I can expect Gunjob to look over a bug report and move it to “info requested” or otherwise now that new information and discussion on the topic has been provided, seeing as that is his job as a technical moderator and Id like to think the majority of people know him to be a good and unbiased technical moderator. I would’ve provided all this in the bug report, but comments are closed, and I figured that you might be a reasonable person who could admit to being wrong when new information was presented, but here we are.
In which case it should be on D-band RWR at all times due to constant D-band radio emissions.
D-band (NATO) is L-band (IEEE) in a different notations. We already know the Rafales IFF system works in L-band (1090MHz specifically), its literally on the brochure I already provided. I converted it to D-band, since the game uses NATO radio notation.
Because the HMD IFF is already a lost cause seeing as the devs believe it to work via the power of friendship and pixie dust, since as they initially shot down a report for the F-16C to acquire SADL in-game (the datalink bound system that allows permanent HMD IFF to the A-10C). https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/vgZoidxjgwWM
You, on the other hand are making a request for the IFF system to perform a function it could not possibly do without constant emission of IFF interrogation signals, which, as I’ve already covered, would compromise the aircrafts stealth irl and in-game if that’s how it worked.
This point you wont even concede to, instead arguing that stealth would not be compromised since the function of constant position updates of allies (what you are asking for in your bug report) would be done by datalink, which is true for irl, but is inapplicable in-game due to the devs response on the above linked SADL bug report.
I owned up to my mistaken assumption that the IFF system functioned directly through the RBE2-AA radar, apologized, and provided new info as to why that would not matter in-game and/or would compromise the aircrafts ability to remain hidden. You’ve done nothing but grasp at straws and compromise the credibility and position of your own bug report simply to cling to the hope you can gain an unwarranted advantage in-game.
It’s LPI just like the radar, something NATO was very familiar with and why Russian EW aircraft like to try and approach NATO planes as much as possible - to try and see if they can get examples of emissions to potentially crack it.
Your nonsense take that it should show up on any RWR is based on a lack of foundational understanding of these systems. The cryptography of NATO IFF is not solely to prevent people from sending and receiving false replies.
I wouldn’t say it’s a lost cause. I’ve gone ahead and made a report asking why the A-10C has HMD IFF and the F-16C doesn’t. Hopefully we’ll see what Gaijin says.
Obviously it is. Insinuating that IFF, datalink, and GPS connection would show up on RWR doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. But he’ll be free to make a bug report if he wishes to. Every aircraft in-game with GPS weapons/bombs attached should be having emissions at all times as well I suppose.
Why would I? Feel free to create a bug report showing that GPS connection, future data-link, and IFF should all be having emissions that show up on RWR. It most likely is not the case IRL at all.
Of course you wouldnt lmao, you’re a hypocrite and your entire position stands on rules for thee, not for me. You have no qualms bug reporting the A-10C to lose its HMD IFF function, but refuse to do so with the Rafale and M2K5D-RMV because they’re french vehicles and you are biased. They literally use the same Scorpion HMD.
Datalinks, GPS connections, and IFF would all be highly directional irl, and likely generally be passed through a primary control node of some kind (such as an AWACS or satellite in the case of datalink/GPS) which isn’t hiding its location through minimization of radio emissions as it would be contrary its function, and is most likely in the complete opposite direction of the enemy which would minimize the chance of radio emissions from a frontline fighter being picked up by enemy combat aircrafts. IFF specifically would only involve very directional short duration signals (interrogation signal and response) with no constant repetition irl, making it largely irrelevant in a battlespace. That being said, these signals are known to be possible to intercepted, which is the very reason they are encrypted in the first place so as to not provide the enemy with information.
As I’ve already stated, its near impossible IFF works via constant signal emission over a large area irl (as it would need to to provide constant ally location like you’ve requested in-game). As the brochure itself stated, the IFF works on a target designated or sector scanned function, which implies it only IFF targets already found by other sensors. The IFF would not be doing the job of the primary radar or IRST.
How am I biased? What a ridiculous assertion. I’m an American through and through and have no ties to France nor any French ancestry. Never even visited the country. Perhaps I accidentally bumped into a French person on a street and never realized it, that’s the extent I have of any connection to the French.
I simply said, “Why would I?” because it’s not as simple as you make it out to be. Some sources indicate M2KD-RMV uses the same IFF system as the Rafale. Further, I don’t make reports on things I am not intimately familiar with or acquainted with. However, it is very easy to simply understand that the A-10C uses datalink on its helmet to identify friendly targets, and Gaijin stated that they do not allow tactical datalink. That is far easier to understand as a concept than to get into the nitty-gritty of IFF, data-link, GPS connection, how their emissions work, and etc. You are pushing me to report something that neither of us can concretely understand off of a 1-hour search on the internet.
The decision to only give Scorpion equipped aircrafts datalink capability and then deny its existence altogether gotta be on the top 10 list of most BS decisions by Gaijin.
They could at least say that “we are working on adding it to other aircrafts”.
Or perhaps the person responsible for modelling the HMDs, truly doesn’t understand how the Scorpion can show friendly contacts, including friendly ground vehicles … (Their response in the bug report suggests such).
I looked at @DirectSupport’s report briefly, and seems like he’s asking for radar display to show IFF responses even if the enemy isn’t scanned or detected by the radar.
And to the best of my knowledge not only is this realistic, but not even such advanced technology.
I remember from naval Phantom manuals that even their primitive radar can still show IFF responses even if the radar contact isn’t shown (e.g. in the clutter or notch etc).
This is actually something that has to be fixed for all planes …
@k_stepanovich
It would be nice if you could implement this.
Friendly IFF responses should be shown even if the radar hasn’t detected or scanned the friendly contact.
Except the A-10C, it should be removed as it has no dedicated interrogation devices to speak of and relies on the datalink which is not supposed to be modeled.
I mean, that’s how it works right now.
It doesn’t show enemies; Only friendlies (send you their own location via datalink).
Now you could make an argument that not all air and ground vehicles have (compatible) datalink capability to send you their location, but then again, in the game, even I-15 gets both Soviet and NATO compatible IFF transponder. (And for obvious reasons)
So A-10C is fine; Other planes should get their datalink capability. Both in terms of showing friendly contacts, but also sharing radar contacts.
Yes, this will change the nature of the game, especially in SB but also in RB to some degree (especially if they add radar contact sharing), but so be it … It’s realistic and the nature of the beast (modern air combat).
