AN/ALR-56M range indications
-
Hello everybody,
I know that the RWR gives you an idea about where a theat is relative to you. It shows the azimuth but what I don’t know is what range those circles show.
In the Dash-34 manual of the Hellenic Air Force(Where they talk about the AN/ALR-93, they clearly say that the inner circle indicates a range of 25NM and that the outer edge means 50NM.And I looked it up in the BMS Dash-34 manual and there they say that the closer a target is, the more lethal it is.
But I have no idea about the range those circles indicate.
Thx guys
-
Well RWR can’t range distance very precise. Especially older ALR-69 and ALR-56M. It estimates range from signal strength and probably with some triangulation over time maybe. So with RWRs implemented in BMS simply take inner circle as lethal range of emitter and outer circle as non lethal range of emitter rather than exact range. If symbol 2 is in inner circle you can be pretty sure it will launch on you.
I don’t know about more modern ones. ALR-93 definitely can record and make triangulation positions from time samples then. I think it’s post flight stuff and not realtime one during a flight.
Also that ALR-93 ranges will be pretty same for all other RWRs as well - inner 25NM and that the outer edge means 50NM.
As I said interpret position on RWR scope more as signal strength.
-
Thanks a lot !
-
Well RWR can’t range distance very precise. Especially older ALR-69 and ALR-56M.
BAF MLU Carapace can range very precise. Too precise even for it’s usage. Sources say it was that precise it could have been used for certain SEAD missions
Contact assigned highest threat when in PRIO mode gives bearing & range, with a 1° accuracy at most times on Carapace. -
That 1° accuracy in azimuth I modeled for Carapace. You will get both more or less accurate range and azimuth for prio target in BMS.
I talked more about ALR-69/56 era devices (as question was about it) where “range” on scope is more signal strength translated empirically to range based on library punched in.
-
That 1° accuracy in azimuth I modeled for Carapace. You will get both more or less accurate range and azimuth for prio target in BMS.
Correct, and I thank you for it. Very nice to fly our native MLU since 4.33
I talked more about ALR-69/56 era devices (as question was about it) where “range” on scope is more signal strength translated empirically to range based on library punched in.
Correct, I just wanted to point out not all BMS RWR’s behave that way, just in case.
-
Ahh ok, was scared that ALR-69/56 and other older are coded badly in this respect. Carapace and ALR-93 are most powerful ones implemented.
It is very hard or even impossible to get detailed info on most RWRs so some stuff in BMS is just wild guesses. Most of stuff is classified. Current implementation is good enough for “our” game IMHO.
-
Ok just to correct some mis-information here but the RTWS does not display by distance alone but by threat level as well. It combines the two bits of data to decide where to display the threat. A good example would be say a MiG-29 on the center ring and say a MiG-21 outside of the center ring. In the above example it is very easy for that MiG-21 to actually be closer than the MiG-29 simply because the system knows that the MiG-29 is a much greater threat to you than the MiG-21.
-
yeah true, i forgot. Stubbies2003 is right it combines estimated range from singnal strenght and lethalility (it’s firing envelope) defined in library as final “range” on scope.