Beamscanner

There is DLC that will prevent you from joining servers if you do not own it, yes.

Will we be locked out of servers with this DLC?

I have never been able to get the kneeboard to change size or position..

looking for clarification Is the F-15C TEWS presented by uMFCD a data export that requires servers to allow sensor export?

I had the old software for DCS/BMS, but it just started asking for 'credentials' to open. Tried to get 'simshaker for aviators' but cannot load the webpage for the download. 403 error

Yes, with multiple antennas facing different directions the antennas facing the direction of the locking radar will receive more energy from that direction. You'd think you'd see more lights in that direction. Though with it being an ancient analog RWR, if it didn't have automatic gain control extremely powerful signals (from a jet locking you within a mile or so) would saturate your RWR receivers. So, does the SPO-10 have automatic gain control? If not, then the indicator would struggle to 'DF' (direction find) the source if the signal is really close and focused on you (locked on). Though a lock from a greater distance probably wouldn't saturate the RWR. The engineering logic is, the RWR uses amplitude comparison to get a bearing on the signal. Receivers only have so much dynamic range (difference between the weakest and most power signals you can see simultaneously) and old electronics have very little dynamic range. RWRs and radars overcome the limits of their dynamic range with gain control (changing the total sensitivity of the receiver). Without the ability to control your gain, the extreme power of a signal can saturate the receiver and prevent an accurate comparison of the signal at the various antenna inputs.

yes. I dont recall which APR it had. Edit: Was it the APR-27?

I noticed in game that RWRs are able to detect the E-2 Hawkeye radar. I do not think this is possible based on its operating frequency. Multiple sources point to the E-2 radar as operating between 300-1000 MHz (one creditble source claiming 400-450 MHz) https://www.forecastinternational.com/archive/disp_old_pdf.cfm?ARC_ID=72 Yet most RWRs cannot direction find frequencies this low. C band = somewhere between 500-1000 MHz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_band_(NATO) I think this fix will be important with the upcoming navy modules (F/A-18C and F-14B). As seeing the E-2 radar on a RWR could give away the location of your fleet.

I've already made a mod for the search button. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=190090 But the functionality needs to be a standard for the module.

What about the APR-XX ?

very out of touch post.. If you've seen the viggen module and the baked renders they posted here you'd know that their art department is constantly setting new bars. I have no doubt that the textures and model will be amazing. I'm more interested in how deep they've gone into the weapons and sensors (AWG-9 / ALR-45 / ALR-67).

very nice

LINK-16 http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/DataLinkProcessingAndManagement/Documents/Understanding_Voice+Data_Link_Networking.pdf F/A-18 integration https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264742534_Multifunctional_Information_Distribution_System_MIDS_Low_Volume_Terminal_LVT_Development_and_Integration_Programs_Towards_LINK-16_Network_Centric_AlliedCoalition_Operations Link-16 messages https://www.viasat.com/sites/default/files/legacy/assets/Link16_NPG_Message_Card_100112a.pdf Big questions are 1. what messages can the F/A-18C recieve? 2. what messages can it transmit 3. how much information can be stored/displayed 4. how often do tracks or messages get updated

http://aviationarchives.blogspot.com/2017/04/grumman-f-14b-tomcat-flight-manual.html

So it has several different synthetic tones to choose from based on PRF and Scan? So like it has a tone for pulse radar equipped fighters(low PRF, sector scan) Pulse doppler fighters(med-high PRF, raster scan) pulse SAMs(low PRF, quick scan/no scan) pulse doppler SAMs(med-high PRF, quick scan/no scan) search radars(low PRF, long scan) ?

If LPRF is being used, you shouldn't see a clutter free display... This because ground clutter is only removed via doppler processing. Little to no doppler processing can be done with LPRF. I think the problem here is the terminology. LPRF as a term in radar engineering may be different from its use in french pilot manuals. Thats why I think there could be a translation error. Here is a good source on it. http://www.turma-aguia.com/davi/skolnik/Skolnik_chapter_17.pdf Jojo, I imagine the HPRF requirement for the Super-530D has to do with target illumination.

