Aircraft RCS and IR signature

Here is an image, created by Quaggles, illustrating all DCS aircraft RCS and IR signatures.

Take a look at the Razbam Mirage values for RCS and IR signatures, compared to the ED Mirage 2000-5, which has the same body and engine. Compare it to other aircraft of its class.

Mirage 2000-5: RCS of 5 m^2 and an IR signature in AB of 3

Mirage 2000 by Razbam: RCS of 4 m^2 and an IR signature in AB of 1.6 (???????)

Another to look at is the Deka JF-17.

JF-17 RCS of 3m^2 compared to the F-16 (4m^2), RB Mirage 2000 (4m^2) and the F-5E-3 (5m^2) which all have similar sizes and shapes.

JF-17 IR signature of 2, compared to the MiG-29 (same engine) of 4.... and no... removing one engine, doesn't cut your IR signature by 2, you still have the same engine, which operates at similar temperatures.

The MiG-21 has an IR signature of 1.... in AB. That's how much a Su-27 has in mil power....An F-5 has a coefficient of 2, but runs its engines a lot cooler (depending on setting can be more than 100C cooler).

Interesting to see this. It appears that the data needs to be updated across the board for all the aircraft. The RCS data is very odd I think it maybe more a coefficient than a true RCS value. It may also take into account materials of construction and resonant frequency due to shape and internal construction. The IR data I wont even guess at as how that was determined. If I recall correctly I think these are the advertised frontal RCS values of US aircraft but I have seen the numbers vary wildly (eg the F-15 can be anywhere from 10-25m^2).

F-15C ~ 10 m^2

F-16C ~ 1.2 m^2

F-18C ~ 3 m^2

F-18E ~ 0.1 m^2

F-22 ~ 0.0005 m^2

F-35A ~ 0.0015 m^2

MiG-21's and M-2000C's IR signature can't be that low in real life.

JF-17 has low-observable intake vs. the F-16 which doesn't.

As for IR signature, the installation CAN affect this, so it isn't as simple as it being "the same engine".

Interesting you shoot the aircraft you don't fly. ;)

How do the F-14, Viggen stack up? Curious you don't mention these. ;)

Looking at the data with an unbiased eye, it looks OK to me.

You neglect to mention the F-14 and JF-17 have the same AB signature (5.0), or that the Viggen and JF-17 have the same RCS (3.0).

Hawk has nearly double the RCS of the L-39 despite being a similar size (5.0 vs. 2.5).

F-18 "only" has an IR signature of 4.0 despite having two engines, vs. the F-14 at 5.0; and the F-16 "only" has an IR signature of 3.0 despite being similar to the JF-17 at 4.0.

Bias everywhere... ;)

I'm not criticizing the topic though - a great discussion! You just need to understand a bit more about how/why similarly APPEARING aircraft can have such different values. It's not as simple as size or shape.

MiG-21's and M-2000C's IR signature can't be that low in real life.

As the note says - it is 1.0 relative to Su-27 at MIL power.

Well... how hot is that? 500 deg. C? 600 deg. C? 300 deg. C?

Does a factor of 2.0 mean if the Su-27 at MIL is 300 deg. C that the IR signature is 600 deg. C?

Is the IR signature in DCS affected by throttle setting?

Without knowing the mathematical equation they are using to model how RCS and IR is used, anything we theorize is speculation. The detection by radar of any object is a function of size, shape, materials, atmospheric conditions, radar type of frequency and all sorts of other factors. From what I understand from a radar engineer friend of mine, the RCS's is a base number that is calculated under a standard protocol. Basically, they stick an aircraft on a tall pylon at a known distance and use a standard power on a standard radar type to come up with the published RCS. Don't ask me what those standards are. The plus side is that it would allow less biased comparisons...so doing the standard procedure on an F-4 and then on an F-16, you could reasonably make judgements on the RCS. Same goes with IR detection...what type of seeker, cooling, computing rate, etc...lots of parameters....so having a standard of 1 and comparing others to it makes sense from a modelling perspective...but is it really a measure of the real world? probably not but if the relative measures are reasonable, then the modelling, depending on how it's done, could be reflective of the real world.

Fascinating topic but without real information as to how things are implemented it's really impossible to assess how realistic it is other than relative comparisons. Do you believe that aircraft A is twice as easy to detect as aircraft B? We all have our biases and those who design DCS do too. For example, the Mig 21 is small, but it has sharp edges and non radar absorbing metal surfaces so there isn't much there to stop or degrade radar reflections yet it has a relatively low RCS. Is it real or bias by the DCS programmers? I've talked to F-4 pilots who told me that the 21 wasn't hard to get on radar of the skies of vietnam...they couldn't shoot because of ROE dictating visual confirmation...but locking them up wasn't an issue. Yeah... a great topic of discussion but we may not get anywhere without knowing how this info is implemented.

ks

You're surprised a 20teen fighter has lower RCS value than a 1970s fighter? Really? You'll be interested to know a Super Hornet is lower in real life than a Legacy Hornet, and they are both lower than other similar sized aircraft (the canted tails help with this even).

Also, why are F-111 and Ka-52 on this list? Unless I'm stupid (possible) these are not even in the game... so your super reliable list of evidence is so reliable it includes stuff that doesn't even exist? Seems problematic, but what do I know?

