-
J2.X and J3.X messages carry position reporting. For an F-16, J2.2 (Air PPLI’s), J3.0 (reference points) and J3.2 (air tracks) are the main ones expected. PPLIs every 12 seconds typically? tracks up to 20 second spacing?
Depends on the Network setup. J2 messages do position reporting, J3 messages contain position data, but not necessarily position reporting. Each transmission slot can only send so much info, one 3.2 does not encapsulate ALL known tracks from a sender, so the software will prioritize and send tracks in bursts. The spacing depends on how many slots a given player is allotted. A network trying to encompass 4 players cycles back to each player much sooner, but a network designed to encompass 20, or 100 players, obviously doesn’t allow as many time slots to a given player in a given amount of time, even if there are only 4 players in the network because the transmit scheme has to be designed to allow dynamic entry and exit of players. PPLI messages are usually given a higher repetition rate, and thus transmit more frequently for every player in the network (Unless it’s a ground station, which doesn’t move) Air tracks and ground tracks are almost always exclusively sent by C2, and target resolution (Who’s going to shoot at who) is done internally based on the information provided from C2, or in some cases can be specifically designated by C2, depends on the RoE and SPINS in a given area.
A mockup of a typical transmit cycle might look something like this (On a much bigger scale):
| Player 1 | Player 2 | Player 3 | Player 1 | Player 2 | Player 1 | Player 3 | Player 1 | Player 1 | Player 1 |
| PPLI | PPLI | PPLI | Track Data | Message 1 | Track Data | Message 5 | Track Data | Message 25 | Timing |
| Player 1 | Player 2 | Player 3 | Player 1 | Player 2 | Player 1 | Player 3 | Player 1 | Player 1 | Player 1 |
| PPLI | PPLI | PPLI | Track Data | Message 16 | Track Data | Message 15 | Track Data | Message 2 | Timing |Where Player 1 is a C2 entity, and the ‘Message x’ could be anything. As this cycle repeats PPLIs get sent every cycle, but the messages may not be the same kind of message in every cycle.
I was under the impression that the IFF integration was also something the C2 player had to correlate themself?
RoE and SPINS dependent. Typically AWACS is responsible for traversing the threat matrix and declaring bandits/hostiles because they have a much bigger picture, and more resources to work with.
If this was part of your job you could probably assist the devs quite a bit with this topic, if you were so inclined.
I wouldn’t mind providing some technical background, but it doesn’t sound like this is a high priority so I won’t wait by the inbox…
-
-
Good reading here.
Well that right there knocks over any complaints about not being able to find open source documents about Link 16…
Great find!
-
There is alot more I know of about detailed PDF’s on all modes aswell to much time on the search button and not enough chatting with Siri me think’s?
-
-
yknow the fourth one down is the last useful one, right…? After that we get stuff about how to merge multiple PDFs lol XD
-
You know that was an example and if you use different search key words you will discover alot more…… Just saying and all.
Tj
-
I received this in a PM and asked permission to use it but wanted to ask another question to the guru’s out there.
I am still a little surprised at how much of the information Northrop Grumman were allowed to put in that actually. Covers at least two thirds of the stuff needed as well.
Is IFF becoming a thing of the past I mean I have searched a plenty in times gone by and yes NOTHING public.
With the new digital battle field concept and the inception of the new multi tracking aesa radars reporting real time to awac for a complete real time solution on anything land air sea also from my understanding all aesa can be coded in signature for friend or foe treatment will IFF in the future become a back up source of information?
Cheers
Tj -
Is IFF becoming a thing of the past I mean I have searched a plenty in times gone by and yes NOTHING public.
With the new digital battle field concept and the inception of the new multi tracking aesa radars reporting real time to awac for a complete real time solution on anything land air sea also from my understanding all aesa can be coded in signature for friend or foe treatment will IFF in the future become a back up source of information?
Cheers
TjI would qualify IFF as already being a ‘backup’ source of information in that its not the sole primary source of information on identification. Older aircraft have an antenna for basically every different device on the aircraft. The F-35 by contrast has a great many functions in software, all using the same antenna (same one the radar uses). In that sense, IFF is relegated to a backup function. Given that IFF can never provide PEI and only PFI or LOF indications, its not really a primary source of info to start with.
I would assume that individual aircraft would use it less frequently though, as the proliferation of tactical datalinks has already given C2 the capacity to provide information on past IFF interrogations to aircrew. So, multiple flights could rely on less of them needing to interrogate a contact of interest.
Apologies for answering, I know you wanted gurus to reply but I thought Id throw my answer in as well XD
-
IFF mode and AIFF it is not so simple to be implement correctly …. some try was in previous falcon versions with circles O and | |squares for friendly and unknown a/c with scan mode via ctrl+o …but i think the whole system must be implemented from scratch not for all modes only for e.g M+/scan mode to return friendly and unknown a/c when in the INTG -interrogator and IFF ICP page the pilot enters the code for AIFF or from DTC-> IFF tab … also the AIFF system collaborate with some data from UFC and LINK16 which is complicated systems. The data and the information are available but i do not know if the programmers wants to try!!!
in Addition the navigation map in HSD -> could be a good feature since we have Redog dynamic navigation map.
The pilot will access the load function via the HSD control page 3. HSD control
page 3 is accessed by selecting the HSD control page and depression and release of OSB 5 (CNTL) will display
the HSD control page 1. Pressing page 1 (OSB 10) twice will result in control page 3 being displayed . This page
contains the options and controls for the displayed map. The pilot now depression and release OSB 20 (Map Mode) to access the
map mode menu page.Also power up the MAP switch from right back console.
-
in Addition the navigation map in HSD -> could be a good feature since we have Redog dynamic navigation map.
The pilot will access the load function via the HSD control page 3. HSD control
page 3 is accessed by selecting the HSD control page and depression and release of OSB 5 (CNTL) will display
the HSD control page 1. Pressing page 1 (OSB 10) twice will result in control page 3 being displayed . This page
contains the options and controls for the displayed map. The pilot now depression and release OSB 20 (Map Mode) to access the
map mode menu page.Also power up the MAP switch from right back console.
Not all the jets have that - and Red Dogs stellar work is not high enough resolution for such a MAP display either sadly. Would need something at WAC scale or better.
-
and Red Dogs stellar work is not high enough resolution for such a MAP display either sadly
that would not be correct
with 4096x4096 current res it’s detailled enough and it has been tested already and works
and with today’s tool i could do a 8192x8192 res map as well -
@Red:
with 4096x4096 current res it’s detailled enough and it has been tested already and works and with today’s tool i could do a 8192x8192 res map as well
I am using the CPD-FG4 software and it can display the default maps very good with no viewing quality problems. I guess putting such a view within the mfd limits might also be good enough specially when MFD’s are extracted. Maybe in 3-4 weeks…
In 16th we use in our internal setup custom UI maps with 10k x 10k resolution. Size is approx 80MB and can display much more details in UI design, with a small effect on loading times for some extra seconds.
-
@Red:
that would not be correct
with 4096x4096 current res it’s detailled enough and it has been tested already and works
and with today’s tool i could do a 8192x8192 res map as wellWell, did you test with the 160 nm range scale?
Some of us fly with the 8 nm depressed scale you know! On this scale there is not much detail…
-
On this scale there is not much detail…
Well this system is not actually Google Earth… Don’t expect to read (or have time & focus to read) map details like mountain heights, cities etc.
-
If there is not detail on the map, its hardly worth having, no? Better giving us the rest of the NAV lines instead if they will have higher resolution.