Jets - Sensor overhaul (Radars, IRs, Lazors, PGMs)

[ampersand38 344]

11 minutes ago, ineptaphid said:

At the very least it needs a reticle on a HMD to aim weapons. If you play with crosshairs off-as I do, it is impossible to aim any weapons in the AH-9

Here's a HUD-type weapon sight on an Afghan Air Force MD 530F. Would be nice to have something similar.

 

[dragon01 902]

20 minutes ago, ineptaphid said:

At the very least it needs a reticle on a HMD to aim weapons. If you play with crosshairs off-as I do, it is literally impossible to aim any weapons in the AH-9

That, or a magic marker drawn circle on the windshield. :) In fact, I'd actually prefer that. AH-6 is friggin' Littlebird with guns and missiles strapped to it, not any sort of dedicated attack helo. I believe that the real ones used this sort of "sight". Not very accurate, but if you've got two miniguns you don't have to be. :)

[petek 62]

i like that the pawnee has the option for DAGRs (obviously my views on being able to fully customise loadouts has been covered extensively elsewhere;-)) but it would make sense to have someway of targeting them in first person if you don't use crosshairs on. At the mo I have to go into 3rd person, fing the sweet spot near the rotor and mark that way. A nice xH9 with a lovely targeting pod would be a cool freebie BIS ;-)

[ineptaphid 6413]

1 hour ago, dragon01 said:

That, or a magic marker drawn circle on the windshield. :) In fact, I'd actually prefer that. AH-6 is friggin' Littlebird with guns and missiles strapped to it, not any sort of dedicated attack helo. I believe that the real ones used this sort of "sight". Not very accurate, but if you've got two miniguns you don't have to be. :)

Thats all we need-like the MELB birds. Just a dot on the window is enough.

 

Anyway-we are dragging this topic off course. Let's get back to jet sensor upgrades.

[Jnr4817 215]

Agree with all of the helo talk for sure. Thanks for the consideration.

 

back on topic. 

 

Will there be a defense against the IR and laser system, besides the chaff and flares. Any electronic warfare items added to air assets?

[S3blapin 15]

5 hours ago, Jnr4817 said:

Will there be a defense against the IR and laser system, besides the chaff and flares. Any electronic warfare items added to air assets?

 

What do you mean? How would you fight IR guidancestors beside with Active CM? There is no way (to my knowledge) to do passive CM against IR system.

 

For laser guidance... there's today really few system that allow you to disturb a laser guided missile (for example the russian Shtora and I'm not even sure). But anyway there's nothing userd on plane cause you rarely use a laser guides ammo on something that fast

 

I don't know if they plan something against Radar guidance (radar jammers, radar ghost emitters,  etc).

[Strike_NOR 898]

36 minutes ago, S3blapin said:

There is no way (to my knowledge) to do passive CM against IR system.

To my knowledge, certain aircraft such as the SU-25T may be equipped with a rearward facing IR strobe. It can be switched on to confuse IR seekers. Not 100% sure off the top of my head exactly what causes the seekers to get spoofed. (Over saturation? "blinded"?)

[Cenwulf 40]

12 hours ago, petek said:

Any one else not like the decision to remove sensors from xH9 family of helos? It may not have them on the model - but neither does the Orca (I'm not suggesting removing them there either!)

 

Way back when they first released the virtual garage a component for the XH9 family slipped in called "Sensor Pod" or something. It had no model or functionality but you could select it from the same list that allowed you to hide the rails and back seats.

 

It's since been removed but I'm still holding out hope that they'll revisit this someday.

[S3blapin 15]

2 hours ago, Strike_NOR said:

To my knowledge, certain aircraft such as the SU-25T may be equipped with a rearward facing IR strobe. It can be switched on to confuse IR seekers. Not 100% sure off the top of my head exactly what causes the seekers to get spoofed. (Over saturation? "blinded"?)

 

I did some research and yes there's some jamming system to spoof incoming missile. So I would consider it as active CM as it act after the missile is launch and could replace flares.

 

From what I understand, JNR4817 was asking for electronic warfare suit that would prevent missile to be launched by preventing the lock to be achieve.

