What is TWS good for?

[derodo]

Mmmm @Hadwell ... you know what? Actually that thing you mention might be worth it in the end.

 

Being able to lock a hostile when a friendly is too close in the HUD and makes it almost impossible to lock the bad guy manually.

 

Haven't tried that before...I'll make a quick test when I get home. ¿Does it automatically snap to the bad guy? Or do you still need to move it around until it ends up snapping on the bandit?

[ShuRugal]

unless you get within 85% of the weapons range, then it becomes more work track without locking than STT

 

I solve this problem by selecting R73 when in TWS and i'm not ready to shoot. I only switch to my ERs when I'm ready to shoot.

[Tucano_uy]

1- Shows you the poles if beyond 85% Rmax

2- keeps the target centered in the scan cone

 

And not much else...

 

I was about to ask for a few days now, shouldn't the antena elevation indicator on the right of the hud also follow the target? Nowadays it doesn't

[Tucano_uy]

The major difference between SCAN/Overview and TWS is that the radar automatically follows the bugged target wherever it goes within the radar's gimbal limits as you and he maneuver. So it reduces your workload in that respect.

 

The problem is, if I'm not mistaken, that if for whatever reason you lose the target, the antenna will return to your selected position instead of staying where it was and try to reacquire.

[Weta43]

The problem is, if I'm not mistaken, that if for whatever reason you lose the target, the antenna will return to your selected position instead of staying where it was and try to reacquire.

 

Not if you periodically adjust the selected position to match where TWS has the radar pointing.

 

If you have something bugged in TWS, but you're busy manoeuvring and watching the RWR, and your bugged target suddenly jinks & drops a couple of Km, when you look back at the HUD / HDD they'll still be there. At that point you can manually align the settings with where TWS has the radar pointing without having to perform a search to find them.

[Tucano_uy]

My problem is not with azimuth, but with elevation since there's no indication to where the antenna is pointing in the vertical plane, and the altitude of te target will not be displayyed until it is STT locked.

[jackmckay]

This is general complain about ED missile(sensors/plane) performance policy!!! ALL the time you change the missile capabilities.. its time to stop f*** tweaking.. make them right/wrong or get out of the way. Do some CFD guys.. Constant 'Cheating' on missiles/sens/pl is too much, each update you change the rules of game so people can not practice combat skills, instead its enough just to select 'the right missile (when you decide its right time to)' regardless of pilot skill or plane capabilities itself. Consistency is THE LAW and you broke it all the time! If this is SIM then make it so if not call it ARCADE and then make missile performance RANDOM! Quit changing performance of models inside, any. This sucks guys! Changes are not subtle but drastic, i don't believe you miss the point at start but manipulate on the go. Consistency!!! F*** the updates!

[jackmckay]

This Plane (Su27) have changed every aspect of its life (scope just on FC3). flight dynamics, sensors, damage ratio.. everything you could f*** you did so. Flight dynamics became dangerous after negative flat spin syndrome introduction.. cool, get used to trim, expect nose dive immediately, fine.. but instant blackout? should it be red out first? and how come you can with ACS on pull short over ground and drastically change velocity vector without inertial drift calculation? no logic! .. Radar was relatively fine, oh except that it won't stay on TWS mode if gremlin inside decides not to, TWS is just mode that tells you who is where around you (something called RWR in F15) but even real model is able to engage multiple targets at once - this one can't even stay focused on single target (that's why MiG29 has TWS2 mode which is of course useless) .. IR sensor was fine except now it loses signals picture by decision of gremlin driving it.. weird ha? Radar range resets by itself on radar off/on an often refuses to lock even changing scan ripple modes? Have you ever lost lock on F15 with direct beam contact line? Damage model - Flanker is relatively big airplane (the largest fighter there beside Su33) so how come that every missile fired on it destroys it even as Russian safety standard is higher than others? Whats the use of damage model in Su27, just to say we have it? Proximity fuses at really high speed pass by are so precise? Really? Next, about Russian missile performance, they are so underestimated its kind off odd, single each countermeasure is so effective against that this must be a miracle countermeasure ET technology, as of ECM which is useless against US missile arsenal. Really? When Suhoy factory rolled out the Flanker they didn't changed it on worst after upgrades only on better. This is not case with you. Oh not to mention the teleportation lag that makes this game so idiotic, instead you could halt velocity vector of plane and keep the plane movement remembered and allowed only in direction of flight and some AoA possible added and last speed record valid, not sideways of upwards at tremendous speed smashing nearby objects. Wtf? ED guys, you ruined good job by constantly changing basic characteristics of things in game. Stop that practice, use CFD before deploying models in game, all models in same conditions! Fixed performance, no degradation updates, ever!

