TWS just a glorified RWS? Is it like this, or just not fully implemented?

[J20Stronk]

It's crazy how much people haven't talked about this.

 

TWS in the JF-17 for the moment displays un-bugged contacts as hits similar to RWS but with a heading vector, rather than an actual moving trackfile.

 

Now, I don't know if it actually is like that in the real aircraft, but this isn't really "tracking while scanning".

 

I imagine every contact in TWS being displayed as if they were bugged as HPT/SPT, minus the aiming symbology.

 

Targets would move around the scope in real time and update position and vector as the radar sweeps over them. And as you make maneuvers, the radar should shift the position of contacts based on your movements without the need to re-scan them to find their next relative position on the scope.

 

That is how TWS mode works in the F-teen modules, even in the FC3 planes, albeit with perfect accuracy due to their lo-fi nature.

 

Is this correct behavior, or is TWS mode not fully implemented yet?

[L0op8ack]

they do move in real time, but no radar contact, no precise position.

contact positions are predicted with last speed measured, without acceleration information,

so the predicted positions are not 100 pecent precise, especially the target have accelarations.

 

 

this implementation make continuous mid-course guidance more important, than ID-guide implementation, you can not shoot and run at a very long distance.

[J20Stronk]

they do move in real time, but no radar contact, no precise position.

contact positions are predicted with last speed measured, without acceleration information,

so the predicted positions are not 100 pecent precise, especially the target have accelarations.

 

 

this implementation make continuous mid-course guidance more important, than ID-guide implementation, you can not shoot and run at a very long distance.

 

No no, I'm talking about when you have no bugged targets while in TWS.

 

I believe every detected contact should move in real-time just as they do now if you were to bug them as HPT/SPT, minus the aiming cues and HPT info, without the need to do so. At least, that's how TWS works in all other aircraft.

 

As it is right now, without any bugged contacts, TWS just displays trackfiles as if they were hits in RWS with the addition of a heading vector of the target. It's not "Tracking While Scaning", just "Scaning" really.

Edited September 10, 2020 by J20Stronk

[AeriaGloria]

I always assumed each unbugged target in TWS was the result of atleast two scans, and only RWS had raw square hits for each scan, maybe I was wrong

[J20Stronk]

I always assumed each unbugged target in TWS was the result of atleast two scans, and only RWS had raw square hits for each scan, maybe I was wrong

 

As it turns out, if you detect something in RWS or VS and use S2Left to switch to TWS, you will see the hit in that mode and be able to lock onto it without the radar scanning for it.

 

That is a different problem though, since a raw RWS hit, or unranged VS hit should not be inter-usable between modes

 

Back on topic; in my experience with other modules with TWS, all unbugged targets always moved in real time as if you were locking them in SAM or STT. Hi-fi modules with half decent modeling would of course receive updates every time the radar picked the target back up again.

 

The JF-17 is the only plane in which TWS basically acts as an RWS, but with the added benefit of knowing where the target is heading. Unbugged contacts never move on the display, they always appear on the position where the radar spotted them/ re-scanned them.

[AeriaGloria]

As it turns out, if you detect something in RWS or VS and use S2Left to switch to TWS, you will see the hit in that mode and be able to lock onto it without the radar scanning for it.

 

That is a different problem though, since a raw RWS hit, or unranged VS hit should not be inter-usable between modes

 

Back on topic; in my experience with other modules with TWS, all unbugged targets always moved in real time as if you were locking them in SAM or STT. Hi-fi modules with half decent modeling would of course receive updates every time the radar picked the target back up again.

 

The JF-17 is the only plane in which TWS basically acts as an RWS, but with the added benefit of knowing where the target is heading. Unbugged contacts never move on the display, they always appear on the position where the radar spotted them/ re-scanned them.

 

For bugged target with long update rate scan, I never see heading change( never see heading “snap” to position when scan goes over target and updates info), but position always changes or jumps every scan ever since they added update rate affecting lock. Maybe I’ll need a friend to try a hard turn right after a scan while I have them bugged and check. In other words it seems to me heading updates instantly but not position. I guess I never looked close enough to see if the bugs were moving closer in real time and the position update movement was always in their direction of travel.

 

I still wake up sometimes and wonder, why would I use one mode over the other. The differences are there but I have never figured out the reasoning for RWS to have these features and TWS to have those. In western planes it always seems to be RWS is only for single target attack and TWS is for dual, but our RWS with ASM and NAM modes can do two targets just like TWS. The RWS can have a shorter or longer update rate then TWS, and has the raw hits displayed. TWS has a higher elevation coverage by larger bar spacing and less azimuth coverage in 25 and 10 degree modes, and has fixed number of bars for each azimuth setting.

 

To me it seems, TWS is better once you find someone as a default setting for most attacks, but RWS has more customization. TWS will help you fight two people with large elevation difference or helping you find someone with large altitude difference, but RWS is better if your two targets have large azimuth separation.

 

And on ASM/NAM, I always read the introductory note that NAM would require completely manual elevation and azimuth control and wouldn’t follow a bugged HPT target. I thought maybe it hasn’t been introduced yet or maybe I interpreted it wrong. If NAM really doesn’t follow HPT and needs manual antenna control, then with only ASM which goes straight to 15 degrees within 20nm, that would mean that TWS is intended for multi target attack with RWS being intended for one target and additional SA capability.

 

I would expect the closer bar spacing in RWS to make locks more reliable and regained more often, but I haven’t noticed a difference, maybe I never looked close enough and didn’t try on extreme enough conditions

 

I know some of that is a digression from your OP, but it reminded me about these questions of how RWS and TWS be used best

Edited September 13, 2020 by AeriaGloria
Jesus that was long I’m so sorry I love this plane so much