Search the Community

I made a diagram which shows all available transitions between radar modes in search and designated-target modes. I arranged the modes in how they are related by auto-aqc switch direction, so it's more of a map than just a table of state transitions like the manual provides. Inop modes are colored yellow. I also made a plot showing the azimuth-elevation profile of all radar modes. These should be accurate to the degree, with the exception of maybe the boresight mode where I had to interpret "4 degrees circle" as an azimuth/elevation rectangle. Source diagrams.net files are available upon request. Note: Plot azimuth scale is 2.5 degrees per grid cell, and elevation scale is 1 degree per grid cell. This skews the representation of angular area (solid angle) subtended by each of these modes. Supersearch (SS) and Boresight (BS) should be square in shape.

This is an issue on the PVP side of things, but I didn't see a mention of it in the bug tracker so I thought I'd give it a post! The Fishbed's radar doesn't produce a lock warning on the RWR if any human piloted aircraft in DCS. It does produce a nail when searching, and It even provides a launch warning when firing in R3R. But never a lock warning. The sequence when piloting an F5 or other aircraft in a PVP environment is: MiG flips radar on -> 21 nails appear. MiG locks you -> nails disappear MiG fires an R3R -> Still no nails, launch warning sounds. This may be related to the Fishbed's radar acting like a laser, though this is something I've just heard through the grapevine of discord.

Hello there fine ladies and gentlemen! My here account is 10 years old, and I never noticed the Tutorial section. Shame on me! Through the last couple of years I put together some studies and tutorial I hope you may find them useful. The ratio was me, knowing nothing, trying to correct the status quo by learning as much as possible about fixed-wing stuff, in primis air-to-air combat. The point of view is mostly from the F-14 RIO. Since there is little documentation about the role, I figured I could adapt the declassified docs focused on other modern aircraft to this 50 years old amazing bird. Nevertheless, the bedrock concepts are the same, no matter the module you are flying. Some studies and tutorials I wrote are unfortunately outdated (for example the study about the AIM-54, where I launched a few thousands Phoenixes and collected data), others cover procedures and techniques, so changes in the module will not affect them. I plan to open two topics. One introductory with the basic concepts, a second with the advanced stuff. This is the former, and here is the latter. Basic Concepts ("Back to Basics" series plus other introductory articles) These short articles cover some basic topics. Latitude and Longitude (DMS, DD, DDM); Brevity Codes; Radar Elevation Bars and Scan Azimuth; Barometric Altimeter (Q Codes, TA/TL); Heading, Bearing, Track and Course; RIO Training in Single Player; Target Aspect and Missile Performance; Rate of Closure (Vc); The “Plus 2 Minus 2” Rule; Back to Basics: Radar Displays: B-Scope vs PPI. AWG-9 WCS Advanced Part I (overview of concepts slightly more advanced such as PRF and Zero Doppler Filter); AWG-9 WCS Advanced Part II (same as above, but covering clutter and notching). Basic Radio Comms Very basic radio comms, aimed for newbie-friendly servers such as Georgia At War (GAW). Part I: Introduction – Frequencies, ATC, ATIS, Runways; Part II: Taxiing and Take off; Part III: Tasking and Landing. Antenna Elevation model One of the first issues I had as noob FW player was understanding the antenna elevation. Here is where Maths came to the rescue! Antenna Elevation Study Part I; Antenna Elevation Study Part II Antenna Elevation Angle Quick Formula. Various Other articles covering various topics. Bullseye in any module - A simple Spider Card Resources The following are lessons held by former or active military personnel (e.g. JTAC, Mi-17 Pilot) about different topics: FLIP and Instrument Approach; - this is useful for new clouds I guess! Introduction to CAS control – Extract from a training session; Close Air Support Theory Lesson by 132nd.AssafB; DCS Syria Map: Historical and Geographical Introduction by 132nd.AssafB. DCS Missiles Visualised - YouTube Modules-specific guides Although more focused on specific modules, the following articles can often be applied to different airframes: DCS: Black Shark This is one of the oldest guides I wrote, it has probably 6-7 years now. It dates back to when the Ka-50 and the A-10 where the only modules in DCS, and I was playing FAC/A with the Shark. Ka-50 / A-10C: Sharing Data. Part I, Part II, Part III, Part IV DCS: F-14 Tomcat In the link below you will find most of the articles about the F-14. They are simply too many to be listed here, and they would be better listed in the F-14's dedicated area. F-14 RIO Training / Presentations I do not organize training sessions as often as I used to any more, but when I do, I record them. They can include different topics, so take what interests you and skip the rest, 31/03/2021: NAVGRID, ZDF & Notching, Timeline, Geometry 29/10/2022: 3h livestreaming session split in 6 parts (Part I, the others are on the YT channel) Note that rather than spamming new topics on the forum, I will update this thread.

