>>29934759
Because to Americans, if its not your friend, its getting shot down.

Sometimes even if it is your friend.

>>29934759
Newer IFF systems have a signature bank connected to your own radar that can tell you what type of radar you're getting zapped with, giving you a clue what country the unknown/hostile radar set is from, what aircraft it was seen to be mounted on, and how new it is.

So yes, it can identify your foe as an obsolete MiG from the '80s or a brand spanking new Chinese Sukhoi clone.

>>29934759
Because it differentiates friends from foes so that you can say if one is a friend or a foe.

What I dont understand is how transponders on jets arent a massive liability. Couldn't a missile just identify and track down a jet from it?

>>29935485
They only squawk if they recieve the right signal, in the same manner that countersigns work.

>>29935485
Military transponders only activate when interrogated with the right passcode by friendly radar.

>>29935325
What if the war ends or they become allies while combat is happening though, wouldn't it be wrong? And how does it ID a neutral third party travelling through?

What stops enemy planes from using civilian transponder codes, forcing us to engage inside visual range?

>>29934759
Modern IFF uses:

Non Cooperative Target Indicator

>"utilizes a massive and continuously updated database of radar returns of different aircraft types and models - returns received from the actual target are searched in and compared to this database to have an ID of the target."

>>29935632
>Flying over a warzone
Ask Malaysian airlines how that turned out. Not justifying the Russians here but, the whole "I went to war, while my countrymen went to the mall" meme is definitely true. I love the mall btw. :)

>>29937771
Because commercial flights usually stick to a set flight plan that is reported to multiple agencies (domestic and international, as well as private and public) making cross-reference a quick inquiry. Seeing numerous anomalous flights would be good indicator of hostile traffic.

>>29934759
because "ioif, nf"
is a bit much to remember
when someone's shooting at you
and would probaly take multiple lights
in an already-crowded dashboard?

>>29934759
>>29935226
>implying the US hasn't had true IFF since Vietnam

https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=en#!topic/rec.aviation.military/BOfkH_AFsy8
According to now declassified U.S. sources, Combat Tree was an IFF
interrogator that could interrogate MiG IFF transponders. It was first
installed on a small number (8?) of F-4Ds in late'71 or so, which were
operated by the 432nd TRW (The serial numbers are given in Anthony
Thornborough's "The Phantom Story"). I've checked his list against the Red
Baron reports, which identify whether and which a/c in a flight are Combat
Tree equipped and which contacts were due to Combat Tree, and cross-checked
those incidents with listings of those kills which include the a/c serial
numbers. They match).

Because of the small numbers available, typically only the flight lead (01)
and (when available) the element lead (03) would be in 'Tree'-equipped birds.
02 and 04 were often in F-4Es, to provide some gun capability without
forcing the F-4Ds to carry gun pods. Because of the loss of several of these
a/c, some more (about 20?) were modified in mid '72 (available July, I
think). Later, when the Rivet Haste slatted F-4Es showed up in theater to
re-equip the 555th, they were apparently all equipped with it.

>>29937771
nothing. there are cryptographically secure IFF codes out there, but those can still theoretically be spoofed. i've used an air-to-air interrogator before, and it's actually super useful to populate your radar scope.

>>29935632
>And how does it ID a neutral third party travelling through?
There are 4 modes for IFF, Civilian air traffic uses mode 3 just like military aircraft. additionally Airliners fly in designated airways high above most operationally used airspace.

>>29940480

there's mode V interrogation too. basically if it's not squawking the right modes and codes, it's suspect and you need to correlate it with other data to figure out if it's somebody you need to shoot down. and these days you might want to go inspect something with the right codes too.

>>29940586
Private pilot here: we are taught special transponder codes for different situations. If I set my transponder to one of those codes, will military RADAR systems, (Ground based or in jets) be alerted automatically?

>>29940642

like 7500/7600/7700?

nah, ATC will talk to you. for 7500, a jet might be scrambled, but the odds of a military jet picking up your 7500 are rather slim - we'd have to be looking for that specific code and that means we're tasked by somebody to do that.