Jump to content

ECM 15sec fictional "warm up" - dear ED, time is to remove it


Falcon_S

Recommended Posts

This is pointless, against amraam users your ecm blinking is useless since missile afm their range is 10 - 15 miles at best while burnthrough is 30 miles.

 

This ecm mechanic should be removed since its silly anyway. What they did on the tomcat is fairly reasonable for an spj given the available tools but fc jammers are just stupid.

 

Why should FC3 not have this SP jammer then? Also, in a non datalink environment and with 120C jammers can make a big difference at high altitude.

 

Also, the tomcats SP jammer completely negates any kind of HOJ R-27ER launch which is critical since waiting until 42km burnthrough (not 30 miles as you claimed) to launch against Mk60 is not an option.


Edited by Max1mus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even above 40 kft your effective shot range is around 20 nm 120C and that's stretching it quite far. Against a guy that isn't afk you will 90% miss outside 15 nm. 15 nm is still a poor pK..

 

HOJ with the current missile capabilities is futile. If you try high altitude HOJ from 20 miles on a tomcat you will already be dead by the time you get to launch. If you try < 30 kft HOJ shot it will not even reach him. And in this scenario shorter burnthrough actually benefits you since you get to position your HOJ shot from a closer distance. It is a waste of a missile nonetheless.

 

30 nm burnthroug on cat jammers is for eagles.

 

TL;DR the tactics that are affected by the ECM implementation are either nonexistant or 1% margin of overall engagements. If you're trying to employ these tactics in DCS basically you are piloting your aircraft poorly.

 

If we had missiles with longer legs it would be a more interesting discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even above 40 kft your effective shot range is around 20 nm 120C and that's stretching it quite far. Against a guy that isn't afk you will 90% miss outside 15 nm. 15 nm is still a poor pK..

 

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/501496403860783104/608113394599460894/Tacview-20190806-034204-DCS.zip.acmi

 

Its not about PK. You can shoot missiles above 20nm and get a reaction from the bandit if youre high and fast enough. And in flankers, for tactical reasons, only detecting the actual range of jamming eagles at only 43 kilometers is a huge game changer when the bandits are not on datalink.

 

The F-15 will always still see the jamming F-14 on scope and see range and altitude perfectly fine, only locking on to the bandit and getting the information is not really possible until burnthrough (which i am pretty sure is still at 43km regardless of airframe). A similar effect is observable when russian aircraft face russian aircraft. My guess is that it is a way to simulate the anti-jamming features of radars, which would arguably be more effective against your own ECM than unknown jammers. I could be wrong.

 

Maybe by your understanding of air to air ECM is not a factor, but when looked at from a different aspect with a different approach it can certainly be seen as one.


Edited by Max1mus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that in terms of SA it can be problematic especially with astronaut pilots doing M2.

 

However you seem to be arguing that the current ECM mechanics cause a critical disadvantage in BVR fighting which is just wrong. Yes you can use HOJ shots to get a reaction from people but common long range surprise tactics like this are extremely situational and even at that very rarely used, and not because of how HOJ works but because what the missile ranges are.

 

If detecting a bandit only at ~ 25 nm is a big problem that means he's flying high which means your datalink will already see him. If you don't have datalink then what is your point with ECM? You can't possibly know what type of airframe it is in a russian jet, and you also can't IFF it and best case scenario you can correlate RWR range to the bandit to judge a HOJ shot. But then again unless there is a clear frontline you're shooting in the blind at an unidentified bogey.

 

 

I see these shots serve a purpose in 2 scenarios:

1) you're in a clean 1v1 trying to deny altitude and SA. In this scenario if the other guy isn't clueless he will understand that within a certain time window any threat is nonlethal since it had to have been fired far outside parameters and a lazy crank or even often flying straight will defeat it alone. IIRC SARH HOJ also does not give any warning as it is passive homing. If they spot the smoke trail they should know how far it was fired which confirms the threat level of the missile. I think 120s go active but that's a different story.

 

2) you're outnumbered trying to push away some of the opposition. This would be far more useful than 1) since in a higher threat density people tend to have less SA. However unless you count on the smoke trail being spotted again as I understand the ER won't give them any warning so what exactly are they supposed to react on?

