[WAD] Is this a bug or WAD, early era RWR cannot detect the "A" Band radar

[Tcao]

Please see attached file
A-7, F-4G and A-6, SEAD aircraft that has early 80's RWR and late 70's technology RWR cannot detect the "A" Band search radars emissions.

is this a bug or WAD?

[blu3s]

That's WAD, the RWR is mainly for tracking and illumination radars. The ESM bands are not displayed currently in the DB, it would be a nice addition

[Dimitris]

Added this ability for the next update.

[Tcao]

Copy that and make sense. But that brings up a tactical problem in CMO, these late 70's early 80's SEAD A/C cannot engage these A band search radar independently.

ARM vs P-14.jpg (124.16 KiB) Viewed 442 times

Looks like the player need to bring an ELINT A/C like EP-3 or RC-135 to share the target info with SEAD A/C first

[thewood1]

Was the APR-25 ever able to detect an A band radar? I'm not sure the upgraded 45 could either. And worse, the Shrike could not attack it even with offboard detection.

[Blast33]

Agree, CMO is to generous by killing all the Spoon Rests with ARMs

Even the Serbs stated that the Spoon Rest radars in Allied Force (1999) could not be engaged with ALARM or HARM missiles and where save.
Source: the book Missileers against Stealth

[blu3s]

Exactly,

Also, we are aware that our RWR are way to powerful and can detect emitters quite precise, we have plans to fix that in the future.

Specific ESM platforms will gain relevance

[Nikel]

Ignore.

[blu3s]

Lol, what amount of BS

Please, use real sources and real life experiences and evidences...

A HARM missile would need like a 3m antena in order to detect the upper frequency of an A Band radar

[Nikel]

Is it BS?

OK, deleted.

[blu3s]

Just some basic math on antenna sizes give you an estimate of the proportions needed to detect some radar frequencies. Also, Vietnam era RWR can blip when you're detected by a Search Radar, but won't give you a very exact location, just direction, but they were mainly fine tuned to illumination soviet radars.

There's a modern case where Agm 88 locked into a patriot bty that was illuminating a F-16CJ

You can probably obtain better results with Gemini, using deep search and making sure that it doesn't invent new data

[blu3s]

The AGM-88A HARM entered service in 1983 and constituted a major improvement over the earlier missiles. The weapon used a broadband spiral antenna, a software programmable seeker which was conceptually similar in design to an RWR, providing coverage from the C through to the J band (2-20 GHz).

https://ausairpower.net/API-AGM-88-HARM ... pabilities.

[Nikel]

I was going to post a Jane's book reference but I think the same is explained in the article you linked.

If I understand correctly, in the self-protect mode, what is important is the radar of the aircraft, that fed the info to the missile.

So if the aircraft radar detects the hostile A-band radar, then the AGM-88 is able to destroy it?

[blu3s]

Until the introduction of the AARGM-ER (AGM-88G), legacy HARM variants primarily relied on their own passive radar homing for terminal guidance. This means that even if a Hornet could theoretically detect a radar emitter operating in Band A (which is highly unlikely due to sensor limitations), the missile would still lack the precision required to engage the target effectively. Passive detection alone typically doesn't provide a sufficiently accurate fix for targeting unless the radar continues to emit throughout the missile's time of flight.

This is precisely why the AARGM, and later the AARGM-ER, introduced enhanced guidance capabilities. Older HARMs were heavily dependent on the target radar remaining active; once it shut down, the missile would often lose lock. To mitigate this vulnerability, newer variants incorporate GPS-aided inertial navigation and active radar seekers, allowing them to continue toward the estimated target location even if the radar stops emitting.

BTW, nowadays you don't need your platform to detect the SAM emitting, you just need to be cued by an external platform (some kind of CEC) that detects the emission and send the information through IBS (Integrated Broadcast System).

Some more information about this:

The idea of launching HARMs using offboard cues isn't new; it goes back to the early '90s with the EA-6B Prowler. In 1993, VAQ-209 (a Naval Reserve squadron) did some pretty groundbreaking stuff during Exercise Talon Sword. They used MATT (Multi-mission Advanced Tactical Terminal) to receive real-time threat data from national sources like Rivet Joint, displaying it on laptops with a system called STRED (Standard TRE Display). The crew used this data alone (without ever having direct line of sight) to launch a HARM while flying below the radar horizon, and it still hit the target dead-on. Later, in Radiant Oak, they even hit an over-the-horizon naval radar target at sea using just this kind of broadcast intel.

By the time the Bosnia conflict rolled around in ’95, ten MATT-equipped EA-6Bs were in theater doing exactly this, and they did it so well that Congress funded MATT installs for the entire Prowler fleet. The only catch was that they were still stuck using laptops in the cockpit until the system got fully integrated into the aircraft displays in 2005. [1] [2]

Now AARGM/AARGM-ER, instead of relying on MATT, use IBS (Integrated Broadcast System), which is way more robust and real-time. Growlers and other aircraft (I think the F-16CJ also got it) can get threat data from Rivet Joint or other theater ESM assets, but now they can also share and update that data with each other mid-flight or even with Super Hornets. [3]




[1] - https://x.com/alexgarcialonso/status/18 ... 1081467946

[2] - https://www.history.navy.mil/research/l ... stars.html

[3] - https://ndia.dtic.mil/wp-content/upload ... Austin.pdf

[Nikel]

OK, thanks for the detailed explanation

[Tcao]

the missile would still lack the precision required to engage the target effectively. Passive detection alone typically doesn't provide a sufficiently accurate fix for targeting unless the radar continues to emit throughout the missile's time of flight.
Older HARMs were heavily dependent on the target radar remaining active; once it shut down, the missile would often lose lock.

A little bit OT. current CMO game doesn't simulate this very well.
1, turn off the radar doesn't help too much in CMO, it will make Shrike and early version of HARM slightly deviate from its intended target, some will be deviate a 60-100ft, while others (I would say 1 in 4) will still hit the target.
2, the warhead of Shrike and HARM seems to be too powerful. 3 HARM missiles can sink a Perry class FFG. one HARM hit on SA-2 can take out the Spoon Rest, Fan Song F as well as additional one or two launcher
3, a Mobile SAM to survive the Shrike and HARM by : turn off the radar, then issue a movement order, that way it will make all Shrike missed.

[thewood1]

the missile would still lack the precision required to engage the target effectively. Passive detection alone typically doesn't provide a sufficiently accurate fix for targeting unless the radar continues to emit throughout the missile's time of flight.
Older HARMs were heavily dependent on the target radar remaining active; once it shut down, the missile would often lose lock.

A little bit OT. current CMO game doesn't simulate this very well.
1, turn off the radar doesn't help too much in CMO, it will make Shrike and early version of HARM slightly deviate from its intended target, some will be deviate a 60-100ft, while others (I would say 1 in 4) will still hit the target.
2, the warhead of Shrike and HARM seems to be too powerful. 3 HARM missiles can sink a Perry class FFG. one HARM hit on SA-2 can take out the Spoon Rest, Fan Song F as well as additional one or two launcher
3, a Mobile SAM to survive the Shrike and HARM by : turn off the radar, then issue a movement order, that way it will make all Shrike missed.

1) I am seeing misses between 500 and 4000 ft firing Shrikes on Fan Song radars from 4-6 nm away. In several Osprey books, its implied that if the Shrikes fired within a few miles of the Fan Song, it could come close enough on its ballistic course to damage the Fan Song. If I leave the radar on, its about a 50% hit rate of some kind. Some hits cause extensive damage and some minor.

Screenshot 2025-06-11 183816.jpg (276.2 KiB) Viewed 207 times

3) While that tactic is a real possibility, can a SAM unit pack up and move in the minute or so a Shrike or older HARM is in transit?

