Jump to content

DCS: MiG-23MLA by RAZBAM


MrDieing

Recommended Posts

The 55km distance for N003 is the detection of a fighter sized target with a 100% probability above 1500 meters. But it has no problem detecting and locking fighter sized targets much far away. While the 60km for a fighter for the Phantom is for a probability of around 85-90% IRC.

The N003 operation and look-down capabilities are better than AP-120.

 

What is not a problem at all for N003 as it was very advanced radar for the task it was meant to be in the Soviet Doctrine. That, you are only allowed to engage targets that GCI can see as well, meaning that you are not going to engage targets that only you will see, as you do not have overall picture that what is happening around you like the GCI does have. This helps a lot to ease the workload and avoid information overload for pilot when they are personally guided by the GCI to targets (air and ground) and the GCI is there to secure the pilots working environment with "need to know" information.

 

And when the GCI was set to cover all the important air spaces, you don't need an radar that can lock on targets multiple times further than the weapons fighter is carrying or even detect targets there. As it is the GCI that detects those targets multiple times further than enemy can detect even Soviet fighters and it then guides their fighters toward enemy for engagement range.

 

So thinking that max launch range for R-23R was around 12-25km for heading target depending the altitude, the radar capability detect and lock targets at 60km is excellent for the weapons capabilities.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the cases and in most of the countries the interceptors are going to be guided by GCI, being ground stations or AWACS. That "Soviet centered CGI" doctrine is a myth and it needs to die already. There was also two Soviet main aviation forces, which were the Air Defense know as PVO, which was in fact more CGI centered (while not at the level many still think) and the Air Force, the VVS, which advocated for a more freely and fluid engagement doctrine.

 

you don't need an radar that can lock on targets multiple times further than the weapons fighter is carrying or even detect targets there.

Well, the fact was that in the 70ies it was still not possible, technologically speaking, to deploy a radar with such capabilities in a fighter. That capability came with the MiG-31 in the 80ies.

And the MLA could also use the R-24 with far greater performance than the R-23.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Most of the cases and in most of the countries the interceptors are going to be guided by GCI, being ground stations or AWACS. That "Soviet centered CGI" doctrine is a myth and it needs to die already. There was also two Soviet main aviation forces, which were the Air Defense know as PVO, which was in fact more CGI centered (while not at the level many still think) and the Air Force, the VVS, which advocated for a more freely and fluid engagement doctrine.

 

 

Well, the fact was that in the 70ies it was still not possible, technologically speaking, to deploy a radar with such capabilities in a fighter. That capability came with the MiG-31 in the 80ies.

And the MLA could also use the R-24 with far greater performance than the R-23.

 

:thumbup:

 

Additionally, VVS birds traded GCI equipment for more advanced navigation(you can always tell a VVS or PVO bird looking at the antennas - datalink OR navigation), and in PVO the guy in your headset is called "Intercept navigator", while in VVS - "Combat control officer".

 

GCI was born during the Battle of Britain of 1940, came to full power during the Korea war, and is used by all air forces of the world at all times when possible. Can you imagine tank platoons acting without their regiment coordinating them? With air combat, its the same as any other.

Another thing - in a fighter regiment, the place of the regiment commander, who is of course a fighter pilot, is not in the cockpit but behind the seats of the CCO's.

 

A question to the audience, can anyone tell what the red stripes on the MiG-19 livery mean?:smilewink::D


Edited by Кош

ППС  АВТ 100 60 36  Ф <  |  >  !  ПД  К

i5-10600k/32GB 3600/SSD NVME/4070ti/2560x1440'32/VPC T-50 VPC T-50CM3 throttle Saitek combat rudder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1_1.jpg

 

U mean these stripes?

 

To identify Soviet aircraft in 1968 Czech invasion is what I found

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DCS: The most expensive free game you'll ever play

 

 

 

Modules: All of them

System:

 

I9-9900k, ROG Maximus , 32gb ram, RTX2070 Founder's Edition, t16000,hotas, pedals & cougar MFD, HP Reverb 1.2, HTC VIVE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wrong:) Its for similar types dogfight training. Those stripes are temporary. Which debunks the myth of "no dogfighting behind the Iron Curtain"

ППС  АВТ 100 60 36  Ф <  |  >  !  ПД  К

i5-10600k/32GB 3600/SSD NVME/4070ti/2560x1440'32/VPC T-50 VPC T-50CM3 throttle Saitek combat rudder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In all fairness, he could've been referring to a different set of stripes.

Here's another mention of the 68 invasion

kamo-21SM.jpg

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DCS: The most expensive free game you'll ever play

 

 

 

Modules: All of them

System:

 

I9-9900k, ROG Maximus , 32gb ram, RTX2070 Founder's Edition, t16000,hotas, pedals & cougar MFD, HP Reverb 1.2, HTC VIVE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they were reused from training, then only half or so of the aircraft would be usable, not accounting for maintenance attrition, unless the other half of the aircraft hurriedly received stripes as well

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DCS: The most expensive free game you'll ever play

 

 

 

Modules: All of them

System:

 

I9-9900k, ROG Maximus , 32gb ram, RTX2070 Founder's Edition, t16000,hotas, pedals & cougar MFD, HP Reverb 1.2, HTC VIVE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they were reused from training, then only half or so of the aircraft would be usable, not accounting for maintenance attrition, unless the other half of the aircraft hurriedly received stripes as well

 

Not training aircraft reuse, practice of temporary markings reuse.