Seems pretty clear for interference, though I guess they are pretty close to emitters. :( My parade is ruined! Do you have a source?

Nice! :)

I wonder if Heatblur has unique radar audio planned like they did with the viggen..? I know other devs have refrained from it since documentation that explicitly details raw audio is nearly impossible to come by. In some cases manuals only talk about synthetic audio, because thats the only audio difference between RWRs. More on that here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=171083&page=4 Heatblur did say that they had "rare" reference material for the radar and RWR. No problem!! I save all RWR videos I come across. They are jewels hidden in the ruff

Squadron: VFA-211 Base: John C. Stennis (CVN-74) Location: en-route to (or already in) the Persian Gulf Time: Feb 2002 Mission: Carrier ops Starting at 43 seconds you can hear a few different emitters coming from the RWR in the video. These emitters are likely from the Carrier itself. This probability is reinforced by the fact that the RIO moves the camera to look at the radars themselves at 1:37. This is 'Constant' (otherwise known as raw, PRF, threat, emitter) RWR audio. Wikipedia suggests that VFA-211 had F-14As at this time, which would imply that this is raw audio from the ALR-45. If its the F-14B, then it'd be audio from the ALR-67. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VFA-211_(U.S._Navy)

I highly doubt the RDI uses LPRF in any air to air modes. LPRF waveforms have little to no ability to pick up targets in clutter because the spectral lines (created from pulse harmonics) make Doppler information ambiguous. (i.e. it cannot be used in look down/shoot down scenarios) LPRF is good for ground mapping (RBM/DBS/SAR), because Sensitivity time control (STC) techniques can be used to suppress side-lobe clutter. This cannot be done in MPRF or HPRF because at these pulse rates the receiver will almost constantly have reflections returning to the receiver and lowering the sensitivity has a negative effect on long range returns. Using STC expands blind zones(eclipsing; because you cant receive a return while transmitting. More transmissions=more eclipsing), which MPRF and HPRF have many, while LPRF (because of their long recieve times) have few or no blind zones(less transmissions=less eclipsing). Perhaps some confusion in translation from french to English when making the manual/module..

MBot, The MiG-23S model flew with the Jaybird radar just like the MiG-21Bis, and either had no RWR or the SPO-10 (same as the MiG-21). Though I hope if we ever get a MiG-23 it will have the Highlark radar instead, which supports new weapon systems like the AA-7 Apex. EDIT: a late model MiG-23 would definitely require a LOT of work. Certainly more than 18 months of work.

Well it sounds like they are the ones with the licence for the MiG-23, but maybe not something we will see anytime soon.

Squadron: VF-24 Base: USS Constellation Location: Somewhere over the Indian Ocean Time: 1981-82 Mission: Air Combat Training Flight HUD footage starts at 3:16 ${1} ?t=3m16s The video should be a good reference as to the raster rate/update rate of the various HUD indicators. Though I'm sure many such references already exist.

So i'm missing the posts right now, but one of the magnitude devs has hinted that their product was being tested by ED (or was about to be?). A few months ago, another mag dev mentioned that they were trying to release a module this year but it wouldn't be the F4U corsair. We also learned awhile back that Razbam couldn't get a licence to make the MiG-23 because another dev already had the licence. At the time I assumed Belsimtek was working on it. But now we know they are working on F/A-18C, F-4E and MI-24 (plus other far off products like Cobra and F-15). I doubt the helo-devs and Aviodev are working on it. So that only leaves Heatblur and Magnitude. I imagine that before they separated they'd had thought a MiG-23 would have been a great module to compliment their F-14, having been from the same era. So does this seem logical or have I found myself under a tinfoil hat? EDIT: Here are the posts Magnitude hoping to release new module this year: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3104496&postcount=37 But not the F4U: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3103568&postcount=35