Bacab

I use ro ask nearly the same thing here: https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforums%2Eeagle%2Eru%2Fshowthread%2Ephp%3Ft%3D178444&share_tid=178444&share_fid=74365&share_type=t I hope it will be useful

If you want to understand all those concepts, maybe a forum is not the best way to satisfy your curiosity (I'm not criticizing Beamscanner, he is doing a great job explaining all those concepts, however I fear simultaneously trying to explain multiple radar technics to different people will result in a bit of confusion) try to read the beginning of the Introduction to Radar system by Mr. Skolnik or, if you understand French, the books by Mr. Darricau (they are free and legal to download except for the book by Mr. Skolnik). They provide a good base (even though I found both of them to be a bit lacking behind in terms of technology).

I'd rather have a Sa-4 over a Sa-12. The thing with modern systems is that you only have numbers from actual users and the designers to build the model and I trust none to give accurate and pertinent informations.

I have seen it too but it is not really annoying. However I wonder if it's a feature or a bug.

I did not manage to make it work on 1.5. I tried on several, designed from scratch, missions and the result is always the same: it doesn't work. Are you sure of the version you tested (1.5.7.10175 stable release) ?

Hi, I've tried several time to make it work but it seems like HAWK battery are not working (I tested in SP, version 1.5.7.10175). I've attached a track from Tacview. ROE are "WEAPON FREE". IA set to excellent. Hawk battery is composed of the element shown in the screenshot (1*PAR, 1*CWAR, 2*HPIR, 6*M-192). I apologise if it has been reported already (searching for "HAWK bug" did not lead to what I expected). It might be related to the SA-6 bug. Thank you in advance. Tacview-20171014-220144-DCS-HAWK test.zip

Np, it's just that you might be surprised by the speed at which a joke become a news those day. Plus, being involved in the design of similar systems I sometime take it a bit personally.

Nearly all European missile including the MICA are made by the same manufacturer which is MBDA. So that's bs.

This picture is a nonsense. The Mirage 2000 is a 4th generation jet, there should be no discussion about that. Indeed the last evolution of the 2000, the Mirage 2000-9 is as capable as an F-16 blk 52. And the Mirage F1 is almost of the same generation than the F-16 (during the European competition to select a replacement the F-16 was facing competition from an upgraded Mirage F1, not from a Mirage 2000). Envoyé de mon D5803 en utilisant Tapatalk

Hi everyone ! I have found a small mistake page 293 : it says "Disable target motion measurement (address 21, value 1)." According to the ingame training and to the manual page 257 the correct input to disable target motion measurement should be address 22 (instead of 21), value 1.

It's unlikely to see -D variant. It's based on the -N which is dedicated to the nuclear strike mission. Therefore it's navigation and weapon systems are still classified (that's a reason why it was never exported) . Moreover they are equipped with a radar dedicated to AG and ED is still developing those functionality. Envoyé de mon D5803 en utilisant Tapatalk

I think he/she was speaking about the AIM-54.

The AIM-120 might not be perfectly represented in DCS. However you still have a point. I think cost (to buy the weapon but also to keep it working) might have been too high or maybe it was unreliable (faulty electronic...). There are a lot of parameters that should be taken into account when assessing the efficiency of a weapon system. Only a few of these parameters are accurately described in DCS. For instance you will never see a weapon malfunction in DCS. It would be too frustrating for the player if it was implemented. The side effect is that for old weapon systems the performances may be higher in DCS than IRL.

Thank you for those informations

From what I could gather the missile will enter a steep climb as soon as it's fired and then it will dive on the emitter. Since I don't think it can reacquire it's original target should the lock be broken I think the climb angle would be limited by the FOV of the seeker. I understand.

It doesn't answer the question :)

Does someone know if the seeker could be tuned to a specific frequency range ? Having a passive seeker that will lock on any kind of emitter does not seem that useful. For all the pilot knows such a missile could be targeted at a FCR but instead lock on a search radar nearby and therefore be useless.

I wish they decide to do multiple missiles with different seekers.

No. The missile guidance are completely differerent and the problem with TWS is really specific to the version of the radar on-board the F-16.

It would be nice if you could discuss the performances of the F-16 radar in another thread. It would make this thread easier to read.

They should be true to what's really done by the radar.

Yes but It's not the case in special CCM mode. In those modes the scanned area is dependent of your roll and pitch.

Yes that's how it's done (if you are in RWS).

In RWS the radar is stabilised in roll and pitch. So it doesn't matter if you are inverted or in a dive... As long as it's physically possible for the antenna it will scan the same area.

It would be a great addition to DCS.