 

I don't recall exactly how it works with the ER, but if instead they get an immediate STT launch warning in HOJ that makes it even easier for them since they can immediately understand that the incoming missile has absolutely no hopes of reaching them so there's no need for serious defense.

 

While against average pilots something like an out of range STT warning can trigger a disproportionate reaction, in that case there is not much need for it since they won't compete with more common tactics that actually result in a kill or kill window. It can save the day every once in a while but like I said it's a very narrow % of your engagements. Labeling it a critical problem is just a lie. A critical problem would be something that affects let's say more than 20% of your fights or a scenario that commonly reoccurs.

 

To name a few examples:

- seeker memory not implemented for active missiles

- TWS memory not implemented

- ludicrous chaff mechanics

- atmospheric conditions not affecting IR equipment

- STT support not affecting active missile guidance past pitbull

- guidance desyncs

 

These are things that cause problems every other fight you have to play out. Comparatively firing HOJ happens once in a blue moon.

 

 

Don't get me wrong having proper ECM mechanics would be a very cool thing. But until then my preferred options are either no ECM or a similar solution to the tomcat. Although full fidelity radars ignoring FC3 jammers is an interesting thing.. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So Eagles with bags are outturning you? :)

 

Hoho when we talk about ECM suddenly is WIP, the rest that affect F-15 is to have fun and turn around. Wait and keep looking to the West and to the East forever cuz BS should be fix it.


Edited by pepin1234

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hoho when we talk about ECM suddenly is WIP, the rest that affect F-15 is to have fun and turn around. Wait and keep looking to the West and to the East forever cuz BS should be fix it.

 

Do you ever take off the tin foil hat?

 

I'm as much for ECM fix for F-14 like for G damage for the Eagle.

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The current burn through range makes ECM useless.

Burn through range is greater than almost all AA missiles practical range at high altitude (Only AIM-54 now can be used above burn through range).

So a fighter with ECM has almost no advantage over a fighter without ECM.

Mirage fanatic !

I7-7700K/ MSI RTX3080/ RAM 64 Go/ SSD / TM Hornet stick-Virpil WarBRD + Virpil CM3 Throttle + MFG Crosswind + Reverb G2.

Flickr gallery: https://www.flickr.com/gp/71068385@N02/728Hbi

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, ECM erasing BVR so completely is also silly. Why would you build medium or long range missiles at all in that case?

 

The EW environment in DCS doesn't really exist - and until it does, it isn't time to change anything at all, just IMHO.

[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

On the other hand, ECM erasing BVR so completely is also silly. Why would you build medium or long range missiles at all in that case?

 

The EW environment in DCS doesn't really exist - and until it does, it isn't time to change anything at all, just IMHO.

 

How convenient.. pff

Specs:

Asus Z97 PRO Gamer, i7 4790K@4.6GHz, 4x8GB Kingston @2400MHz 11-13-14-32, Titan X, Creative X-Fi, 128+2x250GB SSDs, VPC T50 Throttle + G940, MFG Crosswinds, TrackIR 5 w/ pro clip, JetSeat, Win10 Pro 64-bit, Oculus Rift, 27"@1920x1080

 

Settings:

2.1.x - Textures:High Terrain:High Civ.Traffic:Off Water:High VisRan:Low Heatblur:High Shadows:High Res:1920x1080 RoC:1024 MSAA:4x AF:16x HDR:OFF DefS: ON GCI: ON DoF:Off Lens: OFF C/G:390m Trees:1500m R:max Gamma: 1.5

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You mean as opposed to the convenience of 'turning off' BVR? That's really exactly what should happen to our simulated flankers given the opposition they face ;)

[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

The current burn through range makes ECM useless.

Burn through range is greater than almost all AA missiles practical range at high altitude (Only AIM-54 now can be used above burn through range).

So a fighter with ECM has almost no advantage over a fighter without ECM.

 

That is wrong. If launched from enough speed and altitude, AIM-120C for example can easily kill targets 50-60nm away (if those stay high and dont beam significantly) if you trigger lofting by dual launching. Even without lofting 25-30nm shots in those parameters can be deadly if the target does not fully defend.

