Exercise Desert Hawks 2016 [Semi-Open|MT|OOC]

[Aquitayne]

Good evening, people!
Short question, Riysa, what would happen if someone was to decide "Herp-a-derp, that plane there is an enemy!" and shoots down a passenger plane? Any form of punishment for that side in mind or will that be up to the observer leaders?
I mean, in real-life, it would be a PR-desaster, but there might be people here, who go by "They fly over a combat zone, it's their own fault and not our problem!" (like the Selkie do) and simply shoot down everything that doesn't come back as friendly or who make a mistake as we all are human.

Also, as for the problem with the multitude of different IFF-systems, I always thought, that there was some sort of code sent and when the right reply comes back, then the plane is friendly - can't that code be handed over to the allies and be done with it? Or am I thinking in far too simple terms?

(And no problem with the delay.)

IFF signals are easily distinguishable and all passenger airliners have a specific style of IFF signatures to tell military aircraft and air-traffic control towers that they are indeed a passenger aircraft. Military fighter jets in this day and age can scan, detect, and identify hundreds of IFF signals in seconds, and easily display which ones are friendly, foe, or a passenger aircraft. I believe Riysa said that the AO is in an area passenger aircraft don't usually fly over, but even if they do, it's not like we're firing real missiles at one another anyway. If nothing else combat ops may have to be suspended and the aircraft escorted out of the engagement zone.

[Riysa]

Good evening, people!
Short question, Riysa, what would happen if someone was to decide "Herp-a-derp, that plane there is an enemy!" and shoots down a passenger plane? Any form of punishment for that side in mind or will that be up to the observer leaders?
I mean, in real-life, it would be a PR-desaster, but there might be people here, who go by "They fly over a combat zone, it's their own fault and not our problem!" (like the Selkie do) and simply shoot down everything that doesn't come back as friendly or who make a mistake as we all are human.

Also, as for the problem with the multitude of different IFF-systems, I always thought, that there was some sort of code sent and when the right reply comes back, then the plane is friendly - can't that code be handed over to the allies and be done with it? Or am I thinking in far too simple terms?

(And no problem with the delay.)

I don't think there'd be a specific punishment for the pilot unless that side agreed on something, but it'd affect the story as a whole. For example, if the allies shot down an airliner, it'd make the allied nations uncomfortable and cause some to reduce or withdraw support, making it significantly more likely for the opposing force to "win" at the end of the exercise. The same thing can happen to the opposing force; if they shoot down a civvie plane, then several previously-neutral nations will be spurred to contribute forces to defend against their aggression.

IFF is a pretty complicated subject, to be honest. What you described isn't different than what I described, which is NATO-standard military-only mode 4 IFF. You send out a special, encrypted code based on a list of keys for that IFF set, and if the plane interprets it and responds with a correct response, then it is acknowledged as "friendly." Otherwise, its listed as "other". Soviet IFF operated in a similar fashion, but the details are a bit different and still pretty obscure. Whether or not the plane can decode and interpret the challenge in the first place depends on its equipment.

[Riysa]

2. I order Task Force Caesar to establish a three-tiered layer of defense, consisting of a Quick Reaction Alert section, a First Echelon section, and a Second Echelon section, following the following schedule:

Saturday: Aquitayne and Kobolis (QRA)|Nifon and ____ (First)|OS Navy and ____ (Second)
Sunday: Hutanjia and Pakiranistan (QRA)|OSMC and Aquitayne (First)|Nifon and OS Navy (Second)
Monday: Free Asian Ports and Republic of Vietnam (QRA)|
Tuesday: Hutanjia and OS Navy (QRA)|
Wednesday: OSMC and Kobolis (QRA)|
Thursday: Nifon and Atmarea (QRA)
Friday: Nifon and OSMC (QRA)|

3. I order Task Force Caesar's air defense systems to begin deploying immediately, while rotating activity among the same schedule as above.

We have some holes here, did I miss a post where we filled those? Obviously Riysa will revise the list of participating allied forces, which may change this up a bit, but I don't know that he was going to fill in the rest of the First and Second Echelon squadrons. I believe that's on us.

Who is stepping up to take charge to coordinate our response?

