Jump to content

Tactics Against PD Radar in Mig-29 and Su-27


Guest Guest

Recommended Posts

Guest Guest

The pulse-Doppler radar that the Soviet Union put in Mig-29 and Flanker could only track targets if there was closure or extension. If you were heading at a PD radar then you turned 90 degrees and flew parallel to it, the PD radar would fail to show you as a radar contact.

 

I was just curious if you could use this tactic against the FC3 Mig-29, Su-27/33 with the intended effect or if accurate PD radars aren't modeled in the FC3 jets, or if the radars in the Russian FC3 jets are upgraded variants compared to what was in late Soviet era Fulcrums and Flankers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You certainly can. The doppler notch is very much modelled. That being said, any MiG-29 or Su-27 pilot who's worth a pinch of salt won't simply barrel in towards a target, particularly after launching, but will launch & crank to help prevent doppler notching. If you're flying against one, watch carefully what the intercept angle really is, and the enemy velocity vector, and change your flight path to suit otherwise you won't notch successfully and will still be visible.

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

Guest Guest

I also read that the early radar in Soviet Flankers and Fulcrums could only pick out the lead jet in a formation and was unable to differentiate between the lead jet's wingmen. Is that also modeled in the Flankers and Fulcrum?


Edited by Heavy-D69420
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I also read that the early radar in Soviet Flankers and Fulcrums could only pick out the lead jet in a formation and was unable to differentiate between the lead jet's wingmen. Is that also modeled in the Flankers and Fulcrum?

 

Yes it is modelled. I just did a very quick & dirty test. I was flying an Su-27 against 4 x F-15C's. We were all at 5,000m altitude way out over the sea to minimise and issues with ground clutter or reflections. Aspect was head-on. The AI 4-ship of F-15's were set to a close finger-4 formation which apparently means 50 metres separation. They were set up not to react to being locked by my radar.

 

I was able to pick up the enemy group as a single target at around 100 - 120 Km. The 4-ship single target resolved in to 4 separate targets at somewhere between 85 -90Km range. It should be noted that this was WAY beyond effective missile launch range. Note that there appears to be a strange anomaly here in that the enemy flight resolved in to discreet targets on my head-down display before they did on my HuD radar target display. So, in your case, if an enemy pilot is paying attention to their HDD, which all Su-27 pilots should be doing but fewer seem to do, they may be able to resolve a flight of 4 in to individual targets at anything up to 100Km, again for a head-on aspect engagement.

 

The MiG-29 has a less powerful radar than the Su-27 so the ranges I found would probably be reduced by anything between 25-40% if the enemy is a MiG-29.

 

I'd say the take home is that for any reasonable separation of a 4-aircraft flight, an enemy Su-27 will be able to resolve individual targets at anything up to 90 Km, assuming head-on aspect & no ECM. This range will be less for if you're part of a fingertips formation, but if you're going in harms way you should probably be combat spread anyway.


Edited by DarkFire

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

The pulse-Doppler radar that the Soviet Union put in Mig-29 and Flanker could only track targets if there was closure or extension. If you were heading at a PD radar then you turned 90 degrees and flew parallel to it, the PD radar would fail to show you as a radar contact.

 

I think this is complete nonsense. Its true that when operating in "Encounter"(high PRF) search mode, the radar needs sufficient closure rate to see contacts, but own aircraft is not stationary so this would concern contacts that are receeding at the same or higher speed than your own.

 

This does not affect other modes that use medium PRF or a mix(interleaved) of medium/high PRF.

 

You certainly can. The doppler notch is very much modelled.

 

"doppler notch" occurs when the target momentarily appears to be stationary and is filtered out as clutter - simply flying on a perpendicular course to the radar won't do by itself. Besides, it affects any PD aircraft radar - not just the Russian ones :)

 

I also read that the early radar in Soviet Flankers and Fulcrums could only pick out the lead jet in a formation and was unable to differentiate between the lead jet's wingmen.

 

That is true - the radar might actually see aircraft in a formation as individual contacts and display them as such on the HUD, but will only allow the lead contact to be selected.


Edited by Alfa

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Doppler notch takes advantage of the velocity gate set in pd radars such as the n001 and apg-63 to filter out clutter. Inside this closure speed pd radars reject contacts as has been described in the Gulf when an Iraqi Mig25 performed a doppler notch against F-15s resulting in them losing track.

This is modeled in DCS.

 

With regards to being able to lock onto only a lead this is probably down to cell resolution in non aesa radars which limits singling out close formations from long range, this is not modeled in DCS so far.

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is complete nonsense. Its true that when operating in "Encounter"(high PRF) search mode, the radar needs sufficient closure rate to see contacts, but own aircraft is not stationary so this would concern contacts that are receeding at the same or higher speed than your own.

 

This does not affect other modes that use medium PRF or a mix(interleaved) of medium/high PRF...

I'm not so sure about that last statement. From the real world manual:

 

...