Also, why are F-111 and Ka-52 on this list?

They are in the game files, just not usable. If you look at the aircraft in the warehouse list, youll notice that they are there.

Could also be of use:

- MIG-29

- Harrier

- F15, with weapons (Red line)

RCS data without azimuth / elevation taken into account is doubtful anyhow.

[quote=ruxtmp;4389935

F-18E ~ 0.1 m^2

F-22 ~ 0.0005 m^2

F-35A ~ 0.0015 m^2

Good stuff, fairy tailes. Actually, F-35s' RCS is about 0.0000000(0) m^2

JF-17 has low-observable intake vs. the F-16 which doesn't.

 

As for IR signature, the installation CAN affect this, so it isn't as simple as it being "the same engine".

 

Interesting you shoot the aircraft you don't fly. ;)

 

How do the F-14, Viggen stack up? Curious you don't mention these. ;)

 

Looking at the data with an unbiased eye, it looks OK to me.

 

You neglect to mention the F-14 and JF-17 have the same AB signature (5.0), or that the Viggen and JF-17 have the same RCS (3.0).

 

Hawk has nearly double the RCS of the L-39 despite being a similar size (5.0 vs. 2.5).

 

F-18 "only" has an IR signature of 4.0 despite having two engines, vs. the F-14 at 5.0; and the F-16 "only" has an IR signature of 3.0 despite being similar to the JF-17 at 4.0.

 

Bias everywhere... ;)

 

I'm not criticizing the topic though - a great discussion! You just need to understand a bit more about how/why similarly APPEARING aircraft can have such different values. It's not as simple as size or shape.

:lol::lol::lol::megalol:

Regarding different frequencies, the F18 radar gets different results for MED and HI-settings...

Yes that's the PRF, Hi PRF has a greater detection range but also a higher doppler gate speed and less detection range on cold targets than medium iirc.

PRF is a filter and does not increase or decrease RCS or affect it. You need to be able to detect the aircraft first (get a return), according to its RCS and then you have your doppler filters on top of that which will decide if the return will be displayed as a contact or ignored.

Good stuff, fairy tailes. Actually, F-35s' RCS is about 0.0000000(0) m^2

Except on a sustained high intensity battlefield when fixing the RAM every time might not be an option.

Good stuff, fairy tailes. Actually, F-35s' RCS is about 0.0000000(0) m^2

I can just recommend you to look up "ILA 2018 F-35 Radar"...

In short:

No high intensity battlefield and nothing fancy... A German passive radar was able to track the leaving F-35.

For every system sooner or later a counter system will be developed.

I would guess that the MiG-21 AB IR value is actually just a placeholder and unused, as the whole afterburner was modelled as a separate engine, which itself had created various problems in the past including the IR signature reducing with AB engaged, which had been fixed since then.

IMO it's not that important the absolute number itself, but the relation between them. I think ED should be the one deciding the RCS for each aircraft, so all them are consistent with each other

Gathered thrust values for some of flyable DCS aircraft from wiki (I know I know what you want to say).

I think that thrust is best scale for DCS aircraft, how IR signatures can be adjusted according to to following table:

IR signatures now in DCS:

Sure. Interesting marketing stuff... Like the missile ranges you can get from Wikipedia.

 

I can just recommend you to look up "ILA 2018 F-35 Radar"...

 

In short:

No high intensity battlefield and nothing fancy... A German passive radar was able to track the leaving F-35.

For every system sooner or later a counter system will be developed.

In short: That's great, and there are actual systems in production that do this - you can probably find several Russian systems advertising this capability, specialized 'barrier' radar systems. The USA may or may not have such a passive system, but they use the exact same track building techniques in AWACS and other radars.

You can even do this with an SDR at HOME (sort of) and make it work by collecting reflections from TV or radio station transmissions.

These things are used to detect all sorts of LO/VLO things, not just stealth fighters. But at their core they are warning systems and cannot cue weapons. They cannot identify the track, and they're likely more vulnerable to ECM/CMs and other types of decoys than active systems.

Interesting to see this. It appears that the data needs to be updated across the board for all the aircraft. The RCS data is very odd I think it maybe more a coefficient than a true RCS value. It may also take into account materials of construction and resonant frequency due to shape and internal construction. The IR data I wont even guess at as how that was determined. If I recall correctly I think these are the advertised frontal RCS values of US aircraft but I have seen the numbers vary wildly (eg the F-15 can be anywhere from 10-25m^2).

 

F-15C ~ 10 m^2

F-16C ~ 1.2 m^2

F-18C ~ 3 m^2

F-18E ~ 0.1 m^2

F-22 ~ 0.0005 m^2

F-35A ~ 0.0015 m^2

In other words, online RCS data is highly suspect. IIRC measured RCS for a MiG-21 in the x-band was around 10msq, for example ... I don't even remember where I found that piece of information though.

Sure. Interesting marketing stuff... Like the missile ranges you can get from Wikipedia.

 

I can just recommend you to look up "ILA 2018 F-35 Radar"...

 

In short:

No high intensity battlefield and nothing fancy... A German passive radar was able to track the leaving F-35.

For every system sooner or later a counter system will be developed.

Any F35 going to an airshow will have radar reflectors attached so that it cant just be measured by someone on the flight path. F35 also isnt the only plane who does this.