ED has stated that Phase Two of their radar development will include azimuth/bar settings effecting detection performance. "Upon Phase 1 release and tuning, we will implement Phase 2 that will include the effect of radar azimuth and bar settings on detection ranges and the inclusion of more accurate look down radar performance." This is not a correct application of radar theory. The radar range equation does not contain azimuth or bar values in it. Azimuth and bar settings only effect what is has been called Max Range Cumulative detection performance. Which indicates a typical range the radar will first see a target. See my full explanation here. But in short it is a simple way of telling a high ranking officer the typical range he could expect his first detection. Though this does not inform the officer that the detections will be rare/irregular at this range. Azimuth and bar settings have little to no effect on performance. This is a misnomer told to pilots. Detection range performance is based on a probability of detecting a RCS at a given range. ex the APG-66 has a 10% chance of detecting a T-38 at 20 Nmi in a single sweep. (ie the main beam crossed the target once) The benefit of lower ur bar and azimuth isn’t that this performance changes. Rather it’s that you get many more sweeps per second on the target. ie you get more chances to detect the target. Each sweep always being 10% (given the T-38 example). Said another way, you simply get to roll the dice more often. But the average performance remains the same. ED should instead use single scan probability of detection (not effected by azimuth/bar), rather than max cumulative. For instance, given the APG-66 / T-38 example above. Using single scan Pd, the T-38 would only be detected 1/10 sweeps at 20 Nmi. If ED used Max Cumulative, they'd simply make the detection 100% at 20 Nmi. I've made a fully open source/non-ITAR analysis of the APG-63 detailing the math behind all of this. ED should use the SNR figures provided to determine single scan Pd. Id recommend using a 0% Pd for anything lower than a 10% Pd, and a 100% Pd for anything above 95% Pd to simplify the code and because SNR figures get unreliable at these extremes. Note that my math/analysis has been cross checked against the APG-66 as well, with estimates nearly match Westinghouse themselves https://i.imgur.com/cVZSyQf.jpg Note that this graph is from IEEE, and has no government restrictions: "F-16 Pulse Doppler Radar (AN/APG-66) Performance" IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON AEROSPACE AND ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS VOL. AES-19, NO. I JANUARY 1983 APG-63-70 HPRF Basic Analysis.pdf

The newly added German Mammut radar sites are an awesome addition, they look nice! However, it is a bit unfortunate that they were not placed at the historical location of German radar sites. There are many radar sites for which the exact historical location is known, we have actually research these precise positions for many of them for our missions. I'd love for the radar sites on the map to be moved to the correct locations. As an example below is Douvres radar station. This one is very famous, since it was held for a long time by the Germans after they were encircled at the first day of the landing. Today, there is a museum there, and most bunkers that had the radar antennas are still visible, even on google earth. Yet on the DCS map, the radar was placed on the nearby coast, 5 km from the correct site. See the pictures below for an illustration:

