As long as the stuff in front of it is returning interrogator requests - or has time to.
is this not automated? and how long does it even take?
I don’t know how long it would take, but it would require that every aircraft involved be sending and receiving signals back and forth to each other - requires direct line of sight and that both aircraft sensors are within gimbal limits, etc.
For the sake of gameplay you could simplify this greatly and just make aircraft within line of sight and looking at friendlies within 120 degree frontal sector pop up as friendly after a radar track has been provided… the Eurofighter for example requires an A/A track on something to determine it as friend or foe when utilizing the radar which isn’t required if you have electronic scanning capability.
ah, so the Rafale and an AS-4664 & APX-114 equipped F-15, as well as an APX-111 F-18, would all be able to go about typical operation while using their IFF’s?
Yes, no switch turning or careful maneuvering necessary. As long as a target is within line of sight it can find out friend or foe from one of a myriad of sensors available. The Rafale picks that up a notch and uses the sensors to quickly find and interrogate targets without needing to do as much scanning. The sensor fusion means everything talks to each other and it clears the picture up for the pilot rapidly.
Eurofighter needs to look at the target and build an A/A track to determine IFF using the main antenna, not sure what other systems it has but that’s my way of saying I couldn’t find anything else on it. Odd, since BAE systems is so quick to talk about any other IFF on the planet.
1 Like
im sure a newer F-15, with Legion pod for more sensor data and more recent software, could do this as well.
also, while reading through the APX-111 technical data on the PDF you sent, i noticed it said that it had 5 fuseagle ESA antennas which could mean greater FOV for IFF operation
same thing for the APX-126 on the F-16
also for BAE F-15 CIT
due to the variety of antenna options for the APX-114, and the same variety in antenna options for the other IFF systems, i think the APX-114 could very well have multiple antennas to give better coverage
Those systems are not integrated into the onboard systems and take away from the aircrafts RCS, payload capacity, performance, etc.
These are much newer systems, I was unaware they had electronic scanning capability. The system on the Rafale has been in use since the Rafale A demonstrator in 1986 though and I would not say that they had this capability in the 70s.
the rafale is really looking like a 2025s aircraft, and the eurofigher a 2000s aircraft (like its name) in the sensor fusion department
The Eurofighter was supposed to enter service in '98 and even then it would not have PESA, sensor fusion, etc. The IFF and MAWS in particular are totally legacy systems that are indicative of expected early 80s performance but has not been improved since.
The Rafale from the onset has had these modern systems.
APX-111 has had this capabiliity since it was made in late 80’s/early 90’s
APX-113 (similar to 111) is also on F-16C’s (126 better but still), as well as Korean and Singaporean F-15’s
rafale is a pretty impressive jet. wasn’t really the first to anything, but great overall multirole
APX-111 development was initiated in 1993, F-18’s in the US did not start receiving them until 1997 and 500 were upgraded with it by 2003. I’ll reiterate that the French Rafale had a better system as early as 1986.
It does have a very comprehensive sensor fusion system. I just haven’t got around to reporting it yet. And it seems no one else can be bothered to do so.
10 Likes
No it doesn’t
1 Like
1988, but yes, they did have a better IFF system. The APX-100 may have some ESA capability since the Forecast International report on it mentions solid state electronics, which E-scan has, but could be referring to other parts of it.
There is also the possibility that the Rafale’s started out conventional and got upgraded to an E-scan antenna later down the line
James is a terrible source
This is forecast international, not janes. The report was sponsored by BAE themselves
Forecast international is Janes
1 Like
They are 2 separate companies. Janes is in London, Forecast international is headquartered in Connecticut.
Likewise, both sources are invalid for bug reports because of how notoriously unreliable they are.
1 Like