Alfa

Yes it does for the 9.12 and 9.13(same WCS as 9.12). The 9.13S has a modified version of the radar/WCS, so I am not sure about this variant(not mucn information available on it). But the modifications are quite subtle and of a sort of add-on nature(extra SNP/TWS mode for the R-77), so I doubt it involved additional tactical information modes for the HDD like the Su-27 has.

Or maybe the HUD is really a "HDD repeater" rather than the other way around :)

Well... :D

A Danish company(called "Terma") has developed different pylon based self-protection solutions and two of them include missile warning sensors - one(called "PIDS+") appears to be a pylon combining flare dispensers(two magazines) and 3 missile warning sensors, while the other(called "ECIPS+") appears to be a combined ECM/MWS pod. I have attached a photo of an RDAF F-16B carrying the latter.

The Russian radars in the game(N019 and N001) do not have the ability to scan through the entire azimuth range in one go, but need to "slice" it up into smaller sectors, so you need to pre-select the sector within which you expect to find your target. The antenna physically turns into the direction of the selected sector and then moves forth and back within the limits of the sector as it scans it. "Encounter"(high PRF) search mode is used only to detect head-on targets at maximum range, but is prone to loosing contacts if they change aspect - and in fact cannot detect a receeding target. "Pursuit"(medium PRF) search mode is, as the name suggests, mainly for receeding targets - it can also detect head-on ones, but only at short range. "Automatic"(interleaved high/medium PRF) is the "default" seach mode as it provides good detection range against head-on contacts, while being able to detect targets at all aspects. Again "Automatic" is the "multi-purpose" scan mode that works in most conditions and as such should be the "default option". Med PRF("Pursuit") is very short ranged, so you would use it at close range and if you are chasing a receeding target.

It is not a different plane - it is an upgrade to the same plane. You are right that the -SM upgrade involves many other things than just the upgraded radar, but so do the F-15C upgrades - whether the aircraft manufacturer decides to change the aircraft designation accordingly is just "semantics".

An Su-27SM is an upgraded Su-27S and the N001VEP is an upgraded N001 :).

SNP mode has been in the radar infrastructure since day one. There is exactly a multi-stage upgrade program for the N001 involving replacement of varies components including the data processor, additional mode for employment of RVV-AE missile and several air-to-surface modes. There is fact even a final stage which replaces the old cassegrain antenna with an electronically steered phased array antenna(called "Pero").

Of course GG - I am sure that an APG-65 could obtain similar range to a contempory APG-63 if modified with a wacking big antenna of the same size :) . But I was refering to the chart Frostie posted, where it simply said F-18A -> APG-65 radar and then stated the exact same "110 nm +" range for this as for the F-15C -> APG-63, which obviously isn't right. I cannot find any good sources right now, but IIRC the antenna size for APG-65/F-18 is something along the lines of 25 inches(~ 630 mm) diameter and stated range performance is around 60nm against "fighter type target".

Eh yes GG, but the APG-65 was made for the F-18 and therefore has a *much* smaller antenna :)

Improved maintainability and likely also tweaked general performance, but AFAIK there was no change to the processor(at least not back then) - i.e. using the same Ts100 unit as the N019.

But is the aperature smaller? - point taken about the hole in the dish, but the N001 antenna as such is larger(1075 mm diameter versus some 900 mm of the APG-63)

Yes but then surely "the original N001" would be the improved one that was accepted into service :) . Same way as you would refer to the original Su-27 as the "Flanker B" that went into production and not the rejected pre-production "Flanker A" :)

