toilet2000

No it's not. VS is a velocity search only-mode, which gives a azimuth and closure-rate radar picture. This is similar to the PD Search mode of the F-14's AWG-9. It should get it a some point, and yes it gives better "range" due to not having to compute the actual range of the target. As for SAM: I think the closest we have in the Hornet is the LTWS or TWS, but someone more knowledgeable might correct me. SIL vs normal: Silent cuts radar emission, so you won't get any returns.

That info dates back to the 26th of August, DBS could be in. I know back then they had still issues with DBS working correctly (but they had an implementation) and didn’t think they could make it in in time for early access (back when they sound they were aiming for September for release). We’re now closing in on December, so DBS could very well be in.

The notch filter is about the speed difference from ground relative to you. Anything flying below 100 kts even going straight toward you is going to be filtered out. The Notch filter is there to remove Doppler returns from the ground, whereas the Doppler "filter" (really not a filter) is just the absence of Doppler effect due to an object moving at your own speed. Anything flying at +/- 100 kts relative to the speed of the ground for you (either via moving perpendicularly from your direction or by simply moving slowly in your direction relative to the ground) isn't going to appear on the F-14's radar (with the Notch filter on). EDIT: Just to be more clear, you will never be able to see a heli flying less than 100 kts ground speed if your Notch filter is on, which is definitely something that will happen often for a heli (flying less than 100 kts GS).

AFAIK, it is possible to input an image of the target in the weapon's system and it will try and match what it sees with what is saved in its memory. The issue is that the weapon is not Datalink capable and from what I've read, it is done on the ground and not in the air. A TGP image of the target would not suffice. This would not really be feasible in DCS. Note: this is not official info in any form, but simply what I gathered reading online on that topic. Feel free to correct me.

A radar view of a Belgian F-16 seems to show the SAM scan pattern as it is in DCS currently. It is clearly not the same version as our F-16, but at least it gives the possibility that DCS' current SAM scan pattern might be true to life. At 0:40, you can see the "locked" target, with the radar staying for a time on the target (the inverted T at the bottom), then scanning around and so on, just like in DCS currently.

So... Are we still getting that MAWS and defensive systems video? :)

Great post Beamscanner! I'm curious if the tracking algorithms of radars use only a motion model like you seem to imply. Considering the Hornet's radar is capable of NCTR, I would assume some kind of appearance model (based off of the return waveform or the likes) could be use to enhance tracking and discriminate between closely spaced and maneuvering targets.

One of the use of that is something that I found to want to be able to do often: Whenever a target goes defensive and notch the target, it is often possible to still see it on the TCS (especially in narrow FOV) if below 40-50 nm. It still tracks the target with TCS but no radar track is available. Switching the radar to Pulse mode and slaving it to the TCS should therefore permit reacquisition of the target. So even outside of a jamming environment, this option would be quite useful.

The Kiowa Warrior does have a laser designator that can designate for other LSS/T and laser guided weapons (LGBs and Mav E's) IIRC.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=250863 Already reported.

Thanks Santi! @NineLine I added a track (as short as I could make it) to the original post!

I will try and make one as soon as possible! :)

That's weird, I have a worse config than yours and performance is ok (I'm not experiencing micro stutters). My specs: i5-8600K@5GHz, 32 GB CL16 3200MHz, RTX2070 (slightly OC'd), running on an NVMe SSD (4x). Are you running with MSAA?

Re-center your screen. You're looking the wrong way! (Numpad 5 by default IIRC)

As with the Hornet's LTWS (though it was partially fixed), the SAM mode of the radar displays symbology relative to the HUD frame, not World coordinates. As such, the TD box moves with the aircraft, but should stay pointing in the same "world" direction (at least updated as fast as the INS/Air Data Computer can update the pitch ladder/orientation). This makes SAM almost useless during any kind of basic maneuvering (a 15 degree bank will throw the box far away from the real target due to the lower refresh rate of SAM). See this Hornet bug thread for a good explanation: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=238656 f-16_SAM_box_bug.trk

The last one is still on Saturday, contrary to what the person I responded to said.

Last one was Saturday at like 10:00 GMT-4, not Sunday.

Here's what it says: It is in regard to a post (closer to an essay, both worth a read) made by a hoggit user. It was clearly laid out, generally respectful and I think he put on words what the general feeling was for a lot of people, but in a well worded and constructive manner.

Nah, this can be seen as a "transparency" paper. I've been on Polychop's Discord for a while, and that paper translates really well the general feeling of being there. Bug reports are either blantantly denied (e.g. the mouse-controlled camera for the minigun that does not work in VR, but supposedly that's a "feature"), or simply brushed off with "we'll fixed everything in the future, be patient" but without any actual fixes coming up. EDIT: on top of that, fixes that are said to be "in the hands of ED" while a community member proves that it is not the case just goes on to say that these community put effort backing up the point they're trying to make.

Yeah it shouldn’t be picked up at all. The limited range is due to scattering, so a floating designation point makes no physical sense. And I remember linking some public data on older targeting pod (like the LANTIRN) having a range requirement for designation of 15 nm, with newer pod being like 20. I’ll try finding those links again.

In Afghanistan? Sure, they’re basically flying CAS only. In Desert Storm? Nope. They’re actually actively searching for targets in the desert. This is where the AG radar is super useful. That, and low-level night strikes, which haven’t been used as a tactic since Desert Storm (because it just makes no sense to do so when your target might have at best an old rusty MANPAD).

The biggest problem with that point of view arises from "new school" pilots that have almost never used the AG radar because they mainly did low intensity CAS with all the intel they needed and with possible collateral damages. AG radar doesn't really serve any purpose in low intensity asymmetric warfare. In a full-blown war where targets are moving, strikes happen in the middle of the night or during bad weather, where big infrastructure are targeted, a AG radar is definitely an invaluable tool. There's a reason why every single attack aircraft (except light attack and CAS aircrafts like the A-10) nowadays have AG radars. An AG radar gives you: - AGR: ranging info, solving the height of target problem - RBM: mapping through inclement weather and target detection - DBS1 or 2: higher detail, "zoomed in" view of a patch, in which you can see parked aircrafts or hangars for example, with a lock capability - SAR (the F-16 doesn't have that though): range-independent even more "zoomed in" (except at close range) view with better details - GMTI: automatic detection and tracking of moving targets on ground, e.g. detecting a convoy or a tank line moving - TF/TA: terrain following (giving a curve generally coupled with autopilot for low-level flight) and terrain avoidance ("contour" plot of terrain above, at and below the airplane) - SEA: Similar to GMTI but for targets at sea (does not need to be moving in this case) Example of use case: - Finding a convoy - Detecting SCUD launchers in the desert - Targeting an outpost - Low-level strike - Strike with less than ideal intel - Strike in a 80s scenario (where satellite imagery was more difficult to obtain or simply unavailable) - Anti-shipping/anti-piracy - Search and rescue And the list goes on.

I don't know what's happening, but for me the Lysbomb just aren't working. I got to release them, but they didn't emit any light.

Can't wait to try and get that thing to continue flying while doing my troubleshooting master technique: turning every switch off and on again. Honestly, I can't wait to fly that thing! :)

Yep, same for me. I'd rather get the module sooner with WIP textures than latter. I'm much more ok with WIP textures than WIP systems to be honest.