I was planning on filling it in, but it shouldn't restrict anyone from being airborne depending on the allied plan - just that certain people need to have certain planes ready to go at all time.

The need of an allied commander was what I was getting at in my previous post. I'm not commanding it because of the possibility of a conflict of interest.

[The Selkie]

Good evening, people!
Short question, Riysa, what would happen if someone was to decide "Herp-a-derp, that plane there is an enemy!" and shoots down a passenger plane? Any form of punishment for that side in mind or will that be up to the observer leaders?
I mean, in real-life, it would be a PR-desaster, but there might be people here, who go by "They fly over a combat zone, it's their own fault and not our problem!" (like the Selkie do) and simply shoot down everything that doesn't come back as friendly or who make a mistake as we all are human.

Also, as for the problem with the multitude of different IFF-systems, I always thought, that there was some sort of code sent and when the right reply comes back, then the plane is friendly - can't that code be handed over to the allies and be done with it? Or am I thinking in far too simple terms?

(And no problem with the delay.)

I don't think there'd be a specific punishment for the pilot unless that side agreed on something, but it'd affect the story as a whole. For example, if the allies shot down an airliner, it'd make the allied nations uncomfortable and cause some to reduce or withdraw support, making it significantly more likely for the opposing force to "win" at the end of the exercise. The same thing can happen to the opposing force; if they shoot down a civvie plane, then several previously-neutral nations will be spurred to contribute forces to defend against their aggression.

IFF is a pretty complicated subject, to be honest. What you described isn't different than what I described, which is NATO-standard military-only mode 4 IFF. You send out a special, encrypted code based on a list of keys for that IFF set, and if the plane interprets it and responds with a correct response, then it is acknowledged as "friendly." Otherwise, its listed as "other". Soviet IFF operated in a similar fashion, but the details are a bit different and still pretty obscure. Whether or not the plane can decode and interpret the challenge in the first place depends on its equipment.

Thanks for that response, what happens with civilian airliners being shot down was seen in the Ukraine.

I see. So... I'm not imagining it in too simple terms (I hope), which is a bit of a relief. Sharing these keys for the IFF is possible and done, right?
Also... When did the good old times go, where IFF was done via looking at the roundel and shooting at each other with machine guns from biplanes with stuttering engines?

[Riysa]

Good evening, people!
Short question, Riysa, what would happen if someone was to decide "Herp-a-derp, that plane there is an enemy!" and shoots down a passenger plane? Any form of punishment for that side in mind or will that be up to the observer leaders?
I mean, in real-life, it would be a PR-desaster, but there might be people here, who go by "They fly over a combat zone, it's their own fault and not our problem!" (like the Selkie do) and simply shoot down everything that doesn't come back as friendly or who make a mistake as we all are human.

Also, as for the problem with the multitude of different IFF-systems, I always thought, that there was some sort of code sent and when the right reply comes back, then the plane is friendly - can't that code be handed over to the allies and be done with it? Or am I thinking in far too simple terms?

(And no problem with the delay.)

IFF signals are easily distinguishable and all passenger airliners have a specific style of IFF signatures to tell military aircraft and air-traffic control towers that they are indeed a passenger aircraft. Military fighter jets in this day and age can scan, detect, and identify hundreds of IFF signals in seconds, and easily display which ones are friendly, foe, or a passenger aircraft. I believe Riysa said that the AO is in an area passenger aircraft don't usually fly over, but even if they do, it's not like we're firing real missiles at one another anyway. If nothing else combat ops may have to be suspended and the aircraft escorted out of the engagement zone.

Sorry Aq, but I've got to comment on this:

Military IFF modes can not distinguish between friendly and foe by itself, it can only distinguish between friendly and other. Other military modes give ATC data such as unit and mission-specific codes, while Mode 4 sends out a specific interrogation and demands a specific reply. Civilian/general modes give ATC data, such as a flight code for the plane taking off, location, altitude, etc.

The AO itself is in a place frequented with commercial traffic, which is not unusual - there was significant air traffic over all of central Europe during the Cold War, not to mention the Vincennes incident. The civilian traffic will disperse once war has officially been declared, but there will be still some clutter throughout the day.

