The Proper use of ELINT
-
Maybe some of you noticed but the ECM coverage of ecm support flights has been vastly improved
in short
- the ecm flight provides an area coverage around its position
- the ecm flight does not need to be in your package to protect you but any friendly flight in its area will be covered -as long as it is between jamming waypoints-
i toughts this could help te makers
-
Are you speaking about stand off jamming modeling or simple ECM useage?
I’m asking because of jamming waypoints. Does this mean that it is worth to use EF-111 and EA-6B in campaigns? Are they functional?If you statement concers on simple ECM pod here is my next question. If AC are close to each other one ECM can cover the rest of flight? If multiple ECM are onlilne does it count?
-
Nice topic
Please share with us about the new ELINT capabilities :), it would wastly change the way i build my TEs and the way i execute missions.
Thank you
spooky.
-
Yeah, please tell more!
How large is the area E-planes protect? Rough idea? Does the subject radar need to be within the area, or only the objects protected? Is it really stand off, or does the E-plane need to be for eg closer than the protectee? Are there how big differences when comparing specific target SAM systems? Is AAA affected? Will A2A active missiles be affected?I am just designing missions for the Stray Dogs yearly LAN, and this would make a great new addition. With beta-versions it was shaky, sometimes working, sometimes not. (Dunno when the change was introduced?)
Does it effect friendly SAM systems? Friendly A2A radars? Your own FCR?
-
In RP5 manual you can find an explanation. Is it slid valid? I have no idea…
-
I would also be interested to know some features of current ECM implementation in BMS so please share your knowledge.
1. External Jamming afts (EF-111, EA-6B etc)
– Do they jam all the surrounding area?
– Can they jam a specific horizon area?
– Is there a burn-through range specific for each aircraft radar type as per unique jammer source?
– In a “triangle” scenario (2 opponents high-aspect BVR with a 3rd far away jamming aft), in what distance from the source this jam has an effect to the enemy opponent vs his high aspect radar track? Does this jam also impacts the friendly aft? (It should if we are talking for similar types, eg F-16 vs F-16. For dissimilar types eg F-16 vs Mig etc i don’t know but i believe that jamming initiator platform could focus on specific radar/comms frequencies spectrum)2. Integrated ECM suites (like some F-16 variants)
– Most of the above questions apply here also, plus:
– If they jam all the surrounding area is wrong(; ). There are jamming cones in-front and behind the aft.
– Is there an option/plan to select jamming direction cone front/behind? Most older on-board ECM jammers didn’t have this ability and simultaneously jammed both front cone and behind (with impact to the trailing friendly afts in a comao mission for example). In newer systems pilot can select whatever is necessary.3. External jamming pods (ALQ- systems)
– Most of the above apply.4. Regarding Ground Radars
– How ranges are implemented? Is there only a specific radar type or more?
– Any plans to add rl published ground radar types/ranges?
– Can ground radars be jammed, and if yes do they have a specific burn-through range also?
– Is line of sight and detection range implemented and how?
– Can they cease operation
– Can they work all together in a linked network for better aerial picture and/or blind areas over-coverage?
– Can they supply aerial picture to SAM systems like Patriot? (perhaps this is/requires a Link-16 implementation; )5. Communications jamming
– Any plans for this feature in-game or a TS implementation like TARS for DCS A-10?
Sorry for the many q’s or even some “wish-list-like” q’s, just trying to put some lights here for some aspects and nothing more regarding future dev plans. Apart from RP manuals and online tests, perhaps an article to cover all this in BMS would be useful instead of comments in all these. And since this topic is somewhat case-sensitive, we should only use published sources/data.
-
Sorry for the many q’s or even some “wish-list-like” q’s, jus
I like question what concern on current feature, but I do not like wish lists. I have explained why. Devs develop what are able and what is like to do.
(IMHO most os wish lists ask unimportant or idiotic things because they do not know how works Falcon and do not know even the availabla features.)
-
Are you speaking about stand off jamming modeling or simple ECM useage?
I’m asking because of jamming waypoints. Does this mean that it is worth to use EF-111 and EA-6B in campaigns? Are they functional?If you statement concers on simple ECM pod here is my next question. If AC are close to each other one ECM can cover the rest of flight? If multiple ECM are onlilne does it count?
my statement concerns ECM aircraft like EF111 and EA6B for instance , this statement does not concern ecm Pods like the one on the F16.
The EF111 and EA6B now covers an area of xx NM around them.
the way this is computed is quite tricky.
Imagine an Aircraft which has a nominal detection range of X.
First, the code computes what is the range between this aircraft and the Jamming aircraft, let’s say jamming Range.
if jammingRange > X*2.25
then the radar of the aircraft is not impacted.
if the jammingRange < X*2.25, then the radar range will be reduced by the ratio of its normal range and the jammer’s range to the radar to the power of two
so in short, the closest the aircraft will be to the jamming aircraft, the more “jammed” it will be and if you fly very close from the EF111, you will be detected only at a very close distance.
the Far away you are from the jamming aircraft, the less protected you will be.
