Why go for the merge?
-
Hello,
Let’s assume a VID is required and you have to go for the merge:
-
Is the merge even necessary if you can VID with the TGP?
-
How do you know the bandit won’t fire a heater in your face? We are just setting ourselves up to go defensive.
-
Do we just lock the bandit up with the AIM 9 and hope they don’t shoot first?
My point, why take the risk by running into someones fist?
Thank you!
-
-
I’m not 100% sure but I don’t think merges happen really in a true combat situation anymore. With the advanced technology you can use the tgp as stated or other means and destroy the target from a safe distance.
-
Different ID tatics are based on different ROE(Ruler of Engagement).
I think it still needs VID for peacetime operation because it is lack of enough support from other resources to discriminate the target in the peacetime.
The purpose of VID is getting evidence of the target which violates my space or enter ADIZ in the peacetime .
ROE for peacetime is tight.if both go to full scale war or conflict, the VID tactics may have a great risk. So it needs other ID tatics such as IFF and AWACS’s advise or other resources to make sure you wouldn’t go within MAR but can still discriminate friendly or foe.
-
Depends on the ROE.
For example if u r a forgiving peaceful country and u have space violation by others u just don’t kill your neighbors.
In many cases the ROE says u don’t shoot if u r not fired.So you end up to the merge.
Some believe that those merges act as the I’m here watchdog barking to scare off the illegal guy.
At the same time fuel and replacement parts companies smile.
Other times in war BVR weapons might be ineffective, and if no other help is around then u must deffent King and country with your teeth.
The video I don’t think it’s even necessity. U r in my house I brink u down and I don’t care who r u.
In those vids and situations I don’t think that u can tell their markings.
In a late rumored maybe fake journal article one country used another countries markings.
So the actual act and not what u display is the proof.
Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Hello,
Let’s assume a VID is required and you have to go for the merge:
-
Is the merge even necessary if you can VID with the TGP?
-
How do you know the bandit won’t fire a heater in your face? We are just setting ourselves up to go defensive.
-
Do we just lock the bandit up with the AIM 9 and hope they don’t shoot first?
My point, why take the risk by running into someones fist?
Thank you!
If the ROEs say VID is required, then that is that. If the lawyers agree that an electronic VID from ATP/TGP is good enough, then great! But if its cloudy, or the TGP isnt boresighted correctly, or there are radar alignment errors and you cant get that E-VID, then you are going to have to get that VID before you shoot.
Hopefully someone chatted with the lawyers first, and the ROEs are along the lines of VID required to confirm as ENEMY, and hostile action or even better, some form of hostile intent, to confirm as HOSTILE. Its generally the case for ROEs derived from the San Remo ROE handbook that you always have the option to engage in self defense, particularly against a contact demonstrating clear hostile intent. This is well demonstrated in the 1989 Air battle near Tobruk (formerly known as the 1989 Gulf of Sidra incident).
I guess the best answer to the question as written is simple: because the ROEs (and thus the higher ups) said so.
You dont operate in a vacuum, though. You wont be able to engage BVR for this kind of scenario without friendly losses, but you can still engage high aspect with some WVR tactics. Good example is the classic deploy. 2vX ACT tactic, you deploy to a couple miles trail prior to the merge (brevity word DEPLOY, or possibly ACTION if prebriefed) and wait for lead to get tally. Calls like “ONE IS EYEBALL, TWO YOU ARE SHOOTER” indicate you are using deploy or a similar tactic. Lead merges hot and blows through to the trailer, calls ID: “TALLY TWO FULCRUM, SHOOT SHOOT” (if already satisfied HOSTILE ID exists) or perhaps the reason for the VID: “TALLY FRIENDLIES, SKIP IT”
If they havent satisfied HOSTILE ID at that point, you could be in a great spot, merged with enemy aircraft you are not allowed to shoot at… I understand Greek and Turkish aircraft do this pretty frequently with each other. Good BFM training I guess.
If those guys then shoot you and your flight down, they have satisfied HOSTILE ID for sure at that point… and that radar blip is now definitely HOSTILE, so other flights could engage it BVR as ID and ROE will already be satisfied.
This is a key complaint with BMS for simulating specific conflicts, btw. Enemy AI in BMS (actually all AI) dont have to satisfy any ROEs or determine ID - they have an ‘automagic’ IFF with none of the limitations of the real one. So if you are waiting for VID against enemy AI in BMS, be aware that they will not be so sporting.
-
-
What happens when the enemy flies same aircraft as you? Is TGP enough to be sure before the merge?
-
What happens when the enemy flies same aircraft as you? Is TGP enough to be sure before the merge?
As above. It all depends. ROE? How are atmospheric conditions affecting the image? Can you see the aircraft clearly enough electronically to see what markings it has?
-
What happens when the enemy flies same aircraft as you? Is TGP enough to be sure before the merge?
You could give it a try in ITO. IMO, often even with TGP you wont have decent E-VID until very very close anyway, regardless of aircraft, if they are high aspect. WEFT features are most noticeable when you are not on the bandit nose.
-
Hello,
Let’s assume a VID is required and you have to go for the merge:
-
Is the merge even necessary if you can VID with the TGP?
-
How do you know the bandit won’t fire a heater in your face? We are just setting ourselves up to go defensive.
-
Do we just lock the bandit up with the AIM 9 and hope they don’t shoot first?
My point, why take the risk by running into someones fist?
Thank you!
In all out war, you dont.
-
-
Even in less than all out war there are plenty of ways to merge without charging head first into a missile……even without being an F-22. A good example probably Libya and its line of death. Although the 2 shootdown engagements are fairly good examples, no one mentions the other 99% of merges that happened.
-
Ah if only we had functional IFF in this sim…runs away…
-
@Master:
In all out war, you dont.
in full out war you dont merge. even in a 2 vs2 situation
-
Ah if only we had functional IFF in this sim…runs away…
Be careful what you ask for…
In any case any realistic ROE Matrix will not allow you to fire based solely on IFF, which will only give you an indication if the target is friendly (PAINTS) if you get a valid response, or a bogey (SPADES) if you don’t. IFF will not give you an indication if it’s hostile, you’ll need other information for that.
And don’t forget every time you use the AIFF to interrogate a target you’re emitting EM radiation and thereby giving your position away to anyone in the vicinity :shock:
There’s no such thing as a free lunch
-
-
Be careful what you ask for…
In any case any realistic ROE Matrix will not allow you to fire based solely on IFF, which will only give you an indication if the target is friendly (PAINTS) if you get a valid response, or a bogey (SPADES) if you don’t.
Well, depends on that matrix and what situation it was borne of.
PAINTS for any valid IFF/SIF response, SQUAWKING for invalid response (such as correct M4 but incorrect M1), SPADES for no valid response (can include response which is entirely invalid, or just no response).
TARCAP of a deep strike may have a strict commit criteria and an ROE matrix that considers invalid PPLI and SPADES as HOSTILE, to allow expedited engagement of OUTLAW contacts, for example.
All comes back to risk management - what is the level of acceptable risk to air crew that still allows mission accomplishment and where possible prevents unnecessary escalation of conflict?
-
@Master:
Uhmm, that’s what i said
oops. misread it
-
This post is deleted!