MBot Posted August 3, 2018 Share Posted August 3, 2018 The 1L13 and 55G6 EWR units can detect target at ranges of up to 350 km but the scripting function getDetectedTargets() only returns targets within 120 km, which corresponds to the detection range ring as displayed in the mission editor. At first I suspected that getDetectedTargets() is bound to return targets only within the ME range ring distance and tests with some air defense radar initially confirmed this. But further tests with ships (Pyotr Velikiy) showed the function can return targets beyond the range ring. So the problem seems to be related to the EWR units. This issue with getDetectedTargets() causes mission scripts used for radar early warning to not working correctly. This is a continuation of a open alpha bug report from last year: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3117499 Demonstration mission attached.getDetectedTargets.miz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimes Posted August 4, 2018 Share Posted August 4, 2018 Yeah the bug report created from that thread is still open :/ Will update its information and bump it. The right man in the wrong place makes all the difference in the world. Current Projects: Grayflag Server, Scripting Wiki Useful Links: Mission Scripting Tools MIST-(GitHub) MIST-(Thread) SLMOD, Wiki wishlist, Mission Editing Wiki!, Mission Building Forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerbilskij Posted October 25, 2018 Share Posted October 25, 2018 (edited) Apparently the problem of the deection range is still there, I tried to create a mission wit the 1L13 working as GCI and the detection range for a 4-ship flight of F5s flying at 6000m was about 150km, corresponding to the detection range shown on map, and far less than the 350km detection range stated in the encyclopedia (and confirmed by external references). UPDATE: After changing the unit detected range to 300,000 from 120,000 targets get detected by 1L13 at ca. 225km Edited October 25, 2018 by Gerbilskij Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBot Posted June 24, 2019 Author Share Posted June 24, 2019 Any chance this could have been looked at in the mean time? This is still a big obstacles to creating realistic ground controlled intercepts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBot Posted June 14, 2020 Author Share Posted June 14, 2020 Any news on this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimes Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Unfortunately no. The right man in the wrong place makes all the difference in the world. Current Projects: Grayflag Server, Scripting Wiki Useful Links: Mission Scripting Tools MIST-(GitHub) MIST-(Thread) SLMOD, Wiki wishlist, Mission Editing Wiki!, Mission Building Forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBot Posted June 26, 2020 Author Share Posted June 26, 2020 As the latest newsletter talks about new EWRs, might this have a chance to get looked at in the process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northstar98 Posted June 26, 2020 Share Posted June 26, 2020 I sure hope so. Plus, I really hope that in the future we get more modern long-range EWRs, I mean, BLUFOR currently have 0 and REDFOR only have 1 that's graphically up to scratch-ish (antenna is perfect, the truck it's mounted on though...) and another that's wholly non-functional eye-candy. Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk. Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas. System: GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV. Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBot Posted October 24, 2020 Author Share Posted October 24, 2020 EWR units not returning targets beyond 120 km continues to be a major obstacle for GCI scripts. Considering that the range rings for both EWR units appear at arbitrary 120 km, which is about 1/3 of the actual range of these units, I still think this is probably a simple database error. I would really like to have this fixed and am waiting for this for 3.5 years now, since pretty much all of my missions rely on EWR controlled ground alert interceptors. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBot Posted November 4, 2020 Author Share Posted November 4, 2020 Interesting, the new Freya EWR released in today's patch is not limited to 120 km (it has 160 km range). Again it seems that 1L13 and 55G6 are set up incorrectly. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBot Posted July 21, 2021 Author Share Posted July 21, 2021 Any chance that this ever gets fixed? I noted the new 19J6 Tin Shield radar is now in the game. I had high hopes that this new radar might be an usable replacement for the flawed 1L13 and 55G6 EWR. Unfortunately the 19J6 has only a range of 150 km (which is correct) and is not set up to accept an EWR task in DCS. As such it is unfortunately not viable as a new GCI radar and we still depend on the 1L13 and 55G6 to get their script detection range fixed. I am still convinced this is a one minuted DB fix, it's just that no one at ED bothered to look at it. Waiting for 4+ years now. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow KT Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 I feel your pain. 2 'Shadow' Everybody gotta be offended and take it personally now-a-days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dorianR666 Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 (edited) +1 12 hours ago, MBot said: I am still convinced this is a one minuted DB fix, These take the longest to fix in DCS. Edited July 21, 2021 by dorianR666 CPU: AMD Ryzen 5 1600X GPU: AMD RX 580 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimes Posted July 23, 2021 Share Posted July 23, 2021 The 19J6 is the search radar for the SA-5, and just like any other sam it doesn't have the EWR task available. Most likely it is tied to the value assigned to GT.WS.maxTargetDetectionRange for each radar. I'm trying another attack vector by making bug reports for each unit just asking to adjust that and another value. Lets face it even without considering the scripting function they are a good 50% shorter range than they should be. Kinda hoping that "this is a problem that should be fixed easily" might in turn fix the function. The right man in the wrong place makes all the difference in the world. Current Projects: Grayflag Server, Scripting Wiki Useful Links: Mission Scripting Tools MIST-(GitHub) MIST-(Thread) SLMOD, Wiki wishlist, Mission Editing Wiki!, Mission Building Forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow KT Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 Quite interesting that they have labeled it as a SA5 radar, when it has been used with SA-10 and in general as early warning 'Shadow' Everybody gotta be offended and take it personally now-a-days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northstar98 Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 (edited) On 7/23/2021 at 9:23 AM, Grimes said: The 19J6 is the search radar for the SA-5, and just like any other sam it doesn't have the EWR task available. It absolutely isn't, it's a search/acquisition RADAR for the SA-10, superseded by the 5N64 [NATO: "Big Bird"]. We have the S-300PS [NATO: SA-10b "Grumble B"] so the RADARs that are appropriate is either the 5N59S [NATO: "Tin Shield B"] or 5N64S [NATO: "Big Bird B"] for 3D acquisition/search, the 5N63S [NATO: "Flap Lid B"] for target-tracking and fire-control, and the 5N66 [NATO: "Clam Shell"] for 2D, low-altitude acquisition/search. The SA-5 on the other hand should use the P-14/5N84A [NATO: "Tall King C"], for acquisition/search, which is paired with a PRV-13 [NATO: "Odd Group"] for height-finding. Obviously there's the 5N62 [NATO: "Square Pair"] for target tracking and fire-control. Alternatively, there is the 5N69 [NATO: "Big Back"], for acquisiton/search (which is a newer, 3D RADAR), in place of the P-14. Both the P-14/5N84A and the 5N69 would also make for brilliant EW/GCI RADARs, and AFAIK, they were used as such, and both have a 400km intrumented range, which is much more appropriate for the SA-5 than the Tin Shield's 150km range. If we get these RADARs (and we absolutely should seeing as we're getting the SA-5), then they should be able to return targets much further out than 120km. 39 minutes ago, Shadow KT said: Quite interesting that they have labeled it as a SA5 radar, when it has been used with SA-10 and in general as early warning I'm pretty sure it's only ever been used as an acquisition RADAR associated with the SA-10. For early warning the P-14, P-35/37, 5N69 and later the Nebo (Sky) family of RADARs are much more common as air-surveillance/EW/GCI RADARs. Edited July 25, 2021 by Northstar98 Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk. Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas. System: GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV. Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arikaj Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 I am just gonna follow this in order to see if this ever gets fixed feeling the pain with you my man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grimes Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 7 hours ago, Northstar98 said: It absolutely isn't, it's a search/acquisition RADAR for the SA-10, superseded by the 5N64 [NATO: "Big Bird"]. My fault for not having "in game" in my statement because that is all I was referring to. The right man in the wrong place makes all the difference in the world. Current Projects: Grayflag Server, Scripting Wiki Useful Links: Mission Scripting Tools MIST-(GitHub) MIST-(Thread) SLMOD, Wiki wishlist, Mission Editing Wiki!, Mission Building Forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northstar98 Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Grimes said: My fault for not having "in game" in my statement because that is all I was referring to. No worries But the game designation is absolutely incorrect (and makes no sense whatsoever, given that the maximum range of the 5V28 is ~240km, but the Tin Shield only has a range of 150km) Edited July 25, 2021 by Northstar98 Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk. Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas. System: GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV. Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBot Posted October 24, 2021 Author Share Posted October 24, 2021 On 7/23/2021 at 10:23 AM, Grimes said: I'm trying another attack vector by making bug reports for each unit just asking to adjust that and another value. Lets face it even without considering the scripting function they are a good 50% shorter range than they should be. Kinda hoping that "this is a problem that should be fixed easily" might in turn fix the function. Thread can be marked as resolved, thank you very much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now