[DNice]

Are the Russian TWS systems really that susceptible to ECM, that any sort of ECM renders them useless? From my brief research it seems that the Russian systems are the ones more-so concentrated on EW while the US prioritizes stealth tech.

 

Since GCI doesn't work in MP, and TWS doesn't work under any sort of jamming, Russian planes are at a severe disadvantage when it comes to situational awareness, comparative to the F-15C.

[GGTharos]

This Plane (Su27) have changed every aspect of its life (scope just on FC3). flight dynamics, sensors, damage ratio.. everything you could f*** you did so.

 

They made it more realistic. What's your problem?

 

Radar was relatively fine, oh except that it won't stay on TWS mode if gremlin inside decides not to, TWS is just mode that tells you who is where around you

 

Yes, like the real thing - and like the real thing, the processor can't handle the multiple targets in TWS when ECM is present, to it drop out of TWS.

 

(something called RWR in F15)

 

No, F-15 has TWS too.

 

but even real model is able to engage multiple targets at once

 

The Su-27S? Nope.

 

IR sensor was fine except now it loses signals picture by decision of gremlin driving it.. weird ha?

 

IR sensor now operates based on target signature.

 

? Have you ever lost lock on F15 with direct beam contact line?

 

Yep.

 

Flanker is relatively big airplane (the largest fighter there beside Su33) so how come that every missile fired on it destroys it even as Russian safety standard is higher than others?

 

LOL :)

 

RL F-15 has survived AIM-9 hit. And just recently a Su-24 was shot down with AIM-9. What 'higher safety standard'?

 

Whats the use of damage model in Su27, just to say we have it? Proximity fuses at really high speed pass by are so precise? Really?

 

as of ECM which is useless against US missile arsenal

 

ECM is useless againt all missiles in-game.

 

Oh not to mention the teleportation lag that makes this game so idiotic, instead you could halt velocity vector of plane and keep the plane movement remembered and allowed only in direction of flight and some AoA possible added and last speed record valid, not sideways of upwards at tremendous speed smashing nearby objects. Wtf? ED guys, you ruined good job by constantly changing basic characteristics of things in game. Stop that practice, use CFD before deploying models in game, all models in same conditions! Fixed performance, no degradation updates, ever!

 

Write your own flight sim or something then?

[GGTharos]

Are the Russian TWS systems really that susceptible to ECM, that any sort of ECM renders them useless? From my brief research it seems that the Russian systems are the ones more-so concentrated on EW while the US prioritizes stealth tech.

 

That particular radar set is vulnerable. You need an upgrade that came some decades after to deal with it; meanwhile, the F-15 doesn't have any of its TWS capability modeled with respect to ECM (it will track AOJ targets just fine in TWS) ... and that's from aircraft manuals, not brief research.

 

Since GCI doesn't work in MP, and TWS doesn't work under any sort of jamming, Russian planes are at a severe disadvantage when it comes to situational awareness, comparative to the F-15C.

 

The F-15C isn't modeled to 20% of its capability right now - you have it incredibly good. The AWACS is usable, but lacks a lot of the RL C&C capability.

 

Other than AIM-120's you're on pretty much even footing: The missiles are all short-ranged and generally happy to miss, F-15's do better in the 'just before WVR' phase, and flankers do better in the WVR phase.

[Sweep]

RL F-15 has survived AIM-9 hit. And just recently a Su-24 was shot down with AIM-9. What 'higher safety standard'?

 

Comment of the day, for sure. :megalol:

[Nerd1000]

Are the Russian TWS systems really that susceptible to ECM, that any sort of ECM renders them useless? From my brief research it seems that the Russian systems are the ones more-so concentrated on EW while the US prioritizes stealth tech.

 

Since GCI doesn't work in MP, and TWS doesn't work under any sort of jamming, Russian planes are at a severe disadvantage when it comes to situational awareness, comparative to the F-15C.

 

I'm fairly certain that the issue is a memory/cpu power one. Barrage jamming creates a indefinitely large number of false contacts, and the radar doesn't have enough RAM and CPU power to build a track file on all of them. As a result it drops out of TWS. Presumably the F-15 radar is smart enough to know its being jammed and reject the false contacts along with the real one that is making them, so it will contine to track other targets while also displying the jammer without building a track on it.