Its not like half of the force is always striped. Its agressor force receive temporary paint for two weeks and then its washed away. Same described in articles about Il-28.

ППС  АВТ 100 60 36  Ф <  |  >  !  ПД  К

i5-10600k/32GB 3600/SSD NVME/4070ti/2560x1440'32/VPC T-50 VPC T-50CM3 throttle Saitek combat rudder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Makes sense, but "use in training" doesn't denote "training aircraft",there is a difference.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] DCS: The most expensive free game you'll ever play

 

 

 

Modules: All of them

System:

 

I9-9900k, ROG Maximus , 32gb ram, RTX2070 Founder's Edition, t16000,hotas, pedals & cougar MFD, HP Reverb 1.2, HTC VIVE

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our migs used temporary color stripes and motives to play "agressorss" during pre 89' military excercises. I will try find some pictures in my modeling references. Those was not like western top-gun - more like whole operation excercise where you have assigned task like troops support, bombing and so on. There was generally lack of dogfight training.


Edited by ataribaby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
The 55km distance for N003 is the detection of a fighter sized target with a 100% probability above 1500 meters. But it has no problem detecting and locking fighter sized targets much far away. While the 60km for a fighter for the Phantom is for a probability of around 85-90% IRC.

The N003 operation and look-down capabilities are better than AP-120.

 

 

 

It actually is, it just uses external coherence, which is not as effective.

 

Later versions of the Phantom were also updated with Doppler radars, but the operation was really awkward because it would represent the targets in the screen by it´s closing speed while the N003 would just represent them in the regular way a modern radar does.

 

to clarify, it is coherent. But its not "Pulse Doppler" in the western sense of the phrase. ie it doesnt measure velocity, but instead can filter out non-moving targets. Thus, it is Coherent MTI, but not PD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to clarify, it is coherent. But its not "Pulse Doppler" in the western sense of the phrase. ie it doesnt measure velocity, but instead can filter out non-moving targets. Thus, it is Coherent MTI, but not PD.

 

 

I´m not a radio-electronics specialist, but as far as I have read the N003 has external coherence and also uses Doppler filters for special "Doppler modes" of operation. Also, specialists which I have talked to told me that the radar it is in fact a Doppler one, just not as capable as those later present in the 4th gen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you guys may have hashed this out, or at least there is a MIT Lincoln lab video/webpage that explains the difference.

 

My understanding is that MTI techniques won't provide velocity vector information, just that "its there and moving".

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beamscanner, we already had here discussion about this. Russian specialists from "Fazothron" ( radar creator ) called RP-23 a "pulse doppler with external coherency" and they considered this device as a "pulse doppler". Believe me or not but they don't care what was said by some dude from USA, so please give a break.... .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a whole long thread on the secret projects site on this radar.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a whole long thread on the secret projects site on this radar.

 

IIRC the result was that at the time Russian technical literature criticized the American idea, and the main difference really was that West just called something with other terms, so that West really didn't get what Soviets did.

 

This in that "coherent" vs "non-coherent" terminology that West uses.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Just so people who may be completely lost can get caught up I just pulled some definitions from some sources on radars I have.

 

"MTI"

This is a method of clutter rejection that a radar may employ. Clutter is essentially 'noise' on the scope, think the F14's radar in pulse mode when looking at the ground, that can obscure a target. There are two types of MTI that have been developed. Coherent and non-coherent. The non-coherent is the oldest type and may also be called "area' MTI.

Non-coherent MTI radars do not process Doppler frequencies. The returns from one scan are subtracted from returns from the next scan. All targets that move at least one resolution cell in the time between scans are displayed. All stationary objects, including fixed clutter, are cancelled and not displayed. In this type of MTI, clutter cancellation is based on the size and movement of the return. Due to changes in the clutter cross section, instabilities in radar operations, variations such as rain or clouds, and noise from the transmitter, clutter cancellation is never complete. In another form of non-coherent MTI, the radar returns from moving targets are compared to the returns from fixed targets, and the fixed targets are cancelled. These non-coherent MTIs are simple, but they do not provide the clutter rejection available from coherent MTI radars.

[/Quote]

 

Next is Coherent MTI.

A coherent MTI uses the fact that Doppler shifts appear to a pulse radar as phase shifts on the received target pulse. Coherent MTI uses sophisticated circuitry, including stable local oscillators (STALOs) and coherent local oscillators (COHOs) to capture and process these phase shifts. Further processing of these phase shifts yields velocities for each return. Those velocities associated with stationary targets are rejected and only moving targets are displayed. Coherent MTls have a major problem called “blind speeds.” Blind speeds occur for all target Doppler frequencies that are the exact PRF, or any multiple of the PRF, of the radar signal. When a target is moving at a velocity that produces this Doppler frequency, its return is cancelled along with fixed returns.[/Quote]

 

Now a coherent MTI differs from a Pulse Doppler radar in that

MTI uses Doppler frequency shifts only to reject clutter while a pulse Doppler radar uses Doppler frequency shifts to reject clutter and to track targets in velocity[/Quote]

 

------

Secret projects site conclusions, pulled together from multiple posts with grammar adjusted so it makes a bit more sense.

