Ivandrov

Yeah, that looks about right. Don't try to use it as the primary flight instrument, it's not meant to be used for more than an eyes up reference. It'll be slightly off more often than not. A: Not at the moment B: Aircraft Wings Symbol if you're talking about the center reticle. You use it with the pitch ladder for a quick attitude reference among some other small things.

Eh, there's more than a couple of scenarios I could see where it would be a decent shot to take. Bombers are more likely to be on long-range strike duty lacking coverage by EWR. Especially, if we consider a historical scenario with weaker Soviet airborne radar assets like the TU-126, which wasn't able to detect missile sized objects, much less at decent range.

Well, now you seem to be confusing detection of radar and detection of launch signals. It's also difficult to answer some of these threads when the poster seems to be at least initially stuck on looking back at older technology and wondering why it doesn't have some of the capabilities of the newer technology. These RWRs were replaced with newer models for a reason. Technology improved and doctrine about the role of the RWR changed. To answer your question about my response. The SA-11 doesn't give a launch warning because any guidance commands are either not in a detectable frequency range or not of the style that the missile launch warning circuitry was designed for. Some of the active homing signals and the SA-15 are happy accidents as far as I am aware. They fall into detectable parameters and could be included later, along with updated threat libraries.

I don't believe that's Jester doing that. There are switches in the back that control when the RWR overrides the display. It's default setting is for the RWR screen to come up when a radar is detected, it simulates the non-continious painting of an enemy radar as it scans you and around you, so it pulses the screen on and off.

Not at the moment, it was a while ago. Try using the Mk.47 motor. It's more efficient at high altitudes than the Mk.60. An F-14A can also achieve Mach 2.0+ with a single missile for extra speed.

Both are installed together yeah. The ALR-50 is a missile warning system for the SA-2, SA-3, SA-4, and SA-6.

Not really, you are hitting the max range of acquisition at this point for the Blackjack. You may be able to see them in PD search but they drop off in the acquisition mode, until about this range. At this point, the only difference you can make is to go through the controls faster. The TU-95 or the A-50 can be acquired out from farther but they don't move fast enough to permit that high range of a shot. The Tu-22m3 will be the one that you can actually acquire at a range that stretches the Phoenix to it's absolute limit. Just under 150nm I've done, but closure needs to be 2100+ knots . Further ranges are impossible as the battery doesn't last long enough to go out farther.

It's been a little bit, but estimating the angles here based on your videos, Your antenna should be pointing about 2.2 degrees up. The coverage of the beam with Jester's usual settings is 3.7. So part of your radar beam is still going below horizon. That's just the mainlobe we care about of course, sidelobes are probably responsible for all the clutter near the target. Combined with Jester having to turn up the Gain a lot because of the intercept geometry against a tiny Mig-21. False locks happen all the time in the Phantom, doesn't matter that STT is a "narrow beam." (It actually isn't, it's subject to sidelobes just like it is in search.) The radar still needs to figure out which radar echo you are trying to go for and fails frequently in cluttered conditions with such a weak return. (I can't even really see it myself in the video.) Worth noting in the Tomcat, the Main Lobe Clutter Filter doesn't shut off on it's own until the antenna angle is above 3 degrees. That's what I generally consider a look-up situation.

Hard to tell just based on the screenshots and the description given is a bit confusing due to ambiguity. Saying that 1-2 was self lasing on 1711 when his code is 1712?

It isn't a false warning. It completely prevents me from opening the track regardless of whether items from the pack are being used. You have to disable the assets pack in the module list and create another track if you want people who don't have the assets pack to view it.

Yeah that's almost identical to the ALR-46 in the Phantom. The Missile Warning System is the /50 part. Which is dedicated to the SA-2, SA-3, and SA-6 for missile alert and launch warnings (Also, technically, SA-4 but we don't have one in-game.)

Your strategic and medium-range SAMs were SA-2's, SA-3's and SA-6's. So, it was still sufficient.

Can't load either track unfortunately. Requires the "WWII armour and technics" pack I believe that's the WWII assets pack.

For -135, we're talking like mid to late 80's I am pretty sure.

