KA50 can shoot down aircraft in ArmA why?

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

Hmmm. Interesting.

>worked on the GR5 upgrades when he was at BAe

When? Where was he based?

Warton and Wittering in the late 80's i think.

[ShrubMiK 0]

Okay. I quite possibly overlapped with him then

There were of course thousands of people who worked on GR5/7 in some capacity, and very few could claim to be 100% knowledgeable about every aspect of the systems fitted, or the full history of what was added to or deleted from the loadout and when...

So I'm left wondering whose memory and speculations are letting them down. Fair do's, it's perfectly possible it's mine that are at fault, stranger things have happened, but it will take more to convince me of that.

Let's be clear Rock, are you saying that active radar based MAW systems have never existed? Or just that no such system was ever fitted on a Harrier?

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

Okay. I quite possibly overlapped with him then

There were of course thousands of people who worked on GR5/7 in some capacity, and very few could claim to be 100% knowledgeable about every aspect of the systems fitted, or the full history of what was added to or deleted from the loadout and when...

So I'm left wondering whose memory and speculations are letting them down. Fair do's, it's perfectly possible it's mine that are at fault, stranger things have happened, but it will take more to convince me of that.

Well i could well have misunderstood him regarding some of the more technical aspects or time frames but what I posted above comes form various sources, books, aircrew or my own time in the BAe & Eurofighter.  But I will say it was hardly a very thorough discussion on the topic yesterday and this morning. But he was very positive about the whole thing.  But he was on the Harrier development team I first met him in 2000 when I worked for Eurofighter and we were sharing and office part time so i do know he's the man to talk to about the Harrier.

Let's be clear Rock, are you saying that active radar based MAW systems have never existed? Or just that no such system was ever fitted on a Harrier?

Oh no!  I’m not saying that at all.  If you read up again I agreed with you saying “The Harrier is fitted with ACTIVE and PASSIVE systems…â€

And then went on to try and clear up the confusion about passive systems some were having.  The active MAWs system is pretty much integrated to the RWR system anyway.  Once the Passive MAWS/RWR detects the approach the active system kicks in.  It’s rare that the active system would be on all the time due to EMCON (electronic emission controls).  In fact the only application I can think it would be on all the time is the Israeli airliners scenerio.  Since the attempt to shoot one down a few years ago a lot now fly with active MAWS and countermeasures.

[ShrubMiK 0]

Ah, okay...too much wordage in this thread now to follow properly!

I was beginning to wonder whether I was confusing Harrier systems of 20 years ago with Eurofighter systems of 18 years ago, since I worked on that too (avionic systems simulations rather than hands-on experience of the real kit in this case though.)

[subs17 9]

And your office is...?

>The later versions of Harrier (GR5 onwards) also include a passive IR system

You also say such sensors have been around and deployed for the last 15 years. Which doesn't sound unreasonable to me - I've already said my knowledge is from around 20 years ago and I am out of touch since. Were they then retrofitted to GR5s? Even the GR7 was deployed longer ago than your 15 year timeframe. Aircraft kit is normally finalised long before it is actually deployed. I would have expected a major systems enhancement like that to come as part of a major upgrade - although GR9 seems too late and GR7a doesn't sound like a standalone upgrade.

Although those systems have been around for a while I find that its better to combine the use of such systems with visual identification that a missile is launched at you. If they had such systems in the F-16 in the first gulf war they probably would have used all their chaff/flares up before hitting the tgt since so many missiles were launched enroute to tgt. Particularly during the strike against the reactor I know that alot of SAMs were launched(radar guided) but missed due to ECM. I think any sim that models MAWs would need to properly model its different configurations otherwise the sim would become arcady. Sims like lockon don't have such systems and there is a big diference in how the sim is flown. Falcon has different programs for chaff and flares and also several modes manual/semi and auto. I never use full automatic since you loose your chaff and flares very early in a fight. Ideally 5-6 chaff for a radar guided missile and I tend to pop as many flares for IR missiles. The rwr also has different modes but for low level flying or SEAD you use search mode and also low level to detect search radars from IR and radar guided SAM networks. Lockon also models an IR jammer which is quite good for countering manpads effectively it burns out the seeker and the missile will fly off instead of hitting you aircraft. IR jammers are a more effective way of countering manpads although I think it can blind pilots from what I've read.

