Harlikwin Posted June 25, 2021 Posted June 25, 2021 1 hour ago, FWind said: AWG-9 from F-4X http://aviationarchives.blogspot.com/search?q=F-4 That's for the proposed updated awg10? New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Spurts Posted June 25, 2021 Posted June 25, 2021 1 hour ago, Harlikwin said: That's for the proposed updated awg10? The AWG10 was the WCS for the F-4 Phantom 1
Harlikwin Posted June 25, 2021 Posted June 25, 2021 30 minutes ago, Spurts said: The AWG10 was the WCS for the F-4 Phantom Yeah I know but the article he pulled that from was talking about an updated AWG10 New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Spurts Posted June 25, 2021 Posted June 25, 2021 25 minutes ago, Harlikwin said: Yeah I know but the article he pulled that from was talking about an updated AWG10 I misunderstood you then. My apologies.
FWind Posted June 25, 2021 Posted June 25, 2021 3 hours ago, Harlikwin said: That's for the proposed updated awg10? just Vl and Vt
Harlikwin Posted June 26, 2021 Posted June 26, 2021 2 minutes ago, sublime said: Wait so they were launching aim54s from a f4? 7F I think. New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
sublime Posted June 26, 2021 Posted June 26, 2021 Oh I looked at the chart and figured since it was F4 X at the top etc etc Carry on I have nothing valuable to add this conversations a lil above me
gyrovague Posted June 26, 2021 Posted June 26, 2021 On 6/24/2021 at 1:40 PM, Lurker said: Can we get a bit of clarification here? Does that mean that Jester will not be able to set the switch automatically, I.E. Jester will not be able to calculate the closure and set the switch accordingly, but that the pilot in front has to tell Jester to set the switch, otherwise it will always be in nose aspect position? Yes, pilot will need to ask Jester to set it. We could consider making Jester decide in future, but that's far more work. 1 ____________ Heatblur Simulations [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
gyrovague Posted June 26, 2021 Posted June 26, 2021 On 6/24/2021 at 6:13 PM, Golo said: It should do something according to the manual: In the short pulse STT modes the aspect switch sets the system tracking mode to the corresponding echo edge or centroid to counteract countermeasures like chaff and specific jammer modes. However that works. That effect of the aspect switch on P-STT behaviour is not modelled in DCS F-14. ____________ Heatblur Simulations [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Harlikwin Posted June 27, 2021 Posted June 27, 2021 49 minutes ago, gyrovague said: That effect of the aspect switch on P-STT behaviour is not modelled in DCS F-14. So... What effect does it have? New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
gyrovague Posted June 27, 2021 Posted June 27, 2021 11 hours ago, Harlikwin said: So... What effect does it have? Pretty much what @Golo said above, tracking the leading edge, centroid, or trailing edge of pulse returns in P-STT. ____________ Heatblur Simulations [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Harlikwin Posted June 27, 2021 Posted June 27, 2021 2 hours ago, gyrovague said: Pretty much what @Golo said above, tracking the leading edge, centroid, or trailing edge of pulse returns in P-STT. I see, that would be neat if we had an actual ECM model in DCS. 1 New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Kula66 Posted June 27, 2021 Posted June 27, 2021 So switching to beam mode gives no advantage when trying to track a beaming target - in DCS?