[Riysa]

I don't think there'd be a specific punishment for the pilot unless that side agreed on something, but it'd affect the story as a whole. For example, if the allies shot down an airliner, it'd make the allied nations uncomfortable and cause some to reduce or withdraw support, making it significantly more likely for the opposing force to "win" at the end of the exercise. The same thing can happen to the opposing force; if they shoot down a civvie plane, then several previously-neutral nations will be spurred to contribute forces to defend against their aggression.

IFF is a pretty complicated subject, to be honest. What you described isn't different than what I described, which is NATO-standard military-only mode 4 IFF. You send out a special, encrypted code based on a list of keys for that IFF set, and if the plane interprets it and responds with a correct response, then it is acknowledged as "friendly." Otherwise, its listed as "other". Soviet IFF operated in a similar fashion, but the details are a bit different and still pretty obscure. Whether or not the plane can decode and interpret the challenge in the first place depends on its equipment.

Thanks for that response, what happens with civilian airliners being shot down was seen in the Ukraine.

I see. So... I'm not imagining it in too simple terms (I hope), which is a bit of a relief. Sharing these keys for the IFF is possible and done, right?
Also... When did the good old times go, where IFF was done via looking at the roundel and shooting at each other with machine guns from biplanes with stuttering engines?

Nope, you aren't! Yes, they're normally done, but its all about equipment. NATO and WarPac IFF receivers were all supplied with the codes and challenges necessary - though it seems that Soviet IFFs had some special modes that were not found on export IFFs - allowing for coordination between allies. My main point about NS is that not enough arms designers pay attention to what their system's IFF capabilities are, so there's a definite problem for the allied force if they don't happen to be using the same or similar systems.

Missiles happened.

[The Selkie]

Thanks for that response, what happens with civilian airliners being shot down was seen in the Ukraine.

I see. So... I'm not imagining it in too simple terms (I hope), which is a bit of a relief. Sharing these keys for the IFF is possible and done, right?
Also... When did the good old times go, where IFF was done via looking at the roundel and shooting at each other with machine guns from biplanes with stuttering engines?

Nope, you aren't! Yes, they're normally done, but its all about equipment. NATO and WarPac IFF receivers were all supplied with the codes and challenges necessary - though it seems that Soviet IFFs had some special modes that were not found on export IFFs - allowing for coordination between allies. My main point about NS is that not enough arms designers pay attention to what their system's IFF capabilities are, so there's a definite problem for the allied force if they don't happen to be using the same or similar systems.

Missiles happened.

I see. Something for me to read up about, when I ever plan to make another plane, then.
So... the MiG-29s the Germans basically donated to the Poles in 2003 would have been kinda screwed, if Parol hadn't been taken out and the planes itself updates to NATO-Standards as NATO and WP IFF-Systems are not compatible?

Sadly...

[Aquitayne]

Sorry Aq, but I've got to comment on this:

Military IFF modes can not distinguish between friendly and foe by itself, it can only distinguish between friendly and other. Other military modes give ATC data such as unit and mission-specific codes, while Mode 4 sends out a specific interrogation and demands a specific reply. Civilian/general modes give ATC data, such as a flight code for the plane taking off, location, altitude, etc.

The AO itself is in a place frequented with commercial traffic, which is not unusual - there was significant air traffic over all of central Europe during the Cold War, not to mention the Vincennes incident. The civilian traffic will disperse once war has officially been declared, but there will be still some clutter throughout the day.

I was referring to an IRC chat you and I had about the size of the AO being as large as it can be without impeding air traffic in the region; I made my response before reading your last post, so I assume you're only referring to phantom aircraft and not real ones. I'm quite aware Europe and the rest of the world has planes flying over everything pretty frequently.

[The United Remnants of America]

Sorry Aq, but I've got to comment on this:

Military IFF modes can not distinguish between friendly and foe by itself, it can only distinguish between friendly and other. Other military modes give ATC data such as unit and mission-specific codes, while Mode 4 sends out a specific interrogation and demands a specific reply. Civilian/general modes give ATC data, such as a flight code for the plane taking off, location, altitude, etc.

The AO itself is in a place frequented with commercial traffic, which is not unusual - there was significant air traffic over all of central Europe during the Cold War, not to mention the Vincennes incident. The civilian traffic will disperse once war has officially been declared, but there will be still some clutter throughout the day.