I have no clue which Subforum to pick for that but - now here we are. With the advent of the strike eagles mighty AG Radar, upcoming FCR for apache and the fact that many modernish modules do have AG Radar (Jeff, F-16, F-18 whatever) capable of targeting I would love to understand how this is roughly working in DCS. Because it is interesting to me and makes it easier to file proper bug reports or design test scenarios. And because there seems to be something broken / incomplete / weird with it that is hard to pinpoint without any rough knowledge on the logic behind. There are several variables in this it seemed on my tests. It’s dependent on -module used - map used -ground units used. How does this all come together? Is Radar return from objects and terrain like a Texture for FLIR? Is it a value somewhere coded in lua one can check? Is it dependent on how „strong“ the radar beam is? Is grace angle being taken into account besides for creating radar shdows from terrain features or big units like radars and watch towers? Here are the different bug reports / questions I was talking about. For one, the Map factor : And the factor Unit + Module Can someone shed some light on those inner workings and dependencies?

JDAM 2000 gets shot down by enemy anti-air. Radar locks onto enemy/friendly missiles very easily, can't lock helo behind missiles. HMCS is not showing when on the ground, have to be in the air to calibrate JDAM Time in Trk: 01:22:30 Foothold_Caucuses_Extended_1.0-20231101-204021.trk Tacview-20231101-194939-DCS-Host-Foothold_Caucuses_Extended_1.0.zip.acmi

locking a target with ACM Boresight with HMD on can sometimes give the symbology of a lock that doesn't follow the target (sits there stationary on hud/helmet), and firing on it results in missile doing nothing, as its not a valid lock. this state is a false lock, where other actions do not always work and the radar ceases to search for targets. Particularly frustrating, as using ACM boresight is done within 10nm, which is always a time critical situation. this state is semi-permanent until the player uses a workaround. workarounds are: double press undesignate cycle radar power i think switching weapons with weapon select switch will also work past it. system notes: Multithreaded binary, HMD on, HMD blanking off, otherwise stock configuration of the jet from hotstart. Bug happens to cold-started jets too though. video: https://clips.twitch.tv/SteamyHumbleJaguarRalpherZ-Ff4ItXayZTRO20c- not the best video, as I work around it pretty fast (having known this bug well for several months now) to try and secure the kill fox1 Testing.miz

it detects ground units now, most notably outside of 40nm but in some cases also closer for some reason. and yeah, you can shoot amraams at them

once you initiate an STT lock, the radar can get stuck in a state of trying to acquire an STT lock - when you undesignate, the radar tries to acquire an STT on the spot its looking at again, which, will be the target you just had locked. This results in the radar permanently locking a specific target, potentially making the radar entirely useless if it locks something not helpful (like distant awacs or rear echelon forces in 40nm trail) Radar screen symbology when you undesignate is showing AACQ in the top left, radar re-scans and tries to lock targets. If you are in this state and turn away from bandits, when you recommit the radar will lock the first thing it sees and get stuck on it (ie, recommit, you get a hit on their AWACS and it gets stuck STT'ing the AWACS). workarounds: switching weapons with WSS apparently breaks out of this state according to other users I have spoke to about it (cant personally confirm) changing radar mode (TWS/RWS/VS) cycling radar power system notes: Multithreaded binary, HMD on, HMD blanking off, otherwise stock configuration of the jet from hotstart. Bug happens to cold-started jets too though. video: https://clips.twitch.tv/LitigiousCooperativeBeanPogChamp-NhZo_PNiYK3hRGfe .BVR AI testing.miz

