ECM Issues

[Cmptohocah]

I wasn't sure I should post this in DCS World thread or here, so I do apologize in advance.

 

First, and for me, the most important issue: 

Why are 3rd party as well as HF modules blind (not affected) by FC3 plane's ECM [F-16, F/A-18, F-14]?
For me that's very important factor, as it denies them from launching in TWS mode at me. TWS and omni-potent AMRAAMs are already over-performing in a sense of their reliability and target finding. Take away the ECM and this turns into a joke.

Are "red" planes not important at all? Or are we just supposed to serve as bait?

Why is the jammed radar able to "pin point" the azimuth of the ECM source?
From what I understand, the jammer sends actively false signals (returns) and this confuses the radar as it does not know which return is true and it consequently can't tell the range - this is currently implemented as a vertical bar of endless targets. But as the radar sweeps from side to side, many more false returns should appear and the scope should appear cluttered, since the radar is receiving false echoes while the receiver is moving.
Here's an image on how it looks like in the real world:

 

 

Thanks in advance. 

[draconus]

18 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

Why are 3rd party as well as HF modules blind (not affected) by FC3 plane's ECM [F-16, F/A-18, F-14]?

Simply because they all are Early Access atm and lack (or WIP) their ECM modeling.

18 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

Why is the jammed radar able to "pin point" the azimuth of the ECM source?

Since the ECM is currently very simplified in DCS and is rather of SPJ type it is modeled as strong jamming source denying range info. That way it is susceptible to HOJ radar missile guidance and far RWR detection. I wouldn't expect any changes to that any soon and it probably depends on both ECM type used and radar/software on the receiver side. If you have any hard data on that (which I doubt) please provide it to the devs.

Edited December 16, 2020 by draconus

[Cmptohocah]

9 minutes ago, draconus said:

Simply because they all are Early Access atm and lack (or WIP) their ECM modeling.

Since the ECM is currently very simplified in DCS and is rather of SPJ type it is modeled as strong jamming source denying range info. That way it is susceptible to HOJ radar missile guidance and far RWR detection. I wouldn't expect any changes to that any soon and it probably depends on both ECM type used and radar/software on the receiver side. If you have any hard data on that (which I doubt) please provide it to the devs.

 

No need to doubt, very accessible explanation on how basic ECM works can be found here:

 

HOJ has to do with the missile seeker that navigates to the source of the radiation, but making the radar tell the azimuth is just not realistic - maybe we are not striving for realism here. This is also an option.
Everything depends on everything in real life, but we need to start from somewhere. We should not accommodate some things just because they're convenient and use "we don't know" as an excuse. We know 5%? Let's model that 5% and not keep it at 1% 'cause it's fine the way it is. It's not fine!
 

[dundun92]

Why would the radar not know the azimuth? When you get an RWR ping, you know the azimuth. ECM is the same thing: a radio emission from a fixed point in space. Im not doubting that some ECM modes simply flood the reciever, but it is very reasonable to expect HOJ to detect azimuth in many cases. For example, the F-15 -34 describes this very HOJ mode, the "AOJ (angle of jam)", and the symbology is exactly how it is in DCS.

Edited December 16, 2020 by dundun92

[Cmptohocah]

7 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

Why would the radar not know the azimuth? When you get an RWR ping, you know the azimuth. ECM is the same thing: a radio emission from a fixed point in space. Im not doubting that some ECM modes simply flood the reciever, but it is very reasonable to expect HOJ to detect azimuth in many cases. For example, the F-15 -34 describes this very HOJ mode, the "AOJ (angle of jam)", and the symbology is exactly how it is in DCS.

 

It can't tell 'cause the receiver is moving around. So while it's doing that it receives false returns and it can't tell which one of them is real. You can see in the Su-27 HUD I posted above, that the entire scope is filled with false targets (returns).
I would also expect for the missile in HOJ mode to find the receiver as it's just homing in on the signal source, nothing strange about that. To be honest I don't really know how the HOJ mode on F-15 radar works, perhaps it has some memory and it sees in which direction the emission source is strongest, but there is no way it can detect this in search mode.
Also in RL jamming causes the RWR to show false targets, but this is not modeled in DCS either.

[GGTharos]

17 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

It can't tell 'cause the receiver is moving around. So while it's doing that it receives false returns and it can't tell which one of them is real. You can see in the Su-27 HUD I posted above, that the entire scope is filled with false targets (returns).

 

Monopulse antennas have a slightly easier time with this.  That would be every modern antenna out there since the 80's, but also since this is basically sidelobe jamming which doesn't exist in DCS, it's a form of jamming that will be overcome as distance decreases.   The radar's ECCM capabilities (including hardware and software) also come into play here.

 

Quote

I would also expect for the missile in HOJ mode to find the receiver as it's just homing in on the signal source, nothing strange about that. To be honest I don't really know how the HOJ mode on F-15 radar works, perhaps it has some memory and it sees in which direction the emission source is strongest, but there is no way it can detect this in search mode.
Also in RL jamming causes the RWR to show false targets, but this is not modeled in DCS either.

