Ground radar: Jeff vs Hornet

[IDontLikeBigbrother]

Ground radar is like a grey corner in the dcs system, guys are more interested in 120s or mavericksl. So I've tested the ground radar between hornet and jeff, the only two planes that have a complete and modern ground radar system. The result is interesting but somehow weird.

The test altitude is around 45000ft, looking at a airfield 30nm away, 50 degrees on the right side.

First is the unzoomed radar image

f18:

jeff:

Both images are similar, jeff's image is a little bit sharper.

Then is the first level zoom, for f18 is exp1, for jeff is exp:

f18:

jeff:

null

At first zoom level, jeff has a much better performance than f18, the image is much sharper. However, the airfield is unrecognizable for both side, the actual airfield location is in the red circle.

Then is the second level zoom, for f18 is exp2, for jeff is dbs1:

f18:

jeff:

On the second zoom level, the f18 has a larger zoom magnitude, and the airfield is clearly visible. For jeff, I wouldnt say that's a recognizable airfield image(red circle)

Last is the third zoom level, for f18 is exp3, for jeff is dbs2:

f18:

jeff:

The weird thing is here, although the f18 has a much larger zoom magnitude, jeff's image is clearly sharper. On f18 image, bunkers are really blurred and intersect with each other,  while the jeff image is sharper and the bunkers are separated. The pros and cons of both side seems balanced, but f18 has a larger radar antenna and radar power! It is pretty weird that jeff has a sharper image. I know that exp3 mode for f18 is a SAR, so I deliberately put the target on 50 degrees to the right.

Conclusion: It seems that f18 has a larger zoom magnitude, while the jeff image is sharper.

And if you are trying to locate an airfield using only ground radar: if you are on f18, exp2 mode is enough, if you are on jeff, you have to zoom to dbs2 mode to be able to recognize an airfield.  

Btw, I also put on some target on the airfield, those targets are visible on both side:

f18:

jeff:

the actual target:

[Hulkbust44]

Just note that Hornet EXP3 is not correct, dosen't act like SAR. In DCS it's just another view expansion and the image quality depends on range when it should be fixed.

Mobius708

As for the Jeff, I don't see why you wouldn't see the airfield at DBS2, what's creating the reflections there? The reason flat surfaces like runways stick out is because they don't reflect much at all. It's odd that you can only see it zoomed in as there really shouldn't be a return there in the first place afaik.

Mobius708

[Harker]

The Hornet's EXP3 doesn't work like it should. It's just another magnification level in DCS, while in reality, it is capable of building a medium resolution SAR image, whose resolution is consistent with range. In game, it does not perform any sort of buildup, every frame's clarity is dependent on range and angle.

Also, the picture in DCS suffers from excessive azimuth and/or range uncertainties, which show up as these long, wide lines that correspond to returns. They should be smaller to begin with and the picture should get clearer as more frames are integrated and the overall uncertainty decreases. Now, the picture only gets clearer if you move closer.

The APG-73 RUG2 is capable of much better resolution than that, to the point that you can sometimes distinguish types of vehicles or aircraft. Although the displays on Legacy Hornets might not be good enough to show the full resolution of the SAR picture, it shouldn't be as messed up with azimuth and/or range uncertainties as it is in DCS, it should just have less detail.

[FrostLaufeyson]

Off topic, what role does this "MAP" mode play in reality? I find it useless in the game for me (because I can't see what is on it, let alone find an airport)

[Hulkbust44]

26 minutes ago, FrostLaufeyson said:

Off topic, what role does this "MAP" mode play in reality? I find it useless in the game for me (because I can't see what is on it, let alone find an airport)

It's just in general useful for navigation. Very easy to find coast lines, cities and rivers would stand out. Things like that. Plus, you can use it to see through cloud cover, just not a TS. In fact, Hornet NATOPS mentions using the radar MAP to identify and avoid a thunderstorm cell.

[FrostLaufeyson]

56分钟前，Hulkbust44说：

It's just in general useful for navigation. Very easy to find coast lines, cities and rivers would stand out. Things like that. Plus, you can use it to see through cloud cover, just not a TS. In fact, Hornet NATOPS mentions using the radar MAP to identify and avoid a thunderstorm cell.

It's a pity that there is no storm in the game. I really want to see the spectacular clouds (like a bunch of people drilling into a tornado in 2042)

Thanks for your answer

[hein22]

16 hours ago, Harker said:

The Hornet's EXP3 doesn't work like it should. It's just another magnification level in DCS, while in reality, it is capable of building a medium resolution SAR image, whose resolution is consistent with range. In game, it does not perform any sort of buildup, every frame's clarity is dependent on range and angle.

Also, the picture in DCS suffers from excessive azimuth and/or range uncertainties, which show up as these long, wide lines that correspond to returns. They should be smaller to begin with and the picture should get clearer as more frames are integrated and the overall uncertainty decreases. Now, the picture only gets clearer if you move closer.

The APG-73 RUG2 is capable of much better resolution than that, to the point that you can sometimes distinguish types of vehicles or aircraft. Although the displays on Legacy Hornets might not be good enough to show the full resolution of the SAR picture, it shouldn't be as messed up with azimuth and/or range uncertainties as it is in DCS, it should just have less detail.

Wow, I didn't know that. I was sure that ED had nailed it with the AG radar after years of work.

Oh Hornet, my baby Hornet, what have they done to you?