it was fairly similar. Also from what I've been told Zeus was a pile of shite!

I will add that British stuff remains classified for a long time, even if it's long been outdated. The MoD are tighter than a ducks arse for releasing information. To give you an example I've got an RAF Tornado GR.4 weapons manual, the yellow bands around AIM-9's to indicate they're live was redacted and deemed secret. The same for acceptable laser codes on a GBU-10/12. Information for both of those can be easily found on the web.

A couple more HUD RWR symbols, this time from the HUD of a GR.7 on HMS Invincible / Illustrious.

Good enough for me. Thanks Zeus for clarifying and looking into it deeper.

Believe me, it is hell when you have documents contradicting each other. That means one superseded the other.

Believe me, it is hell when you have documents contradicting each other. That means one superseded the other.