 

No, it's not just homing on the signal source.   That's sort of how it's modeled in the game, but HoJ is a lot more complicated and it may in fact not do this at all.   There are various ECM countermeasures that may be rightly or wrongly captured by that acronym, including the weapon system allowing you to launch the missile when the most recent data for the target becomes obviously bad.

 

A simple noise or range jammer can be homed in on like with a heat seeker (AZ/EL is easy to determine), and you may even be able to range it.   Modern DECM, to the best of our knowledge attempts to break the offender's lock, which the offender tries to prevent and maybe reacquire, so it's a fight.   Then there's JAFF.   And there's no guarantee that a specific ECM set can prevent TWS from working, the simple reason being that the resources available tot he ECM (processing power, literally emission power) can limit how many and the type of targets you can jam.  A MiG-29S jammer is overcome with one eagle radar in STT and possibly one, definitely two 120s since it's limited to two targets, and both of those mentioned have plenty of ECCM to play with.

A flanker's jammer might be in ground-bounce mode so while it may provide some false targets, it might not be doing much else that's interesting, etc.

 

So draconus answered the facts WRT DCS, and the reality is that you can expect zero new modeling/nuances for ECM to show up any time soon.

Edited December 16, 2020 by GGTharos

[BlackPixxel]

1 hour ago, dundun92 said:

Why would the radar not know the azimuth? When you get an RWR ping, you know the azimuth. ECM is the same thing: a radio emission from a fixed point in space. Im not doubting that some ECM modes simply flood the reciever, but it is very reasonable to expect HOJ to detect azimuth in many cases. For example, the F-15 -34 describes this very HOJ mode, the "AOJ (angle of jam)", and the symbology is exactly how it is in DCS.

 

ECM does not have to be a single emitter.

 

L-005 pods of the Flanker are widely spaced appart, and might do angular deception using crosseye jamming. Then the monopulse seeker will home in on a twisted wavefront, and point in the wrong direction.

[GGTharos]

My understanding is that in this setup, one listens and one emits which is better than some other ECM sets (which have to time-share listening and emitting).   A few meters being enough for cross-eyed jamming, maybe?  I don't know enough about it - it was discussed a very long time ago and it was decided that crosseyed jamming was difficult to do WRT phase sync.   It may also not be possible to keep up with the signal at all.

 

Modern DRFM jammers could in theory do better since they eliminate drift (I think?), but the theory still requires an un-changing signal, and receiving and retransmitting likely takes longer than it takes for the reflection to get back to the radar.  By then, the next pulse might be on a completely different channel.

 

However, passing a nice non-ECM looking (but strong) Vc signal to the missile might cause it to do things that aren't good for the intercept.   And then there's JAFF.

[BlackPixxel]

Only for the much simpler L-203 pods (for export) we know how it is set up. There you have indeed one pod receiving and one pod transmitting. But it is a much more primitive design overall, with simple antennas just transmitting/receiving in the whole coverage sector and additional antennas pointing downwards for the terrain bounce jamming.

 

L-005 is not comparable at all, it can controll the beams and focus the radiation directly on the target. But whether or not each pod is a transceiver or transmitter and receiver are seperated is not known I think.

Edited December 16, 2020 by BlackPixxel

[Cmptohocah]

6 hours ago, GGTharos said:

So draconus answered the facts WRT DCS, and the reality is that you can expect zero new modeling/nuances for ECM to show up any time soon.

 

This right here is the essence. Any discussion on any topic, at least for the "red", that might improve perfomance to an undermodeled system is ended swiftly wit h an answer: "it's working as it's supposed and don't expect any changes".

 

I've seen it too many times here on the forum already. Any real data from the manuals and other credible sources  is quickly disgarded.

 

To my question: why is my Su-27's ECM not affecting "blue" planes? I got an answer: they are early access and ECM is no guarantee against TWS. How can something be any "access" without basic system modeling?

 

To my question, how on earth, can AIM-120 reacquire targets within its seekers gimbal-limits volume almost instantly? I got an answer: yeah it's probably too much, but doesn't make much difference.

 

Bottom line is, it seems: "Don't ask to many questions. It's the way it's supposed to be."

 

Well, fair enough. Saves both my and your time.

[GGTharos]

17 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

Any discussion on any topic, at least for the "red", that might improve perfomance to an undermodeled system is ended swiftly wit h an answer: "it's working as it's supposed and don't expect any changes".

 

This has nothing to do with 'red'.  In an F-15, my ECM doesn't affect anything that's not FC3.  I didn't say they won't add some simulation to current modules, I'm just saying don't expect it to be more than the simple thing it is now.

 

17 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

To my question: why is my Su-27's ECM not affecting "blue" planes? I got an answer: they are early access and ECM is no guarantee against TWS. How can something be any "access" without basic system modeling?