 

I suspect that not all ecm would cause the flanker to lose tws. Deception jamming making just a few false returns would probably cause the radar to act as if the false returns were real aircraft.

[GGTharos]

It builds some form of AoJ track, but I'm not sure how that works internally. It will track any AoJ track like it does TWS contacts, but that's not modeled.

[ShuRugal]

@GGTharos: On the note of this bit here,

Oh not to mention the teleportation lag that makes this game so idiotic

 

I noticed something last night that had never happened to me before. I was flying on a server with a fair amount of AI traffic, and I had an AI F-15 exhibit this behavior. I had always been under the impression that this particular gremlin was a result of the server receiving bad position data from a particular client, and then passing that bad data on to another client. Now, it would make equal sense that the server could send me good position data, but it gets banged up in transit and so i receive a bad contact... but there is one other piece that bothered me: I had engaged several other AI craft (drones and transports) and none of them so much as twitched. Is this only a bug that is possible with PFM (or whatever the acronym is this week) airframes? Is the bug not actually caused by bad positional data between client and server, but bad positional calculating of PFM craft by the server?

 

Also, how difficult (from a technical standpoint) would it be to add a sanity check to position data? At the very least, the client and server should be smart enough to reject movements which are physically impossible, even if it can't be made to distinguish the merely improbable.

[DNice]

That particular radar set is vulnerable. You need an upgrade that came some decades after to deal with it; meanwhile, the F-15 doesn't have any of its TWS capability modeled with respect to ECM (it will track AOJ targets just fine in TWS) ... and that's from aircraft manuals, not brief research.

 

 

 

The F-15C isn't modeled to 20% of its capability right now - you have it incredibly good. The AWACS is usable, but lacks a lot of the RL C&C capability.

 

Other than AIM-120's you're on pretty much even footing: The missiles are all short-ranged and generally happy to miss, F-15's do better in the 'just before WVR' phase, and flankers do better in the WVR phase.

 

I really don't understand the need for the seemingly passive-aggressive reply here. I'm not contending that a 1980's plane should be superior to a 2000 upgrade, god forbid if it is. I just didn't understand the TWS resetting, and that as it stands with this, the F-15C has much better situational awareness, while as soon as the Su-27 STTs, it's open to being flanked, ironically.

 

And this happens due to the fact that GCI isn't implemented in MP, and having developed for MP games in the past, I really don't see how a few radar updates could be so difficult to add to MP, unless they're waiting for overall improved netcode before implementing this, although I don't see it having a great bandwidth effect on the current netcode, it only gets incremental updates anyways. If GCI was properly implemented, there would really be nothing to complain about, in a 1v1 I find the Russian planes to be superior in the sim's current state, but when it comes to a fight involving more than 1 party, the Russians are automatically at a large disadvantage, which is quite unrealistic.

 

And I have no idea how you can say the F-15C is only 20% modeled, are you talking about the flight model? Because look at every system it has implemented, TWS, multiple launch with TWS, AOJ, FLOOD mode, actual working ACS unlike the Su-27 which flies like a sailboat on the rough seas. Since you claim 80% of features are missing, I'm sure you can list 20 more features that are missing, from just some of the 20% modeled features I mentioned...

 

They must be crazy to have developed the F-22 and even considered the F-35, when they have the invincible F-15 :music_whistling:

 

I'm fairly certain that the issue is a memory/cpu power one. Barrage jamming creates a indefinitely large number of false contacts, and the radar doesn't have enough RAM and CPU power to build a track file on all of them. As a result it drops out of TWS. Presumably the F-15 radar is smart enough to know its being jammed and reject the false contacts along with the real one that is making them, so it will contine to track other targets while also displying the jammer without building a track on it.

 

I suspect that not all ecm would cause the flanker to lose tws. Deception jamming making just a few false returns would probably cause the radar to act as if the false returns were real aircraft.

 

Absolutely makes sense, thank you very much for properly explaining this, I just wanted clarification whether the RL counterparts react like those, or this was some bug in the game. If TWS breaks from jamming, then it should, and your 2nd statement absolutely makes sense as well, which is more of what I was expecting, that jamming is moreso relative rather than absolute, and that it wouldn't just automatically reset on any sort of jamming it comes to.

[GGTharos]

I really don't understand the need for the seemingly passive-aggressive reply here.

