Harlikwin

The radar range select and azimuth select binds don't really work. It should increment from 60-7 and 60deg-the lowest one. Currently its just min/max no increments, i.e 60/7 for range. please fix.

Yeah all those planes are "perfect" for ODS... But literally irrelevant for the cold war. If you are realistic about it the cold war ended in 87-88 for all practical purposes, fall of the berlin wall in 89 was just the public acknowledgment of it.

There are alot of things broken about how TWS works and is detected in DCS in particular in relation to soviet era SAMS... Like you should get "CW" launch warning from the SA5 in terminal guidance, but not much else. Since the SAMs are using very different modes of guidance. For example the SA-8 can just use optical guidance. But all of this modeled really badly in DCS because the average "player" is just clueless on how it should actually work even at a very high level.

The acronym means Diffuse Echo attenuator (in french) basically. So here is the deal. the IV "M" is the same radar, with the same PRF issues, the same antenna and sidelobe issues and so forth. Most likely its the same basic MTI implementation etc. Given that it lacks the low alt mode and medium alt modes of the IV from the manual, it most likely automates that for the pilot, but likely the actual modes are still there behind the scenes, just automated now. And now with DATEP stuck on top as basically a post-processor to help with some clutter. So, while yes its far better than the original due to the automation of modes, its not adding a whole lot in terms of filtering. So. Again, at low alt the radar is gonna hoover up a ton of MLC and SLC. At higher alt looking down, MLC filtering is gonna be the classical lower PRF MTI problems. Currently the "clutter" on the radar doesn't change AT ALL, you can be at 30k feet looking up. Or at 3 ft looking fwd, or at 10k looking "down" and that "sparkly texture" is the same for all 3 cases. It should look like: High alt looking up, its a pulse radar at that point, so aside from weather clutter it should basically be the most beautifully clear scope in the world. 3 ft looking fwd, yeah forget it, you don't have a radar, you have big glowing blob of clutter on your scope 10k looking down in MTI, go look at that vid. Good luck, it can work, but... Well its not easy mode. On the upside, it does seem to drop contacts "in the notch" which for a radar of this type is gonna be few miles wide, at least in lookdown.

Not really. At this point having a decently modeled radar in DCS is become the norm, whether ED likes it or not. And I hope Aerges can do a good job with it. Especially when you can basically do a pretty good job modeling it in Matlab. It shouldn't be too hard to literally do what Razbam did with the M2k and run this on a 2nd core. https://www.mathworks.com/help/radar/ug/generate-clutter-and-target-returns-for-mti-radar.html https://www.mathworks.com/help/radar/ug/ground-clutter-mitigation-with-moving-target-indication-mti-radar.html You want to in detail explain to me what DATEP actually does? I have my theories and a bit of background with it, but I'm searching for enlightenment. Also, Iraqi mirage pilots are a source of alot of the claims of poor lookdown performance, and I'm pretty sure the EQ's had the most modern Cyrano. After all, Giraffe tactics were implemented for several reasons.

The RDM entered service then (kinda), they had 2 squadrons of them IIRC. So like 30 planes. for "the cold war". RDI entered service in late 87 as did the 530D. So really more like 88 before they were up to speed, and the CW ended in 89, so not really relevant. And I will absolutely make that same argument for all the F-teen variants that entered service in 87-89. (that would be C ones generally)

Yup this is exactly the issue with the mirage F1 and BVR stuff. The radar was absolutely terrible in lookdown and at low alt. Hence the whole "giraffe" tactics they used against the Iraqis, since both the radar and the Super 530 excelled in that regime. It should do "OK" at high alt as well as its not looking down. But the highalt lookdown/shootdown capability is one that did not really exist prior to the RDM/RDI radars and the Super530D. And given that the RDM, was charmingly described by the french pilots as Radar de Merde... Probably the first real LD/SD capability was the 87-88 M2000/RDI. At any rate, the F1 is very good for BFM vs other 3rd gen stuff. But as everyone said its gonna loose to 4th gens which shouldn't a surprise. For 70's BVR the 530's were terrible missiles, and are grossly overperforming in DCS right now, but then again so is the R3R. The issue being the radars on the F1 and 21 are modeled badly.