When the player crosses 10nm from his bandit, the STT lock is lost 100% of the time, if an aim-7p is in flight towards target. fly at target, launch at ~15nm, keep closing distance, at 10NM the lock will be dropped (yes, even when they are not evading and in the doppler radar notch) drop of lock seems to be almost exactly 10nm every time (when the lock box becomes just outlines of the corners of a box), at which point fox-1's go stupid. workaround: ACM boresight the enemy to recover the lock, if you are fast enough the missile will begin homing again. system notes: Multithreaded binary, HMD on, HMD blanking off, otherwise stock configuration of the jet from hotstart. Bug happens to cold-started jets too though. video: https://clips.twitch.tv/ScrumptiousFlirtyKoupreyEleGiggle-88M2U86hGTtvKQv8 more footage of the issue, showing a workaround being used: https://clips.twitch.tv/SteamyHumbleJaguarRalpherZ-Ff4ItXayZTRO20c- fox1 Testing.miz

The radar and weapons of the F1 are something that has been keeping me busy for the past six months. This post isn’t necessarily to prove any capabilities of the plane, I mostly want to get some other people's opinion and maybe a response from the devs themselves on this. I will post links to the sources where I got my information from and add translations to English if needed at the end of the post. Part 1 - The Radar I love the Mirage F1 and I think that Aerges has done an amazing job so far. I very much enjoy the way the Mirage planes have been designed internally; thus, I also enjoy flying the Mirage 2000. Both Mirages we have in DCS have been concepted as interceptors/fighters and both excel when used accordingly. Still, they are not limited to only carrying air to air weaponry. For Example: Low drag bombs, high drag bombs, rockets, runway bombs and laser guided bombs with no self lasing capabilities. Whilst it is more of an art dropping bombs in the F1, the Mirage 2000 is quite a modern plane with the ability of dropping bombs via the radar in CCIP and CCRP modes. From what I could gather the F1M with the upgraded HUD and radar should also be able to drop bombs in CCIP and CCRP mode as well. Now, this pretty much brings me to my first point of discussion. I have been reading into all the different versions of the Cyrano IV radar to get an idea about what to expect from the F1M once we get our hands on it and tried to compile it into an infographic describing the different versions. The functions we currently have with the F1EE are pretty much equal to the Cyrano IV-3 with limited look down ability and ground mapping. It probably comes down to the radar not being finished yet. The manual by Aerges shows all the settings on the function indicator (Page 104) with an inoperable blind penetration mode and air-ground telemetry mode. This makes it seems more like the Cyrano IVM. The description on the Steam page says the module comes with the Cyrano IVM as well. On a Spanish forum I found this description of the different versions of the Cyrano IV and it says this about the Cyrano IVM (translated): This would correlate to the description of the manual except for the air to sea mode. Air to ground telemetry seems to be a different name for air to ground ranging, which should be what is used for CCIP and CCRP (Taken from Chucks guide for the Mirage 2000, chapter 4.1 explaining “Télémétrie Air-Sol” translated as “Air-to-Ground Ranging Mode”). I don’t know weather an air to ground ranging mode automatically enables CCIP/CCRP capabilities though or if some sort of designation ability is needed. Also the F1CE seems to have the same radar in-game. Maybe someone can clear this up for me, also which version exactly we have or are getting. I sadly couldn’t find any information specifically on the Spanish versions of the F1. I could imagine that the F1M would either include all the abilities of all previous versions since it pretty much was the last time the Cyrano IV was used in an upgrade, or a combination of the Cyrano IVM and IVMR which also was used by France in the Mirage F1CT upgrades. Part 2 - The Weapons Now before I get into all the information I’ve gathered about armament the Mirage F1 could carry, I want to say the following: I know that some of the weapons I will talk about have not been used by the versions of the F1 we are getting for DCS. Now, except Aerges decides to do more playable versions of the F1 in the future, this definitely will be the only time we get a thoroughly simulated Mirage F1 in an environment that also simulates usable weaponry in the next years, maybe even for the next decade. There simply will not be a second developer developing a Mirage F1 for DCS. This probably is a whole other discussion about how far you can go into adding weapons not carried by the real plane. Whilst I fully agree that one should not add a targeting pod if there wasn’t one in real life, because you would have to make up a whole page for the MFD, I think that if the capability of a weapon is based on hardpoint wiring (not talking about being a smart hardpoint or not) it simply is so far under the hood that it should not matter for DCS. Obviously, one should not argue about adding weapons that weren’t used by any version of the airplane. But if it isn’t too farfetched technically, I don’t see why one should not add a weapon. I personally would be somewhat disappointed in not being able to enjoy some of the weapons that were used by other F1 versions because of absolute “realism”. For the people interested in absolute realism the DCS mission editor allows to disable certain weapons from use. At the end of the day this is also about me being interested in having a capable, non-American, true multirole