Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Target Recognition

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Target Recognition

    Does anyone know if the crews of modern fighter/ground attack aircraft still undergo aircraft/afv recognition training? Or do they just rely on IFF and information from AWACS etc.
    Obviously BVR engagements cannot be verified, but the MK1 eyeball is still one of the best bits of kit out there and shouldn’t be neglected.

  • #2
    US pilots do. Hell, AWACS crews do, and there're only a couple of windows on that jet.

    Comment


    • #3
      Indian Air Force and the Indian Army do.


      "Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

      I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

      HAKUNA MATATA

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Jimmy View Post
        US pilots do. Hell, AWACS crews do, and there're only a couple of windows on that jet.
        I have to disagree with that. We are becoming far too dependent on electronics and making BIG mistakes.

        For example, those two US Army Blackhawk helicopters shot down by two US Air Force jets in Iraq several years ago. IFF signals for the day were not coordinated and both AWACS and the fighter pilots just went Eeny, Meeny, Miney, Moe and decided those were "enemy" blips on the screen.

        A couple of years before that a Ticonderoga class ship mis-identified a 4-engined civilian airliner from Iran as an Iranian F-14 Tomcat.

        During Desert Storm, long range electronic cameras on negative mode repeatedly mis-identified American tanks and vehicles as "enemy". As great as the A-10 "Warthog" is, it's IFF system of targets was out of date. And that can be bad when they can lock on to a target and fire from 8 miles away.

        I recall an incident back in the 70's just off of San Diego where a Navy plane not only missed the towed target sled, but hit the tugboat towing it. The bomb went right through the mast and bounced off the deck and over the side.

        To date, there is nothing as accurate as the Mk-1 eyeball. But you have to get dangerously close to make positive visual identification. Which means that our Radars and Camera systems are not accurate enough to give a clear picture of what you are aiming at.

        A movie studio in Hollywood can mount a camera up in San Pedro and zoom in on the Casino in Avalon on Catalina Island 26 miles away. But our weapons ID equipment can't tell the difference between a T-72 or an M1-A1 Abrams at less than one-third that distance.

        Oh. Yeah. I forgot. According to law we have to buy from the lowest bidder.

        I believe our weapons systems AND target ID systems are the best in the world. BUT, they can be made much better even with today's technology already on the shelf.
        Able to leap tall tales in a single groan.

        Comment


        • #5
          Still part of Royal Australian Air Force training
          with some flow over to other divisions of the defence force.

          and I agree dependence on IFF is not a good thing, yet it is so important in jets where it can be difficult to ID by Eyeball when travelling at the speed of sound and from a distance.
          Still it helps when one side use US F-xx jets and the other use MiG's, but when the same tech is used you have to be careful
          Last edited by Rodinga; 11 Nov 08,, 07:06. Reason: typo
          There is no such thing as free lunch

          Comment


          • #6
            but then again you know something is not working when it id's a passenger jet as a F-14 Fighter jet.
            There is no such thing as free lunch

            Comment


            • #7
              Good post Rusty

              Alas it does appear the MK 1 eyeball is still the most reliable, I am not sure about nowadays, but in my day AFV recognition was a huge part of training, and in those days the talk was not about avoiding FRATRICIDE but to be able to ascertain the threat that was coming towards you, ie which force was coming towards you, given the build up of vehicles being encountered.
              We are not going to get away from the electronic age, but in this area (IFF) money should not be an issue and it should be a priority to be put right.
              sigpicFEAR NAUGHT

              Should raw analytical data ever be passed to policy makers?

              Comment


              • #8
                I received training on aircraft and AFV recognition.
                Nulli Secundus
                People always talk of dying for their country, and never of making the other bastard die for his

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by RustyBattleship View Post
                  I have to disagree with that. We are becoming far too dependent on electronics and making BIG mistakes.

                  For example, those two US Army Blackhawk helicopters shot down by two US Air Force jets in Iraq several years ago. IFF signals for the day were not coordinated and both AWACS and the fighter pilots just went Eeny, Meeny, Miney, Moe and decided those were "enemy" blips on the screen.
                  I meant that US aviators ARE trained to visually ID.

                  The Blackhawk shootdown was in 94. And those Eagle pilots did VID them...incorrectly. There's a whole lot going on in that scenario, and everyone involved deserved a share of the blame...the Army for blatantly ignoring IFF/safe passage procedures, the AWACS for poor coordination (some people knew there were friendlies somewhere in the area, but didnt relay the info), the Eagle drivers for their failure to accurately identify the helos (BOTH PILOTS!).
                  Last edited by Jimmy; 11 Nov 08,, 19:10.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Thanks for the input guys, my main area of concern is with ground attack aircraft. Even if the target type cannot be identified it should be possible to determine if it is friendly or hostile and if any doubt exists no attack should be initiated (in my ideal world).

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Rodinga View Post
                      but then again you know something is not working when it id's a passenger jet as a F-14 Fighter jet.
                      It didn't. That was human error.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Buggerit View Post
                        Thanks for the input guys, my main area of concern is with ground attack aircraft. Even if the target type cannot be identified it should be possible to determine if it is friendly or hostile and if any doubt exists no attack should be initiated (in my ideal world).
                        If you're talking about CAS, that's pretty much how the system works. A qualified guy on the ground describes the terrain and tells the pilot where the bad guys are, where the good guys are, and which direction to attack from. If friendlies and targets are too close together, the pilot can't drop ordnance unless the guy on the ground "buys the bomb" by giving his initials...basically he's taking responsibility.

                        Unfortunately you STILL get friendly fire incidents from time to time, but its surprisingly rare. Every couple of years there's an incident, but there are multiple close support attacks every day.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          I wasn't refering to CAS, finding targets and calling in Dropbird airstrikes was part of my job in the army.
                          I was referring to attacks on targets of opportunity whether initiated by the pilot himself or from details given by AWAC’s etc.
                          I agree totally that friendly fire incidents have happened and will continue to occur but the chances of them happening should be minimised by training and SOP’s. Rather than just enquiring if any friendly forces are in the area positive visual ID should be made.
                          As well as the effect these incidents have on the mistaken target they probably have a massive impact on the pilot himself.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Tarnak Farm.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X