 

Nothing passive-agressive here, just a bunch of facts. I usually type stuff out in a hurry :)

 

I just didn't understand the TWS resetting, and that as it stands with this, the F-15C has much better situational awareness, while as soon as the Su-27 STTs, it's open to being flanked, ironically.

Right, but so is anyone in STT :)

There was actually talk about two-target engagements with 27Rs and 7F/M's, but neither fighter ever got that (probably for obvious reasons). The F-15 got some situational awareness modes out of those efforts though.

 

And this happens due to the fact that GCI isn't implemented in MP, and having developed for MP games in the past, I really don't see how a few radar updates could be so difficult to add to MP, unless they're waiting for overall improved netcode before implementing this, although I don't see it having a great bandwidth effect on the current netcode, it only gets incremental updates anyways.

Sorry, not sure what you mean by 'radar updates' here. The radars themselves are old school as modeled now and ED doesn't want to spend time on them, but rather do something new.

 

If GCI was properly implemented, there would really be nothing to complain about, in a 1v1 I find the Russian planes to be superior in the sim's current state, but when it comes to a fight involving more than 1 party, the Russians are automatically at a large disadvantage, which is quite unrealistic.

There shouldn't be an advantage in either case, except for WVR. BVR is eagle territory, with estimates of 4-6 flankers lost to each eagle lost.

 

And I have no idea how you can say the F-15C is only 20% modeled, are you talking about the flight model? Because look at every system it has implemented, TWS, multiple launch with TWS, AOJ, FLOOD mode, actual working ACS unlike the Su-27 which flies like a sailboat on the rough seas. Since you claim 80% of features are missing, I'm sure you can list 20 more features that are missing, from just some of the 20% modeled features I mentioned...

I'm talking about the systems. But ok, since you want a list:

 

The RWR is missing contact classification features (eg. brightness indicating the state of an active emitter, dashed lines for faded emitters, relative altitude display, unique sounds for a given emitter and its modes ... )

 

TWS is missing several sub-modes.

TWS is missing actual track memory capability, and that's a huge dead.

TWS is missing any type of target memory ... also a huge deal.

TWS should be able to designate 10 tracks plus display another 16 half-tracks.

The SAM modes are missing.

The RAID mode is missing.

Mini-raster is not implemented.

FLOOD is not well-implemented. It's supposed to activate automatically.

This radar should switch PRFs automatically depending on certain circumstances.

Long range boresight is not implemented.

GACQ is not correctly implemented.

Velocity search mode is missing.

SuperSearch mode is missing.

AACQ modes should be slewable.

MAR bars, missile-fly-out dots and FOM display are missing.

Quick-step and automatic TWS designation functionality is missing.

Relative bearing to selected steerpoint is missing.

SNIFF and BEACON modes are missing.

NCTR is incorrectly implemented.

RGH mode is not implemented.

AOJ ranging mode is missing.

Manual radar engagement mode is missing.

MPCD SIT display is missing.

CMDS programs are missing.

 

And that's just the old stuff, I'm not even getting into data-links, AESA radars and other fun things :)

 

They must be crazy to have developed the F-22 and even considered the F-35, when they have the invincible F-15 :music_whistling:

Imagine the scary things the F-22 and F-35 can do ... Golden Eagles, too.

The devil's in the details though.

Edited February 15, 2016 by GGTharos

[GGTharos]

I noticed something last night that had never happened to me before. I was flying on a server with a fair amount of AI traffic, and I had an AI F-15 exhibit this behavior.

 

The AI F-15 lagged?

 

I had always been under the impression that this particular gremlin was a result of the server receiving bad position data from a particular client, and then passing that bad data on to another client. Now, it would make equal sense that the server could send me good position data, but it gets banged up in transit and so i receive a bad contact... but there is one other piece that bothered me: I had engaged several other AI craft (drones and transports) and none of them so much as twitched. Is this only a bug that is possible with PFM (or whatever the acronym is this week) airframes? Is the bug not actually caused by bad positional data between client and server, but bad positional calculating of PFM craft by the server?

 

AI aircraft don't use PFM though. Things that can affect the position report, IMHO:

 

- Malicious (let's get this one out of the way) tampering with the packets. Whether it's the 'good old' screenshot thing or something even more direct.

- UDP is not reliable, so your packets can arrive out-of-order without a hiccup on either end. A router inbetween can cause them to get messed up

- Packets could be dropped

- The sending computer experiences some hiccup like high disk usage or any other blocking event that causes a micro-freeze and thus lag.

