Passive Radar and Home on Jam

[boogabooga]

I'm by no means an expert in this area, but wouldn't one expect many ground radars (and possibly airborne ones as well) to have a passive mode that could determine the general strength and direction of OECM jammers? Especially when the jamming is only effective over a narrow angle from the emitter. Wouldn't the ground radars "see" the jamming corridor? Or to put it in CMO terms, wouldn't many radars have a built-in ESM/ELINT capability as well?

I've included a scenario to show how this might work by including a generic ESM in a SAM site. But now that the jammer can be detected, is Home on Jam actually implemented in CMO? The SA-21s have the "Home on Jam" property flag, however, it appears that they are unable to actually engage an imprecise target. Is there a way to get HOJ to work that I am not seeing?

[KnightHawk75]

I think\always thought HOJ only came into play post-launch. In addition I assumed it mostly only applied on the terminal portion of a munitions lifetime, or at least after it activated it's own guidance in the case of like a sa-21.

[boogabooga]

Are you talking real life or CMO modeling?

[tiag]

Radars can be jammed via their side lobes (making a large area of the scope "jammed"), depending on the characteristics of the radar side lobe, strength of the jammer, etc.

In real life, HOJ can come to play even before launch as for some A2A weapons. This is not modelled for CMO.

[AndrewJ]

Way back in CMANO days there was a time when you could sometimes get Phoenix missiles to launch HOJ, without a solid radar contact, against things like jammer Badgers, etc. I think the function got discontinued before CMANO ended, and never made the transition to CMO.

[KnightHawk75]

Are you talking real life or CMO modeling?

CMO, when in doubt I'm always talking CMO.

[KnightHawk75]

ORIGINAL: AndrewJ

Way back in CMANO days there was a time when you could sometimes get Phoenix missiles to launch HOJ, without a solid radar contact, against things like jammer Badgers, etc. I think the function got discontinued before CMANO ended, and never made the transition to CMO.

Yeah I think that went away around the time of CMANO where each unit started evaluating it's own level of tracking, vs the side at large for launch conditions, ie when mass fire and forgetting went away, which would my guess of why that worked prior.

[boogabooga]

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75
I think\always thought HOJ only came into play post-launch. In addition I assumed it mostly only applied on the terminal portion of a munitions lifetime, or at least after it activated it's own guidance in the case of like a sa-21.

Right, but if you can't even engage an ambiguous target, it's kind of pointless.

It just seems to me that many fire control radars would be 'directional' enough to get bearing to an OECM jammer since it's 'directional' enough to obtain a lock in the first place.

I know in SAM Simulator it is possible to lock onto a noise jammer in passive mode; even command guided missiles like SA-2s and 3s can be fired down the bearing (and elevation) in "three-point" mode. There are even simulated proximity fuse settings to support this method.

[tiag]

CMO is not a simulator, so dont expect that specific platform engagement mechanics are simulated. It is hard to accept (I know) but if you try to replicate real life engagement scenarios you will only be frustrated (been there).

IMO, the fact that you see units flying and moving around in a map gives the wrong impression they are being simulated as Falcon 4 or DCS in a 2D map. Well, far from that. Tons of aspects are abstracted within the scope the devs want to model.

Just to give an example within the OP. HOJ is an important capability of many SAM systems, which is used against defensive ECM pods too, not only OECM. However, DECM is not explicitly simulated in CMO...it is a number modifier (a factor multiplied in the probability of weapon hit) in the final engagement of the weapon.

[thewood1]

Thats a good perspective. And its one that people miss all the time. It is a simulator of operations and battles with the ability to see individual units. Its not a simulator of individual units and capabilities. I think the devs have continuously added detail as their knowledge grows. But way too many people look for every real world capability from study sims games that simulate in great detail a specific type of unit. Comparing CMO to DCS, Combat Mission, or SAM Simulator is a recipe for frustration for both players and devs.

There needs to be a balance in detailed unit simulation, playability, performance, and the dev's roadmap. Its one of the reasons I don't use Tacview much. In the end CMO is a sandbox for tens of thousands of units across 70 years of conflict. Its not DCS.

[boogabooga]

So to respond to the last two posts,

I absolutely consider CMO to be a simulation engine. All of the commercial flight simulators are ALSO full of abstractions. To your example, nobody in the commercial flight sim world EXPLICITLY models modern ECM, either- the details are simply not open source (to put it mildly). So, to turn around tiag's point- just because use strap on a fancy ECM pod onto your favorite DCS ride does NOT mean that ECM is NOT abstracted. Indeed, abstraction is an important part of simulation, not the absence of simulation. But, I digress.

To the point, the question of whether radar sensors should be capable of generating ambiguous targets in the case of jammers or whether a weapon should be capable of engaging an ambiguous target-or not- is easily within the existing scope of CMO and in my opinion, a fair question to ask. Indeed, some sensors and weapons in CMO do already have these capabilities.
I also want to point out that the HOJ issue is not necessarily a minor technicality; it potentially has a game-changer effect on SEAD operations.

[Struan76]

I think we're asking the same question in different ways! https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=5064396

I'd love to run a few scenarios looking at tactical employment of the AA-10E (R-27P, dbid=2055) using passive home on jam.

This would be a great feature to see in CMO.

[BDukes]

This seems like something that should probably work and maybe it got lost in the shuffle. Regardless, it is a good ask.

I have no idea why anybody would be against asking for this

Mike

[thewood1]

Where did anyone come out against it? I didn't see that anywhere.