Indeed, the jammer will be more efficient on short nominal range radars than long nominal range radars
this is independant from the fact that the jamming aircraft is in your package or not.
so yes now EF11 and EA6B are of a vital importance in campaign
-
SO to answer some of Raptor’s questions:
- external jamming
- yes they jam a range area , but dependant on the opponent Radar nominal range actually
- yes there is a burn through range dependant on the radar itself
- i explained the triangle scenario above
- ground based radars
- there are various radar implemented for ground units, open F4editor to vizualize them
- ground radars can be jammed as well with proper burn through parameters
- LOS is coded for all sensors including ground mounted radars, both with radiohorizon limitations and of course ground masking
- they can cease operation
- yes they are working in a network system to detect / track / fire aerial contacts (only in campaign, not in TE)
-
Cool, very cool. What is needed? Jammer variant of Tu-16 or Su-24 on red side.
They efficiency currently modeling are the same, but IMHO it is better than nothing. In FF in TE you can set for any AC jam STP. How is is modeled the availability of ECM? In campaign my guess is the role score.
-
What is the EFFECTIVE (not maximum/theoretical) jamming range of an EF-111?
-
In game or RL? RL data is classified even the AC retired about 13 years ago.
-
I’m not able to encode the equation that you described. Can you post in an real mathematical form? (equation)
-
my statement concerns ECM aircraft like EF111 and EA6B for instance , this statement does not concern ecm Pods like the one on the F16.
The EF111 and EA6B now covers an area of xx NM around them.
the way this is computed is quite tricky.
Imagine an Aircraft which has a nominal detection range of X.
First, the code computes what is the range between this aircraft and the Jamming aircraft, let’s say jamming Range.
if jammingRange > X*2.25
then the radar of the aircraft is not impacted.
if the jammingRange < X*2.25, then the radar range will be reduced by the ratio of its normal range and the jammer’s range to the radar to the power of two
so in short, the closest the aircraft will be to the jamming aircraft, the more “jammed” it will be and if you fly very close from the EF111, you will be detected only at a very close distance.
the Far away you are from the jamming aircraft, the less protected you will be.
Indeed, the jammer will be more efficient on short nominal range radars than long nominal range radars
this is independant from the fact that the jamming aircraft is in your package or not.
so yes now EF11 and EA6B are of a vital importance in campaign
thnx jp for the bless of EW power:)
-
my statement concerns ECM aircraft like EF111 and EA6B for instance , this statement does not concern ecm Pods like the one on the F16.
all pods? or just F-16 pod? how about ALQ-99?
-
Cool, very cool. What is needed? Jammer variant of Tu-16 or Su-24 on red side.
:bowd: :drink::blowpar::woohoo:
-
Added to the Hotlist
-
As of mid-2016, the following link is added for additional cross reference.
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?28303-EWS-ESJ-Package-as-general-support-working
-
A little birdy told me that the jamming support only works if the jamming aircraft is the first plane into the radar circle of the threat but wouldn’t work if the protected plane was picked up by the SAM first and the jamming aircraft came second. Is this or was this ever true?
Also “ELINT” confused the heck out of me. Jamming isn’t ELectronic INTelligence. E-8 JSTARS for example is ELINT and I guess E-3 probably does some of that too.
-
A little birdy told me that the jamming support only works if the jamming aircraft is the first plane into the radar circle of the threat but wouldn’t work if the protected plane was picked up by the SAM first and the jamming aircraft came second. Is this or was this ever true?
Electrically speaking, yes it can be true if they have the technical know-how. Once you’ve identified some RF emission it’s pretty easy (relative term) to filter out the junk and find that signal again. So if you’ve identified some F-16 flying somewhere and then all of the sudden your spectrum is full of noise, the F-16 can be found again using some of the tools of the trade that are generally very highly classified.
Also “ELINT” confused the heck out of me. Jamming isn’t ELectronic INTelligence. E-8 JSTARS for example is ELINT and I guess E-3 probably does some of that too.
I think E-3’s might do some COMINT/FISINT but that doesn’t fall under ELINT. The world of SIGINT is a very confusing thing where COMINT is a specific branch, ELINT is another branch, FISINT & MASINT are their own branches, etc. etc…
Then they start to overlap and get even more confusing when you throw HUMINT into the mix and have guys on the ground that are doing stuff for the SIGINT branches with handheld devices. And in case that wasn’t confusing enough, then you can get into counter-SIGINT each with their own sub-branches and capabilities.
Plus all of that intel is useless without solid GEOINT/IMINT to get the full picture, no pun intended.
Long story short, it’s easy to see why you, me, or anyone else would be easily confused by it :mrgreen: