Bacab

That's not entirely true. In reality the radar antenna emits most of its energy in an area in front of it (in the case of a mechanical antenna). However you still have secondary emissions (called side lobes) around this main area of emission that can be reflected by the ground even if the antenna does not directly point to the ground. This produces echoes that need to be removed by doppler treatment, hence it may be present even if the antenna is not looking down. Obviously the influence of those side lobes vary with altitude and other parameters. EDIT: I have to had that the radar may echo undesired things in the main lobe even if not looking down; in the case of a mountain for instance. Therefore I think the doppler filter presence does not rely on antenna elevation.

Is it possible to "loft" the Super 530D ?

Adding those bombs would have required to add parameters in the targeting computer in order to account for the drag, weight of the new bombs when computing impact point.

Because there is no common definition of max. range. Is it the maximum kinetic range (at which altitude, what speed for the launching aircraft...), is it the max. range displayed on the hud ? (beware as constructor doesn't use the same algorithm to compute those). Is the target manoeuvring (how many G, in which direction ?, for how long ?). Here I only discuss one parameter and it is already a mess, now imagine if we try to define seeker performance ! You would end up with thousands of test case scenario and still have no idea how to compare figures between missile.

Yeah I have seen it too but after I posted :) I don't know the exact signal aspect of the echo from the decoy I am just guessing but I think IRL the chaff could received enough power from the emitting aircraft so the receiver in the missile mistake it for a brief moment for its target and then it may not be able to get back to the true target. Therefore the implemented logic make sense.

The receiver on the missile does use a sort of rejection filter to get rid of parasite echoes (coming from the ground for instance) the same way an active radar does (indeed the wikipedia page about CW radar explain in details why). Therefore in reality you can break the lock of a SARH missile the same way you could break the lock of an active radar. Since the receiver on the plane and on the missile does not share the same aspect it is possible for a SARH missile to loose its lock while the guiding plane still has it. A more simpler explanation could be that the signal was lost for a few seconds. Since the radar has a memory it does not immediately display the target as lost but indeed it is. If the target is acquired again just after that you (the pilot) may not notice the signal was lost for a few seconds but the missile is already lost. However I'm not sure those mechanics are implemented in DCS.

Indeed it is no small request to evaluate those parameters, it would need hundreds of run to be valid and consistent.

What kind of measures do you expect ?

Wasn't it upgraded with the AJS upgrade ?

It reminds me of my previous question : what AG mode does the radar have ? I assume GMTI, SAR (I read something about radar imagery for recon, can't see another mode to perform that), air-sea mode and perhaps a ground following mode ?

Does anyone know what AG mode the radar had ? From what I've seen it I'm expecting GMTI, SAR, and some kind of air-sea mode, anything else ?

Thank you for your answer. It does bring a new perspective on how the plane was designed.

Could the Viggen carry bombs bigger than the 120 kg HE ?

I think we are lucky, no one asked yet how the 2000 behave against a f-86.

Already taken by ED.

What do you mean by a "working cockpit" ?

Some manuals about procedures and systems can be found on the Internet. They include details about the navigation and attack system as well as some informations about performances of those systems. Data about the materials and aerodynamics seems to be more difficult to find.

I would like to see a sepecat Jaguar in DCS.

Seems feasible against an helicopter but I won't try it. Moreover despite the scene correlation treatment I think the maverick use I still think it might be sensible to decoy.

I agree but usually when doing CCRP drop of GBU I use altitude as a protection against fire from the ground.

When doing CCIP drop you usually are at a lower altitude (than when in CCRP) to maintain visibility on your target. Therefore the fall time might not be sufficient for the bomb to guide on the laser. So in the event of a bomb guided by laser I don't think you would use it. But that's only based on my simulation experience.

Before you ask, the 2000D might be in the same situation since its weapon/navigation system is derived from the N version.

Back to the discussion I don't understand some comments on the snake of the 2000. My understanding of it was that it worked like the EEGS mod of the F-16 except you had a snake instead of the funnel but I assumed it was a cosmetic difference, am I wrong ?

Interesting but I don't know what is applicable to the RDI version. Thanks for sharing anyway.

I agree, a supersonic attack aircraft is missing in the DCS collection.