[FIXED]MAWS picks up burned AIM-120?

I'm not sure If it's a bug, but the MAWS seems to continue to detect an AIM-120 that's no longer has its motor burning and is gliding in a perpendicular angle(or more).

MAWS.trk

It's the pod picking up the active radar right?

It's the pod picking up the active radar right?

Negative, I'm getting the same result without using the SPJ pod. It's definitely the MAWS when it's within its detection range.

The missile nose temperature is very high, as well is its wings leading edges etc. And if the aircraft/missile is breaking the sound varrier (> 1 Mach), the moisture in air the missile flies through gets heated very hot, generating very large area of heat cone around it as the air gets compressed instantly by object flying over speed of sound.

A few decades old IRST systems can see this on aircrafts as well, why you can spot a Mach 1.2 aircraft from the front far further distance than aircraft that flies ie. mach 0.8. It is like having afterburner on from the rear, but this from anywhere around it.

So missile doesn't need to have engine burning to get a high temperature area around it, it just needs to fly toward you at Mach +1.

In DCS it's probably more that any missile in the detection zone will be detected and shown.

So missile doesn't need to have engine burning to get a high temperature area around it, it just needs to fly toward you at Mach +1.

Thanks for the explanation! But, I'm not sure whether DCS has modeled the interaction between heat and moisture in such detail tho.

I just checked tacview and the missile that was behind me was gliding at M0.6. My MAWS stayed buzzing until the missile impacted the ground.

I’m sure it is acting like an IRST

Thanks for the explanation! But, I'm not sure whether DCS has modeled the interaction between heat and moisture in such detail tho.

I bet it doesn't do it at all yet, because that is the core features of the new weather system (if you listen the famous Wags Alert 5 podcast interview). But that same result can be met by other means simply by making the MAWS system to detect all the missile ID's at the given range and issue warning/tracking if the missile speed is above Mach 1, time of launch is X (how long it takes to generate the missile front to heat up etc) and various other things.

To perform a simulation, one doesn't need to simulate things in details, as known elements and factors can be simply skipped by assuming they exist.

I just checked tacview and the missile that was behind me was gliding at M0.6. My MAWS stayed buzzing until the missile impacted the ground.

The missile doesn't cool down because it is just below Mach 1. Flying at high speed will heat up the missile, even when flying at the -40 to -50 C temperatures, as the friction is high. And the missile is a thick object that will collect the heat and reserve it well.

In space at -270 C, after example the rocket booster has already cooled down, I would not expect anything detect a missile without an radar or some other fancy UV detection.

I own a FLIR that you can attach to smartphone, from the company called FLIR (duh!). And it is extremely useful tool for all kind applications, finding heat leaks in buildings, moisture damage, water leaking in roofs, car engine problems or car A/C unit problems, the electricity cables inside walls, water pipes inside walls, you can even find a city water pipes and especially heating pipes under the ground (and that is like below 1.25m below surface).

But one thing that was interesting as aviation fan was as well that how does the aircrafts look through a simple FLIR.

And I am talking about device like this:

So talking really small, lightweight and tiny device. Comes with MicroUSB (old model now), USB-C and Lighting connectors. And the battery offering operation time is about 30-60 minutes depending working environment temperature (at winter time outside different than at summer time etc).

Here is FLIR own example of the how F/A-18C looks when looking through at such tiny gadget:

Now compare that to military grade IRST systems and then to MAWS systems that are specifically designed to detect the small heat sources etc and then check their parameters and track them. IRST systems use mechanical scanning, while MAWS systems has fixed lenses with ultra wide angle optics, and where IRST system can have very narrow zoom to scan a long range distance, the MAWS system works at limited space as its resolution is smaller and trying to find a smaller missile, but so is everything surrounding, so it is all relative. Detection of the IR missile from 15-30 km range is one thing, like a RWR getting lock from the active seeker missile scanning emissions at 30 km range, and then to find something, lets say 3-5 km and react to it.

This is similar thing example with the PRESIDENT-S system, that is against IR- and Radar guided missiles. A shoulder launched IR missile engine burn times are very short, nothing like Medium Range missiles etc that are larger and has more fuel, but consider that example Stringer has 2 second engine burntime, and it might need to travel to 4-5 km distance, the time it takes to accelerate that missile is just about 1-1.4 km from launch point when the engine stops. So rest of that max ranges the missile is just gliding.

But for the PRESIDENT-S system that is enough to detect the launch, spot the missile, track the missile and if the missile is guiding toward the system (doesn't cause false-alarms from the missiles that are missing the aircraft) then it will wait that missile is at the optimal range from the aircraft and only after that it will perform automatic counter measurements actions at it.

Now, that President-S system is not big one, its major parts are really the RF/IR lamps or RF/IR lasers turrets (first and second generation, we are getting the second generation to Black Shark 3) that will jam and guide missile to other direction, with the assistance of the flares and chaff to generate other noise around the protected aircraft. And you can fit all that to a much larger carried aircraft pod below the fuselage/wing. The sensors are not large, but as aerodynamic features in fighter jets are required, it is better to have them on pod than on fuselage itself if no sealth features are required.

There is as well reason why modern normal infantry clothing is IR block coated, so you can't see them in FLIR. The facial paint that is issued for soldiers is as well IR blocked, to suppress reflections and avoid heating up in colder environments. As well all normal preparations like using foliage to improve soldier equipment hiding on helmet, on upper body etc is effectively suppressing IR signature of the soldier. Yet it takes only one soldier to lit up a cigarette and whole squad location is revealed to any enemy that is using TIS or NV for very long ranges.

As soldiers on ground are not really fearing the fighters or attack aircrafts, they fear MBT's, IFV's and enemy recon teams that has far more advanced TIS/NV equipment than fighters does have, but far more difficult terrain requirements than aircrafts does.

What comes to missiles, the surrounding of near by of the aircraft is very cold, and the missile movement in the area will reveal its possible signature, as said, unlike the IRST system, the MAWS is constantly observing the whole field of view at once, detecting the moving patterns etc, instead scanning an area with a steered small FOV pattern.

So if flying at altitude, the missile will generate a signature that modern MAWS can spot and track. While the old MAWS systems like in A-10C, you really get it just as a launch blume happens etc, and the system can't detect anything else, why you get just a single light warning of detection of launch, and then it is your job to act for that. Why leaving MAWS and automatic flaring On, will effectively empty you quickly over battlefield or friendly missile launches etc as system doesn't track missiles, doesn't detect ranges etc.

Now as any sensor, MAWS are not perfect. Clouds, snow, rain etc will effectively block it. Same way as X-band radars do not see clouds, unless the cloud is raining as only the rain droplets gets detected as they reflect the radar emissions. And you need multiple different radars to detect clouds, or see through the clouds, or detect rain and see through the rain.

We would need more information about the MAWS system in JF-17 to really know what all kind features it can do and how. Like is it as advanced like the President-S is in first generation, or is it like more advanced second generation etc?

It is well required to remember that JF-17 is a most modern aircraft in DCS, and very modern in the concept of the fighters. Other like F/A-18C or F-16C are nothing like it. Those are old aircrafts compared to JF-17. And in while military requirements are pushing technology forward, it is very slow and old, when compared to IT technology speed. That what 30 years (1989) was possible, is very old technology by ITC standards, but very high tech by military standards. What was build in 2000-2005 era for military, it is old technology compared what a ITC segment can do in 5 years from 2015 to 2020.

The technology level, access and innovations speed is crushing in ITC sector anything that military can really do. Why there are far more small defense contractor companies working with military because they can far more freely innovate and test and build systems. It takes just a one software coder with little engineering skills and arduino, few simple sensors and a lot fancy advances can be made very cheaply.

And it is the military that lags behind by their military standards, their testing methods and all kind other things. Like alone the most advanced computers in fighters are multiple times worse than anything in last 20 years in ITC. Why universities etc is the place where the future is created, not in military.

I think that is simply a bug. The MAWS on the A10c is quite modern also and cannot detect amraams with the engine dead long ago, same for MAWS in the m2k.

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

I think that is simply a bug. The MAWS on the A10c is quite modern also and cannot detect amraams with the engine dead long ago, same for MAWS in the m2k.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

The MAWS in A-10C can't even detect the range or direction of the missiles, nor their flight path like some other modern MAWS like PRESIDENT-S and the one in JF-17 (but it can't detect the range for IR or SARH missiles).

It is a known bug and will be fixed soon. JF-17 maws detect the Ultraviolet signal of burning rocket motor not IR(so much ambient IR interference ).

The MAWS in A-10C can't even detect the range or direction of the missiles, nor their flight path like some other modern MAWS like PRESIDENT-S and the one in JF-17 (but it can't detect the range for IR or SARH missiles).

MAWS that detect flight path tend to be radar sensors and they also tend to be very expensive and rare. Your MWS is giving away your position. (There is an alternative that is possible, with the F-35s DASS, but range detection becomes questionable).

