Jammer priority

[Azrayen]

If jamming is very very simplified in its current implementation you might be right.

It is (very very simplified). :)

 

Anyway. Guys. The problem is as follows (my thoughts, nothing official):

 

1/ indeed, given the current state of ECM modelization in DCS, the only option is to have two "power outputs" of ECM:

- one low power that doesn't preclude using the radar

- one high power that precludes using the radar (totally? a bit? how much?)

 

2/ then, assuming it's doable, as all other DCS aircraft have a unique ECM power output (that doesn't jam their own radar), should the Mirage have:

- the same output as the other aircraft as "low" (allowing radar use)

- a super-output as "PCM" => better jammer than any other aircraft in DCS (advantage for the M-2000)

or

- a reduced efficiency jammer as "low" (allowing radar use)

- a normal efficiency jammer (same output as the other aircraft) as "PCM" => but no radar (disadvantage for the M-2000)

 

Knowing that we don't have the data nor the code to accurately simulate even the principles, is it worth the debate?

My answer is no. We must learn to live without a 100% simulation, in particular when ECM is concerned in DCS (or other public sims).

 

Regards,

Az'

[TomCatMucDe]

IFF and encrypted comms can't be modeled realistically either.

[rrohde]

My answer is no. We must learn to live without a 100% simulation, in particular when ECM is concerned in DCS (or other public sims).

 

If one can't simulate - emulate.;)

 

Also, for DCS 2.0, ED might be already working towards improving other simulation aspects, including ECM, and ECCM. But then again, that's pure speculation on my part.