1.2.12 -- radar modeling - fighters vs helos

The FC3 code base is the same for all playable planes within FC3, so making distinctions between the radar sets is difficult and probably undesireable.

Look at the MiG-21 for example, it uses its very own radar display code and does an interesting job of throwing radar clutter at you.

Can't really do all that with FC3 easily. Even adding TWS to MiG-29C was difficult.

But this doesn't exist in the game' date=' does it? :)[/quote']

I have no idea what the bug report fix was. Like does helicopters now be visible realistically or was it buggy that they were not be spotted by radars?

The FC3 code base is the same for all playable planes within FC3, so making distinctions between the radar sets is difficult and probably undesireable.

Does that mean that all FC3 radars essentially operate the same way? Or do different radars have advantages and disadvantages that correlate with their real life counterparts?

I have no idea what the bug report fix was. Like does helicopters now be visible realistically or was it buggy that they were not be spotted by radars?

That's not what I'm talking about. I heard a rumor sometime ago that rotor doppler return was disabled some time ago for balance purposes. I'm trying to find out if it's true, partially true, or just flat out wrong. It has nothing to do with what was mentioned in the patch note AFAIK.

They have very basic advantages and disadvantages yes, some parameters are different. Superficially, if you looked at descriptions of the radar sets on the net, you might think the differences are modeled quite well.

They're not, but they're enough to at least cause some distinction. :)

Example: TWS vs STT is a very visible distinction.

You will find the MiG-29 radar sees things at shorter ranges compared to the Su-27 or F-15 radar as well.

On the slightly more obscure side, different notch gates can be modeled from set to set, but you only get one notch gate per radar set - you can't change it.

Other characteristics flat out can't be currently modeled. For the issue in this thread, F-15's will see helis sitting on the ground and cue them for attack from 40-50nm away, as long as the rotor is spinning.

Su-27S, MiG-29A, might not be able to attack such a heli but I have some confidence that they can at least detect it as a jamming strobe, for example.

Does that mean that all FC3 radars essentially operate the same way? Or do different radars have advantages and disadvantages that correlate with their real life counterparts?

Thanks for the clarification GGTharos.

If they do, that's good. The RWR has no way of knowing what's what. Friendly SAMs not showing on RWR is a 'game' feature, not realistic. It was there to help out with players that chose aircraft with RWRs that weren't so great at giving you SA as those of other aircraft.

On this, one thing I'm curious about it RWR threat coding. In my more recent missions, I've been adding more planes in an attempt to get a more realistic feel (you're a single mission in a war, not the whole war itself).

Anyway, the F-15 RWR gets overloaded and goes crazy. The new threat tone plays repeatedly (and makes the ears bleed). FC3 has a RWR filter, but it will only show STT locks. I image the RWR can filter by radar type. While TEWS doesn't know whether or not a F-15 is friendly or foe, the command structure will realize that the enemy has no F-15's. They could then program the RWR to ID all 15 signals as friendly, or to just ignore them. I'd image you could do the same with SAM's like Patriot for example.

Or am I just totally off on this?

Realistically the RWR has a limit of how many targets it will display (realistically also how many it can process), so it should, AFAIK, display the 16 highest priority threats to the aircraft.

I'm sure there's a possibilty of 'de-prioritizing' known friendly equipment, but what if your enemies happen to share this equipment?

The RWR limiting contacts I don't have a problem with. More that it handles it by changing the 16th contact constantly and chirping the new threat sound over and over. For the first time I had a reason to map RWR volume controls to my stick.

As for shared equipment, I was thinking that the RWR would be reprogrammable. What gets programmed as what would depend on where the aircraft was headed. So during Gulf War I, all F-14's would be classified as friendly unless Iran decided to fight the US for some reason, then the RWR would be programmed to recognize 14 signals as ambiguous.

If this is how it really works, I'd love to see it in the sim. Even if it doesn't make it on the Eagle in FC3, I'd image it would work for the A-10 and F-18.

They are reprogrammable, but with respect to reprogramming threat libraries beyond the manufacturer's site, I wouldn't know.

In any case, any good RWR isn't going to omit informing you of a high-threat signal.

As for the 'new threat' sound ... I have some ideas but for now, no comment.

The RWR limiting contacts I don't have a problem with. More that it handles it by changing the 16th contact constantly and chirping the new threat sound over and over. For the first time I had a reason to map RWR volume controls to my stick.

 

As for shared equipment, I was thinking that the RWR would be reprogrammable. What gets programmed as what would depend on where the aircraft was headed. So during Gulf War I, all F-14's would be classified as friendly unless Iran decided to fight the US for some reason, then the RWR would be programmed to recognize 14 signals as ambiguous.