Optical MWS tend to use the UV, and specifically (IIRC at least) mostly look for the rocket motor ignition. If that type of MWS didn't pick up the engine firing, it won't be picking up a burned-out missile. This is what you have in the JF-17.

fixed

Three types of MAWS

There are three types of MAWS in use on aircraft today, each with its complexity and characteristics.

1. The simplest is the MAWS that work on detecting the UV light from the missiles burning motor. It can have a wide-angle single detector design that relies on spectral filtering to not trigger false alarms and empty the flare dispenser prematurely (and also give the aircraft away visually). There are not too many UV sources in nature, thus it works with the negative that it won't detect missiles where the engine has burned out.

2. A more complex MAWS, and, therefore, heavier and more expensive it the IR based one. It detects the IR heating of the missile fuselage as discussed. There are a lot of IR sources in a fighters environment (ref AIM9L problems with clouds lit by the sun etc) and it must, therefore, use sophisticated filtering to achieve a decent false alarm rate. The most know unit is the ELBIT PAWS. It has high spacial angle resolution and it uses track tracing filtering to separate occasional and stationary IR glints from a missile. The JF-17 MAWS seems to be of this type. One can see this on the sensor window which is opaque white like some longer wave IR missile seekers (UV ones have dark windows). But it can also be a UV system and the opaque window seen is a peacetime sensor aluminum cover (it seems to be a turned al cap).

3. The third type is a small pulse doppler radar looking backward. It's expensive, complicated, and difficult to install as the antenna diagram has to have very low sidelobes for it to work. The Typhoon MAWS is of this type. It can have a very low false alarm rate and will give the distance to the missile and thus it's time to impact. It can thus schedule the flare dispensing precisely. It has the negative of emitting radar signals that can be picked up by RWR and ESM receivers.

I think that is simply a bug. The MAWS on the A10c is quite modern also and cannot detect amraams with the engine dead long ago, same for MAWS in the m2k.

 

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk

You call the MAWs on the A-10c modern? That thing can't even detect the range of the missile. You might want to do some study and redefine what is "modern".

Ah ah, I got you, as long as that thing is from western, it is "modern", right? Good logic you guys have there, just hope you guys can stop putting wars around the world

There are three types of MAWS in use on aircraft today, each with its complexity and characteristics.

 

1. The simplest is the MAWS that work on detecting the UV light from the missiles burning motor. It can have a wide-angle single detector design that relies on spectral filtering to not trigger false alarms and empty the flare dispenser prematurely (and also give the aircraft away visually). There are not too many UV sources in nature, thus it works with the negative that it won't detect missiles where the engine has burned out.

 

2. A more complex MAWS, and, therefore, heavier and more expensive it the IR based one. It detects the IR heating of the missile fuselage as discussed. There are a lot of IR sources in a fighters environment (ref AIM9L problems with clouds lit by the sun etc) and it must, therefore, use sophisticated filtering to achieve a decent false alarm rate. The most know unit is the ELBIT PAWS. It has high spacial angle resolution and it uses track tracing filtering to separate occasional and stationary IR glints from a missile. The JF-17 MAWS seems to be of this type. One can see this on the sensor window which is opaque white like some longer wave IR missile seekers (UV ones have dark windows). But it can also be a UV system and the opaque window seen is a peacetime sensor aluminum cover (it seems to be a turned al cap).

 

3. The third type is a small pulse doppler radar looking backward. It's expensive, complicated, and difficult to install as the antenna diagram has to have very low sidelobes for it to work. The Typhoon MAWS is of this type. It can have a very low false alarm rate and will give the distance to the missile and thus it's time to impact. It can thus schedule the flare dispensing precisely. It has the negative of emitting radar signals that can be picked up by RWR and ESM receivers.

And what type of MAWS does the JF-17 has now?

I think the MAWS on Jeff is IR type.

Here's an interesting test for you to try with the Jeff:

* Set up a target at 40000 ft (I use AWACS)

* Set target to not react to you

* Fly at 10000 ft and fire a missile at it from 40 NM

* Missile will miss, but that's not the interesting part...

The missile will climb to try and reach the target, but will run out of energy. Keep flying at 10000 ft at Mach 1+. The missile will fall behind the aircraft, MAWS will see it, and it will start alerting.

By this time, the missile battery should be dead, so the missile should no longer be active, so it's not RWR that is picking up the missile.

@Fri13: I've seen some crazy IR systems. One system was so sensitive, at the bottom of a stack of paper (we're talking 500+ sheets of A4) it could see where I had put my finger on the top of the stack for not even a second. A whole new way to see the world.