Muchocracker

It centroids to all ranked trackfiles, not just L&S. Post a track demonstrating it not keeping the L&S within the volume

There's a ton of conflicting sources around that mix the P/PT and the PS/PM so it's always been hard for me to find what the truth is on the PS. The most common statements i've seen is that the 5V55R used on the PS/PM is always specified as only SARH, and not command-SARH or command-TVM. If you have more direct sources or even first party ones i'd love to add them to my collection. Using TVM affords you more flexibility in the waveforms that you can use which could or could not preclude RWR systems from keying on launches. For example again the APG-73, its PDI mode is a different CPI to CPI waveform than HPRF track and RGHPRF used in search. It's likely a single adaptive PRF and close to 50% duty cycle while only ranging based doppler frequency. Supplimented with periodic burst ranging to keep range estimation errors in line that can accumulate. Once an AIM-7 is fired it ceases all burst ranging because the sparrow has to have uninterrupted HPRF pulses to home in on. You don't have this limitation TVM and do more with it, you can keep your waveforms similar between track and launch without it being detectable as one by warning receivers. It also means you can do more things to hide your uplink from being detected. Yes, if it can detect either the radar mode change or the datalink, it'll detect launch. If it cant detect either then it cant detect launch at all. The research just needs to be done on the systems in question to get specifics on how each mode operates or get specifics of the waveforms. I think you're misinterpreting things. That document does say those things, but they say it in 2 separate places not together and i think you're making conclusion to 1 based off the other. I'm not convinced the TVM array does the target illumination but instead it handles the up and down link separately so the main array doesnt have to interrupt its interlieved search/track/target illumination tasks, which is a very time-energy intesive task as it has to be continuous and be extremely rapid in update rates. The fact that the TVM array is a fraction of the size of the main array would suggest this to be the case as well. SM-2 doesn't use TVM guidance so not sure why that's being brought up, under AEGIS scheme its command-SARH while others use the 2T scheme with command/inertial-SARH. SPY tracks the interceptors for acceleration command computations and the uplink is a whole separate array task with an FSK encoded waveform. You missed the point i made. The search, track and PDI waveforms for the APG-73 are in fact different and there is reasons for it. It's the whole reason why i gave it as an example as to why you cant make the conclusion that PD illuminated sparrows are all undetectable launches. HPRF search is 2 PRFs with FMR and high duty cycle but lower than HPRF track, HPRF track is 4 PRFs at high duty cycle and no FMR with periodic HPRF or MRF burst ranging, HPRF PDI is single adaptive PRF to keep the target out of eclipsing zones and no burst ranging. A sufficiently modern RWR system could absolutely identify each one of these stages and trigger launch warning based on switch to PDI. There is nothing advanced about a PSK/QPSK uplink to make it undetectable. The amraam's datalink is going to be constrained by the requirements of the data message format and bit encoding while having cross-compatibility across a huge variety of launch platforms all with different radars built to different requirements. There isn't any room building in LPI characteristics. Its datalink is made more or less interceptable by how that datalink is used across different platforms. The hornets is less interceptable because the encoding happens within the same HPRF pulses its sending out for target detection/tracking in any search or track mode, making whatever identified mode it is pretty much irrelevant. This is a big point because if you design your RWR system to trigger launch warnings just on the presence of a detected datalink and nothing else, there will be a ton of false positives and the the usefulness of the system to provide adequete SA to the pilot will be very degraded. As seen by those F-4's in vietnam that had no indication of whether that datalink signal was it alone or if there was also a CW signal from the track radar.