 

And to my knowledge there's no way to prevent an IR missile to be launched... aside destroying the launch platform. ^^"

[oukej 2911]

On 24. 4. 2017 at 4:52 PM, snoops_213 said:

The other thing is while missiles are very agile they will loose power in a turning fight so to off set this the onboard sensors will detonate short of its taget spraying them with shrapnel. This is something that arma doesnt do, but i think it can now with the new submunitions for missiles but i see this could get very taxing on performance on large scaled events. If a basic version was done that let out a small cloud of shrapnel  this could go a long way to helping aa missiles being less borked and those near misses can become fatal. 

To solve it subammo is certainly a possibility but it's also somewhat resource-hungry. But a doc said there's already a new parameter for proximity explosions being tested.

 

23 hours ago, petek said:

Any one else not like the decision to remove sensors from xH9 family of helos? It may not have them on the model - but neither does the Orca (I'm not suggesting removing them there either!)

Orca actually has them. Other than that this decision is open to feedback :)

[petek 62]

5 minutes ago, oukej said:

To solve it subammo is certainly a possibility but it's also somewhat resource-hungry. But a doc said there's already a new parameter for proximity explosions being tested.

 

Orca actually has them. Other than that this decision is open to feedback :)

Thanks for replying oukej. I was aware the Orca has sensors - I meant the model doesn't appear to have an obvious sensor/radar visible (In case anyone thought it was unrealistic;-))

I personally would like them back...... I'm spending far too much time already trying to find solutions to reverting back to the less restricted loadouts and the 2km view distance thing to try and script around this too;-)

 

cheers

[dragon01 902]

I think that removing them is fine. At least as long as the helos don't have an AH-6 style cockpit, the equipment should be no different from the civilian version. I suppose you could put in an "addon" MFD wired to the RWR, but this would still require model modification.

[bars91 956]

Unless the model itself is modded to reflect having the said sensors - I say "good riddance" and further differentiation of airframes = players have to actually think before randomly hopping into whatever and having all the toys up and running!

 

And I like games that promote thinking, adaptation and improv gameplay-vise!

 

If one chooses AH-9 = they have to be on top of their game and actually be familiar with the asset )

[oukej 2911]

13 minutes ago, petek said:

Thanks for replying oukej. I was aware the Orca has sensors - I meant the model doesn't appear to have an obvious sensor/radar visible (In case anyone thought it was unrealistic;-))

I personally would like them back...... I'm spending far too much time already trying to find solutions to reverting back to the less restricted loadouts and the 2km view distance thing to try and script around this too;-)

I actually meant flare dispensers.

xH-9 family together with Ceasar are atm the only vanilla non-EW assets. Orca only has an RWR, similarly to other transport helicopters.

[petek 62]

I'm all for giving individual players choice - could we not have it as a difficulty option like the map etc...

 

Cheers

[petek 62]

1 minute ago, oukej said:

I actually meant flare dispensers.

xH-9 family together with Ceasar are atm the only vanilla non-EW assets. Orca only has an RWR, similarly to other transport helicopters.

Got ya - I was just thinking of the sensor display

cheers

[arkhir 135]

1 hour ago, petek said:

I'm all for giving individual players choice - could we not have it as a difficulty option like the map etc...

 

Cheers

You can add flares to any vehicle you want.

[S3blapin 15]

For the xh-9 problem what about give the warning tone when a missile is launched but not giving him the rafar display? And a really small pool of CM like 2 or 3 burst for example.

 

This way, the pilot could actually save itself once maybe twice but he wouldn't know from where the missile was launched.

 

This would mock up pretty correctly the fact that xh-9 series is a lightly equiped  chopper that can't sustain a lot of fire and that need to fly a nearly missile free area.

[Strike_NOR 898]

I have no problems with removing the RWR on xH-9 series. It is a small and agile helicopter that can get away with a lot if you fly it low and fast. It probably also has a smaller IR signaure and Radar Cross Section than other helicopters. Like others have mentioned, I think this promotes some diversity and thinking into the game. Do I take the Ghosthawk with flares that can carry a whole squad, but is slow and sluggish OR do I get the nimble stealthy MH-9 and carry a few special forces guys behind enemy lines?.

 

The MH-9 is already weak to small arms fire, so keeping clear of enemies is a must. Nap of the earth flight is the way to go :)

 

How about considering a basic RWR for the AH-9, seeing that you are forced to fly higher to successfully attack something? The AH-9 has to "put itself out there" a lot more than the MH-9.

