Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Another one of my dumb questions… There is a very obvious difference between exercises and real engagements, namely, a missile launch. What constitutes a kill in regular exercises? I’ve always imagined that computers have some kind of simulation mode. Is it all over after a successful lock? Is there some kind of virtual missile launch with time of flight and probability of hit factored in?

F-16.net Sponsor

There was a movie based on Red Flag, I think it was titled Red Flag. It was a great movie because it was down to earth, not a lot of hollywood (i.e. impossible manuevers in aircrafts). It shows stuff like that: a referee who views a data link from the aircrafts and determines who is dead and who isn't.

There was a movie based on Red Flag, I think it was titled Red Flag. It was a great movie because it was down to earth, not a lot of hollywood (i.e. impossible manuevers in aircrafts). It shows stuff like that: a referee who views a data link from the aircrafts and determines who is dead and who isn't.

Ok, first, just remember that there are NO dumb questions, except for the following:

"Honey would it be alright if I slept with your little sister?" or...

"Officer, isn't it morally wrong to only give me a warning, when in fact I WAS speeding?"

However, if you are asking a legit question for the purpose of learning, then there are NO dumb questions. That being said, here we go.

When aircraft are flying DACT missions against each other (say for instance, over the Gulf Range), they will carry an ACMI (Air Combat Maneuvering Instrumentation) pod on a missile rail. The pod is linked with computers and telemetry in the ACMI building. Computer displays will show what each aircraft is doing, and when/if shots are taken.

To score a "kill," the shooter must be in a realistic launch envelope for the desired missile or gun shot. For example, just as in real life, one can not take a Sidewinder shot from 85 miles out and expect to acheive a kill. Making sense so far? Clear as mud?

Now, when we are talking about live fire exercises, like the USAF Air-to-Air Weapons Meet, aka "William Tell," the planes will carry live missiles. Unlike operational weapons, these missiles do not have warheads. Pilots will fire the missiles on Full Scale Aerial Targets (currently, the QF-4). Since there are no warheads, instead of exploding near the drone, the missile will actually hit the drone. Sometimes, the damage is light, and the drone can be landed and repaired. Most times though, the hit will knock the drone out of control, at which point an onboard AIM-9 warhead is used to destruct the drone.

Scoring in William Tell is a points-based system, based on individual and team efforts in a variety of profiles throughout the competition. Pilots and teams earn points for: Number of drone kills, DACT missions against Aggressors, time to intercept, weapons load, and fastest arrival time, among other categories. At the conclusion of William Tell, the top overal scoring individual pilot, and team are named "Top Gun". Individual and team winners of each profile are also named.

Hope this helps you.

Beers, MiGs, and QF-4s (what else?) were made to be pounded!

Hey, are they going to start using old F-14 to convert to QF-14s for a different set of targets for the drones? Just curious because the entire batch is being retired so why not (other than obvious expenses involved). Also, do they do the same thing with bomber interception? I mean are there flying drone made from some of the old bombers? Retired BUFFs, B-58s, other things for bomber stuff?

Nope. The TomTurkeys are going to the Boneyard to rot or be stuck on sticks somewhere. The F-14 is a bigger maintenance b#tch than the Rhino. Far too complex and $$$$$ to be turned into an FSAT.

Drones are used to provide targets to evaluate weapon systems. Generally, they will take a number of missiles from a certain production block (for example, a group of AIM-9s built in 1994) and evaluate the performance of the missile to see if missiles from that block are still feasable for operational use. These tests are known as WSEPs (Weapon System Evaluation Program) (pronounced "Wessup").

All you really need to learn to intercept a bomber is a working radar, and how to fly formation. Therefore, unmanned aerial targets are not really needed. You can fly wing on nearly anything to practice an intercept. Perhaps Gums will see this and tell us some stories about his days sitting 5 min. alerts in the Voodoo.

Back in the late '40s, B-17s were flown as drones through nuclear tests to show the effects of flying through a nuclear blast. Needless to say, none fared well. FYI, the last B-58 Hustler flight was in 1970.

The next generation FSAT is slated for 2008, and Blk.15 F-16As and Bs are talked about as a replacement for the Rhinos. There is also talk of the AF and Navy building a joint FSAT. Also, what might happen is that the AF will take control of FSAT operations, and the Navy will work with the AF in joint ops as drone pilots, and both AF and Navy ranges will be used for WSEP missions.

Beers and MiGs were made to be pounded!

