IFF - Why so important?
-
Well, it was certainly a lively discussion, thanks to all ( well, nearly all…) participants ! . I don’t think I have changed my initial view that while a quite cool feature to have, if easily implemented, that it should not be the “Holy Grail” of features that so many people seem to revere it as. And good points about the actual operation being more complex and less certain than I perhaps envisaged. I do think avionics features such as JDAM implementation and FLIR would be more beneficial. Lets see what happens then!
Cheers, Mark
-
Link 16 is not very likely to come ever: the user interface in the plane is not hard at all, and the benefits for the air combat would be super. Like a cheat. But Link 16 operation needs quite a lot of everyday work, and it is unlikely that this could be coded into BMS. Perhaps some very coarse static approximation could be found, but it is not very simple thing.
In short: (limited) Link 16 data exchange is not a problem, but actual practical operation is too complex to implement. It is not just the link, but actual operational structure behind it.
-
Well Mission Commander can Help on this alongside with the code. we already for MP flights share the ini file. I believe all those parameters can be boxed in the same file and use MC as the program to adjust such settings… Also Monsters Awacs Program could Help for Online Link changes like new Target assignments or Role change… this would be very stimulating for PvP Campaigns…
So please pass the Info u have…
-
I wonder what people are going to be asking for when IFF gets implemented.
-
-
?
the Online Squadron Collection.
basically an AWACS or GCI program that runs alongside BMS. you get one program that pulls AI info from a 2d running BMS, one interface, and then every player who is in 3D needs another program running that sends their location to the AWACS program. compatible with multiplayer pvp, using a red and blue channel.https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?11804-Online-Squadron-Collection-v2-is-out
-
I wonder what people are going to be asking for when IFF gets implemented.
Proper JDAM modeling XP
-
the Online Squadron Collection.
basically an AWACS or GCI program that runs alongside BMS.Ah, F4AWACS. We have been using that too. Admitted, a while ago and it was not like this yet. Thanks.
I thought Arty was talking some kind of Artificial Intelligence AWACS program. And that is somewhat unheard of. In proper quality. I have heard some things about GCI/C3 stuff though. -
Ah, F4AWACS. We have been using that too. Admitted, a while ago and it was not like this yet. Thanks.
I thought Arty was talking some kind of Artificial Intelligence AWACS program. And that is somewhat unheard of. In proper quality. I have heard some things about GCI/C3 stuff though.well, there is the built in AI AWACS, but I much prefer SHOWTIME to SENTRY. humans seem to make a better picture…
-
For there are so many things when considering the ID, not only electrically but many other considerations.
Like SPD/HDG/ALT/Point of origin/Geographical position…etc.
I think the AIFF in BMS can significantly reduce the chance to FRAT.
But it’s still impossible for us to upgrade a “BOGEY” to “BANDIT” by just simply TMS-Left.
HOWEVER, I’d rather my teammates ping the target first before shooting their missiles, FRAT IS NOT AN OPTION IN THE AIR!! -
Agree! AI AWACS doesn’t even tell us how many groups are within certain range(i.e. 40nm)
Always multi-group then nothing else.
Of course, no any information about the formation of those groups…it sucks!! -
I wonder what people are going to be asking for when IFF gets implemented.
A thick manual to figure out how to work with IFF!!
-
I leave a document that it may be nice to read explaining some things about the IFF (IFF.doc)
-
I leave a document that it may be nice to read explaining some things about the IFF (IFF.doc)
Thank you but this is not really useful. this is a very old document.
We know how IFF works IRL does. No problem for that.
The question is how to implement that in the simulator. Interaction with IA, When should it be on and when should it be off. Which mode to use … 1 2 3 or 4 or altogether.
How should react the air defenses against a wrong reply … which other ID criteria have to be taken in account etc …
Are red fighters equipped with interrogator …
What is the priority level … do we have a coder able (want) to develop an IFF code …
Etc…
-
About IFF … Just one thing that many ppl are missing: IFF (every mode from M1 to M4) is only made to provide a positive ID solution over friendly area.
By the time you are crossing the FLOT (more precisely the “Switch OFF” line located several Nm before the FLOT), all the IFF modes are supposed to be strangled.
So, in a scenario like in our favorite simulation, IFF is pointless as soon as you are leaving the friendly airspace and the only ways to make a positive ID are: Communications, AWACS, sensors (RWR, NCTR, TGP and direct visual ID) timings, trajectory and altitude.
IFF will be usable again over hostile airspace ONLY when air supremacy is gained and when the enemy air threat is reduced close to zero.So, while IFF could be a nice addition in the sim, it is far from providing an ultimate ID solution if simmers are considering RL constrains.
Just to say … since the Korea war, the most of the friendly losses were due to friendly fire and air collision. This is why the most important are the respect of assigner corridors, altitude and timings.
During major exercises like Red Flag, Maple Flag etc … most of the time, late comers (a/c not “as fraged” and unable to push on time) are simply kicked out and are not authorized to push.To sum-up … IFF in only one more device/procedure to prevent frat kills on friendly side. And remember the most important: Positive IFF ID can only ID a friendly, not a foe. If you have no IFF reply, you can’t assume safely that it is an enemy in 100% of the cases.
-
Yes, IFF can give Positive Friendly Identification or Lack of Friendly Identification - no Positive Enemy Identification.
Im curious DeeJay, when might RWR cues form part of the ID matrix? Im amusing myself presently by trying to write an example one, and I cant see RWR working correctly as PEI without correlating the RWR cue to the specific radar track… and as the RWR cue has no elevation information, you cannot correlate a specific track to a specific cue (although it might be useful information telling you that there is a MiG-29 down range, it doesnt help you tell which group on the scope is the MiG-29).
Cheers
EDIT: Also, whats up with the necro? Bit of an old thread to resurrect?
-
Im curious DeeJay, when might RWR cues form part of the ID matrix?
I do not really know. But it can help to have a good idea IF no ambiguities are assumed. In any cases … to be considered with cautious. In a rule of thumb, a simple RWR cues can’t be considered as a positive enemy ID whatever it is.
RWR cue is just on more entry in the matrix.
(although it might be useful information telling you that there is a MiG-29 down range, it doesnt help you tell which group on the scope is the MiG-29).
Exactly.
-
-
I am sure Win10 WILL have IFF.
-
I do not really know. But it can help to have a good idea IF no ambiguities are assumed. In any cases … to be considered with cautious. In a rule of thumb, a simple RWR cues can’t be considered as a positive enemy ID whatever it is.
RWR cue is just on more entry in the matrix.
I found the following describing the ID matrix online:
An “IF/THEN” decision tree used to determine the ID of all tracks or targets inside an AOR.
To the guys (and gals) who are familiar with such things, does that description fit well?
If you have two groups close together, and ^16s and ^29s on the RWR roughly on that azimuth… seems like that would cause problems to a well defined decision making tree.
Hell, what if you were getting RWR data from a Su-27 at 10 thousand bearing 030, and you find a contact on your scope on the same azimuth, at 30 thousand… you probably wouldnt even see the contact at 10 thousand unless you were far away enough.
You would just get a nice single contact on the scope that appears to correlate with the RWR paints.
Im not trying to say RWR isnt used in ID, at all - but I am trying to work out when it might be used, and what kind of caveats might get used. It seems to me like if you can correlate a hostile radar to an FCR track, then that would be PEI right there. Its just the getting the correlation that I am stuck on.
I am sure Win10 WILL have IFF.
So, is there another acronym which is ALSO IFF…?
Internal Feature Fixing or something that M$ might use?