Yeah so in theory yes. Currently its broken in game cuz the 530 is modeled as rear aspect only (and in that regime its stupid short ranged). IRL the 530IR had a early InSb seeker that allowed limited all aspect performance, basically the target had to be supersonic/in burner against a cool background (sky) for the seeker to be able to see it and engage it. The Magic1 is also currently broken, since its supposed to rear aspect only, and currently is all aspect. personally I think someone fat fingered the seeker entries between the two so it should be an easy fix. (go upvote my bug report)

So, I'm mostly hoping the current radar "model" is a placeholder for something better. Currently this radar doesn't really behave much like a radar at all, it seems to be using FC3 level radar "logic" i.e. pop in detection range, and "notching". along with a pretty animated "texture" which is supposed to be ground clutter but isn't. Also the "clutter effect seems to be done wrong anyway its far too weak and targets are way too easy to pick out as you can see in the following vid at around the 6 minute mark. I mean look at that target vs the ground clutter returns, nearly impossible to pick out. And at least anecdotally the Cyrano was pretty much garbage in look down modes and at lower altitudes where sidlobe and mainlobe clutter presented additional challanges for the MTI design. Can aerges give us some hope that you guys are gonna make a better radar model like the Razbam M2k one? Vid.

Well, the F1 is certainly cold war even though we have the lastest greatest 80's version. The M2k we have generally speaking is not. Its basically a 90's era bird. You only had a small amount of RDI and 530D equipped mirages flying in like 88, so like for the last year of the cold war which hardly makes it representative. And even the earlier RDM radar birds were so few in actual number to kinda make the whole thing moot. Though I'd welcome a early 80's RDM M2000 with Super 530F's.

Per most sources: ( i can provide, but I'm not gonna 1.16 myself) but a quick wiki search will confirm this anyway. 530IR has an early generation InSb seeker, and therefore should be "limited" all aspect. I.e. it could engage supersonic targets frontally (its way more complex IRL but hey its DCS and the IR modeling is what it is). 550 Magic1 is listed everywhere as being rear aspect only and having a PbS seeker (like most early sidewinders). In game, the 550 will get front aspect locks. And the 530IR will not. I frankly think someone just copied the wrong parameters for these missiles, and swapping the seekers should fix the problem.

IDK I'd assume they self defend with ECM and flares, that seems to be default.

Well spotted, I hope it gets changed.

Yeah check that. IDK. But Ive seen weird stuff in online servers, like you have a 4 ship of bombers, you have one locked, you shoot, missile goes and hits a different bomber in the formation. This is ofc after you are in burn thru range for ECM so hard to tell which one is jamming. And OFC in the cat there is no burn thru cuz the AWG9 doesn't have ECM stuff modeled yet.

Maybe it went HOJ? I've seen various SARH missiles hit different bombers than what I had locked before, both in the cat and FC3 modules for example. I always figured it was likely a HOJ thing.

Hows this? All radars suffer from those 2 lobe clutters, it only matters how the processing deals with that. Since HA mode is basically a pulse mode with no filtering you should get a ton of clutter at low alt and when looking down. I forget which vid it was, maybe Spudknockers he turned the radar elevation down by a few degrees and no real change in the "clutter". IIRC you are supposed to use the Low alt mode (MTI) below 6k feet I think. But thats not implemented yet. And at any rate if you point a pulse radar at the ground from ANY altitude you are gonna get a ton of MLC. Speaking of MTI, here is a fun matlab program to help estimate how much ground clutter there should be and how well you can resolve moving targets. https://www.mathworks.com/help/radar/ug/generate-clutter-and-target-returns-for-mti-radar.html#GenerateClutterAndTargetReturnsForMTIRadarExample-1 And here is a decent on of how to simulate clutter effects. https://www.mathworks.com/help/radar/ug/introduction-to-radar-scenario-clutter-simulation.html?searchHighlight=real&s_tid=doc_srchtitle

Cool, thanks for your input.

Thanks. Any idea on the Super530F?

I'm not talking about some sparkly "effect". I mean the clutter should be dynamic based on ownship altitude and what sort of terrain you are flying over. The texture hardly changes, watch a few vids its always mostly the same, yes the "sparkles" change but I doubt its anything beyond cosmetic. And honestly its fairly questionable how much actual clutter you should be seeing in HA mode at higher alt. I'd assume its overwhelmed by clutter at lower alt in the radar from the MLC and SLC. But again, haven't really seen that in the vids. IDK to me it looks like a FC3 radar with a sparkly texture added to it, which if that is the case is pretty disappointing. Yup. Very true. I hope the F1 radar gets to that level at some point.

The fact that the clutter seems to be a static "texture" doesn't exactly give me warm fuzzies about the fidelity of radar modeling in the F1...

I mean the Mirage was still a write off.

Yeah I'd believe the Super530 could be monopulse, the 530D is for sure. And I recall that being touted as one of the improvements to the 530D though I can't find the source for that right now.

ARGHHHH LOL, got one with the top cover off? So close... I.e. like this: This is an R-27 and you can clearly the 4 channels it uses for monopulse tracking

That video was so full of fail and errors... The F1 shot down mig23s in angola.... Um, nooo, It got shot down BY mig23's... It did get some mig21 kills tho.

Are you talking about the radar here or the 530 missile seeker. Also anyone got pictures of the 530 missile seeker antenna? Should be easy to tell if its just con-scan or an actual monopulse that way.