[thewood1]

The bigger issue with the Shrike is it has a real life limitation for a firing arc of 3-5 deg. In CMO its quite a bit broader. Not sure if that can even be addressed.

[boogabooga]

Was the APR-25 ever able to detect an A band radar? I'm not sure the upgraded 45 could either. And worse, the Shrike could not attack it even with offboard detection.

Looks like NATO I, G, and E band only:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kHgrQe0mXWk

[Tcao]

the missile would still lack the precision required to engage the target effectively. Passive detection alone typically doesn't provide a sufficiently accurate fix for targeting unless the radar continues to emit throughout the missile's time of flight.
Older HARMs were heavily dependent on the target radar remaining active; once it shut down, the missile would often lose lock.

A little bit OT. current CMO game doesn't simulate this very well.
1, turn off the radar doesn't help too much in CMO, it will make Shrike and early version of HARM slightly deviate from its intended target, some will be deviate a 60-100ft, while others (I would say 1 in 4) will still hit the target.
2, the warhead of Shrike and HARM seems to be too powerful. 3 HARM missiles can sink a Perry class FFG. one HARM hit on SA-2 can take out the Spoon Rest, Fan Song F as well as additional one or two launcher
3, a Mobile SAM to survive the Shrike and HARM by : turn off the radar, then issue a movement order, that way it will make all Shrike missed.

1) I am seeing misses between 500 and 4000 ft firing Shrikes on Fan Song radars from 4-6 nm away. In several Osprey books, its implied that if the Shrikes fired within a few miles of the Fan Song, it could come close enough on its ballistic course to damage the Fan Song. If I leave the radar on, its about a 50% hit rate of some kind. Some hits cause extensive damage and some minor.

My bad, I should do more tests before drawing a conclusion.
yes, keep the radar off as well as keep a good trigger discipline will defeat the Vietnam era ARM

6/8/2025 6:56:06 PM - Weapon: AGM-45B Shrike [ARM] missed Vehicle (Fan Song C [SNR-75M]) (of SAM Bn (SA-2b Guideline [S-75 Dvina])) by 1519ft
6/8/2025 6:56:06 PM - Weapon: AGM-45B Shrike [ARM] missed Vehicle (Fan Song C [SNR-75M]) (of SAM Bn (SA-2b Guideline [S-75 Dvina])) by 14537ft
6/8/2025 6:56:08 PM - Weapon: AGM-45B Shrike [ARM] missed Vehicle (Spoon Rest C [P-12]) (of SAM Bn (SA-2b Guideline [S-75 Dvina])) by 8003ft
6/8/2025 6:56:10 PM - Weapon: AGM-45B Shrike [ARM] missed Vehicle (Fan Song C [SNR-75M]) (of SAM Bn (SA-2b Guideline [S-75 Dvina])) by 5384ft
6/8/2025 6:56:11 PM - Weapon: AGM-45B Shrike [ARM] missed Vehicle (Fan Song C [SNR-75M]) (of SAM Bn (SA-2b Guideline [S-75 Dvina])) by 2921ft
6/8/2025 6:56:13 PM - Weapon: AGM-45B Shrike [ARM] missed Vehicle (Spoon Rest C [P-12]) (of SAM Bn (SA-2b Guideline [S-75 Dvina])) by 12895ft
6/8/2025 6:56:13 PM - Weapon: AGM-45B Shrike [ARM] missed Vehicle (Spoon Rest C [P-12]) (of SAM Bn (SA-2b Guideline [S-75 Dvina])) by 11477ft

Why my first few tests generated disappointing result is that I forgot to make SAM site hold fire on ARM.
I put a S-75 , a HQ-2 and a SA-8 on the map. Even though I shut the radar down after detecting ARM, the AI turn the FCR back on later to intercept ARM (although SAM-2 has a single digit PoH against AGM-54)

Change WRA -- guide weapon : supersonic to NO automatic fire will keep a strict EMCON silence.