ECM pods
-
Hi just wondering what the difference is between the ALQ-131 and 184? i take it that the 184 is harder for enemy radars to burn through? (requires a/c with pod to be closer to threat radar for the threat radar to burn through it) and if this is the case then does that mean an SA-10’s Flap Lid can burn through an ALQ-131 at greater than 35nm?
-
as far as SA-10 goes i dare not say anything… that thing has been spawned by an evil genius…
the 131 is a noise jammer and the 184 has several modes on top of just the noise one, as far as i know none of those modes are implemented but i cannot say this for certain, most of that stuff is classified enough as it is so i doubt it is.
taking on an SA-10 is not to be attempted with an onboard jammer pod but only to be attempted with an ECM escort flight or NOE attack in mountainous terreinfor more info read through this topic
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?11588-Jammer-Tactics-when-using-it-and-when-not-using-it-!&highlight=drones+bmsnot all of it is accurate ofcourse but most of it is.
-
That jammer discussion has made me check out the quick threat guide for missiles with HOJ capability. From what i can see the only missile that has this is the AA-12 so i know not to bother using the ECM when facing a su-27 or 30. But theres’ also the AA-9 Amos carried by the Mig-31 that has good ECCM capability. So what is this? from my reckoning it is electronic counter counter measures- which must mean that it is pretty much similar to the HOJ that the AA-12 has.
-
Hi just wondering what the difference is between the ALQ-131 and 184? i take it that the 184 is harder for enemy radars to burn through? (requires a/c with pod to be closer to threat radar for the threat radar to burn through it) and if this is the case then does that mean an SA-10’s Flap Lid can burn through an ALQ-131 at greater than 35nm?
It does not have as I know. Is an ECM value for each AC in DB which can boost the base ECM effect but I nowhere found info about how it exactly work but it works. It worked in FF and as I can remember in BMS4 either. All AC have 0, but if you increase about 50 (I can’t remember the max.) you can break the lock of AIM-120 by simply turning on the jammer.
So if anybody willing to make such DB that a ceratin AC can carry only one type of ECM pod it is possible to build such DB which give different ECM strenght to different AC with certain pods. Of course in RL jammer is rather about quality than “quantity”. A certain type of jamming against certain guidance and waveform simply does not work no matter how powerful is the ECM signal…
-
Isnt the AIM-120 HOJ capable ?
-
-
as far as SA-10 goes i dare not say anything… that thing has been spawned by an evil genius…
the 131 is a noise jammer and the 184 has several modes on top of just the noise one, as far as i know none of those modes are implemented but i cannot say this for certain, most of that stuff is classified enough as it is so i doubt it is.
taking on an SA-10 is not to be attempted with an onboard jammer pod but only to be attempted with an ECM escort flight or NOE attack in mountainous terreinfor more info read through this topic
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?11588-Jammer-Tactics-when-using-it-and-when-not-using-it-!&highlight=drones+bmsnot all of it is accurate ofcourse but most of it is.
In BMS there is no difference between types of jamming. In the real world there is of course. The -131 can be customised and is capable of a variety of modes of jamming depending on what modules are installed in it. The -184 is customisable in software and is quite versatile. The exact performance of both IRL is of course classified. The disappointing part is that the ECM panel in the cockpit, the CIU-9492, is also classified. Exactly how it works, we dont know. So even if in the future, electronic warfare in BMS gets a big upgrade, we wont know exactly what the push buttons on the panel do, or what the indicator lights mean. It would either be guessed in, or left nonfunctional.
But yeah, the -131 can do repeater jamming, if it has the right hardware installed, and the -184 can do a lot depending what software is installed. Whereas in BMS the only difference is that the -184 works better.
-
[QUOTE=
taking on an SA-10 is not to be attempted with an onboard jammer pod but only to be attempted with an ECM escort flight or NOE attack in mountainous terreinfor more info read through this topic
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?11588-Jammer-Tactics-when-using-it-and-when-not-using-it-!&highlight=drones+bmsnot all of it is accurate ofcourse but most of it is.
Sa10 can safely be attacked with an AGM-88 without use of jammerflight or NOE.
-
Sa10 can safely be attacked with an AGM-88 without use of jammerflight or NOE.