Yes 80-100 km detection range agianst RCS=3m2 which would be something like an F-16, so likely a little better against an F-15. The Su-27SK is not an upgrade - its just an export designation for the original production version. Same goes for the radar. I believe the 240 km is the maximum displayable range calibrated for the HDD, which in turn may have more to do with GCI than onboard radar capabilites. Again the Su-27SK is just an export name for the Su-27S and the radar specs are the same. Only export versions of the Su-30 multirole variant(Su-30MK) have an upgraded version of the N001 radar(called N001VE), which in turn made it into the more recent Su-27SM. During the late eighties Niip developed a slotted array radar called N011, which probably could have given a comtempory APG-63 radar a run for its money, but neither this nor the aircraft it was slated for(Su-27M aka Su-35) made it into production. So if you are looking for Flanker radars with significanty improved performance, you need to look at something like the furhter developed N011M "Bars" PESA(installed in the Indian Su-30MKI) or the latest iteration of this, the Irbis(installed in the Su-35S). Btw in regards to the chart you posted - according to this the AN/APG-65(F-18 ) should have the same range("100 nm +") as the AN/APG-63.....so :)

lunaticfringe - read the damn thread from the start! I agreed with the thread-starter that introduction of such features for the F-15 would needlessly "un-balance" capabilities as compared with all other FC3 aircraft - then you jumped in and told me to quit calling it unbalance and accusing me of seeking "false equivalence" - how am I to interpret that other than supporting their introduction?

No not as such, but you did argue that introducing them would be fine and that dealing with the disproportonate increase in capabilities the F-15C would gain against any other aircraft in the game could be solved simply by "applied doctrine and scenario design". Lol

No I realise that GG, but thats what I meant by "if modelled to full specs" - i.e. that an MSIP upgraded F-15C from ~ 1985 modelled with all its actual capabilities/Sparrows would be a superiour BVR platform compared to an Su-27S modelled to its full specs :) Well I think the above would be "cooler" :) .

I could probably respond better to that if I had any idea what the hell you are talking about. There is no Su-27SM in the sim. There is the old "plain vanilla" Su-27 its original ~1984 configuration(minus aspects that aren't modelled) versus a ~ 1992 upgraded F-15C(AMRAAMs) - again minus aspects that aren't modelled. The F-15C is already far superiour to the Su-27 in BVR and(if both were modelled to their full specs) likely would have been even without the AMRAAMs. Why in your opinion, would it need the latest gadgets such as JHMS, AIM-9X and AESA radar? "False equivalency" would be to add to- or subtract from actual capabilities of a platform in order to obtain some sort of overall parity - needless unbalance is to model one aircraft type in a 30 year old configuration and its closest(even older) equivalent with the latest upgrades from the day before yesterday - regardless of applied doctrine and scenario design.

No but un-balancing it needlessly shouldn't be a goal either.

Ok didn't know that - it makes sense. No but then that wouldn't apply to the R-27R/ER anyway.

Exactly - the question being whether the radars(N019/N001) associated with the R-27R/ER have such a track memory - taking age as well as type of weapon into consideration :) .

Perhaps a case of nitpicking, but... A SARH seeker doesn't just "see" the reflection - it recieves and processes radar returns based on which it calculates intercept point and steers the missile towards it in the same way as an ARH seeker. It simply lacks the emitter component and therefore relies on the aircraft radar to provide that aspect - so it does have a radar ...or "half a radar" of its own :) .

Good question - if the target is still within the gimbal limits of the seeker antenna, it should be possible to get it to re-acquire. The question is really down to the workings of the aircraft WCS/radar - i.e. whether the missile link is maintained or just dropped as soon as target lock is broken....probably the latter.

No its not - its a semi-active radar missile. A SARH seeker works in much the same way as an ARH - it just doesn't have its own onboard emitter and therefore relies on the aircraft radar to "ping" the target and thereby provide the reflected energy required for target processing - hence "semi-active". Passive radar homing is something else - it has to do with the detection of the target's radar emissions and homing directly on that.

No the R-27R/ER is not "beam riding". Its true that early SARH missiles employed such a method for midcourse guidance, but the R-27R/ER was developed later and its 9B1101K seekerhead has an INS(Inertial Navigation System). Prior to launch the aircraft radar feeds it with a target fix - after launch during initial stage of flight, the INS steers the missile into general direction of the target(using proportional navigation), while the aircraft radar transmits updated target information to it via radio(known as "radio correction" or "datalink") . At terminal stage of engagement, the seeker switches to semi-active radar homing(SARH).