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

Although those systems have been around for a while I find that its better to combine the use of such systems with visual identification that a missile is launched at you. .

If you were to rely on the MK1 eyeball for confirmation then you would be dead before you crossed the enemy’s border!

If they had such systems in the F-16 in the first gulf war they probably would have used all their chaff/flares up before hitting the tgt since so many missiles were launched enroute to tgt. Particularly during the strike against the reactor I know that alot of SAMs were launched(radar guided) but missed due to ECM.

I'm sorry, I’m not sure I understand what point you are trying to make.  Maybe I missed something?  It sounds like you are assuming that the chaff and flares are automatic? While it is possible to switch the countermeasures system to automatic but it’s not something you would do in transit while escorted by ECM equipped aircraft.

I think any sim that models MAWs would need to properly model its different configurations otherwise the sim would become arcady. Sims like lockon don't have such systems and there is a big diference in how the sim is flown. Falcon has different programs for chaff and flares and also several modes manual/semi and auto. I never use full automatic since you loose your chaff and flares very early in a fight. Ideally 5-6 chaff for a radar guided missile and I tend to pop as many flares for IR missiles. The rwr also has different modes but for low level flying or SEAD you use search mode and also low level to detect search radars from IR and radar guided SAM networks. Lockon also models an IR jammer which is quite good for countering manpads effectively it burns out the seeker and the missile will fly off instead of hitting you aircraft. IR jammers are a more effective way of countering manpads although I think it can blind pilots from what I've read.

Without wanting to sound like plaintiff  or confrontational what is your point?  As I said I may have missed something but I don’t see how that was relevant?  Was it just a statement about what you think would need to be developed?

If you were to model RWR and threat warning system (and we already have –

)  for ArmA you would also be forced to address the issue of identifying threat types etc which would mean also addressing proper countermeasures (which we are also looking at) which would go along way to addressing your concerns you listed above but without a fundamental change to the way ArmA handles “radar†and target acquisition there would be no point in RWR modes or any complex systems.

Also given the response from the OFP FCSS/RWR beta test we did the response to a simple RWR was very positive.  If anything is made OFP/ArmA far less “arcadeyâ€.  I doubt you will see anything like Lockon’s complexity in anything the community makes but  I honestly think a base RWR and MAWS system would be a huge step forward than the current ‘arcade’ method we have now.  The current “WTF was that!? Why am I dead!?†approach to missile detection isn’t the exactly ideal

[ShrubMiK 0]

I never bother flying aircraft in ArmA (or indeed in OFP) as it's not very satisfying or immersive at all. I certainly don't expect full flight-sim capabilities, and I'm not even complaining 'cos I never expected it to do air combat well - and tbh I've got Falcon 4.0 glaring at me from the shelf because I don't find the time to get to grips with a complex sim nowadays - but something that bridged the gap a bit I would certainly be interested in seeing.

...and back on original topic I see in another thread that whisper has some stuff to force Vikhr AA engagements to confrm to realistic parameters...sounds interesting...

[whisper 0]

Has to be confirmed as functionnal though.

Currently my formula is a bit off and results ain't good.

+ I play damn too much and don't code enough Just out of a 2 hours game, exhausted, time to go to bed

Basically what I want is a system that has chance to destroy the missile before it arrives on target if the distance or speed of target is too great.

Also, I'd like to have a system where you need to keep the nose roughly pointed toward target during all flight time of the missile.

[subs17 9]

If you were to rely on the MK1 eyeball for confirmation then you would be dead before you crossed the enemy’s border!

I'm sorry, I’m not sure I understand what point you are trying to make.  Maybe I missed something?  It sounds like you are assuming that the chaff and flares are automatic? While it is possible to switch the countermeasures system to automatic but it’s not something you would do in transit while escorted by ECM equipped aircraft.

Without wanting to sound like plaintiff  or confrontational what is your point?  As I said I may have missed something but I don’t see how that was relevant?  Was it just a statement about what you think would need to be developed?

If you were to model RWR and threat warning system (and we already have –

)  for ArmA you would also be forced to address the issue of identifying threat types etc which would mean also addressing proper countermeasures (which we are also looking at) which would go along way to addressing your concerns you listed above but without a fundamental change to the way ArmA handles “radar†and target acquisition there would be no point in RWR modes or any complex systems.

Also given the response from the OFP FCSS/RWR beta test we did the response to a simple RWR was very positive.  If anything is made OFP/ArmA far less “arcadeyâ€.  I doubt you will see anything like Lockon’s complexity in anything the community makes but  I honestly think a base RWR and MAWS system would be a huge step forward than the current ‘arcade’ method we have now.  The current “WTF was that!? Why am I dead!?†approach to missile detection isn’t the exactly ideal

No you would not since you are flying as part of a package your wingman and you both watch out for IR/radar SAMs and AAA. You use the RWR to determine threat type and angle from your aircraft. You can also determine by the RWR if they are tracking you(STT) or they maybe close enough to be a threat. I don't assume anything regarding the chaff flares I merely pointed out that the F-16 has an automatic/semi automatic and manual chaff/flare modes and 5 programs.(that can be setup on the DTC cartridge prior to ramp start) Regarding flying enroute to tgt some not all of the missiles in the situation I mentioned did hit some of the aircraft in the package so some of the pilots if they are locked up will then have to evade the missile. Part of SAM evasion is actually visually acquiring it if you can in order to execute a SAM evasion manouvre to exceed the missiles gimbal limits. One way of doing this is a barrel roll and in some older radars can loose track of you if your aircraft rolls.

Regarding RWR mod in Arma you only have 2 threat types AAA shilkas tracking radar(not modeled) and the Flankers.(29 or 35). It would be nice if someone made a Tungaska as that would rock as a SAM platform. If you are going to model MAWs then you would have to model the appropriate aircraft equipt with it. It would be nice to see a decent GR7/9 aircraft in Arma with the right load out. But how MAWs could be realistcally modeled would be difficult since most of that stuff is secret. And the current WTF why am I dead is exactly how it is IRL anyway although realistic damage would add more to it.

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

.... And the current WTF why am I dead is exactly how it is IRL  anyway although realistic damage would add more to it.

I know a few aircrew who would strongly disagree with you there. In fact i know from reading alot of accounts that 90% of the pilots who were shot at never saw the missile. Nor did there wing men. They were all dependant on the MAWS and RWR.

As for a decent Harrier GR7/9 wait and see.

[subs17 9]

Has to be confirmed as functionnal though.

Currently my formula is a bit off and results ain't good.

+ I play damn too much and don't code enough Just out of a 2 hours game, exhausted, time to go to bed

Basically what I want is a system that has chance to destroy the missile before it arrives on target if the distance or speed of target is too great.

Also, I'd like to have a system where you need to keep the nose roughly pointed toward target during all flight time of the missile.

1st you need to remodel the whole cockpit, add trackir and chaff/flares and probability of hit or miss for the SAM.

Pk igla 0.30 to 0.48 unprotected

0.24 in presence of flares and jamming.

0.59 for approaching aircraft

0.44 against receding tgt

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9K38_Igla

[max power 21]

Without wanting to sound like plaintiff  or confrontational what is your point?

Do I haunt your dreams at night, Rock? Do you often wake up in cold sweats... or hot ones?

[Guest RKSL-Rock]

Without wanting to sound like plaintiff  or confrontational what is your point?

Do I haunt your dreams at night, Rock?  Do you often wake up in cold sweats... or hot ones?  

Actually, you remind me a lot of “athlete’s footâ€. A minor infection that’s really annoying and hard to get rid of.

But unless you are the rather stunning brunette i met last week on the tube you won't get any where near my dreams.

[whisper 0]

Just FI :

http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=74172

[max power 21]

Without wanting to sound like plaintiff  or confrontational what is your point?

Do I haunt your dreams at night, Rock?  Do you often wake up in cold sweats... or hot ones?  

Actually, you remind me a lot of “athlete’s footâ€.  A minor infection that’s really annoying and hard to get rid of.

But unless you are the rather stunning brunette i met last week on the tube you won't get any where near my dreams.

Correction: Impossible to get rid of.