Great resource for understanding Command's ECM model

[boogabooga]

I saw this video the other day:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyFqaaqqph0

The ALQ-41/51 as described is a clear example what Command calls DECM: breaking a radar lock (that can otherwise detect you) to make successful missile engagement against you less likely. Video goes through how the sausage is being made in that regard.

While they called ALQ-35 "DECM" in the video, I would argue that it is an example of what command would consider "OECM." i.e. Putting so much clutter on a radar screen that you can't be easily detected in the first place. Noise jamming would be similar, and perhaps what you get when you generate infinite false targets.

Question, couldn't the same ALQ-35 with the same false target generation technique be considered "OECM" against a constantly rotating GCI radar with vulnerable side lobes but "DECM" against a targeting radar that has the ability to precisely track you (or your signal) in elevation and azimuth?

Then there is the comms jammer...

[Zanthra]

Yes, swamping the target with false tracks would be considered OECM in command, but the ECM models in command are significantly simplified.

OECM as I understand it in command simply increases the noise floor for the radar, a pure white noise generator, that reduces it's ability to pick up targets. There are no "false contacts" modeled in command's radar system. If an object appears on radar, it is an ingame object (possibly one of the new decoys however).

DECM is even more limited in Command, with radar DECM only being effective against radar guided missiles, by giving the aircraft a roll to deceive the incoming missile or guiding radar to miss the target. Once a tracking radar detects you, there is little that will cause them to lose that track unless you fly away or change orientation to a lower RCS facing.

So Command models none of those ECM systems with any degree of accuracy, it's very abstract.

One of the other major issues with the DECM model in command is actually the fact that the operating aircraft's radar cross section has no effect on the DECM chance of jamming an incoming missile. It is fairly well known that something like a towed decoy on a stealth jet like the F-22 will be far more effective than the same decoy on a B-1, because the radar return for the decoy would be many orders of magnitude greater than the F-35 making it difficult for the incoming missile to identify the real target.

Chaff is actually an interesting tool in the game, as while it is deployed by aircraft under missile attack, it can actually be deployed manually by a great many different kinds of aircraft, and the chaff cloud (when used manually) will hang in the air and slowly descend, degrading radar effectiveness through it. It can take some significant thought and planning to deploy as you have to think about the altitudes and slant ranges for aircraft and weapons vs. the enemy radars, and make sure you don't impede your own radars too much as well, but it can really help to shape the battlefield if used properly.

[Dimitris]

Yes, swamping the target with false tracks would be considered OECM in command, but the ECM models in command are significantly simplified.

OECM as I understand it in command simply increases the noise floor for the radar, a pure white noise generator, that reduces it's ability to pick up targets. There are no "false contacts" modeled in command's radar system. If an object appears on radar, it is an ingame object (possibly one of the new decoys however).

False contacts are more of a DECM (D as in deception) feature, and it is something we are working towards. The decoy-mode units we recently introduced are a step in that direction, but more elaborate "electronic" false contacts (ie. having no real-world "physical presence") is where we really want to expand. This requires some more work on the EW modeling.

DECM is even more limited in Command, with radar DECM only being effective against radar guided missiles, by giving the aircraft a roll to deceive the incoming missile or guiding radar to miss the target. Once a tracking radar detects you, there is little that will cause them to lose that track unless you fly away or change orientation to a lower RCS facing.

The "track-breaking" function has been discussed here: https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 0&t=387395 and it's also on our stack. It has taken longer than originally envisaged because it requires modelling "tracking" as a discrete intermediate sensory step between volume search and fire control, plus awareness on the target that it is indeed being explicitly tracked instead of just scanned, plus appropriate doctrinal changes for jamming use (ie. multiple different conditions for when to jam as a response to being scanned vs tracked vs engaged) - and _that_ can be a significant challenge.

One of the other major issues with the DECM model in command is actually the fact that the operating aircraft's radar cross section has no effect on the DECM chance of jamming an incoming missile. It is fairly well known that something like a towed decoy on a stealth jet like the F-22 will be far more effective than the same decoy on a B-1, because the radar return for the decoy would be many orders of magnitude greater than the F-35 making it difficult for the incoming missile to identify the real target.

That's an interesting observation. Do you have any specific real-life examples we can use as sources for a reasonable model?

Thanks.

(Also: Bookmarking this thread for the next inevitable discussion on how Command is getting too complex/technical to be any "fun"...)

[Zanthra]

Here is one reference I have seen regarding stealth and ECM (as well as Towed Decoys). Starting at the end of page 50. I don’t know of any real life examples where decoys have been used by stealth aircraft successfully or unsuccessfully, and performance in testing of these things is likely to be highly classified.

https://secure.afa.org/Mitchell/reports ... e_0910.pdf

[DavidRob0]

Interesting response from Dimitris. Looking forward to what comes out of this discussion - could be most interesting.

[Dimitris]

Here is one reference I have seen regarding stealth and ECM (as well as Towed Decoys). Starting at the end of page 50. I don’t know of any real life examples where decoys have been used by stealth aircraft successfully or unsuccessfully, and performance in testing of these things is likely to be highly classified.

https://secure.afa.org/Mitchell/reports ... e_0910.pdf

Thanks.

[Nikel]

One of the other major issues with the DECM model in command is actually the fact that the operating aircraft's radar cross section has no effect on the DECM chance of jamming an incoming missile. It is fairly well known that something like a towed decoy on a stealth jet like the F-22 will be far more effective than the same decoy on a B-1, because the radar return for the decoy would be many orders of magnitude greater than the F-35 making it difficult for the incoming missile to identify the real target.

That's an interesting observation. Do you have any specific real-life examples we can use as sources for a reasonable model?

Thanks.

(Also: Bookmarking this thread for the next inevitable discussion on how Command is getting too complex/technical to be any "fun"...)

Some questions, thoughts:

Revising the database, I do not see any F-22 version mounting towed decoys, is it an error or am I missing something?


Also found this:

To be effective, the towed decoy must turn on within the threat radar’s resolution cell after the radar is tracking the protected target. To successfully decoy the missile, the towed decoy must return radar
signals with sufficient power to simulate a radar cross section (RCS) significantly larger than that of the protected target.

The B-1B and the F-35 mounted towed decoys, though different (AN/ALE-50 and AN/ALE-70 respectively), both have the same radar signatures, 4-5 dBsm.

But the signatures for both aircraft are the following:

-27,10 to -40 dBsm for the F-35.

12,60 to 17,40 dBsm for the B1-B.

Conclusion: the B-1B is not protected at all!?


The only stealth aircraft shot down was a F-117A in the Kosovo war in 1999. Not towed decoy for v1994 in the database, the one used in the war I guess. The v1999 of the B-1B already includes the decoy, this technology was probably added after the incident.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1999_F-117A_shootdown



Also of interest.

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/2 ... althy-skin



Dimitris, the game may be complicated or not, but for sure provides a lot of fun and I am just scratching the surface

[Zanthra]

It was my mistake to mention the F-22 in relation to towed decoys. I had meant the F-35.

I am not sure where the 4-5 dBsm of the decoy comes from, but I suspect with active signature enhancement, they can get higher radar returns than that.