 

The Radar Aiming Complex (RLPK) provides detection of aerial targets flying with a speed of more than 210 km/hr in both Front Hemisphere (HPRF) and Rear Hemisphere PRF (MPRF). Targets flying at a lower speed (for example, a helicopter) are not detected. The Radar Aiming Complex supports the locking of slow moving objects like helicopters when locked using Front Hemisphere PRFs. The detection and locking of hovering helicopters and attacking using Rear Hemisphere PRFs is not guaranteed.

 

When attacking targets using Rear Hemisphere PRFs in a look-up situation at flight altitudes of more than 8500 m, the Radar Aiming Complex (РЛПК) provides the detection and capture of targets if the closure rate is greater than 300 km/hr. In the rest of the cases, when attacking with Rear Hemisphere PRFs, the RLPK supports the detection and capture of targets with closure rates of 180 km/h or more. This closure speed is reduced to 100 km/hr or more, when approaching from behind the target. In situations with little or no closure rate, detection isn’t provided.

 

Tracking of targets is provided when closing with a speed differential of no less than 150 km/hr. In order to maintain a specified speed during an attack using Rear Hemisphere PRFs, it is necessary to keep the closure rate marker (which is not represented inthe sim) centered between the zero closure rate and “own speed” marks. If the closure rate scale starts flashing, increase your aircraft’s airspeed.

 

...


Edited by Ironhand

YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU1...CR6IZ7crfdZxDg

 

_____

Win 10 Pro x64, ASUS Z97 Pro MoBo, Intel i7-4790K, EVGA GTX 970 4GB, HyperX Savage 32GB, Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB SSD, 2x Seagate Hybrid Drive 2TB Raid 0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure about that last statement. From the real world manual:

You wrote speeds for autotracking in SNP. The minimal closure speed for locking target is 60km/h or 50km/h if target is making 180 turn (front to rear hem.).


Edited by Vatikus
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not so sure about that last statement. From the real world manual:

 

This is interesting. Is there a complete English translation available?

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

I'm not so sure about that last statement. From the real world manual:

 

No I can understand that - the text you quoted is not very clear and seems to contradict itself.

 

I think it would be necessary to find a better description of each radar mode, what they provide/limitations and how they are used.

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the radar needs sufficient closure rate to see contacts, but own aircraft is not stationary so this would concern contacts that are receeding at the same or higher speed than your own [...] simply flying on a perpendicular course to the radar won't do by itself.

Wow! This is enlightening and yet very much logical. That would mean that in practice most of the contact dissappearings would happen in tail aspect rather than perpendicular. And then what is currently modeled would be plain wrong just like many forum users wrongly describing how it's done. Or they are right just for the game behavior not RL. Or yet just the beaming aircraft is wrong (radar against higher targets) but the notching is ok (against lower targets because of ground clutter). Beaming the radar would only do for stationary ones (SAM, ship, hovering helo). Can someone clarify?


Edited by draconus

🖥️ 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

Sure I'll clarify.

 

Notching and beaming IS a thing, it is mostly correctly modeled in game (within limitations of the gamr engine), and if you know where to look you can find video of fighter radars being notched.

 

In weapon delivery manuals radar memory modes are described which help deal with a notching target but it's more skiing the lines of expecting the target to fly himself out of the notch (or other track loss condition) so that the radar can automatically acquire again.

 

Tactical manuals, IF you get lucky to find one, describe using the notch to approach an aircraft that has BVR advantage.

 

Etc.

 

Beaming to the notch is the act of flying perpendicular to the offending radar in order to make ones closure with that radar the same as the closure of the ground. This will cause one's aircraft to be filtered out from the list of targets - more sensitive modes exist too, but they will also display an increasing amount of false targets.


Edited by GGTharos

[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

Wow! This is enlightening and yet very much logical. That would mean that in practice most of the notching dissappearings would happen in tail aspect rather than perpendicular. And then what is currently modeled would be plain wrong just like many forum users wrongly describing how it's done. Or they are right just for the game behavior not RL. Strafing the circle perpendicular to the radar would only do for stationary ones (SAM, ship, hovering helo).

PRF would only affect how much of a closure speed is needed then.

 

Maybe you should learn to read and not manipulate quotes you clearly didn't understand before trying your hand at sarcasm.

 

The first part of your quote concerned required closure rate for a specific radar mode of the N019/N001 and has nothing to do with doppler notching, but was in response to the OP's claim that exactly these radars would loose track as soon as the target does a 90 deg. turn because there would be insufficient closure rate.

 

The second part concerned Darkfire's response about doppler notching - i.e. that doppler notching is a specific condition that you can try to force by flying a perpendicular course to opposing radar, but does not occur automatically as soon as you make the turn.

 

Besides, the OP concerned specific weaknesses of the N019 and N001 and whether they could be exploited in the sim....doppler notch is not just a "Russian thing".


Edited by Alfa

JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe you should learn to read and not manipulate quotes you clearly didn't understand before trying your hand at sarcasm.

Sorry, no sarcasm intended. I am really the one who tries to learn something here and I thought that I already know a thing. Please reread my post as I edited it multiple times to make myself clear on how and what to ask.

Back to PD radar: So a turning aircraft would only dissappear because of small closure speed. What about chasing the aircraft with same speed - meaning zero closure speed? How does PD radar handle it?

