Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • ED Team
Posted

We are still looking into this, but there is some discussion that it is working as intended for the version we have. When we know more we will let you know.

  • Thanks 1

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, PIMAX Crystal

Posted

I can't believe someone really thinks a western 1980s RWR would only show search OR track radar, but not both, when every other same-era RWR does just that, where the search button let's you display both. 

 

But looking at the long bug list that has never been addressed by ED, I have pretty much given up on the F5. It will not get any improvements any more. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Posted
15 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

We are still looking into this, but there is some discussion that it is working as intended for the version we have. When we know more we will let you know.

Why not incorporate the user fix until it is proven otherwise? The fix makes it operate in accordance with other RWR's of the era. However, if the An/ALR-87 is someday proven to be the exception, it can be easily reverted.

  • Like 1

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Posted

They think the RWR would hide a threating emitter with search mode selected..

 

In order for an RWR to filter out tracking emitters and only display search emitters, it would first need to process and classify all the emitters it detects. 

 

So they must believe that the RWR knows there's a threat emitter tracking you, since in order to filter it out it had to process it and determine it was a tracking radar and not a search radar, but is choosing to hide that information from the pilot.

 

 

 

On the other hand, they think having a button to hide air traffic control radars and long range search radars ("S" emitters), which would otherwise clutter the RWR scope, is the less logical usage. 

  • Like 5
  • 7 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 3 weeks later...
  • 4 months later...
Posted

If I'm reading today's 2.8 patch changelog correctly, this mod will no longer be compliant with IC. 

  • Like 2

Discord: @dsplayer

Setup: R7 7800X3D, 64GB 6000Mhz, Saitek/Logitech X56 HOTAS, TrackIR + TrackClipPro

Resources I've Made: F-4E RWR PRF Sound Player | DCS DTC Web Editor

Mods I've Made: F-14 Factory Clean Cockpit Mod | Modern F-14 Weapons Mod | Iranian F-14 Weapons Pack | F-14B Nozzle Percentage Mod + Label Fix | AIM-23 Hawk Mod for F-14 

  • 2 weeks later...
Posted

Are they seriously just never going to fix this? Didn't they say they were going to take a 2nd pass at the f-5 like just a year ago? I don't understand why they continue to ignore stuff like this. It's probably an incredibly simple fix. Considering there's a mod that fixes the thing.

  • 3 months later...
Posted

Does it break IC now? If that's the case, could we please keep one thread open about the issue in the Bug report, because by the looks of it, every thread was closed while the issue remains...

The F-5E in DCS is the only "Bluefor" plane with an RWR that either warns you about a radar "searching" but not firing at you, or "firing" but not searching. And it looks like a simple misunderstanding of how it should work by the dev team.
 

  • Like 2

HRP | Derby
"Wardog, launch!"

  • 1 month later...
Posted (edited)

Maybe someone can educate me about the difference between a search radar and a track radar. When an f18 is in rws mode is that search? And when it locks you then it becomes a track radar? What is tws then? What scenarios would benefit from either rwr mode? Should i press the ‘s’ button when i get an awacs call of bogeys headed my way?

 

i just dont know how to use that button either with or without the mod.

Edited by skypickle

4930K @ 4.5, 32g ram, TitanPascal

Posted
On 3/15/2023 at 11:07 AM, skypickle said:

Maybe someone can educate me about the difference between a search radar and a track radar. When an f18 is in rws mode is that search? And when it locks you then it becomes a track radar? What is tws then? What scenarios would benefit from either rwr mode? Should i press the ‘s’ button when i get an awacs call of bogeys headed my way?

 

i just dont know how to use that button either with or without the mod.

 

Yes, any more that doesn't have the antenna pointed straight at you (for MSAs) is a search mode.  THis includes TWS.   It's Track while Scan, primary is the scan.  AESA performs SWT instead, because it can.

The way it should be interpreted though (the way it is NOT in the game) is that the button allows you to see surveillance radars - ie. the list of radars in your RWR database marked as 'these look for things'.   In this respect, an SA-6/11/15 search radar should not be considered as a surveillance radar, since detection by it can be expected to lead to the corresponding track radar to attack in the very near future.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted

@GGTharos thank you for your explanation. But maybe you could clarify "AESA performs SWT instead, because it can." I figured out that AESA is an active electronically scanned array (AESA) Something that would be in a modern jet. But what is SWT?

I understand what you said about SA 6/11/15 and that it's appearrance on the RWR after I push 'search' is a high level threat.

Also, you alluded to how DCS is not what you described. Now that is confusing to me. What is DCS doing in its current revision?


The sense I am getting is that I should routinely push 'search' as soon as the jet is airborne.

4930K @ 4.5, 32g ram, TitanPascal

  • 3 months later...
  • 3 months later...
  • 2 months later...
Posted

Such a shame that this is still an issue. I loved flying the F-5 with this mod, and the erroneous interpretation of the default RWR logic is all that stops me from recommending it to others. I'd really love to see this longstanding inaccuracy corrected.

  • Like 1
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...