When to use RWS (Range While Search) ?

[secretcode]

I'm learning about the different radar modes of the F-14 and analyzing the capabilities and numbers of each mode I just realized that RWS has a range of 90nm, but the radar doesn't create any tracks of the targets to shoot the AIM-54.

 

TWS also has the range of 90nm and it does create profile targets to shoot the AIM-54.

 

So my question is, why would you use RWS, when you have TWS with the same range and even more capabilities?

Edit: I just realized that RWS allows you to have any config of Bars and Azimuth, while TWS forces you to some configuration of less bars and less azimuth. Is that the only difference between the two?

Edited October 2, 2021 by secretcode

[QuiGon]

1 hour ago, secretcode said:

Edit: I just realized that RWS allows you to have any config of Bars and Azimuth, while TWS forces you to some configuration of less bars and less azimuth. Is that the only difference between the two?

 

This is at least the major difference, which makes it great for scanning a great volume of airspace, which is not possible with TWS. It's the mode I use the most, especially if there is no data link from AWACS available. I only switch to TWS to examine contacts more closely or to attack them.

Edited October 2, 2021 by QuiGon

[DSplayer]

I use RWS' large scan area to get SA then switch to TWS to engage targets.

[captain_dalan]

Painting a picture usually. At range. Generally above what you would call engagement ranges. As long as refresh isn't an issue, you can scan pretty high volumes of space this way and decide on the best course of action. 

[Sideburns]

PD search - Useful for absolute maximum long range searches, but trickier for SA and results not visible to pilot.

RWS - Initial, potential for large search volume SA build, particularly in absence of AWACS.

TWS - Detailed picture and aim54 deployment.

[Prez]

TWS IRL(and as modeled by HB) is a very unreliable form of tracking as it relies on data extrapolation to maintain a track. RWS is much more reliable as it doesn’t require much computation and just displays the radar returns. TWS should really only be used when you are sure you want to focus the radar on that target or group

[Jayhawk1971]

FWIW: https://fightson.net/1030/thoughts-on-radar-modes-of-the-awg-9/

 

It's an article by "Bio" Baranek on the AWG-9.

 

Zitat

As for the simulated AWG-9 in DCS compared to the real AWG-9: I’ve “flown” the Heatblur F-14B a little, and can say the cockpit is very realistic. I know Heatblur spoke with several pilots and RIOs about many details, but I can’t comment on whether it has the same number of TWS false contacts – I just don’t know. I’ve seen some DCS RIOs use RWS, and if it works for them that is great. In my time, we knew about RWS (of course!) but I didn’t know any RIOs who used it. On the other hand, in the real F-14 I occasionally used PD Search, but only in limited circumstances and I don’t know if other RIOs ever used it.

 

[Karon]

On 10/2/2021 at 4:12 PM, secretcode said:

I'm learning about the different radar modes of the F-14 and analyzing the capabilities and numbers of each mode I just realized that RWS has a range of 90nm, but the radar doesn't create any tracks of the targets to shoot the AIM-54.

 

TWS also has the range of 90nm and it does create profile targets to shoot the AIM-54.

 

So my question is, why would you use RWS, when you have TWS with the same range and even more capabilities?

Edit: I just realized that RWS allows you to have any config of Bars and Azimuth, while TWS forces you to some configuration of less bars and less azimuth. Is that the only difference between the two?

 

TWS is limited to the ~2" refresh it needs to build tracks. Therefore you only have two sets of settings available. De facto, you are looking at the sky through a monocle. Every other mode can be instead spread out to ±65° and 8 Bars if you want, giving you a huge look at the airspace, at the cost of ~15" vs 2". In other words, you use TWS when you already have an idea of where your target is, and you want to increase your SA (by hooking a contact you get plenty of details, you can IFF and employ the AIM-54).

 

RWS, is the most used radar mode, it's similar to TWS (huge range, shows returns on the TID, etc) but the contacts cannot be hooked and the tracks are not built. Nevertheless, you can correlate with the DL contacts often, and it's great in conjunction with the NAVGRID.

 

PD SRCH is similar to RWS but it lacks the FM ranging used the other modes. Ergo it has a longer detection range, but it shows returns only on the DDD. The DDD is PD mode is surprisingly good though, it offers a lot of info once you understand how it works. See if this helps.

 

To give you a better idea, these sketches show the amount of airspace covered by different settings. In green, you see the two TWS options. Red is the smallest possible combination, grey is fully open instead.

 

 

 

More info here.

 

Now, LPRH Pulse radar offers the Pulse Search mode. It is a great mode, as long as you are feet wet, otherwise you need to play with the gain and potentially have to reduce the detection range a bit. It's also a DDD-only mode, akin the classic b-scope if you want. However, it is great: it can be opened fully, it does not suffer blindzones due to ZDF or MLCF and it gives you in a glance:

- ATA: antenna train angle, so the relative bearing from your nose to the contact;

- range: since it's azimuth (abscissa) vs range (ordinate)

 

Probably one of the most useful features it provides is the ability of assessing the Drift effortlessly by checking that the ATA is not changing, and when you have no drift, you have collision course. On top of that, there are other aspects of the intercept that can be quickly assessed from the DDD in this radar mode.

Moreover, the fundamentals of the intercepts described between the 70s and ~2010 were quite similar (the really basic and public stuff, so take everything with a metric ton of salt), and they all work with a b-scope. I guess that's why Bio said he used PSRCH. On top of that, we may consider the feet wet factor and purely DCS-related considerations, such as the different usage of the NAVGRID (for almost everyone the YY is placed over the bullseye), or even silly things, such as the fact that many pilots enjoy the TID repeater to have better SA.

Well, if someone is in contact with him, ask him