🖥️ 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

Depends on the radar ... Some radars can't handle it, others are electronically powerful enough to deal with it by staggering PRFs etc.

[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

Sorry, no sarcasm intended. I am really the one who tries to learn something here and I thought that I already know a thing. Please reread my post as I edited it multiple times to make myself clear on how and what to ask.

Back to PD radar: So a turning aircraft would only dissappear because of small closure speed. What about chasing the aircraft with same speed - meaning zero closure speed? How does PD radar handle it?

 

Maybe I should have been more clear in my original post on the subject. If your closure rate with the target is below a certain value then some radars will filter out the target as a false return or ground clutter etc. Depending on the intercept geometry one way in which this can be achieved is by flying perpendicular to the approaching aircraft so that your relative velocity to it is the same as it's ground speed.

 

As GG explained, some radars will generate track files and will try to interpret based on known target movement where and when a target might re-appear. The track files are usually discarded after a certain period of time as they are considered to be of insufficient probability of being accurate. Other radars can interleave PRF frequencies in an attempt to maintain a valid target track.

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

Thanks, guys, for clarifying. What struck me the most was that the beaming a moving radar that is lower is basically pointless and should have no effect, because there is enough closure speed and no ground clutter, right?

🖥️ 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

Nope. Not quite right.

 

Thanks, guys, for clarifying. What struck me the most was that the beaming a moving radar that is lower is basically pointless and should have no effect, because there is enough closure speed and no ground clutter, right?

[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

You wrote speeds for autotracking in SNP. The minimal closure speed for locking target is 60km/h or 50km/h if target is making 180 turn (front to rear hem.).

Is this from the Russian language Su-27 manual that's been floating around the internernet for the last several years? If so, could you point me to the page and paragraph? If not, can you provide the reference.

 

This is interesting. Is there a complete English translation available?

Unfortunately, nothing that's been well translated (that I'm aware of). Only the Google translation that often accompanies the Russian. Consequently, I've been translating as time and focus have allowed. I've done a few sections based on what I was interested in at the time. But Russian is not my native language and, so, it's been a time consuming and laborious process.

 

No I can understand that - the text you quoted is not very clear and seems to contradict itself.

 

I think it would be necessary to find a better description of each radar mode, what they provide/limitations and how they are used.

It does and it doesn't, I guess. There seems to be a lot of "THIS except when it's THAT or sometimes THIS OTHER" involved in that particular manual. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of anything more complete.

 

Thanks, guys, for clarifying. What struck me the most was that the beaming a moving radar that is lower is basically pointless and should have no effect, because there is enough closure speed and no ground clutter, right?

As GG noted, not quite right. But it's been my experience in the sim that, getting and staying below your target after you launch, increases the likelihood that your missile will hit.


Edited by Ironhand

YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU1...CR6IZ7crfdZxDg

 

_____

Win 10 Pro x64, ASUS Z97 Pro MoBo, Intel i7-4790K, EVGA GTX 970 4GB, HyperX Savage 32GB, Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB SSD, 2x Seagate Hybrid Drive 2TB Raid 0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is this from the Russian language Su-27 manual that's been floating around the internernet for the last several years? If so, could you point me to the page and paragraph? If not, can you provide the reference.

No, I am using mig29 manual of yuaf. But cross-referencing with russian one it has same data, however it is written in different didactic.

Since the given radars are pretty much the same family, there should not be that much difference and the limits pretty much confirm that.

 

 

So there is section of given speeds of detecting and autotracking, which correspond to the ones you wrote (> 150km/h). Then there is a section of detection and locking which state the given speeds I've wrote.

The formula of the closure limit is defined by: Vtarget * cos(TA) > Vmin.closure ... which coresponds to the next page in su27 manual you made the citation from - 70/80deg TA - target entering the notch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I am using mig29 manual of yuaf. But cross-referencing with russian one it has same data, however it is written in different didactic.

Since the given radars are pretty much the same family, there should not be that much difference and the limits pretty much confirm that.

 

 

So there is section of given speeds of detecting and autotracking, which correspond to the ones you wrote (> 150km/h). Then there is a section of detection and locking which state the given speeds I've wrote.

The formula of the closure limit is defined by: Vtarget * cos(TA) > Vmin.closure ... which coresponds to the next page in su27 manual you made the citation from - 70/80deg TA - target entering the notch.

 

From an entirely empirical viewpoint 70 degrees seems a little on the low side for the edge of the notch, but 80 degrees sounds entirely reasonable.

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

Depends on target's speed. 80 can be completely ineffective depending on notch size and high enough target speed.

[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

From an entirely empirical viewpoint 70 degrees seems a little on the low side for the edge of the notch, but 80 degrees sounds entirely reasonable.

As GGTharos mentioned it depends on speed of the target... for typical fighter target this is indeed around 80deg.

Here is picture from manual regarding where can one expect notch

attachment.php?attachmentid=184973&stc=1&d=1526972399

blindspeed.jpg.0e0dac02a4cce60a49c5081e4fd95311.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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