crobatoI understand that perfectly well. But in case of your daddy’s Su-27 we are not talking about MFD as it has none, it only has a simple radar scope. I do not see much more there than a YaRK rotating knob (could be brightness adjustment?) and something that looks like an on/off switch. That means no commands to the radar system, no handling of the entire process, no separate graphics processors, just a stupid monochrome monitor. What on Earth is so difficult there? To replace current plug by a dual feed connector?
The original system would have a display system built in. But the new subsystem did not. The new subsystem isn’t capable of generating its own display. Since the new subsystem is not tightly integrated with the old system it would not be able to access the display circuits for the CRT.
The same subsystem is used on the Su-30MKK, so it is intended to work with MFDs. That means no local graphics subsystem and a serial bus intended to communicate with an MFD, a much more flexible layout that reflects more modern thinking and planning for the future. The main radar no longer has its own graphics system but communicates its data through a standard bus to the MFDs. It should be noted that the R-77 subsystem isn’t just meant to fire R-77s but other radar guided weapons as well, which includes in this category, antiship missiles. The capability to use things like Kh-31A or Kh-35 would be handled in this system, aka Su-30MK2, in another update.
R-77 wiring in Su-27 / early Mig-29 do not require any MFD change. This is 100% sure, and was stated several times in interview. You greatly overstimate difficulties here. I dont know details how it is made, but main designer stated there is only 1 small computer plate addidional needed.
The R-77 adaptation to the MiG-29 did not appear to require a separate subsystem but for the Su-27 I am absolutely sure it did based on the documentation and the same subsystem is also used on the Su-30MKK and MK2. It seems strange but they took different approaches in the way the R-77 is implemented, being done by separate companies (Phazotron vs. NIIP). If you look at the way TV weapons were planned to be integrated on the N019 it seemed tightly integrated too, but on the N001, they used another separate subsystem for the TV guided PGMs.
What’s definitely for sure is that the late batch Su-27UBK and J-11A all have an MFD on the top deck of the dashboard, and the R-77 capability is the most apparent change in these aircraft.
crobatoEven with a display, the main MFD has to be connected to a serial bus that’s tied to the main system. You really cannot put another computer into the same serial bus being used already by another computer. It you want to multiplex the bus to rapidly switch between two masters that would only be more complicated. Hence the brute force method which is just simpler to do, add another MFD for the subsystem.
An MFD is not like a simple computer monitor that is connected to the main system via analog cable. It has its own graphics processor and display memory, a dedicated processor, and a bus that talks to the main system. If you need to display a radar mode, you press one of the buttons in the MFD, and the MFD sends a command to the radar system, which sends the data to the bus, and the MFD handles the entire display process within itself. If you are familiar with legacy mainframe and minicomputer systems, the MFD is in effect, a terminal.
crobatoYou are just wrong here. Wiring for R-77 does NOT include installation of any additional MFD. The MFD came for Chinese J-11s, ok, but that is a completely different story and has nothing to do with Russian-built Su-27s, whatsoever.
Then what’s the extra MFD for? Can you guess? From a programmer’s point of view, it would be very difficult to add the R-77 support modes into the existing system and that includes displaying it with the existing MFD. This is not an open architecture system, and machine-assembly language programming means that the coding is done directly right at the bone. That means a very tight integration between software and hardware and that’s extremely difficult to do. It would have been a lot easier to display the new radar modes on a separate MFD with that MFD connected to the new subsystem. Of course its not as elegant as to display it in the existing MFD but thats the nature of a quick and dirty fix.
The MFD also came with the Russian built Su-27UBKs of the last batch, 28 in all, that started deliveries around December 2000 and ending two years later. KANWA did indicate that time that these UBKs were upgraded for the R-77. The MFD certainly had a Russian origin.
crobatoAnd what “mode” were you referring to eh?:rolleyes:
The one where the inner lights around the plane outline would light up.
Oh and by the way, the SPO-15 will give you bearing information on 15 degree increments if two of the green lights would go up, meaning, the bearing is between the two lights. So if 30 and 60 lights up, the bearing is 45 degrees. That would certainly make using the third indicator ring redundant for bearing isn’t it?
crobatoThat was the old LOMAC manual. Not the original Russian flight manual for the Su-27SK that was used for the basis of the simulation. You won’t find that material anywhere for download. I am referring to this manual where the diagram of the SPO-15 shows the readouts of the third orange ring go from right to left. That certainly isn’t telling you bearing information.
crobatoIts says..Lock On reference Manual.the picture which I uploaded is from page 80.Check it yourself.
In any case my point still stands.RWRs are not basically rangefinders.particularly the RWRs one and more generations behind than the recent ones.And i have given some examples.There are others also.And you were saying “from sixties,sixties” etc.
Anyway I was trying to maintain civilty in discussion.
Funny that you want to quote LOMAC. Why don’t you actually play the game, because that picture in the manual is wrong. In the game, the RWR plays exactly like I said. The ingame training simulator in the game has an entire chapter that will teach you the basics and use of the SPO-15, and it will tell you the same thing. The ring is for threat signal strength which can be used for guessimation of the range of threat (the F-15 is more precise). I also have the updated manual for LOMAC for Flaming Cliffs and it says the same thing. I checked on the real Su-27SK manual and it shows the same thing.