 

If this is how it really works, I'd love to see it in the sim. Even if it doesn't make it on the Eagle in FC3, I'd image it would work for the A-10 and F-18.

I think this could be an option for the far future but most mission builders would not want do go that deep.

Sure, it could add some spice to missions when you leave the programming incomplete but that is very advanced mission editing.... I would like to fly the Hornet first, before the developers spare some time for these things

Taking your example, in Gulf War 2 were many cases, in which old threats like SA-2, SA-3 profiles were not programmed for planes flying SEAD. Simply because some people tought these systems were to old for a conflict at that time. As you can imagine it was a bad suprise for those pilots...

You can't really buy inventions and better results. Money just helps to get raw materials if needed but to actually improve the most important factor that is the brain power, not even hiring people will help there.

 

It is interesting as far I know the radars works currently On/Off manner. You either are on the range or not. So RWR picking up signal far before signal bounces back to lighters doesn't seem to be there. Notch etc does seem to work and all other fancier things from Mig-21 radar etc.

 

When it comes to helicopters, they are easy to spot via radar. The fuselag isn't the main radar bouncer but the rotor blades are. As radar works by comparing the timings of the received signals to you, the technology to have "look-down" radar is required only. Notch works because you get ground behind you and your fuselage speed to beamer basically stops, becoming a "static object" (against older radars). Helicopter rotors are rotating all the time, on one side the blades are rotating forward and one side rotating away, at high speed (rotor RPM is kept steady all the time) around 300km/h and straight and round edges the blades are, are pointing to all directions continually. The radars can even identify a helicopter type by the signal, how many rotor blades it has and can even spot the flight style of the pilot from how blades are operated.

 

So if the radar can look-down (old tech), helicopters are easy to find as long the rotor disks are visible to radar. What eliminates the idea of "stealth helicopter" completely until the blades material can be 100% energy observed so it "sucks" radar emissions (and would work same time as RWR) and that is pretty huge task as the rotor "is the helicopter" aerodynamically.

 

Until someone "rotates" helicopter upside down, so the helicopter fuselage is over rotor disk, helicopter can't sneak around any radar without using terrain to block radar emissions reaching it. And then the fuselage could be made less visible and allow it to do "invisible pop-up" with some surprising manners. It is perfectly possible by aerodynamics and even the flight characters would stay same as fly-by-wire does rotate your controls around.

 

PS. Don't you think the "Defense" is a strange word if the military is all around the world outside of their country borders

I think you missed one important point here, because if it was just like you write here, you would basicly spot a Rotor on radar at any speed, because it's at the same rpm basicly.

It's the gearbox that change the angle of attack on blades that rotate backwards to keep balanced lift on both sides.

At slower speed, the angle of attack is much lower, and the radar beam would just bounce away in a different direction.

Only when the speed is high enough, the area of leading or trailing edge on blades, will increase enough to reflect back to a radar. And probably not in just any direction either. (doppler radar mode)

And ,you can actually buy better results. The big advantage western RWR and radars have, is not the slightly better power. It's much more important the ability to detect weaker signals and filter away noise, and this is the most costly part i guess.

I don't think mone money necessarily gets you better ideas - who got the first electronically scanned radar in an in service fighter ? The US or the USSR ? The USSR.

It does mean you can actually get your ideas into service - who has more aircraft with electronically scanned radar in service, the US or Russian ? The US...

"The big advantage western RWR and radars have, is not the slightly better power"

Didn't the Su-27 historically have a higher power output than the F-15 - while - yes - the F-15 had a much better processor...

I'm sure there's a possibilty of 'de-prioritizing' known friendly equipment, but what if your enemies happen to share this equipment?

You use a different threat library/multi mission data load which reflects the order of battle. No more complex than loading new map data or anything else. Many RWR systems allow for multiple threat libraries to be loaded and the pilot can select them from the RWR config menus, as well as other options that affect threat prioritisation (hide or show search emitters for example). The same type of data is used for the "AUTO" modes in newer countermeasures dispensing systems, and also ECM systems.

This is a sim, not a game.

Everything should be modeled as accurately as possible. Nothing should be done for game balancing purposes.

+1

Couldn't agree more!

Everything should be modeled as accurately as possible. Nothing should be done for game balancing purposes.

Except for SAMs and Manpads right?

I don't think mone money necessarily gets you better ideas - who got the first electronically scanned radar in an in service fighter ? The US or the USSR ? The USSR.

PESA, yes, but they put it in a plane with a size that allows for it. Meanwhile only prototype AESAs exist in Russia, and the US guys are using their 3rd generation of "mass" produced AESA. The only reason that comes into my mind for the americans not developing PESA because they were probably already working on AESA, the Raptor project started around that time. The 31s only got their PESA in '81 anyway IIRC.

