Alpha

@Ziptie: That´s not really a workaround - as the aim of the game is to avoid going STT at this point (and also to avoid the limitations of TWS) ;-) Question is to the devs if this is on their list or planned for a future update. I hope this is the correct sub-forum for that :-)

*Bump* Any news on slewing the RWS Radar in azimuth? It should be slewable when azimuth area is smaller than 140. Currently works in TWS, but it should work in RWS as well. Thank you :-)

Confirmed - VACQ is still too slow.

Actually the pulse-doppler radar doesn´t care. It locks up contacts with the same speed just fine.

The real radar (APG-65) CAN be slewed in azimuth (left/right) - just like in elevation. And there are reasons to do it, especially in group tactics. Also a lot of times RWS is really the better mode compared to TWS - TWS is not a replacement for RWS but adds a better option for certain situations.

@sinnerman49: mini-raster is different than what was mentioned here (moving the tdc around in stt) - it happens prior stt... ;-)

Sorry to spoil and no offence - but obviously you guys didn't read the last pages of this thread. The current radar behavior and performance is in many aspects not realistic. The "stt fishing" you describe here is completely unrealistic and the real radar keeps a stable lock in stt no matter how you yank the jet around (within gimbal limits) etc. Check these pages and the bug section for details on current problems. ACM mode bugs have also been pointed out there. Also you can't defeat a notch (or "beam" as called here...) by putting the target above the horizon.

Don´t worry - the real radar does not work that way and therefore this DCS-simulation will probably become more realistic as updates come along.

@Fri13: Going to say it one more time here: There is a false perception of real radar here! Talking RWS: The real radar DOES NOT drop a STT locked target due to your maneuvering until reaching gimbal limits. You can roll and pitch all the way you want - the (real) radar will track just fine. Also the real radar doesn´t "want to reaquire a lock via looking at the old position". If the contact is lost the radar will revert to the search pattern used before. In real life you hardly ever see something at 20-30km - and if it hasn´t been on the scope before you really screwed up you radar work. There is so much stuff wrong here: Are you talking TWS or RWS? RWS doesn´t predict anything at all - it just displays current radar returns (not going into detail on latent TWS as that´s not implemented currently). If you lock a target up in RWS that´s happening really quickly in real life - see bug section. Once again: Don´t pretend the current radar would be "more realistic" due to it dropping contacts and stuff -it´s not. The real APG-65 is WAY more capable than what the current build here in DCS offers. And yes - I did work with the real APG-65 in a real aircraft.

Well, never heard about such a filter. Maybe for stuff on the radom etc - definately not outside the range of more than a few feet. The real APG-65 has no problem locking up wingmen or keeping them locked in formation (considered bad form though...). It even has a "VI"-mode to guide the jet into a position for "visual identification" - and that is QUITE CLOSE... So for anything that´s relevant on the B-scope: there is no such filter ;-) And for the co-speed: that doesn´t annoy the real APG-65 at all. Been there, done that.

As mentioned before: the radar is currently very limited so don´t jump to conclusions using the current version. There´s some weird theories out here explaining stuff that´s really just "not implemented yet" or simply a bug. Speaking of the real Radar: There is no "short range filter" dropping contact due to them being "very close". The radar doesn´t loose track of targets travelling co-speed. Ownship maneuvering doesn´t drop locked STT-contacts as long as they remain within the scanned volume of the radar. And so on. In real life working the radar (air-air) is quite a complex thing, even more so in singleseat fighters. There is a whole lot of coordination going on within a formation as to which radar mode to use when, who scans which part of the sky, sorting, targeting etc. pp. And those "standards" differ between different users/nations of the same radar/weapon system. Bottom line: wait until this radar is more functional.

I wouldn´t worry about the radar for now. It´s early access and they said multiple times that the radar system is currently very limited. Of course this isn´t how the real radar performs - give the team some time. @G-con: ;-)

As mentioned multiple times: This is early access! The Radar system isn´t really there yet.

Sorry, but that´s wrong. In real life this radar (APG-65) achieves lock-on in ACM-modes VERY quickly. The currently used time is way too high and will be fixed. See the bug section.

No, they don´t. Even in STT the TDC-bars are still there and usable. They also keep indicating Elevation-coverage at TDC-position. This is in a real-life APG65.

@Philips-Monitor: Sorry, but that's wrong. It doesn't take seconds and it doesn't scan bars like you assumed. As explained before. It's a close combat mode for a reason - lock on happens very fast with the real radar.

No, it´s not. In VACQ the radar basically only scans up/down very rapidly with very little sideway movement. About what you can see on the HUD in azimuth and 47 or so degrees up and 13 degrees down. Anything in that sector within 5nm is locked up VERY rapidly, like below one second. The Radar is currently WIP as stated, lock-up times are too high even in RWS - but there it doesn´t have the same impact. So I thought the lock-up time might be corrected even befor the radar-module is out of WIP. I have never flown a real F-18 - but another jet which used the APG-65.

Hi Important things first: Great Aircraft! Really nice. It´s early access and WIP, but maybe this is a rather easy fix: The Radar Lock in ACM Modes is too slow. It´s most apparent when using VACQ - the target has to be within the scan-area for a couple of seconds before it aquires lock. Boresight is slow too, but VACQ is worse. When using VACQ it should be really fast to lock - like less than half the time it takes right now. Please check with your Radar SME, I don´t remember exact times any more... ;-) Thanks for a great simulation