BreaKKer Posted June 28, 2021 Posted June 28, 2021 Only was able to pick the AS-4 Kitchen up in Pulse at 48nm. Couldn't ever see it in any PD mode regardless of how slow I got. Real pain in the ass if you ask me. 1 BreaKKer CAG and Commanding Officer of: Carrier Air Wing Five // VF-154 Black Knights
Harlikwin Posted June 28, 2021 Posted June 28, 2021 8 minutes ago, BreaKKer said: Only was able to pick the AS-4 Kitchen up in Pulse at 48nm. Couldn't ever see it in any PD mode regardless of how slow I got. Real pain in the ass if you ask me. That doesn't seem that unrealistic to me. New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
BreaKKer Posted June 28, 2021 Posted June 28, 2021 30 minutes ago, Harlikwin said: That doesn't seem that unrealistic to me. I agree, it seems realistic in the Pulse sense, but the PD aspect switch thing makes it a real pain. Might as well just shoot a sparrow at the missile, at the range I had to, for the phoenix to reliably track. The Tu-22 could have just gotten 80nm closer because he knows I won't be able to do jack crap to his missiles til ~20nm BreaKKer CAG and Commanding Officer of: Carrier Air Wing Five // VF-154 Black Knights
Harlikwin Posted June 29, 2021 Posted June 29, 2021 1 hour ago, BreaKKer said: I agree, it seems realistic in the Pulse sense, but the PD aspect switch thing makes it a real pain. Might as well just shoot a sparrow at the missile, at the range I had to, for the phoenix to reliably track. The Tu-22 could have just gotten 80nm closer because he knows I won't be able to do jack crap to his missiles til ~20nm Most people don't think 60's technology be like it is, but it do... New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
captain_dalan Posted June 29, 2021 Posted June 29, 2021 11 hours ago, Harlikwin said: That doesn't seem that unrealistic to me. The problem is with much slower targets as it currently stands. At first i though i was the problem during the last PvE session. Then last night, instant action Gulf Map, Beyond Visual Range mission. Kept losing all the locks, PD-STT and TWS, even at mach 0.7-0.8 at 15000ft. I assumed ED has implemented some space-age AI techniques and the computer controlled bandits now performed some top-notch notching maneuvers. I'm talking before actual lunch maneuvers. Then i clicked F2 and decided to observe them, you know, maybe i can learn something. Nope, they were flying straight! Then i jumped into the RIO seat, set the switch to nose. No more lock loss. I actually prefer the STT locks now, at least with good SA. Unfortunately i can't jump in the RIO seat when in MP Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache
Biggus Posted June 29, 2021 Posted June 29, 2021 (edited) Just in reference to the AWG-10, the 2900 closing was in pulse only. PD was 1800. Source is the F-4B/N/J tactical manual. The 1964 document referenced earlier might have been a bit optimistic, but given the date I'm not surprised. I'd pay very little attention to the F-4X proposed performance otherwise. An on-paper-only variant of a radar that would never be produced, referencing a Sparrow variant that was still on the drawing board. Edit: I've attached a snippet from NAVAIR 01-245FDB-1T, page 1-219. Edited June 29, 2021 by Biggus Added relevant section. 2 3
FWind Posted June 29, 2021 Posted June 29, 2021 (edited) 6 hours ago, Biggus said: Just in reference to the AWG-10, the 2900 closing was in pulse only. PD was 1800. Source is the F-4B/N/J tactical manual. The 1964 document referenced earlier might have been a bit optimistic, but given the date I'm not surprised. I'd pay very little attention to the F-4X proposed performance otherwise. An on-paper-only variant of a radar that would never be produced, referencing a Sparrow variant that was still on the drawing board. Edit: I've attached a snippet from NAVAIR 01-245FDB-1T, page 1-219. 2900 closing in PD form F-4K，not form F-4X.http://aviationarchives.blogspot.com/2016/01/royal-navy-f-4k-phantom-ii-report.html?m=1 Edited June 29, 2021 by FWind
BreaKKer Posted June 29, 2021 Posted June 29, 2021 Makes me wonder if the early stages of the AWG-9 had 1800 KTAS and later software updated to something higher? BreaKKer CAG and Commanding Officer of: Carrier Air Wing Five // VF-154 Black Knights
Naquaii Posted June 29, 2021 Posted June 29, 2021 The Doppler filters are not a software thing. The doppler filter number and ranges depend on the actual electronics in the radar. The documentation we have is quite clear on the -1800 to 1800 knots range. 1 2
Harlikwin Posted June 29, 2021 Posted June 29, 2021 21 minutes ago, Naquaii said: The Doppler filters are not a software thing. The doppler filter number and ranges depend on the actual electronics in the radar. The documentation we have is quite clear on the -1800 to 1800 knots range. Yup, the AWG-9 is not a "software defined radar" Follow on question, is this speed limit only in PD or does it apply to pulse as well? New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1) Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Naquaii Posted June 29, 2021 Posted June 29, 2021 8 minutes ago, Harlikwin said: Yup, the AWG-9 is not a "software defined radar" Follow on question, is this speed limit only in PD or does it apply to pulse as well? Only PD, Pulse mode does not use the filters at all.
Recommended Posts