TC wrote:

Nope. The TomTurkeys are going to the Boneyard to rot or be stuck on sticks somewhere. The F-14 is a bigger maintenance b#tch than the Rhino. Far too complex and $$$$$ to be turned into an FSAT.

Besides....have ya seen the number of F-4's at AMARC recently? Yikes! Shocked

Doesn't look like they'll have a shortage of FSAT candidates any time soon.

Actually in Live fire exercises (My exposure was in Combat Sage) the warhead section of the missile is replaced with a telemetry package. It has a little tiny antenna on it that transmit missile data back to the ground. Telemetry actualy causes the missile to intentionally veer off at the last second and avoid impacting the drone after the system determines a "hit" is scored. Drones are simply too expensive to shoot one down every time you need to shoot a live missile. I can't remember what the exact numbers were but our pilots had to shoot a live AIM-9 once every two years I believe to remain proficient.

Live fire exercises were alot like shooting clay pigeons though. The drones were painted bright orange, flying straight and level on a pre arranged course, speed, altitude and time while trailing smoke for enhanced visability.

My first trip to Combat Sage the unit I was with fired 16 missiles. Scored 15 "hits" by computer and had one telemetry failure. That one Splashed the drone.... 16 out of 16. Not bad for almost $100K per missile.

Ok, you were at Combat Sage, which was at Clark if I'm not mistaken. Since Clark didn't have an FSAT mission, you guys were most likely shooting at SubScales, not FSATs, because the FSATs get hit. I've seen a couple Rhinos come back with panels blown off of the fuselage, holes in the wing, and one time, they brought one back with both blast panels damaged, and the tail hook blown off! Shocked

It was repaired, and returned to "death row" at Tyndall's Drone Runway.

The SubScales (the small, all orange drones) have a heat-emitting package strapped to the back that the AIM-9 seeker head aims for. Sometimes, the SubScale gets hit, and blown apart. They do try to recover SubScales whenever possible though. At the Eglin/Tyndall portion of the Gulf Range, the Subs are launched, and recovered in the water just past Cape San Blas by a specialized drone recovery boat, which belongs to the 82nd ATRS.

Beers and Drones? NO, MiGs were made to be pounded!

Thanks everyone for the responses, very informative Very Happy

Quote:

To score a "kill," the shooter must be in a realistic launch envelope for the desired missile or gun shot. For example, just as in real life, one can not take a Sidewinder shot from 85 miles out and expect to acheive a kill.

Hi TC,

What happens once you are in a realistic launch envelope? How do you simulate a launch and how is a kill determined?

Good question. In layman's terms, once the pursuing jet locks up the "bandit" the pilot fires the selected simulated weapon, and a receiver on the other jet will get a signal that the aircraft has been "hit."

Telemetry equipment positioned at various spots on the range, and onboard each aircraft will tell the "killed" pilot that he is "dead."

I hope this provided a good explanation for you. I've had enough Silver Bullets today to kill a pack of warewolves! And of course, as you know...

Beers and MiGs were made to be pounded!

LinkF16SimDude wrote:

Besides....have ya seen the number of F-4's at AMARC recently? Yikes! Shocked

Doesn't look like they'll have a shortage of FSAT candidates any time soon.

Not true. Most of the F-4's at DM are in too bad a condition to restore. The program has been "cherry picking" the good ones, and using the bad ones to can parts from. As the pickings get slimmer, the cost of modifying goes up...fast. The replacement has been put off for so long now (lack of $$ priority) that there is no way now to develop an FSAT from scratch and have it ready before the QF-4 fleet runs out. The QF-16 has been repeatedly quoted as too expensive (why USAF keeps kicking the can), so they are now looking at German F-4s and RF-4Cs as an interim fix, both of which however are significantly different enough to required major drone kit design changes (the german models have non-US parts making those REALLY tough).

Conceptually, a new-design UAV target can be built pretty cheaply since the design life is pretty short, but the time required is killing off interest.

Thanks TC!

One more... Is there time for evasive maneuvers by the locked-on target (simulated missile flight time) or is it over once the reciever gets photon-blasted. Roscoe?

Countermeasures, and evasive maneuvering can both be used to break a lock. I also forgot that jets will carry a captive Sidewinder to help track heat sources, when taking simulated AIM-9 shots.

Beers and MiGs were made to be pounded!

Thanks TC. I'm still a little unclear about what goes on between a lock and a kill, but it seems these exercises are conducted as realistically as a real engagement as opposed to an aerial lasertag match. Very Happy

Forum: Modern Military Aircraft

Missile Launch: real vs. simulated