By: bring_it_on
- 6th December 2016 at 21:50Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Capability of the EODAS, along with sources to support those capabilities have been provided repeatedly here and it's always the same user with the same argument. The DAS need not ID anything, it only needs to accurately track it. There are other sensors for organic ID, and there are yet more available since there is multi-ship fusion thanks to MADL.
By: bring_it_on
- 6th December 2016 at 22:02Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
DAS lost track on the space rocket at burnout, dont count on tracking with low/moderate IR radiation
At what range? The idea with DAS is to use it as a shorter range system to the EOTS. Multiple ways to ID an object if it is outside of the range of the DAS but once within range it can be tracked by DAS.
By: SpudmanWP
- 6th December 2016 at 22:39Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And you know this how ?
Simple:
1. It's the first IIR based MAWS to provide video to the avionics
2. Nobody else has claimed that they can.
3. You can't prove a negative.
New
Posts: 4,472
By: Nicolas10
- 6th December 2016 at 22:46Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Simple:
1. It's the first IIR based MAWS to provide video to the avionics
2. Nobody else has claimed that they can.
3. You can't prove a negative.
1. No, see DDM-NG
2. Who would actually claim that they can track a space rocket at 900NM except some company desperate to find positives to sell the lemon of a plane they're working on?
3. It was not a negative. You claimed that it's the only MAWS in existence capable of doing it.
Anything else, I still have some time to waste tonight.
Nic
New
Posts: 6,983
By: obligatory
- 6th December 2016 at 22:47Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
1] providing video dont do anything for the sensor to detect
2] not everyone got a ballistic missile handy, and even less got them in abundance to fling one just for the sake of it
3] its not proven either way, and likely will never be,
hence, i dont think theres a difference in MAWS sensors detection ability,
unlike yourself that are certain any other sensor is inferior
By: SpudmanWP
- 6th December 2016 at 22:54Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
DDM-NG does not send the video images to the avionics. It is a drop in replacement for the previous system and only provides more accurate detection and tracking due to it's improved sensors. They will have to upgrade the datalinks and avionics before the rest of the avionics can use the raw video image feeds. This is a similar issue with the F-22 which also uses IIR based MAWS but the avionics only gets track data from the sensors, not the raw video feed.
"You can't prove a negative" is the same as saying "The absence of evidence is the evidence of absence". In other words, they have never claimed that it was a feature so it's safe to say that it's not a feature. This is in the same vein as my long held belief that the F-35 did not have a towed decoy. It was not until this year that BAE gave us the details to the system and looking back at budget docs shows that it was in Block2B and part of the USMC's IOC.
Here is what has been published about the Mig-35's SOAR
SOAR – System consist of two stations, one on engine’s gondola, second on the top of the fuselage, behind the cabin. It detects rocket launches and shows the direction from which the missile is coming. The threat is also signalled by vioce. It can detect Stinger/Igla from 10km, a2a missiles from 30km, big surface to air missiles from 50km. SOAR was also developed in NII PP Institute.
Info on DDM-NG
The concept behind DDM NG is the ability to detect incoming attacking missiles from any direction and angle of attack with regard to the host aircraft. It will succeed the current DDM system on the Rafale as a “form, fit and function” replacement. DDM NG incorporates a new infrared array detector which enhances performance with regard to the range at which a missile firing will be detected, offers improved rejection of false alarms and gives an angular localisation capability which will be compatible with the future use of Directional Infra Red Counter Measures (DIRCM). With two sensors, each equipped with a fish-eye lens, DDM NG provides a spherical field of view around the aircraft.
By: FBW
- 6th December 2016 at 23:49Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
1. No, see DDM-NG
2. Who would actually claim that they can track a space rocket at 900NM except some company desperate to find positives to sell the lemon of a plane they're working on?
3. It was not a negative. You claimed that it's the only MAWS in existence capable of doing it.
Anything else, I still have some time to waste tonight.
Nic
You've wasted plenty already. Kindly point out where DDM-NG is tied into the MDPU for processing. Also, how it is fused with OSF and radar. Point out it tracking function with HMD.
Can't do this? Then they are not comparable systems.
By: FBW
- 6th December 2016 at 23:52Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
"that fluffy thing in the middle of the ocean surely has got to be a boat ?
i'll better have a look outside the window and see what it is !"
Would have bet good money that Oblig would pull out one of his five "go to" quotes. This is despite constantly being told he is confusing the DAS functions with HMD imagery.
By: Armed Update
- 7th December 2016 at 01:05Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
DDM-NG has zero capability to detect and track enemy aircraft like an IRST. The reason why they tested a MICA shot, they needed another aircraft to datalink radar info.
By: garryA
- 7th December 2016 at 05:44Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
If it was trivial as you suggest, then we wouldn't see specialized IR systems at all. In fact often attack pods have multiple separate cameras. LANTIRN, for example, has FLIR in two separate pods - one with fixed wide FoV field, other with zoomable optics for narrow view. LITENING has two TV cameras and one FLIR sensor, and so on. They wouldn't bother with multiple cameras if they could just do all that with zoomable optics.
LANTIRN has 2 pod : 1 is targeting pod and the other is navigating pod.The navigating pod has a terrain following radar and a thermal camera for short range navigation . Basically a night vision system that help pilot look outside , while the targeting pod help pilot look at target at distance target at the sametime.
LITENING has 1 pod only and all the CCD and FLIR sensors are included in a single pod just like Sniper-XR.
Posts: 127
By: Armed Update - 6th December 2016 at 21:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Rafale has EOTS?????? How misinformed are you?