This isnt as cut and dry of an answer as it is made out to be. The missile command link for amraam as an exhibit is largely a case by case basis on *how* it is transmited based on that radar system's particular operation. Hornet's APG-73 encodes them directly in its HPRF pulses presumably by phase shift keying. But the APG-68 for example does dedicated transmissions between pulses for its amraam command link because its MPRF already uses barker code phase modulation for pulse compression. You would likely not be able to detect the datalink for the former but much more likely the latter. For other missiles and their datalinks you cant really just make blanket assumptions that they will be detectable. Everything should he individually should be studied and determine their susceptability to intercept separate from others. With PD SARH launches not all HPRF waveforms may be created equal. PDI signals are typically much higher duty cycle, more PRF stages or single adaptive PRF and no FMR in comparison to its volume search RG-HPRF. This is how the hornet's APG-73 operates at least. This isnt a factor that most people consider in the PD sparrow launch warning discourse, and i wish there was more context to the tornado foxhunter document that is commonly cited in that argument. Because it's been taken far and wide to label any system that guides SARH missiles with PDI as being undetectable launches, and the evidence just isnt there to make these kind of conclusions. My guess on that is because the SA-10 that's modelled is the command-SARH timeframe of that system while the 20 was well after they switched to SAGG/TVM. But i have never been able to nail down any data on how exactly TVM works on the waveform side to determine if RWR's are able to detect launches from these guidance types. Been mostly speculative.

The DTC ELINT partition will show you the nearly exact list of what is programmed to be detectable by the ALR-56M in DCS.

i had it backwards nvm. It's defaulted to CW with manual selection for PD.

Sparrow/phoenix semi active illumination is HPRF PDI Which again wouldnt happen automatically and may be something the AI does. I would reccomend retesting with a player controlled aircraft.

You must not understand how glint works then.

Wouldnt be surprised if the AI do things differently. Probably would be better to test using a player controlled aircraft. I can't think of any reason why would switch to pulse search mode just because it's at closer ranges. AWG wouldn't do that

The quote in question Glint is going to happen nearly continuously at varying magnitudes as the lines of sight and geometry presenting to the missile changes by tiny amounts. It doesn't only happen while the target is barrel rolling, the induced aiming errors are just much more severe.

Demonstrably false. Sapfir's operate well within X band range.

It has to be turned on, it's off by default. Right console below the tailhook lever, rotate the kob clockwise.

and yet it still needs to be repeated it seems.

The fact that it's a sim is why it is not "balanced". This is how the SPO-15LM worked. Pointing to other systems in the game is not an argument. ED themselves have said the SPO-15LM model will carry over into DCS core as a new standard for RWR simulation

You have another conflicting input somewhere, likely an axis. Look in your controls bindings.

From the most recent wags video https://youtu.be/HyiWR8UYfS4

And that's why we ask for more clarification, guy. It could or could not have anything to do with the blanking circuit itself but some other part of the system. We need the dev to give us more detail on their reason and what information they used to reference it. I said the thread was looping back to the "circuit exists" point. Not the later *actual* point of debate. We all know it has a blanking circuit.

The system having a blanking circuit and sync with the radar was never in dispute. Idk why the thread keeps looping on this. The debate is if it's able to handle blanking with HPRF waveforms or not. And assuming for a second that this is true. As far as im aware it's still being disabled when the radar is transmitting in MPRF, and has not been mentioned by the devs as being incapable of handling it. So this portion is at least can be concluded to be a bug and should get corrected. If newy can get some more clarification from the team on why the blanking circuits cant handle HPRF signals that would get great. Then this debate can actually be productive and the right sourcing can be found to prove or disprove it. Otherwise this is just going to keep going nowhere.

Against what system? What waveform? Does it use pulse compression and long/short integration periods? Imo expressing RWR interception ranges as ratios of radars detection ranges just doesnt work all that well.

Please read the manual

Because as i explained before, if the target is at true 90 degrees it will fall in the sidelobes of the 50 degree sector antennas. This makes that sector very insensitive to an emitter in that area. Combined with the low gain of the rear hemisphere antennas and the fact that both sectors have to independently detect the target at the same time to trigger the 90 light. This is why it triggers are very low ranges. They are not "merged" together or provide a boost in detection if that's what you're trying to get at. The system doesn't work that way. ED has said as much that the 90 degree sector is much weaker

Not in DCS.

Unverifiable anecdotes dont really prove anything. Neither does declaring a bug exists without evidence or principles based reasoning.

Auto is interlieved PRF for each bar in the raster search. It has nothing to do with the lock mode functions.

The entire point of the new SPO-15 model was laying the ground work for a higher fidelity RWR simulation across the entire game. ED has said it numerous times. You're acting like it's a permanent unique implementation that will never exist elsewhere.

OFP 21x isnt what is modelled. That's way newer.