 

Also, in the high altitude, initial missile exchange between the R-27ER and the AIM-120C, under some parameters the ECM only gives you about 3 seconds after burnthrough to sort a bandit before having to shoot (shoot later and you can not support the missile and he can stay hot), which can end badly. Against F-14s its even worse, ECM completely prohibits any shot (yes, that shot exists if you know how the ranges) you can take and support while also being safe from the AIM-54.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"F-14 seeing through ECM isn't a big deal"

ffs how don't you understand that ECM would help reduce minimum abort range against the 14

 

Things to consider are the burn through range that would probably be much greater for the far more powerful AN/AWG-9.

The lack of ECCM techniques in DCS at the moment that should be there that would allow the possibility to negate jammer effectivness.

The lack of ECM power dedication and radar frequencies in DCS, an SPJ can't necessarily jam several aircraft and ground radars with the same power as they would against one alone as happens with FC aircraft jammers.

 

With that in mind ECM is not black and white like we see in DCS, there is so much more to the EW conflict.

Jamming in DCS is gamey, using SPO to gauge range whilst relying on bordering burnthrough to prosecute attacks is not great for realism simulation, a lot of work needs to be done to EW as a whole and is probably why so many full fidelity modules are missing these features.

 

The day the Mirage locking on to jammers and getting 80nm range indication on the HUD just highlighted how much a joke DCS ECM is.

These days i'd be more concerned about the magic missile tracking being highlighted by the Phoenix more than how ECM works with FF modules.


Edited by Frostie

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's worth mentioning that neither the L-005 Sorbtsiya nor the ALQ-135 are simple noise jammers, as DCS models them to be. The question then is whether or not it would be possible to model these systems (and ECM in general) to the exacting standards of DCS world. I would suggest not, given that the functioning of ECM systems are some of the most closely guarded military secrets for air forces the world over. That and how computationally expensive it would be to even approximate actual ECM / ECCM / ESM functions.

 

I'd love to see electronic warfare in general get a serious treatment in a future DCS world update, but I think it's very unlikely to happen. Pretty sure the very basic noise jammers that we currently have in DCS World have been modelled that way all the way back to Su-27 Flanker Squadron Commander's Edition days in about 1996. My personal view is that I'd like to see them removed until the time that ECM could be given a comprehensive treatment, if that's ever possible.

System Spec: Cooler Master Cosmos C700P Black Edition case. | AMD 5950X CPU | MSI RTX-3090 GPU | 32GB HyperX Predator PC4000 RAM | | TM Warthog stick & throttle | TrackIR 5 | Samsung 980 Pro NVMe 4 SSD 1TB (boot) | Samsung 870 QVO SSD 4TB (games) | Windows 10 Pro 64-bit.

 

Personal wish list: DCS: Su-27SM & DCS: Avro Vulcan.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's worth mentioning that neither the L-005 Sorbtsiya nor the ALQ-135 are simple noise jammers, as DCS models them to be. The question then is whether or not it would be possible to model these systems (and ECM in general) to the exacting standards of DCS world. I would suggest not, given that the functioning of ECM systems are some of the most closely guarded military secrets for air forces the world over. That and how computationally expensive it would be to even approximate actual ECM / ECCM / ESM functions.

 

I'd love to see electronic warfare in general get a serious treatment in a future DCS world update, but I think it's very unlikely to happen. Pretty sure the very basic noise jammers that we currently have in DCS World have been modelled that way all the way back to Su-27 Flanker Squadron Commander's Edition days in about 1996. My personal view is that I'd like to see them removed until the time that ECM could be given a comprehensive treatment, if that's ever possible.

 

 

I'm of similar mind, although the somewhat recent change to force ECM off until locked for the AI makes the ECM somewhat tolerable in single player.

 

 

Even if ECM can't be modeled precisely, I think we can do better than what we have now. Move away from noise jamming (except when appropriate of course) and have some hierarchy of ECM effectiveness to simulate different generations of ECM systems.

Awaiting: DCS F-15C

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It can be modeled for sure. I don't know if the new RF modeling is sufficient.

 

It's very unlikely anyone will get data on what implementations of ECM techniques existed in a given device at a given time, but once the background exists they should be able to implement fairly accurate approximates.

 

Due the complexity of the topic and the foreseeable business gain I doubt this will be done anytime soon. Plenty of other things to take care of first.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...