EODAS>4th Gen MAWs which zero IRST capability.
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 6th December 2016 at 21:50 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Capability of the EODAS, along with sources to support those capabilities have been provided repeatedly here and it's always the same user with the same argument. The DAS need not ID anything, it only needs to accurately track it. There are other sensors for organic ID, and there are yet more available since there is multi-ship fusion thanks to MADL.
DAS was made sensitive enough, precise enough, and long-range enough to include aircraft detection and track capabilities. For even longer-range IR functions and targeting, EOTS can be used in conjunction with DAS.
Posts: 6,983
By: obligatory - 6th December 2016 at 22:00 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
DAS lost track on the space rocket at burnout, dont count on tracking with low/moderate IR radiation
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 6th December 2016 at 22:02 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
At what range? The idea with DAS is to use it as a shorter range system to the EOTS. Multiple ways to ID an object if it is outside of the range of the DAS but once within range it can be tracked by DAS.
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 6th December 2016 at 22:15 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
WHAT.. it lost track of a non-burning rocket at 900+nm.. say it aint so!!!!
FAIL
CANCEL
What.. wait...
What do you mean it's the only MAWS in existence that can even do that?
Next thing you know they'll tell us it's a failure since it can't track orbiting satellites. ;)
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 6th December 2016 at 22:19 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
How many posts before someone says they never loose track of the sun 90 million miles away using the MK1 eyeball..
Posts: 6,983
By: obligatory - 6th December 2016 at 22:22 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
lol, no, i sure dont require that,
i dont think its the only MAWS that can track a space rocket under power tho
ed: and BIO, loose is what my belt isnt at this point,
lose is what happened to my money on my last woman
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 6th December 2016 at 22:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Instead of guessing, try Googling and provide a link if you find it.
Posts: 4,472
By: Nicolas10 - 6th December 2016 at 22:30 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
And you know this how ?
Posts: 6,983
By: obligatory - 6th December 2016 at 22:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
instead of guessing, how about you try google that any other MAWS cant ?
Posts: 12,109
By: bring_it_on - 6th December 2016 at 22:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Good catch. I'm in a habit of typing , posting and then coming back and making edits :).
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 6th December 2016 at 22:39 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Simple:
1. It's the first IIR based MAWS to provide video to the avionics
2. Nobody else has claimed that they can.
3. You can't prove a negative.
Posts: 4,472
By: Nicolas10 - 6th December 2016 at 22:46 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
1. No, see DDM-NG
2. Who would actually claim that they can track a space rocket at 900NM except some company desperate to find positives to sell the lemon of a plane they're working on?
3. It was not a negative. You claimed that it's the only MAWS in existence capable of doing it.
Anything else, I still have some time to waste tonight.
Nic
Posts: 6,983
By: obligatory - 6th December 2016 at 22:47 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
1] providing video dont do anything for the sensor to detect
2] not everyone got a ballistic missile handy, and even less got them in abundance to fling one just for the sake of it
3] its not proven either way, and likely will never be,
hence, i dont think theres a difference in MAWS sensors detection ability,
unlike yourself that are certain any other sensor is inferior
Posts: 5,197
By: SpudmanWP - 6th December 2016 at 22:54 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
DDM-NG does not send the video images to the avionics. It is a drop in replacement for the previous system and only provides more accurate detection and tracking due to it's improved sensors. They will have to upgrade the datalinks and avionics before the rest of the avionics can use the raw video image feeds. This is a similar issue with the F-22 which also uses IIR based MAWS but the avionics only gets track data from the sensors, not the raw video feed.
"You can't prove a negative" is the same as saying "The absence of evidence is the evidence of absence". In other words, they have never claimed that it was a feature so it's safe to say that it's not a feature. This is in the same vein as my long held belief that the F-35 did not have a towed decoy. It was not until this year that BAE gave us the details to the system and looking back at budget docs shows that it was in Block2B and part of the USMC's IOC.
Here is what has been published about the Mig-35's SOAR
Info on DDM-NG
http://www.mbda-systems.com/press-releases/even-greater-protection-for-the-rafale-thanks-to-ddm-ng/Note lack of any new feature or mention of video imagery.
The Eurofighter does not even have an IR based MAWS (tranche 3 maybe???) so no contest there.
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 6th December 2016 at 23:49 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
You've wasted plenty already. Kindly point out where DDM-NG is tied into the MDPU for processing. Also, how it is fused with OSF and radar. Point out it tracking function with HMD.
Can't do this? Then they are not comparable systems.
Posts: 3,106
By: FBW - 6th December 2016 at 23:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
Would have bet good money that Oblig would pull out one of his five "go to" quotes. This is despite constantly being told he is confusing the DAS functions with HMD imagery.
Posts: 127
By: Armed Update - 7th December 2016 at 01:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
DDM-NG has zero capability to detect and track enemy aircraft like an IRST. The reason why they tested a MICA shot, they needed another aircraft to datalink radar info.
Posts: 1,081
By: garryA - 7th December 2016 at 05:28 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
A boat is significant smaller than an aircraft
Vs
Moreover , he also said that DAS can identify a Jeep in desert at close range.
Posts: 1,081
By: garryA - 7th December 2016 at 05:44 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
LANTIRN has 2 pod : 1 is targeting pod and the other is navigating pod.The navigating pod has a terrain following radar and a thermal camera for short range navigation . Basically a night vision system that help pilot look outside , while the targeting pod help pilot look at target at distance target at the sametime.
LITENING has 1 pod only and all the CCD and FLIR sensors are included in a single pod just like Sniper-XR.