 

The Saphir-23MLA (N-003E) radar the primary radar in the MIG-23MLA and is defined in Russian literature as a “coherent pulse Doppler radar” with a inverse Cassegrain antenna. In the west this would better be described as a pulse radar with a clutter-referenced MTI mode. It uses "a method of moving target selection by external coherence", which is best described as clutter-referenced MTI rather than non-coherent MTI. A true coherent pulse doppler radar produces identical trains of pulses, allowing you to process doppler information in the phase/frequency that the pulse was given by you. A Coherent-On-Recieve radar transmits varying pulses, but stores the information on the pulse so that on receiving the returning pulse it can be compared to the original transmitted pulse. In contrast Sapfir-23 doesn't store the transmitted pulse information. Instead, it uses the clutter return as a reference signal. So "coherence", by the western definition - in order for the pulse phase to be an integer number of wavelengths apart- it means that the pulses are simply on/off interruptions of a continuous wave. Hence Western "coherence" = Russian "quazicontinuous", rather than Russian "coherence". "quasicontinuous wave" consists of pulses with high repetition frequency. So, at some aspect you can say the wave appears as a continuous but in real it is not, thus the word "quasi=nearly"continuous or in russian (Квазинепрерывный режим излучения-KNI). The Sapfir radar is thus quasicontinuous wave, a pulse radar with high repetition frequency, which at last enabled them to utilize various doppler filtering techniques.

 

The Sapfir-23 is a pulse radar that uses doppler processing, and uses an external method of obtaining coherence. Hence, you could, at a stretch, say it is a "coherent pulse doppler" radar without lying. The Sapfir-23 was continuously developed, later versions used greater numbers of doppler filters for better range accuracy and introduced additional modes to pick out targets in different situations. Later versions are better in lookdown, but still not comparable to a true pulse-doppler radar. The N-019 is a pulse-doppler radar with true internal coherence, and hence is an interrupted continuous wave ("quazicontinuous") radar.

 

I will speak about the radars delivered with the Mig-23 variants to Iraq (Mig-23MS, MF, and ML). The radar delivered with the Mig-23MS was the Almaz-23 which was the same delivered with the mig-21bis. That radar was good for nothing; just to summarize. The radar delivered with the Mig-23MF was a Sapfir-23E but interestingly had no capability to launch the R-13M or the R-60. This is an interesting point since the radar mentioned in the second reply by overscan, does have the capability to launch the am weapons. The radar supplied with the Mig-23ML was the Sapfir-23M and not the NOO3. Again it had no capability to launch the R-13M. The technical documentation of the Sapfir-23E was very meager; the main technical documentation was for the Sapfir-23M radar. Here the PRF is 1 KHz and 5 KHz. The quasi-continuous frequency is 100 KHz; it is used only in guiding the R-23R and R-24R Semi Active Radar Homing Missiles. The difference between the western approach and the eastern approach is that the western (not always; the French didn’t adopt this approach in the Matra Super-530 missile) approach use a pure carrier while the eastern approach was to use high repetition pulse. The Soviets never used the western solution for guidance; in fact they criticize it in their scientific literature.

[/Quote]


Edited by nighthawk2174
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The radar delivered with the Mig-23MF was a Sapfir-23E but interestingly had no capability to launch the R-13M or the R-60. This is an interesting point since the radar mentioned in the second reply by overscan, does have the capability to launch the am weapons. The radar supplied with the Mig-23ML was the Sapfir-23M and not the NOO3. Again it had no capability to launch the R-13M.

 

Not sure what they are talking about here. R-60 and R-13 are IR guided. All the radar has to do is provide ranging information. Unless it is about slaving the IR seeker head to the radar contact?


Edited by Dehuman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Agreed i've never heard of the N003 as being a PD in our traditional sense of it, as in it directly measuring doppler I've always seen it referenced as a pulse radar. Hence why i'm in favor of what is described on the secret forums site that its really just a matter of different terms that's getting everything confused as per normal with Russian equipment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I know there's no onboard designation capabilities, but don't suppose there's any word on KAB-500L's or KH-25's? Those being available to use with red JTAC's would certainly stave off my wishes for a MiG-27.

 

I know we're getting KH-23's but a man can dream, right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know there's no onboard designation capabilities, but don't suppose there's any word on KAB-500L's or KH-25's? Those being available to use with red JTAC's would certainly stave off my wishes for a MiG-27.

 

I know we're getting KH-23's but a man can dream, right?

Only used on the BK 23's.

 

As for JTAC with ground laser - it was really experimental and rare.

ППС  АВТ 100 60 36  Ф <  |  >  !  ПД  К

i5-10600k/32GB 3600/SSD NVME/4070ti/2560x1440'32/VPC T-50 VPC T-50CM3 throttle Saitek combat rudder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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