aircraft (besides the JF-17) in DCS. I already love the F1 though, this is not about having it as capable as possible. Now I would like to state some information I’ve found online about a few weapons. Again, I don’t necessarily try to prove certain capability for those weapons. I know Wikipedia is not the most reliable source for these kind of things, but I used it anyway to underline a claim if there is another source claiming similar/the same facts. Martel / ARMAT I want to start off with the MARTEL and ARMAT anti-radiation missiles. It is somewhat complicated to find something about which air forces used these weapons on which plane. The Iraqis have definitely used them on their F1EQs. A small Danish website about plane facts claims that the Kuwaiti have used the ARMAT on their F1CKs. A stat page about the Mirage F1CK-2 on CMANO-DB also lists the ARMAT as a used weapon. Wikipedia also suggests that the ARMAT was in use with the Kuwaiti air force. The German Wikipedia article of the MARTEL claims that 25 ARMAT were delivered to Kuwait. The Kuwaiti F1CK-1 are equal to the general F1C model, and the later F1CK-2 are equal to the F1E. This would suggest that the version the F1 we already have in game probably are capable to launch the MARTEL/ARMAT ARM. If I find more information on this, I will add it here later. AS-30 Next, I want to talk about the AS-30 and AS-30L missile. F1EQs of the Iraqi air force used AS-30L during the Iran-Iraq war. The Wikipedia page of the AS-30 links to an external image of a French F1 firing an AS-30L. The F1 in the picture is one of the later F1CR or F1CT as it has a laser spot tracker below the cockpit. I would think that the AS-30L does not have any special launch constraints and will simply track a laser after launch with a pre-set code as most laser guided weapons. From what I could gather, only the South African F1AZ/CZ used the regular AS-30 with MCLOS guidance. I don’t know how farfetched (probably a lot) this one would be, as especially the F1AZ were specifically made for ground attack with heavy modifications to the ground attack suite compared to all other F1 versions. The laser guided version seems to be technically possible though. AM39 Exocet This last one has been discussed a lot. The AM39 Exocet. I found this to be a rather complex one. Only the Iraqi F1EQ have fired Exocets and these have a version of the Cyrano IV with a special designation, namely the Cyrano IVM3. On a Spanish forum there was a post made by someone about the Cyrano radar in the Venezuelan Mirage 5 and he said the following about the Iraqi F1EQs and the Cyrano IVM3 (translated): Interestingly the late upgrade of the Mirage 5 of Venezuela, the Mirage 50EV, was upgraded with the Cyrano IVM3 radar as well and was fully capable of launching Exocets as stated on Wikipedia. Though, not only did the radar get replaced, but the inertial navigation system (INS) as well. It was replaced by one made by SAGEM. Coincidentally SAGEM is the company producing the Uliss INS. This makes it likely that in the case of the Mirage 50EV there also was a link between the INS and radar. Coming to the F1M upgrade made for Spain. The Wikipedia page mentions that part of the upgrade was “…added anti shipping capability with a modernised Cyrano IVM radar…” suggesting again that this last version of the Cyrano IV does incorporate all functions of previous versions (Cyrano IVM, IVMR, IVM3). Besides, right afterwards Exocet compatibility gets mentioned. Here the full paragraph: To double down on this, I found an article from 2011 in the “Archivo Mirage” about the Cyrano IV radars history and it states the radar of the F1M being “…digitised, as its readings can be displayed on a colour multifunction display … replacing the old monochrome display”. Further the following is said: This should basically be it. The “digitised” Cyrano IVM can communicate with other systems and thus probably also with the INS. This possibly brings it down to being a wiring issue first and foremost. Because of all this I don’t think it would be that farfetched to add the Exocet to the F1M. Again, this could be disabled in the mission editor by the people that don’t like it. Also, this probably is out of the scope for the DCS Mirage F1, but another article on “Archivo Mirage” about the Mirage F1 MF2000 by ASTRAC mentions Exocet capability. Yes, it has a different radar and a "GPS-upgraded SIGMA 95 laser gyro intertial navigator" but also uses the 1553 data bus for the systems. This also somewhat reinforces the claim that Exocet capability is dependent on a link between radar and INS. Again, I am first and foremost interested in opinions on all this and maybe a response from the devs. I may or may not have missed something as I am finishing this with a headache. Source as links and translations as PDF files: Archivo Mirage Cyrano Article: https://archivomirage.blogspot.com/2011/01/radar-thomson-csf-cyrano-iv.html Archivo Mirage on MF2000: https://archivomirage.blogspot.com/2009/07/le-bourget-2009-astrac-presenta-el.html Zona Militare about Cyrano IV: https://www.zona-militar.com/foros/threads/caracteristicas-tecnicas-del-cyrano-iv.3313/ ARMAT Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARMAT MARTEL German Wikipedia page: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/AS.37_Martel Mirage F1 Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Mirage_F1 Mirage 5 Wikipedia page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Mirage_5 Kampfly.dk on Kuwait F1: http://www.kampfly.dk/Flysiden/Fly/Dassault/MirageF1KW.htm GermanMARTELWikipage.pdf ArchivoMirageCyranoArticle.pdf ArchivoMirageMirageF1ASTRACArticle.pdf ZonaMilitareCyranoPost.pdf Kampflydk.pdf

