HAS or HAD?
-
-
-
-
HAS is a kind of anti-radar Maverick. You see exactly what’s happening, right now, and attack directly in a first person way. You’re “LOBL” and it’s the most positive targeting possible. It’s only really superior in situations where you dominate the situation and making sure you hit exactly what you want and it’s active.
HAD is a little less immediate and direct. There’s an abstraction where position isn’t exact and it’s more LOAL (although I think they can see an active on the rail LOBL-type). There’s a lot more situational awareness and flexibility. In most situations, especially longer range SAMs the HAD is superior.
-
@Frederf Yes, the SA provided by the HAD page on the MFD is very useful. For me, it outweighs the “less immediate” aspect of HAD.
-
@Bayonet said in HAS or HAD?:
@Frederf Yes, the SA provided by the HAD page on the MFD is very useful. For me, it outweighs the “less immediate” aspect of HAD.
Concur. Even with no HARM aboard, I often use HAD as the HSD
-
-
HAD
-
Btw , for curent (4.36) HAD implementation…
I’m not creating/entering debate is it RL or not, just asking…When target sam “magenta” (missile programmed) , it is hard to see the state of the radar … green/yellow. - actually impossible
Can this “magenta square” be made some more transparent… or … other technique ??
Only “clue” is harm - lar scale …
if emmiting/yellow , the lar scale appears - shoot ,
… if passive/green then no lar scale.That’s what I’ve experienced… maybe the true differs a bit… but in any case ???
Magenta square … hiding state of radar/sam -
@white_fang said in HAS or HAD?:
Btw , for curent (4.36) HAD implementation…
I’m not creating/entering debate is it RL or not, just asking…When target sam “magenta” (missile programmed) , it is hard to see the state of the radar … green/yellow. - actually impossible
Can this “magenta square” be made some more transparent… or … other technique ??
Only “clue” is harm - lar scale …
if emmiting/yellow , the lar scale appears - shoot ,
… if passive/green then no lar scale.That’s what I’ve experienced… maybe the true differs a bit… but in any case ???
Magenta square … hiding state of radar/samConcur. Perhaps the square itself could change color and not inside it? The “workaround” I ‘ve come up with is-when I engage something in the Ol’ Magenta Square I put it on my nose and if I get a RWR spike, I shoot . If I have HARM . I then spoof it to try to keep them active. If I don’t have HARM , but am engaging the site ,it’s a whole different ball game. In that case I don’t want them to radiate, so I can close on the site. Another "no-HARM-aboard " trick is to lock HAD on it, try to get good Bull data, lock the FCR and/or TGP on those coordinates, and undesignate HAD. That way I can see emitter status.
-
@drtbkj Nice, work -around !
Yep, ol’ “magenta square” is “interfering” my SA., when look-down.
I like it more when target in “offload to missile” process … then sqare is hollow , only “magenta frame” …
Maybe devs could deal with this , like that, “frame color” … when offloading , one color of frame … missile ready , another frame color.
That way we could see the middle icon (sam of interest) state with no problem… but mnemonics would still be “readable”…Just an idea… they’ll probably come up with something - good
Chhers
-
@white_fang said in HAS or HAD?:
@drtbkj Nice, work -around !
Yep, ol’ “magenta square” is “interfering” my SA., when look-down.
I like it more when target in “offload to missile” process … then sqare is hollow , only “magenta frame” …
Maybe devs could deal with this , like that, “frame color” … when offloading , one color of frame … missile ready , another frame color.
That way we could see the middle icon (sam of interest) state with no problem… but mnemonics would still be “readable”…Just an idea… they’ll probably come up with something - good
Chhers
Why would you think the real would indicate the status of the radar after handoff ?
-
@Mav-jp Hi, Mav. I can’t speak for W_F, and if you say BMS models it accurately, fine. So, are you saying that HAD does not give emitter status once Handoff has occurred? That would be interesting to me. I 've assumed, since HAD shows emitter status before Handoff, as per Dash-34 p.264, that it would show it afterwards. That would seem to be important , especially with HARM. If you shoot a HARM at a non-emitter, you’ve just wasted a weapon( in the strictly DEAD sense, anyway)
-
@Mav-jp Well… yes indeed good question. Short answer would be “it is logical”, maybe
You’re not carrying “unlimited weapons”. - tho, in order to suppress… you, would prefer them “OFF” … if not destroyed.
