F/A-18E not protected by EA-18G Jamming vs. SA-21 Cheeseboard

[BDukes]

Hi All

Run the attached scenario. Notice that the Growler is jamming the Cheeseboard Radar and isn't detected but for some reason the F/A-18E's flying not too far behind it are.

The Cheeseboard detects these aircraft minus jamming at about 212nm @ high Alt and 57.1nm @ 2000ft low.
With jamming its roughly the same so it does look like the radar isn't being jammed in respect to other targets.

Removed the Mk 1 Eyeball sensor as well. Same results.

Mike

[BDukes]

Looks like another user experienced

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 1&t=381556

Mike

[boogabooga]

Here is how to make the jamming effective, you have to get in tight with your jammer. But, you can get fairly close like this, even at altitude.

You have some more wiggle room with older radars as far as how much volume your jammer will be effective in.

[BDukes]

Thanks for spending time to look at and holy schmidt is that tight. Gonna be a bear to set up a complete AI attack that meets those parameters

Looks to be a data issue. Will take up in the db string at some point

Thanks!

Mike

[thewood1]

I guess my question is if jamming in modern ECM is more of a point activity. I know early jamming was just pushing out noise over specific frequencies. But when I have read about modern jamming, its seems they actually point the emitters at specific areas or units. Or maybe its a combination of both. I thought that's why units like an EA-6 carry multiple ECM pods and emitters. They have to cover specific frequencies and very narrow fields of activity.

And how that applies to CMO, I have no idea.

[BDukes]

I guess my question is if jamming in modern ECM is more of a point activity. I know early jamming was just pushing out noise over specific frequencies. But when I have read about modern jamming, its seems they actually point the emitters at specific areas or units. Or maybe its a combination of both. I thought that's why units like an EA-6 carry multiple ECM pods and emitters. They have to cover specific frequencies and very narrow fields of activity.

And how that applies to CMO, I have no idea.

Yeah in my first test the detected aircraft I was trying to protect were 9-12 miles stb and port aft of the jammer. On top of that, the jammer is hidden from the jammed radar so it's in range and pointed at the radar. In BB's fix file the detected aircraft are tucked in tight (mile?) directly aft of the jammer. In my view, the odds of that being true are less likely than my 9-12nm scenario. I don't know classified data points so rely on o other ways such as comparing the likelihood of each scenario to judge.

This is not an end-of-the-world thing. Just need to do the work and report to DB folks to figure it out. My posts are just a step along the way. Better finding it here than a pro going wtf during a demo.

Need to also figure out how to make this paradigm work for my AI side in a scenario. This problem is all mine.

Mike