Hi everyone, I'd like to propose the addition of 2 British RADARs that would be right at home on the Channel Map, with one situated at RAF Sandwhich/RAF Ash just about 10km to the south of RAF Manston. First up is the AMES Type 7, this was a fairly modern RADAR with 3D capability. It was a fixed RADAR, with electronics beneath the antenna, in an underground cubicle. The operators were located in a remote operations room in a separate building known as the 'Happidrome' This RADAR was pretty revolutionary for GCI, and was even used post war up to I think the early 50s. The RADAR also didn't require separate height-finding RADARs, using beam-switching to obtain heights. Main specifications: Frequency: 250-300MHz PRF: 250-540Hz Pulsewidth: 3.6, 5 or 8μs Beamwidth: 15° (yes, that large, fortunately returns were symmetrical, allowing operators to achieve resolutions of 1.5°) Polarisation: Horizontal Peak Power: 150kW Azimuth: 360° Elevation: 2.5-20° Elevation resolution +/- 500ft Range: 410km (theoretical), 90km (in practice) against bomber sized targets, altitude dependent. Altitude: 80,000ft (according to wiki) Rotation speed: 0.5-8 RPM, either direction. Source 1 Source 2 The next is the AMES Type 15, which is a mobile derivative of the Type 7. Frequency: 190-212MHz PRF: 250-550Hz Pulsewidth: 3.8μs Beamwidth: 15° (yes, that large, fortunately returns were symmetrical, allowing operators to achieve resolutions of 1.5°) Polarisation: Horizontal Peak Power: 150kW Azimuth: 360° Elevation: 4-20° Elevation resolution +/- 500ft Range: 140km (in practice) against bomber sized targets, altitude dependent. Altitude: 45,000ft Rotation speed: 0.5-6 RPM, either direction. Source(though for the later Mk.5) Good collection of reference images for the Mk.1 Cheers!

