54 not guiding on track-hold contacts.

[Golo]

For the record Im against "just disabling it".

If you can make see clutter a thing that is fine. From a little I know about a radar I know water likes to gobble up radar energy depending on wavelength probably. Also depending on a sea state and the type of surface target, if the reflection of the target is stronger than ambient clutter from sea you should still be able to pick up the the surface target from clutter. It would be cool if we could have various strengths of clutter depending on a sea state. 

Also how is PD search with MLC OFF different from pulse search, that using PD should not be a thing? If you should get surface clutter in PD with MLC OFF you should also get in in P, so both should be useless in anything other than rudimentary ground mapping. As I noted before I get NO clutter from sea surface whatsoever in both P and PD with MLC OFF.       

[Naquaii]

11 hours ago, Golo said:

For the record Im against "just disabling it".

If you can make see clutter a thing that is fine. From a little I know about a radar I know water likes to gobble up radar energy depending on wavelength probably. Also depending on a sea state and the type of surface target, if the reflection of the target is stronger than ambient clutter from sea you should still be able to pick up the the surface target from clutter. It would be cool if we could have various strengths of clutter depending on a sea state. 

Also how is PD search with MLC OFF different from pulse search, that using PD should not be a thing? If you should get surface clutter in PD with MLC OFF you should also get in in P, so both should be useless in anything other than rudimentary ground mapping. As I noted before I get NO clutter from sea surface whatsoever in both P and PD with MLC OFF.       

 

The difference is that in pulse doppler all surface/ground returns show up in the same rate location meaning that it should be much harder to see the ships. Currently there likely is too little clutter from water modelled but even if we increase it it would make much less difference in pulse than in PD, again becase it would all show up at the same rate. PD just shouldn't be good at looking at ground/surface targets and locking them in PD-STT should be nearly impossible due to the fact that the STT would not know what returns to focus on.

 

My current thinking is to disable the ability for STT in PD against ground/surface targets as that shouldn't be a thing but in the end we might have a look at changing how the clutter looks at sea.

[Spurts]

For clarity, @Naquaii, you are saying that looking at the ground/sea in PD and trying to track a slow/static target is problematic because all the returns have the same Velocity Gate so all that is left is looking for which Range Gate has the strongest return, which is in effect what Pulse does?

[Naquaii]

6 minutes ago, Spurts said:

For clarity, @Naquaii, you are saying that looking at the ground/sea in PD and trying to track a slow/static target is problematic because all the returns have the same Velocity Gate so all that is left is looking for which Range Gate has the strongest return, which is in effect what Pulse does?

 

Yeah, everything static or nearly static will show in the MLC area while in pulse they will show in range. So it will be really hard to sort it out from all clutter with the same rate.

[BreaKKer]

On 7/13/2021 at 2:53 PM, Naquaii said:

Optimally the returns from the sea should depend greatly on sea state. In any case, using PD to search for surface targets shouldn't be a thing, we might have to look at disabling that or making it much harder. I'll have a talk with the others.

RIP locking up the boat on the way back home, got plenty of TCS photos of the CVN.

[draconus]

8 hours ago, BreaKKer said:

RIP locking up the boat on the way back home, got plenty of TCS photos of the CVN.

Why? TCS has nothing to do with the radar except for slaving to it and P-STT should still be possible for the ships.

[Naquaii]

9 hours ago, BreaKKer said:

RIP locking up the boat on the way back home, got plenty of TCS photos of the CVN.

Use pulse instead then like RIOs in irl did.

[captain_dalan]

Are the claims of the radar picking up ground traffic over Nevada just exaggerated rumours then?

[Naquaii]

37 minutes ago, captain_dalan said:

Are the claims of the radar picking up ground traffic over Nevada just exaggerated rumours then?

 

I think a lot of you guys are confusing what we're saying. Pulse-doppler would be worseless for this, normal pulse, not so much. We will not be disabling this functionality with pulse, only pulse doppler. You will still be able to find ships with pulse and lock them. As for ground traffic I can totally believe it, I'm not sure they'd actually be able to make sense of it but seing something sure. That said we won't be putting any effort into that as it's more of a peculiarity, not something useful.

[captain_dalan]

3 minutes ago, Naquaii said:

 

As for ground traffic I can totally believe it, I'm not sure they'd actually be able to make sense of it but seing something sure. That said we won't be putting any effort into that as it's more of a peculiarity, not something useful.

I was only referring to this, as i always assumed it was the doppler effect from the traffic they claimed they detected, yet AWG-9 being old tech, and far less sensitive then other radars in that aspect, i found the claim......well, dubious. Unless it was really, really, REALLY fast traffic!
Anyways, thanks for the rapid response!

[Naquaii]

Just now, captain_dalan said:

I was only referring to this, as i always assumed it was the doppler effect from the traffic they claimed they detected, yet AWG-9 being old tech, and far less sensitive then other radars in that aspect, i found the claim......well, dubious. Unless it was really, really, REALLY fast traffic!
Anyways, thanks for the rapid response!

 

I can believe them seeing them in pulse in some fashion, even if not in a usable fashion but seeing them in pulse doppler with mlc off I have a hard time believing.

[QuiGon]

On 6/28/2021 at 1:19 PM, Naquaii said:

 

Is that when looking at the TID repeater or the actual TID and in multiplayer or singleplayer? There's a bug currently with a pending fix regarding the blinking of the TTI on the pilot repeater.

 

 

I observed this behaviour (TTI doesn't start to flash when guiding on a lost/track hold track file) a lot these days when flying the Tomcat in MP as a RIO. So in other words: This happens on the actual TID. The missile never seems to go active on such targets.

[Naquaii]

4 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

 

I observed this behaviour (TTI doesn't start to flash when guiding on a lost/track hold track file) a lot these days when flying the Tomcat in MP as a RIO. So in other words: This happens on the actual TID. The missile never seems to go active on such targets.

 

Might have something todo with how we do those, we'll have a look.