I’m interested that you say “safely”, Snowman, as (again according to Threat Guideand as seen in flight) the SA-10 can engage outside HARM range
-
Me too, this topic is interesting me a lot.
With best regards,
-
I’m interested that you say “safely”, Snowman, as (again according to Threat Guideand as seen in flight) the SA-10 can engage outside HARM range
Depend on your altitude…
-
Isnt the AIM-120 HOJ capable ?
Yea but in the Korean theater i wont come up against those, but the AA-12 is basically the russian version of the AIM-120 that the North Koreans and chinese su-27s/30s and J-11s use anyway.
-
Sa10 can safely be attacked with an AGM-88 without use of jammerflight or NOE.
yep agreed, speed and angels are key but you could do it safely with the agm 88 but afaik it’s the only weapon you can use that can safely do it, entering it’s threat circle with the intention of going deep into it without ECM escort or mountains to cover you it’s suicide
-
-
Is HOJ functional in ANY Falcon version…? How should it work…?
Its very functional, although as with all things EW related, not quite right.
-
I’m interested that you say “safely”, Snowman, as (again according to Threat Guideand as seen in flight) the SA-10 can engage outside HARM range
If you fly high and fast you can you can fire the harm, turn around and fly outside the range of the incoming missile. If you do not have a AGM-88, that’s of course another matter. But saying that the SA-10 can only be attacked by NOE and jamming flights is incorrect. Just try it. You’ll find its not too hard. Just remember you will not get an active missile spike so take some spacing on your cold leg. Since you can count on a missile being airborne but you will not have SA on it through your RWR.
-
Its very functional, although as with all things EW related, not quite right.
But how exactly? How exactly works HOJ? Because for ARH is irrelevant because they have higher ECM modifier value than 1 and you can launch even without lock anything on radar if you use pitbull mode. For SARH you have to acquire STT lock which means you have to burn through the ECM so HOJ is simply cannot be interpreted because you do not need it. You cannot launch any of these missile without lock on radar, I have not found any HOJ mode launch process.
In older Falcon version sometimes if you used SARH missile you could see HOJ text on HUD but it was a text nothing else. If you broke the STT lock SARH missiles never followed the target regarldess ECM was on…
-
If you fly high and fast you can you can fire the harm, turn around and fly outside the range of the incoming missile. If you do not have a AGM-88, that’s of course another matter. But saying that the SA-10 can only be attacked by NOE and jamming flights is incorrect. Just try it. You’ll find its not too hard. Just remember you will not get an active missile spike so take some spacing on your cold leg. Since you can count on a missile being airborne but you will not have SA on it through your RWR.
Because SA-10 variants with different missiles in Falcon never were enough accurately modeled. Depending on missile type and S-300 subvariant you are ceartinly not safe. Eng. zones of S-300PMU1, PMU2 and S-400.
http://forum.index.hu/Article/showArticle?t=9120320Even the very old S-300PT/PS had 75 km eng. zone with 5V55R missiles and combined RCG/SAGG method. First S-300PT had 5V55K only 47 km because of limitation of pure RCG guidance, the kinematics of the missile could provide much larger engagement zone.
HARM eng. zone even from med alt (up to 6-7 km) is smaller than 75 km with subsonic terminal phase. In Falcon SAMs cannot engage missile while in RL S-300 can defend itself against ARMs. In RL S-300 is much harder target then in Falcon currently.
-
HOJ in Falcon works on to my knowledge ARH missiles. If you are jamming when they go active, they will home in on you automatically, even if the launching platform does not have a lock. HOJ was displayed IIRC for this before BMS update 1, but since then there is no indication that it is happening. I have no idea about HOJ with SARH missiles.
-
HOJ in Falcon works on to my knowledge ARH missiles. If you are jamming when they go active, they will home in on you automatically, even if the launching platform does not have a lock. HOJ was displayed IIRC for this before BMS update 1, but since then there is no indication that it is happening. I have no idea about HOJ with SARH missiles.
Because in BMS4.32 and 33 ARH missile are 100% jam resistant also cannot be interpreted the HOJ capability. Only question what will lock the ARM missile when the onboard radar goes online.