 

What do you mean how?  They're all like this.

 

17 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

To my question, how on earth, can AIM-120 reacquire targets within its seekers gimbal-limits volume almost instantly? I got an answer: yeah it's probably too much, but doesn't make much difference.

 

Indeed it doesn't.  With the turn that missile has to pull, it won't hit anything.  So you're right, it's not right but it's also not a huge problem.   It's been like this forever, as the only search available for AAMs apparently is that fast spiral search.

 

 

17 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

 

Bottom line is, it seems: "Don't ask to many questions. It's the way it's supposed to be."

 

Well, fair enough. Saves both my and your time.

 

Nothing wrong with asking questions.  You've just run into stuff that's been going on for a long time and it's not like others haven't reported them ... you've seen the history here, change is slooooooow.

[draconus]

11 hours ago, Cmptohocah said:

I've seen it too many times here on the forum already. Any real data from the manuals and other credible sources  is quickly disgarded.

Dude, you put a youtube link and one image and expect simulation changes based on that? It doesn't work like that here. I already told you - if you have any credible docs or hard data (which I doubt, because it's highly classified), legally obtained, go to the devs with it 'cause right now it's not even in plans to work on that.

We only tell you that for you to manage your expactations - think far future. We're not against red or sim changes. We all would love to see proper EW implemented and wait for it patiently but constant poking with bug reports and wishlists is all we can do. And no - it's not like it suppose to be. Cheers.

Edited December 17, 2020 by draconus

[QuiGon]

On 12/16/2020 at 10:45 AM, Cmptohocah said:

First, and for me, the most important issue: 

Why are 3rd party as well as HF modules blind (not affected) by FC3 plane's ECM [F-16, F/A-18, F-14]?
For me that's very important factor, as it denies them from launching in TWS mode at me. TWS and omni-potent AMRAAMs are already over-performing in a sense of their reliability and target finding. Take away the ECM and this turns into a joke.

Are "red" planes not important at all? Or are we just supposed to serve as bait?

 

You're not the only one who is pretty frustrated about this unfair advantage (altough I don't even play FC3 aircraft, but it's also unfair to full fidelity modules like the MiG-21 and M2000C that model jamming effects). I made a thread about this issue a while ago here:

 

 

[Coxy_99]

29 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

 

You're not the only one who is pretty frustrated about this unfair advantage (altough I don't even play FC3 aircraft, but it's also unfair to full fidelity modules like the MiG-21 and M2000C that model jamming effects). I made a thread about this issue a while ago here:

 

 

 

ECM works for the f-14, Its just not added to F-16 and F-18.

[QuiGon]

39 minutes ago, Coxy_99 said:

 

ECM works for the f-14, Its just not added to F-16 and F-18.

 

Please read the thread I linked. I explained, that the F-14s own ECM system is working (unlike the F-16s or F/A-18s ECM system), but just like with the F-16 or F/A-18, the F-14 is still missing jamming effects when it is beeing jammed by ECM systems of other (enemy) aircraft. That's a pretty unfair and unrealistic advantage, being able to jam others but being immune against jamming.

Edited December 17, 2020 by QuiGon

[BlackPixxel]

What makes it even worse is that the F-14 ECM does not have a 15 s cooldown like the FC3 aircraft.

 

So it has the best ECM in DCS whilebeing unaffected by ECM of other aircraft. The best of both worlds.

[QuiGon]

1 hour ago, BlackPixxel said:

What makes it even worse is that the F-14 ECM does not have a 15 s cooldown like the FC3 aircraft.

 

So it has the best ECM in DCS whilebeing unaffected by ECM of other aircraft. The best of both worlds.

 

I'm not really familiar with the FC3 aircraft, having only flown the F-15 a little bit, but I can't recall that there was an ECM cooldown in the F-15. Also, AFAIK none of the full fidelity aircraft with ECM has a cooldown on it (A-10C, F-14, Viggen, M2000C, MiG-21, JF-17).

Edited December 17, 2020 by QuiGon

[dundun92]

No cooldown, just a 15s warmup

[QuiGon]

5 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

No cooldown, just a 15s warmup

 

Oh, yeah, I remember that from the F-15

[Cmptohocah]

1 hour ago, dundun92 said:

No cooldown, just a 15s warmup

This "warmup" was introduced in the old days of LOMAC or FC (can't recall exactly) 'cause the F-15 drivers were complaining it ruins their target tracking as the "red" drivers were turning it on and off constantly. AI still has no "warmup" but the flyable planes do.

[dundun92]

18 minutes ago, Cmptohocah said:

This "warmup" was introduced in the old days of LOMAC or FC (can't recall exactly) 'cause the F-15 drivers were complaining it ruins their target tracking as the "red" drivers were turning it on and off constantly. AI still has no "warmup" but the flyable planes do.

Yes, but it wasnt really a red/blue thing, as both planes are equally affected by ECM.