But to ensure a hit, making it pk >99% , SA of their state, on/off, would guarantee the “exact window” of opportunity. - you can’t control the other side , deciding when to “blink”.
That was my understanding, so I see it sane… guess not big issue , but still , with current implementation you’re limiting just yourself. and that’s … well, not smart
Cheers
-
@white_fang said in HAS or HAD?:
But to ensure a hit, making it pk >99% , SA of their state, on/off, would guarantee the “exact window” of opportunity. - you can’t control the other side , deciding when to “blink”.
Cheers
Fang, you’ve hit on what my question is. IMHO, it almost makes HARM a SEAD-only weapon. You shoot it to make them “blink”. Unless, of course, you are supposed to use RWR as the primary emitter-status instrument. That would be ok in he Hornet, I don’t even have to go head-down to see that
-
I may be alone on this, but I don’t love the HAD.
I find it gives me a warped view of the 2D picture… when emitters are first detected, there is so much uncertainty on range, and azimuth… the placement of the number on the MFD screen may be 20 miles off, initially.
Do the numbers “move” as their locations become more refined (pgm 5->1)? I think so but I’m not sure.
Similarly, I feel like the HAD sometimes shows me lingering dupes, when an emitter switches off then back on. Is there a way to “clear” a known/suspected dupe?
Also, one less pod to carry.
-
@airtex2019 mmm no. HTS works fine, pgm wise … I think,… haven’t noticed some major… some emitters are not shown, only lines.
That that you see dupes, I’ve seen that , but figured it out like this, …
- those are 2 sam’s (same type emitters) … one closer , other further … kinda in the LOS. so sometimes it looks like they overlap., but with time (and space ) it all sorts out.
@drtbkj … Indeed, … in SEAD you force them to “blink”… but only for a while… if they don’t , they are “dead” hehe… get the joke ??
The (blink) window is just too short. (especially if you, allies, are in range of , eg SA15)
@Mav-jp Yeah, 'bout docs… well. Good luck waiting me to provide something like that… dunno, maybe even classified … ?
Can’t we just improvise in “cases like that” ? - you know, make it functional if not realistic -
@drtbkj said in HAS or HAD?:
@Mav-jp Hi, Mav. I can’t speak for W_F, and if you say BMS models it accurately, fine. So, are you saying that HAD does not give emitter status once Handoff has occurred? That would be interesting to me. I 've assumed, since HAD shows emitter status before Handoff, as per Dash-34 p.264, that it would show it afterwards. That would seem to be important , especially with HARM. If you shoot a HARM at a non-emitter, you’ve just wasted a weapon( in the strictly DEAD sense, anyway)
Assuming proved many times beeing a wrong thing to do.
Try to find a document which depicts the handoff symbology that is different depending on emitter status and we can talk again
-
Maybe bit off topic but always wondered if there is a way to know if a target is in range for missile launch in HAS mode. You have this T cross like display. Mostly I wait till enemy sams get active on me to guess it’s in range but I am pretty sure the scale lines could be used somehow?
-
@Mav-jp said in HAS or HAD?:
@drtbkj said in HAS or HAD?:
@Mav-jp Hi, Mav. I can’t speak for W_F, and if you say BMS models it accurately, fine. So, are you saying that HAD does not give emitter status once Handoff has occurred? That would be interesting to me. I 've assumed, since HAD shows emitter status before Handoff, as per Dash-34 p.264, that it would show it afterwards. That would seem to be important , especially with HARM. If you shoot a HARM at a non-emitter, you’ve just wasted a weapon( in the strictly DEAD sense, anyway)
Assuming proved many times beeing a wrong thing to do.
Try to find a document which depicts the handoff symbology that is different depending on emitter status and we can talk again
That is always true, and I will take your suggestion. Meanwhile, does HAD display emittor-status after Handoff?