Everything is saying you’re wrong. You make me waste quite a number of posts and time just to end up on the same thing.
I never said that most plane RWRs were accurate rangefinders. I said they can help give you rough approximation of distance.
crobatoYou’re still wrong. I can’t write or pronounce what it is in Russian, but I got to the page mentioned. I have the page number here but I want to be sure you’re in the same page or have the same material I am. (The Su-27SK manual, not the Lockon manual).
The way the lights are drawn are similar to the Japanese page, where the lights go up from right to left. It showed the outer ring and the green ring being lighted, and they’re both shaded in the same position, indicating both are consistent with bearing. Yet the third ring is not lighted in the same way, because if they were bearing, they would also have been marked in the same position.
You’re definitely wrong. I was absolutely sure of it, and now I am absolutely absolutely absolutely sure of it.
I could have uploaded the page, but I have long filled up my quota of loaded images. I would be forced to delete megabytes of pictures of great historical value that I have uploaded to this forum.
crobatoI will recheck later the manual. It was from the Russian developers LOMAC forums that leaked the manual out, and they used that to model the RWR in the simulation. They’re in a better position (Moscow based) to countercheck if there are any errata on the manual.
You sound very funny claiming that its easier to determine bearing than signal strength. Really. As if you think its hard to read the frequency and ampitude of the signal.
You look at it. It does not make sense that you already have the outer ring and green ring to tell you the bearing. It is a function of any RWR to indicate signal intensity (the F-15 RWR in the same simulation definitely does that too).
crobatoNooo. You don’t need two bearing indicators, and the SPO-15 isn’t capable of anything more than the bearing indication in those rough increments shown.
LOMAC used the manual to simulate the RWR exactly.
crobatoOops NO! You are wrong.the inner circle is the threat bearing indicator.NO RELATION to signal strength.
And I know what the rest of it indicates.
I disagree. The green lights near the numbers would have told you the bearing. I am talking of the circle between the green lights and the red areas.
crobatoIn SPO15 there is no way to know the variation of the amplitude/intensity of the illuminating radar with distance because the threat indicator display does not have provision for displaying varying signals.The frequency of illumination can be displayed but that depends on the search period of the radar , not distance.Only when the radar tracks or locks it will indicate but that is again based on the frequency of illumination of the target(Su-27) and not nearing distance.
http://image02.webshots.com/2/2/55/65/45725565kxfVfD_ph.jpg
http://www.chez.com/tolky/Airzone/Aircrafts/Photos/su27-cp1.jpg
http://img145.imageshack.us/img145/4374/rwrgz9.jpg
You’re wrong.
Do you see the circle of dashed lines around the plane outline? That will show you the intensity of the signals being received. The closer, the stronger the threat signal, the more lights in this circle will light up and this circle will extend and complete itself.
Do you see the B and H and the two red areas left and right of the plane? These areas will light up if the threat radar is near and in a critical distance of the plane. It will light at the left if the threat is left, right if the threat is right, B if from above, and H if from below. If you are being CWI’ed, all will light up.
You see the six lights on the bottom? Each light indicates what radar threat you are facing, like ship radar, ground search radar, SAM threat, airborne AEW and so on.
crobatoThe upgrade also contains an MFD, which is put on top of the cockpit CRT and on the right side of the HUD. The box would extend BEHIND the HUD and it won’t be a short stub like you’re showing here.
What you are showing in the Eritrean planes are on the wrong side of the cockpit. The installation should be on the right side. If you look at the J-11A, the outline of the box is quite long and extends nearly right to the windshield glass itself.
crobatoWell it should, since the official JH-7A mockup features PL-11 and PL-12 in the wings. Remember the radar set on the JH-7A once vied for the J-10 contract as well (and lost to another Chinese competitor).
It is possible that the same company who developed the JH-7A’s radar is also the ones developing the seekers here.
crobatoGot a photo or a link to demonstrate? TIA
Lots of it, though I cannot upload photos in this forum anymore due to quota reasons.
I can take any example and show it.
From the cockpit view
http://cnair.top81.cn/fighter/J-11A.jpg
from the outside
http://cnair.top81.cn/gallery/J-11_03a.jpg
Here take a look at the dark box behind the HUD.
Or do yourself a favor and decide to check as many of them.
http://cnair.top81.cn/gallery.htm
Its not found in some of the early Su-27s or J-11s as in earlier pictures taken of them, and this can tell you how to spot the upgrade. I got a lot of better ones myself with a better view to the windshield that shows that box with the MFD.
crobatoNice one!
There is also a pic showing a ramjet-powered version of the BVRAAM missile. I’m hoping to make time to go snuffling around the ‘net for it later today if that doesn’t take too much time away for my plan (mentioned in another thread) to tackle some calculations on likely mid-1960s V-bomber survivability.
Active or SAR, I wonder? Jane’s Defence Weekly has some theories, which I’ll try to sum up and post later this morning.
Definitely active. The two looks like small active guided missiles. The big one is a PL-12 in comparison.
Sign In