Fuselage is only the fuselage tanks, it excludes the wing tanks as well. So, 12.2k in the fuselage setting sounds right.

Yeah, I also remember the Tomcat having to press it 3x. The keybind itself is also named Eject (3 times)

Would probably be better if you showed us an example of what you are talking about. Track or video.

That's the only bug that I see so far is that STC doesn't seem to be functioning in PPI. You say "focusing radar energy" but this is just an issue of the reflected radar energy weakening with distance. The manual gives the formula as 1/r^4. The brightness of radar returns is expected to diminish as the distance to them increases. As you turn the gain up, radar reflections from further distances start showing up. Gain is not a function that physically adjusted the antenna itself or how much power it is outputting, it is a modification to the returned signals that are received through one of the amplifiers so that you can have a useable picture to look at, because if you just turn the gain all the way up, the entire radar screen completely whites out and is unusable. So, if you gradually swipe through the gain control and look at what happens to the radar picture, the returns should bias towards the closer distances of the aircraft as you turn it down, and as you increase it, the closer distances white out and the longer distance returns begin to show up and intensify. You should be able to see that here. The only that has changed is that the receiver gain was turned up in the 2nd picture.

Bring up the gain and switch to a circular polarization to find the full coverage of the beam on the ground. The LIN polarization makes many potential ground clutter returns less reflective and this dynamically changes as you roll the aircraft for instance. It's also a case where the relative angle of the surface being painted by radar will increase as you try to look at the longer range ground returns and so less radar energy makes it back to the aircraft, either because it is attenuated by distance or diffuses/reflects in another direction. That's what I can think of off the top of my head. MAP-PPI directly counters this by dynamically increasing the gain as the range of returns increases.

My understanding is that the circuitry responsible for sounding off launch warnings is specifically reserved for the guidance commands of certain C/D band SAM systems. These have very distinct signals. The RWR will however sound off anytime it detects a PRF change from a present emitter. So, you'll be able to hear a MIG-23 change from search to track for instance by listening to the new guy audio tones. It's an entirely different beast of RWR from anything else we've had before especially simulation wise. At the time these were installed, the MIG-23 really wasn't the primary air threat, they were only in service a few years at that point, and it is unlikely that the US intelligence community at that point had the proper ELINT data to be able to feed to RWRs in the first place. Also keep in mind that we're still really less than a decade (like 6 or 7 years) from when these types of RWR systems were geting fitted in these aircraft in the first place, and their primary focus in these first iterations were for SAM threats. Which is why air threats in the threat library get the short end of the stick as far as identification. I guess as a TL:DR, the primary radar threat that these first RWR's were looking for was the SA-2 and the other systems employed by Vietnam. Everything else is extra.

The reference point that the AWACS uses is the same one as the one on the F10 and the briefing. The other parameters are up to you. Set threat axis to where you would expect bandits to be based on the briefing. Sectors and angle coverage are preference. I like to use pairs of settings that make the sectors 10's of degrees wide with an even number of sectors so that the border of the two middle sector goes right through the threat axis. (120/4, 120/6, 90/6, 80/4 ) You need less angle coverage the farther away bullseye is from the expected engagement area. That just makes it faster and easier to process bandit positioning on the NAVGRID. Say we have a threat axis of 300, with 6 sectors that are 20 degrees wide. If AWACS calls a bullseye 270, you can immediately deduce that he is in the middle of the 2nd sector to the left. Even if he's not showing up on datalink for whatever reason. I cannot overstate how useful NAVGRID is, especially when datalink drops the ball. You can very quickly plot an entire picture call on it like a spider card with self updating own position and indicators for your radar coverage.

AWACS picture call outs. Use the NAVGRID all the time for that because Bogey Dope simply gives you the closest Bandit. Which might not be the one you are going for.

Your boresight is limited to 5 nm. His is not.

That's at 30 nm. It's not at all sufficient for closer distances. Even at 30 nm I find he doesn't scan fast enough through elevation for the default behavior to be useful for anything but co-altitude, much better success telling him to scan an altitude.

Use his Boresight mode for that. You can point at the visual contact with your pipper and he'll come straight up on radar most of the time.