TAW_Blaze

Because there's no need for it at the moment. Same reason the F-15s are not getting the -229 and so on.

I think that's not possible in case of a planar array. It'll only scan in the direction the dish is pointed. It's not by coincidence you have to rotate around the dish to complete a multiple bar scan. An AESA can do it though. But an AESA doesn't even have a rotating dish. :) I don't understand how this relates to the sentence before. But we answered this, the echoes are received faster than the mechanical movement of the antenna. So it basically doesn't matter.

The thing is, it can't. Even for a 1-bar scan you have to rotate the antenna in the horizontal. There is a specific cone that you can scan without rotating at all and it's not very large. Mechanical antenna rotation takes a lot more time than transmitting. This is the exact reason why AESA is so powerful, because there's no need for mechanical steering.

They scan in a specific pattern generally defined as X-bar scan. One bar is usually as much as the radar can scan without moving the dish (in the vertical). I think this pretty much answers your question.

In case of a planar array antenna they are slightly behind it IIRC. There are some holes on the dish and the radio waves are transmitted through them. I'm reading Stimson's book atm but I've only started it a few weeks ago and I have a hard time understanding a lot of stuff - english is not my mother tongue after all. As for constant flood there is no such thing really, as GG said, pulse doppler radars have a duty cycle and very little part of that is spent actually radiating. That wouldn't make a hell of a lot of sense though. :D

I'm really not sure what he means either but this is my guess: I think what he's trying to say is that if you transmit do you wait before moving the antenna to receieve the echo from X reasonable max range or you move it without waiting. I have no idea how that works.

Edit: after reading your PM ( your inbox is full, can't reply, but I want it in the post anyway) There's a bit of missunderstanding here. We are trying to find out if the F-15C's radar is stabilized in game, not in real life. AAQ modes are most likely not stabilized, the opposite would be quite counterproductive. However RWS/TWS stabilization is not quite obvious (in DCS, anyway).

Sure. What I really meant is that if you do use terminology you should make sure it's defined exactly and correctly. I've seen a lot of threads like this, the first thing that pops up nearly every time is terminology. By using terminology you can define clear situations that are easy understand provided you know what the words mean. Without terminology you'd either have to draw a comic or make a big mess. None of them are a good option. Maybe the forum should have a terminology department, albeit most of the threads would still be posted because nobody ever uses forum search. :D I know you didn't direct it at me, don't worry. I don't understand why people have to attack each other when both are essentially trying to help a third. I do know why though.

Is there a chance to have a word on it from someone who knows how it's built? It's really unnerving that some stuff in the game are a downright mistery that you can test for eternity but won't know if your theory is true or not. They should definitely include key information like this in the manual. No matter if the real thing has it it's not necessarily made in the game just because of that. In comparison in the BMS manual a lot of things that are not functional are just stated as being such instead of leaving a fog on them.

Using the terms correctly is crucial to avoid misunderstandings between the people in the discussion. Given that the guy I'm talking to knows the terms exactly as I or everyone else do I can describe specific situations. Without this you'll end up with the 'uh, do you think what I'm thinking' nonsense. This is essential in learning anything related to air combat, or to be honest anything in general. It's like if you didn't define what addition means in math. Or an equals sign. Start from the absolute basic and work your way up to more and more complex things. Telling newcomers that terminology isn't important is not only incorrect but rude. For someone who's new and does not understand terminology it's close to impossible to progress. Most of the people that are here on the forum asking questions are trying to learn because of curiosity and dedication. Dedication however will have a different meaning to each individual. A guy spending 6 hours a week flying DCS may seem very commited for someone, and seem average for another. It is indeed a game, but some people take more care about their game than others about their real life. We shall give them the opportunity to learn things the proper way. How far would a kid go without learning the basics of math properly? (I see a stupid amount of people failing at university maths because of not having a stable knowledge from their previous studies. It's very sad).

Unfortunely none of them have to do anything with it, they are both working on the kinematics part. I'm not too sure if there's anyone to point at to do it. Maybe me in a decade or two. I'm about to jump into the radar technology department. I mean if I have the luck to get to the jump. It'll be fixed by that time though, probably. Or not. :megalol:

Now this is particularly interesting. IIRC I've gone through some situations where from a starting position of X degree bank I'd see the bandit in RWS/TWS, then wing level he'd disappear. Then if I banked to the same side again he would reapppear on the VSD. I'm quite curious how this really works in game, as far as both horizontal (bank) and vertical (pitch) stabilization goes. It is crucial to proficient radar management. However not a single word is mentioned about it in the manual.

Indeed the datalink is a big want for the Eagle. Unfortunately it's not happening until full ASM. :( I'm not sure if F-15C-s have MAWS irl. Maybe those that went through the golden eagle program.

No, cranking has nothing to do with 3/9 line. Flying perpendicular to a target is called beaming or notching. Cranking is the term used for maintaining radar contact while taking an offset from the target, which can generally be 1 to 60 degrees. Don't confuse it.

Crank you mean.

deleted

IIRC if someone joined with very high ping it'd completely destroy the game for everyone.

First of all the loft logic is incorrect. You can see this at HI-LO shots. Radar support missing for the AMRAAM post active state. And the list could go on and on..

Yeah R-27R vs AIM-7M is a fun deal. Not being able to carry more than 4 Sparrows is a bummer though, 4x AIM-9M is a waste in every scenario.

DCS browser version anyone? :megalol: We could make a turn based game. :D

Yeah I shot 3 slammers into it and then my sparrow got the kill according to DCS. Whatever though, I don't really mind.

According to DCS in the live match I got their AWACS. What happened to that?

Anyone else having massive problems with the patch? Non stop warping, 1 FPS when looking at the battle. Utterly unplayable.

Me too, usually. Usually :D

... and end up firing AIM-9s instead of AMRAAMS because you forgot that the sequence is now 3 long instead of 2, and curse for a few minutes. :megalol: