The Radar Lock Problem

[Zeus67]

Hello folks.

 

Today I was checking the super radar (no lock loss) problem. I got bad news for you: all the super radar code has been deleted.

 

While testing a very rare bug appeared and I then checked with ED on how the radar behaves when locking a target in STT mode.

 

Well, I found out that there is a built-in range limiter for radar lock. The radar STT lock range is 85% the value of the target detection range as defined by the radar. It is a function of RCS, PRF, etc.

 

This is what happens when you try to lock a target into STT mode:

1. The radar checks the target detection status which include a bunch of flags. Among those flags is the can_be_locked, which is self explaining.

2. If the radar check says that can_be_locked is true then you get your STT lock.

3. If on the other hand the radar check says that can_be_locked is false, then the radar drops the contact and my anti-CTDs checks create a series of situations where the "lock is lost".

 

As I said before, this is a built-in check that I cannot modify. All I know is that the internal check gives a max STT lock range and if the contact is beyond that range then no STT lock is possible.

 

This explained some problems I had and thus I had to delete a bunch of code lines, basically anti-CTDs checks because they are now superfluous.

 

The radar behavior was changed to take into account the built-in radar check.

 

Now, if you try to go from TWS to STT (or if you are in CCM) the M-2000C radar will verify that by ED's standards your target is within STT lock range. If it is, then it will make the change to STT. If it is not, then it will remain in TWS until it gets within STT range.

 

Again, I cannot control this range. It is calculated internally by ED's radar. I don't even know this range since it changes dynamically. I can only check that the RDI radar lock parameters fall inside ED's radar lock parameters.

 

I made a test against a C-17 flying steadily away from me. I could detect it at nearly 40 nmiles but it was impossible for me to do a STT lock until it was at about 26 nmiles.

 

TWS lock is unaffected by this check, because RWS and TWS behavior is different from STT.

 

This new behavior will take some polishing but this is how it will work from today onwards.

[Voodooflies]

I made a test against a C-17 flying steadily away from me. I could detect it at nearly 40 nmiles but it was impossible for me to do a STT lock until it was at about 26 nmiles.

 

Fair enough, that leaves still plenty of room for targets management. No one does fox at 26nm onboard the M2KC so no worries by my side. :pilotfly:

[Drona]

Nice, thanks for the update.

[Zeus67]

Fair enough, that leaves still plenty of room for targets management. No one does fox at 26nm onboard the M2KC so no worries by my side. :pilotfly:

Remember that this is against a big fat target like the C-17. It can be lower for a smaller target like a SU-27, Mig-29 or F-15.

 

I'll make other tests against fighters flying head on.

[Rlaxoxo]

What's the maximum STT lock for a big target for Mirage IRL?

Does anyone know?

[Zeus67]

What's the maximum STT lock for a big target for Mirage IRL?

Does anyone know?

 

I've been told that for a C-17 in a heads-on aspect (my test was tail) detection range should be 70 nm. But in this case I am in ED's hands, it will be whatever they have determined it should be.

 

My main problem is that I have no control in STT unlike RWS and TWS. In RWS and TWS, all I need is for the radar to give me contacts and I handle them.

STT is special, since this is the mode that the missiles use to track targets. So all I can do is tell the radar "this is the target" and then basically saying "sic Fido!" to the missiles when I launch them. ED is in control of everything from the moment the radar is in STT mode.

[gospadin]

This will be an even bigger issue for the upcoming F-14, hopefully ED fixes it soon!

[Rlaxoxo]

I've been told that for a C-17 in a heads-on aspect (my test was tail) detection range should be 70 nm. But in this case I am in ED's hands, it will be whatever they have determined it should be.

 

My main problem is that I have no control in STT unlike RWS and TWS. In RWS and TWS, all I need is for the radar to give me contacts and I handle them.

STT is special, since this is the mode that the missiles use to track targets. So all I can do is tell the radar "this is the target" and then basically saying "sic Fido!" to the missiles when I launch them. ED is in control of everything from the moment the radar is in STT mode.

 

When You shoot Missile in DCS

[ame]

[/ame]

[Voodooflies]

When You shoot Missile in DCS

 

OMG !! I litterally fell of my chair laughing ! :megalol:

[Hedhunta]

This will be an even bigger issue for the upcoming F-14, hopefully ED fixes it soon!

 

No kidding. If they don't fix that the Aim54's will basically be worthless.

[Britchot]

Your constant clarification and freedom of information has me hooked on your products. I picked up the Mirage because it looked nice, it is now among my favorite ships in the fleet.

 

Thank you.

[jojo]

No kidding. If they don't fix that the Aim54's will basically be worthless.

 

Do you need STT to shoot AIM-54 Phoenix ?

I don't think so but just to check...

[Skjold]

Thanks for the heads up! Seems liike a limiting system that could do with some improvements.

[Zeus67]

Your constant clarification and freedom of information has me hooked on your products. I picked up the Mirage because it looked nice, it is now among my favorite ships in the fleet.