When selecting ACM/CRM mode options then selecting Standby on the FCR page, the radar is unable to exit standby mode. Can be reproduced, and effects all modes once selected for each mode, NAV, AA, MRM, Dogfight ect. Additionally Override OSB option no longer has any function. See track below: Thanks! F-16CJ FCR Standby Bug.trk

I saw a video where Tricker says using pinky switch to zoom in on the fcr, useful for more easily getting a better picture of two targets close together. When I'm trying to use the nws/missile step button nothing happens. Is nws button not the same as pinky switch? I couldn't find any key binding for it.

I looked around to see if this was already documented somewhere, but I couldn't find anything. After the latest update, we got some new symbology on the FCR and I was wondering if anyone could explain the following things a bit. I got this flashing yellow "sun" symbol on a STT target? I'm guessing that's when this bandit has fired a missile? What does it mean when the contact turns yellow? It was red before and then it switched to yellow. I also had a contact turn purple. I think this was when I fired a missile at it? Any help is appreciated!

I'm learning about the different radar modes of the F-14 and analyzing the capabilities and numbers of each mode I just realized that RWS has a range of 90nm, but the radar doesn't create any tracks of the targets to shoot the AIM-54. TWS also has the range of 90nm and it does create profile targets to shoot the AIM-54. So my question is, why would you use RWS, when you have TWS with the same range and even more capabilities? Edit: I just realized that RWS allows you to have any config of Bars and Azimuth, while TWS forces you to some configuration of less bars and less azimuth. Is that the only difference between the two?

Cross posting from the F5 forum for additional help: Having a weird issue, I have my RWR working just fine, but my radar does not seem to want to go onto my 2nd screen (see screenshot. I have attached my Lua files and I am hoping that I am just missing something dumb. Helios.lua AN_APQ159_init.lua

According to manuals, the AN/APG-68v5 should include a radar sub-mode called Long Range Search (LRS) which offers the same symbology and functions as RWS but it should be optimized for long range target detection. If confirmed to be applicable to the modeled Viper, it would furtherly deepen the simulation of the F-16's radar.

HI everyone, As of the 2.7.4 update to the OB, the Tin Shield radar has incorrectly been given the name "SAM SA-5 S-200 Gammon SR". IRL however, the Tin Shield is actually associated with S-300/SA-10 system (or used a general purpose EWR). Given that we have the S-300PS [SA-10b Grumble], we should have the 5N59S [Tin Shield B] (though it has a host of other designations which use different rules - I prefer the 5NXXX for radars as it's cleaner to work with). It's especially puzzling because the 5V28 missile of the S-200V "Vega" [SA-5b Gammon] has a maximum range of 240km, but the Tin Shield RADAR only has a maximum instrumented range of 150km, 60% less range.

When OSB 19 and 20 are pressed and the scale changing option is currently automatic the radar should change to manual scale changing option and perform the scale change associated with the pressed OSB. Currently presses of OSB 19/20 in automatic scale option causes the radar to remain in automatic scale option and the range change to be rejected. F16 scale OSB press in AUTO.trk

Currently GM range is automatically changing based on cursor position while slewing. Automatic scale change should only occur when slewing stops. F16 scale changes cursor deflected.trk

In freeze mode the radar is currently automatically changing display range scale. For auto scale the range does not automatically change until freeze mode is deselected. F16 freeze scale changes.trk

With freeze mode radar display in which the ownship marker is displayed, the marker position is not displayed relative to the expanded radar imagery accurately. In the attached track the marker indicates ownship is directly over the bridge/steerpoint on the FCR display but the actual ownship position is a few miles away. This occurs using freeze in all EXP/DBS1/DBS2 modes. F16 ownship marker expand.trk

Currently pressing "CZ" exits snowplow mode. From reading this is not one of the ways to exit snowplow. Being able to zero snowplow slews without exiting SP would allow a return to initial SP designation. Possibly related, designating in SP causes the "SP" to dehighlight (indicating the mode is exited) despite remaining in the snowplow mode. F16 SP CZ.trk