Except for SAMs and Manpads right?

I would love to see SAMs modeled as realistic as possible - especially with the F/A-18C inbound.

That's what I figured, but I didn't know on which level it happens, and you probably don't get those options on all aircraft (eg. I'm not certain how you'd make this choice in a MiG-29A, whereas I'm fairly confident that you can get your NCTR and TEWS libraries loaded from a data cart in the F-15. Probably USB stick on the tiffie ;) )

You use a different threat library/multi mission data load which reflects the order of battle. No more complex than loading new map data or anything else. Many RWR systems allow for multiple threat libraries to be loaded and the pilot can select them from the RWR config menus, as well as other options that affect threat prioritisation (hide or show search emitters for example). The same type of data is used for the "AUTO" modes in newer countermeasures dispensing systems, and also ECM systems.

I think you misunderstood some stuff.

The SA-2 and SA-3's were not ignored. Certainly sometimes there are memory limitations in older systems and maybe you can't get all the threats you want in there.

On the other hand, what you probably read was something about some aircraft's ECM systems not being able to cope with the older SAMs well. That would seem to be true of the F-15 family back in that day.

As for the RWR, any quality RWR should be able tell you when you're being attacked regardless of whether the threat is programmed in or not. Any quality ECM system can at least attempt to jam that signal as well. It's just not identified as a specific threat, so the defensive programming might not be optimal.

I think this could be an option for the far future but most mission builders would not want do go that deep.

Sure, it could add some spice to missions when you leave the programming incomplete but that is very advanced mission editing.... I would like to fly the Hornet first, before the developers spare some time for these things

 

Taking your example, in Gulf War 2 were many cases, in which old threats like SA-2, SA-3 profiles were not programmed for planes flying SEAD. Simply because some people tought these systems were to old for a conflict at that time. As you can imagine it was a bad suprise for those pilots...

very interesting...

I think you misunderstood some stuff.

 

The SA-2 and SA-3's were not ignored. Certainly sometimes there are memory limitations in older systems and maybe you can't get all the threats you want in there.

 

On the other hand, what you probably read was something about some aircraft's ECM systems not being able to cope with the older SAMs well. That would seem to be true of the F-15 family back in that day.

 

As for the RWR, any quality RWR should be able tell you when you're being attacked regardless of whether the threat is programmed in or not. Any quality ECM system can at least attempt to jam that signal as well. It's just not identified as a specific threat, so the defensive programming might not be optimal.

1. For sure there are limitations in memory and in this case you are right. Eagles were the main platform which encountered These Problems. But even with 6 months preparation some genius decided Gammon and Grumble threats are more likely to expect at this time...Maybe it was simply grossly negligent :music_whistling:

2&3. I really mean the RWR not the ECM (Don't know about the ECM stuff but can also be true if you say so). Yes there were warnings on the RWR that they got illuminated but without a clue which system it was.

Ok, you can do your evasive turns under all forms of attack but again I would say with 6 months prep it was at least negligent.

From "Strike Eagle" page 111 (Capt. John Norbeck): "I called and told them about all the SAM's and that our RWR gear did not give us a single indication of all those SA-2 launches. It was not a malfunctioning instrument, either. We had done the self check on it on the line. It was fine. It just didn't have the programming to pick up the band they were using up there."

This was no single case...

A lot of launches were ballistic. I really doubt they need special programming to 'pick up that band', especially considering that there are other threats they undoubtedly had factored in that operated in similar bands - I'd go with a ballistic launch, 'cause they were actually quite worried about taking HARMs down on the ground. Launch now, guide later :)

Yes, but I'dont know what you want to say with it (sry, english is not my native language). As I would imagine the Fan Song activation for Missile tracking should initiate a RWR warning for missile launch!?

PS: I have most of my knowledge by documentary books, if you have better hands on material I will believe it.

For the target, yes, but not for someone who's not in the way of the beam. I think you'd have to pick up the uplink if they were trying to use optical guidance, too. That would last only a few seconds, and it would only work if the target was flying where the missile is going.

Basically, the deal is: We can't really tell what's right - if they didn't load those libraries, if the F-15 was unable to detect those SAMs at all (which sounds fishy to me, but it is possible), or if something else was going on, like using a different SAM firing technique and maybe the pilot thinking the missile was launched at them, but it never was, or the operators just failed to get the guidance going altogether.

Yes, but I'dont know what you want to say with it (sry, english is not my native language). As I would imagine the Fan Song activation for Missile tracking should initiate a RWR warning for missile launch!?

 

PS: I have most of my knowledge by documentary books, if you have better hands on material I will believe it.