 

Thank you.

 

Thank you. I wish it was altruism. I found out a long time ago that telling people the problems and possible solutions of a project does tend to help me in the long run. So I do this for selfish reasons: so I don't have you with pitchforks and torches at my door. :P

 

It takes too long to heat the oil and you can't imagine the hourly rate of your standard archer/crossbowman. :music_whistling:

 

And my GF is still giving me grief over the murder holes.

 

Thanks for the heads up! Seems liike a limiting system that could do with some improvements.

 

Unfortunately it is not mine so it will be up to ED to improve it.

[Zeus67]

On a more serious note:

I've been checking the info that I have and I think that I can place the following legend in the HUD:

PSIC with a crossing bar. That way you will be notified that STT is not possible. The legend will remain visible for about 5 seconds.

[nomdeplume]

^ that sounds good, some kind of indication that it tried to lock but was unable to would be quite useful.

 

Have you had a chance to look into the accuracy of target information when it's being tracked in PID mode? I haven't done any specific testing in the latest open alpha we have, but I'm fairly sure I noticed on the weekend when I was pursuing a damaged Su-25 that the closing speed reported in PID was very different to that reported in PIC.

[Andrei]

I was so surprised by this implementation that I dared to ask a question on the russian side of the forums. Thankfully Chizh was kind enough to reply here.

 

Radar code dates back from last century. It's a hardcoded value cause the code is from Flanker series and probably Flanker 1. To solve this RAZBAM should contact our lead developer (unless they have already done so).

 

Flanker 1.. OMG.. :)

Edited August 2, 2016 by Andrei

[T_A]

I guess that`s the price RAZBAM of being the first and only 4th gen fighter in DCS.

i wonder how LNS are handling the situation with their F-14 (if they even got as far as implementing RADAR)

[QuiGon]

Thanks for the heads up Zeus, I really appreciate it :thumbup:

 

On a more serious note:

I've been checking the info that I have and I think that I can place the following legend in the HUD:

PSIC with a crossing bar. That way you will be notified that STT is not possible. The legend will remain visible for about 5 seconds.

Does the real aircraft has something like that?

[ZHeN]

Well, I found out that there is a built-in range limiter for radar lock. The radar STT lock range is 85% the value of the target detection range as defined by the radar.

Is this the main concern ?

 

if so, then can you elaborate on this one?

for example, I'm flying @ 40k feet, seeing nothing in front of me, but my target is in front of me, say at the 25nm range @ 5k feet alt. Descending my antenna doesn't help, still nothing on VTB, so I put my nose down, go lower and finally see my target on my radar at the range of 10nm. Does this mean I'll only be able to STT it @ 8.5nm ?

Edited August 2, 2016 by ZHeN

[Andrei]

Is this the main concern ?

 

if so, then can you elaborate on this one?

for example, I'm flying @ 40k feet, seeing nothing in front of me, but my target is in front of me, say at the 25nm range @ 5k feet alt. Descending my antenna doesn't help, still nothing on VTB, so I put my nose down, go lower and finally see my target on my radar at the range of 10nm. Does this mean I'll only be able to STT it @ 8.5nm ?

 

I don't think so. Reading Zeus' original post it looks like there's theoretical maximum of discovery range for a given aircraft taking into account other conditions e.g. RCS, PRF, aspect etc. Say for MiG-21 it's 20nm. Thus it can be locked only at ~17nm. Again, we should be taking about max ranges, not actual.

 

If you failed to detect it earlier and you finally saw it around 10nm, you should be able to get a hard lock and fire away immediatley.

[ZHeN]

yea, thanks Andrei, that's what I wanted to know

[Azrayen]

Well, this is consistent with test we made on FC aircraft and comparisons with the M-2000C.

 

As Zeus said, the distances are function of fighter(radar) and target(RCS).

 

For example, from above-mentionned tests:

Situation = both aircraft @ 8000m (above sea to avoid ground clutter/mountains), head on aspect (+radar in HPRF for the fighter), non-maneuvering, no ECM. Distances in km.

1/ different fighters, same target:

[TABLE]Fighter | Target | Detection_distance | STT_distance

F-15C | Tu-22 | 219 | 185

MiG-29S | Tu-22 | 138 | 116[/TABLE]

=> The F-15C radar is more powerful than the MiG-29's one.

 

2/ same fighter, different targets:

[TABLE]Fighter | Target | Detection_distance | STT_distance

F-15C | Tu-22 | 219 | 185

F-15C | MiG-29S | 117 | 99[/TABLE]

=> The RCS of the Tu-22 is larger than the MiG-29's one.

=> indeed, RCS of targets in DCS:

Tu-22: 60m²

MiG-29S: 5m²

 

QED ;)

[T_A]

Interesting , i`d love to see the same comparison with M2000C

[droopy114]

Okay, but considering the relatively short range for firing the S530, i guess it's not really a problem for STT (PIC) lock...i usually use RWS (PID) mod, and when in range, STT. it's another problem if there are limitations for detecting targets of course.