[jukk 4]

On 4/24/2017 at 6:20 PM, arkhir said:

R-73 is capable of high-G maneuvers and off-boresight guidance as well. In fact R-73 had these characteristics first, even before 9x was designed, let's not forget about that! :)

 

If off-bore capability won't be introduced initially, is it at least possible to somehow mod it in with current config structure?

 

Any comment on this @oukej?

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

If I'm not mistaken, the Wiki for Dynamic Loadouts states that it's intended to eventually have a variety of options such as sniper pods, sensors (WE Suites), etc. So I suppose that we could get some pods that help against certain threats, for example maybe the AH-9 could equip a flare dispenser pod with very limited ammo, or maybe the Gryphon could get some sort of jammer pod. We don't even have all the items for Dynamic loadout, so it's worth noting that there may be more options in the near future regarding EW suites for some of the aircraft that don't currently have integrated defenses.

[panduhh 40]

On 4/25/2017 at 2:13 AM, S3blapin said:

 

What do you mean? How would you fight IR guidancestors beside with Active CM? There is no way (to my knowledge) to do passive CM against IR system.

 

For laser guidance... there's today really few system that allow you to disturb a laser guided missile (for example the russian Shtora and I'm not even sure). But anyway there's nothing userd on plane cause you rarely use a laser guides ammo on something that fast

 

I don't know if they plan something against Radar guidance (radar jammers, radar ghost emitters,  etc).

Retired USAF Electronic Warfare maintainer here. The USAF has had several different types of IR countermeasures IRCM) for years now and is deploying new ones even now.

 

Everyone is aware of flare-based IRCM as it's been around the longest. Technology has improved greatly over the decades to more precisely match seeker capability (including tuning flare spectrum to emit far less visible light and far more IR in the specific bands used by seekers). Disadvantage: the entire battlefield sees where you are visually/IR.

 

Next to appear were IR jammers - essentially powerful blinking lights (with an IR filter) facing rearward. The blink rate was designed to mess with seeker scan rates to drive the missile away from the target until it was no longer in the missile's FOV. Disadvantage: everyone behind you sees where you are (IR) from very far away.

 

In the late 90s, DIRCM became a thing (on larger aircraft like high value modified transporters) where the blinking light is focused in a much tighter beam (think like a floodlight is switched to a spotlight). Disadvantage: everyone in or near the beam can see where you are.

 

More recently, DIRCM has switched to lasers as the light source as component size has shrunk to meet the weight & space constraints of aircraft. This greatly increases stealth as only the jammed platform can see the bright (IR) light - note this means the actual missile and not the launching platform. Performance is also enhanced as the jammer can potentially defeat several missiles simultaneously.

 

Most recently, DIRCM has shrunk to the point where small aircraft like helos and certain fighters can carry these systems, not just the big boys (C-130s and larger). These systems are much less expensive so it becomes practical to equip larger fleets.

 

In future (or possibly in the classified present), these DIRCM systems will have enough power to permanently blind IR sensors and eventually disable all missiles (directed energy weapon - "ray guns").

 

Unfortunately, I have no idea what sorts of counter-countermeasures work against DIRCM. Home on jam (a radar counter-countermeasure) is possible if the missile seeker has some ability to locate the exact direction of the jammer but it would be difficult if the seeker receives massive amounts of energy apparently from its entire FOV.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

On 4/25/2017 at 4:51 PM, oukej said:

To solve it subammo is certainly a possibility but it's also somewhat resource-hungry. But a doc said there's already a new parameter for proximity explosions being tested.

Could this also be used for new possibilities like Air Burst munitions/bombs?

[oukej 2911]

Re off boresight - it's possible, ASRAAM can lock targets in 90° cone, BIM-9x up to 120° cone (be it on a target tracked by veh. sensors (sensor-cueing) or locked by player freelooking at it and pressing "T" (helmet-cueing))

[pipyn1970 19]

I would love to see maps covered with the enemies radar & connected to static SAM sites within the hills or even vehicle AA's could hook up to. I think it would be a game changer where they would be heavily defended from both air & ground attack but to win the ECM war then they must be taken out. Reading all this thread about the radars has got me wishing that you guys at Arma could & would make this for us & make a map update to place them all over your maps & make them extremely well hidden from the air by maybe not allowing them to have a signature maybe? I'm not sure how that would work but the idea around it could be they are extremely hard to hit from the air, very well defended from the ground but when they go active not only will they fire at the aircraft within range but maybe they could JAM his radar or something for a couple of minutes? From the air they could be made almost impossible to see maybe?