I was referring to an IRC chat you and I had about the size of the AO being as large as it can be without impeding air traffic in the region; I made my response before reading your last post, so I assume you're only referring to phantom aircraft and not real ones. I'm quite aware Europe and the rest of the world has planes flying over everything pretty frequently.

I believe the "civilian planes" in the scope of the exercise were aircraft provided by the Riysians that were going to be marked as civilian and flying on routes that simulate civilian routes. So there's actually going to be planes flying that could be targeted.

[Riysa]

Sorry Aq, but I've got to comment on this:

Military IFF modes can not distinguish between friendly and foe by itself, it can only distinguish between friendly and other. Other military modes give ATC data such as unit and mission-specific codes, while Mode 4 sends out a specific interrogation and demands a specific reply. Civilian/general modes give ATC data, such as a flight code for the plane taking off, location, altitude, etc.

The AO itself is in a place frequented with commercial traffic, which is not unusual - there was significant air traffic over all of central Europe during the Cold War, not to mention the Vincennes incident. The civilian traffic will disperse once war has officially been declared, but there will be still some clutter throughout the day.

I was referring to an IRC chat you and I had about the size of the AO being as large as it can be without impeding air traffic in the region; I made my response before reading your last post, so I assume you're only referring to phantom aircraft and not real ones. I'm quite aware Europe and the rest of the world has planes flying over everything pretty frequently.

My bad, looks like I didn't clarify it well These are just Cessnas and the like being flown across the AO, actual air traffic is no go.

I believe the "civilian planes" in the scope of the exercise were aircraft provided by the Riysians that were going to be marked as civilian and flying on routes that simulate civilian routes. So there's actually going to be planes flying that could be targeted.

Bingo. They're being flown by RiyAAF personnel, but they act like civvie planes and will be flying civvie-like routes. Some may act differently (eg. gliders, border patrol, etc), but for all intents and purposes they shouldn't be charging your AWACS while painting them with a missile.

[The United Remnants of America]

I don't have much to post about presently, but know the Remnant delegation is still present and observing.

[Kobolis]

Been a busy week with work, celebrating my birthday and doing stuff with my girlfriend. I might be able to post tomorrow, or the day after that at the latest. Sorry for the delay.

[New Aeyariss]

Riysa: Do we know number, type & disposition of the aircraft posting as neutral traffic?

Also can I get some statics on TaH-27? I would ask, if it is possible, about:

- Radar & other sensors.

- Fuel volume (that used to be a problem on MiG-29)

- Cockpit & piloting system.

- Weight, trust to weight, etc. etc.

[Aquitayne]

Riysa: Do we know number, type & disposition of the aircraft posting as neutral traffic?

Also can I get some statics on TaH-27? I would ask, if it is possible, about:

- Radar & other sensors.

- Fuel volume (that used to be a problem on MiG-29)

- Cockpit & piloting system.

- Weight, trust to weight, etc. etc.

There's a whole thing http://iiwiki.com/wiki/TaH-29_Daqanoush

[Kobolis]

There's a whole thing http://iiwiki.com/wiki/TaH-29_Daqanoush

That's the 29. There's no info on the 27.

[New Aeyariss]

There's a whole thing http://iiwiki.com/wiki/TaH-29_Daqanoush

That's the 29. There's no info on the 27.

Riysa told me that 27 is comparable to MiG-29. But I am waiting on specifics.

[The Technocratic Syndicalists]

Are observer applications still open?

[Riysa]

Looks like I have to catch up on a few questions. I'll edit this in once I'm free.

QRA list is partially updated, and should hopefully be permanent. Inyur by request isn't on there since he's primarily running SEAD.

[New Aeyariss]

Come on, let us get this moving! Kobolis, can you contact me on chat in the nearest time so we can write that conversation on it and then you just post it?

[Kobolis]

I've been spending the majority of the week on the exercise IRC but all I'm doing is policing tumbleweeds there. I'll TG you a google doc to work in.

[New Aeyariss]

I've been spending the majority of the week on the exercise IRC but all I'm doing is policing tumbleweeds there. I'll TG you a google doc to work in.

And I think our biggest foe - timezones - struck again .