 

So ... it gets complicated :)

 

Also, how difficult (from a technical standpoint) would it be to add a sanity check to position data? At the very least, the client and server should be smart enough to reject movements which are physically impossible, even if it can't be made to distinguish the merely improbable.

 

I think the devs would probably rather rewrite the network protocol instead of bolting stuff onto it ... when that might happen is anyone's guess, but perhaps it'll be something scheduled for when there's work on the dedicated server :)

[gavagai]

TWS in the F-15C is useless compared to TWS in Falcon BMS. The F-15C has one hand tied behind its back.

[DNice]

I'm talking about the systems. But ok, since you want a list:

 

The RWR is missing contact classification features (eg. brightness indicating the state of an active emitter, dashed lines for faded emitters, relative altitude display, unique sounds for a given emitter and its modes ... )

 

TWS is missing several sub-modes.

TWS is missing actual track memory capability, and that's a huge dead.

TWS is missing any type of target memory ... also a huge deal.

TWS should be able to designate 10 tracks plus display another 16 half-tracks.

The SAM modes are missing.

The RAID mode is missing.

Mini-raster is not implemented.

FLOOD is not well-implemented. It's supposed to activate automatically.

This radar should switch PRFs automatically depending on certain circumstances.

Long range boresight is not implemented.

GACQ is not correctly implemented.

Velocity search mode is missing.

SuperSearch mode is missing.

AACQ modes should be slewable.

MAR bars, missile-fly-out dots and FOM display are missing.

Quick-step and automatic TWS designation functionality is missing.

Relative bearing to selected steerpoint is missing.

SNIFF and BEACON modes are missing.

NCTR is incorrectly implemented.

RGH mode is not implemented.

AOJ ranging mode is missing.

Manual radar engagement mode is missing.

MPCD SIT display is missing.

CMDS programs are missing.

 

And that's just the old stuff, I'm not even getting into data-links, AESA radars and other fun things :)

 

Imagine the scary things the F-22 and F-35 can do ... Golden Eagles, too.

The devil's in the details though.

 

Touché :P

 

Couldn't imagine implementing the workload of all those then, more than happy with what ED has modeled so far, goddamn thing seems like a supercomputer, but at the same time, in a simulator these things give a great advantage, without the RL counterpart cost, which is insane maintenance and a lot more systems that can fail.

Edited February 15, 2016 by DNice

[SinusoidDelta]

The FC3 F-15 radar is so far removed from what exists in reality that discussions on accuracy of modes and behavior are superfluous. And GG is only listing whats in the declassified -34, only Eagle Drivers know what the classified -34-1-1-1 or -1-1-2 contains.

 

Basically we got what we got. It's a fun representation, although frustrating. It's difficult to be the underdog and not get upset. But when you win its much more rewarding. I fly the eagle only because it's always been my favorite aircraft. The flight model gives a sense of immersion not offered anywhere else.

[DarkFire]

...

unlike the Su-27 which flies like a sailboat on the rough seas.

...

 

Granted, the Su-27 doesn't have the same degree of carefree handling that the Eagle does, but lots of people seem to believe it's an uncontrollable death machine that does it's malevolent best to kill anyone who has the audacity to sit in the cockpit. I actually thought the same when I came back to FC after the Su-27 got it's PFM, but it simply isn't true.

 

It really is just a matter of stick time. The Su-27 takes a lot longer to become comfortable and proficient at the controls than other aircraft do, but eventually things click together after which it becomes a real pleasure to fly, and no more demanding really than any other DCS aircraft (OK, you have to trim a lot, but meh).

 

Not sure how the Flanker got such a bad reputation with DCS pilots, but it's entirely undeserved.

 

Back on topic, I like the TWS mode in the Flanker because the soft-lock gives you the ability to maintain SA a bit longer before it drops in to STT mode, and the auto-target-following means that you can manoeuvre a bit without having to manually slew the radar scan around which helps positioning before missile launch or before the merge, whichever is relevant.

[DNice]

The TWS is amazing in the Su and especially the MiG, it's just unusable in most cases due to ECM.

[DarkFire]

The TWS is amazing in the Su and especially the MiG, it's just unusable in most cases due to ECM.

 

Sadly true. A lot of pilots seem to turn it on right after takeoff and then just leave it active. Useful for finding them I guess :D

[GGTharos]

They don't even wait for take-off :P