When will we get full TCS functionality?

[DSplayer]

When will be able to get the full functionality of the TCS on the F-14s like the ability switch to PD-STT and P-STT directly from an optical track by the TCS? I find the TCS to be a pretty unique system that no other aircraft in DCS has without having to mount a TPOD (and those aircraft can't guide their weapons using those tracks) and I would like to see it have its full potential shown in DCS.

[BonerCat]

I was under the impression slaving radar to TCS already works, tho i m not sure if you can acquire classic locks from it, instead of just flooding the target with your radar

 

[BreaKKer]

7 hours ago, DSplayer said:

When will be able to get the full functionality of the TCS on the F-14s like the ability switch to PD-STT and P-STT directly from an optical track by the TCS? I find the TCS to be a pretty unique system that no other aircraft in DCS has without having to mount a TPOD (and those aircraft can't guide their weapons using those tracks) and I would like to see it have its full potential shown in DCS.

What’s your source with that functionality ever being a thing? 

[DSplayer]

1 hour ago, BreaKKer said:

What’s your source with that functionality ever being a thing? 

The HB manual.

[Naquaii]

5 minutes ago, DSplayer said:

The HB manual.

The missing functionality is the ability to still have a radar lock when the radar is slaved to the TCS. Basically either if you switch to radar slaved with an already present lock on the same target with both systems or if you find a target with the TCS and then, in radar slaved, lock it using the HCU. In this case the HCU only controls range/rate and the azimuth is locked to TCS track.

This results in a slaved STT that uses radar only for range and/or rate and the TCS for elevation and angles. The advantage of this is that the TCS can then keep the radar on target even if jammed or otherwise unable to lock and as soon as that condition disappears the RIO can quickly relock that target. IRL this also helps against certain jamming techniques that try to fool the radar in respect to angles.

This is something we do want to implement but it's further down the line behind stuff like Jamming/ECM effects on the AWG-9 etc.

[iantron]

Wait... So what does it do now? It flood the target with radar but does not gather any information from it? Can you effectively transition to a full radar lock or vice versa?

[Naquaii]

3 minutes ago, iantron said:

Wait... So what does it do now? It flood the target with radar but does not gather any information from it? Can you effectively transition to a full radar lock or vice versa?

Currently it supports the AIM-54 by launching it along the TCS line of sight regardless of the radar and the AIM-7 by spot illuminating the target using CW allowing the AIM-7 to be used.

[eatthis]

im lost here. you can use tcs only to give guidence to a sparrow and phoenix?

[Naquaii]

8 minutes ago, eatthis said:

im lost here. you can use tcs only to give guidence to a sparrow and phoenix?

Yes, that's already possible.

For the AIM-54 it's basically a pitbul-shot with the difference that the WCS uses the TCS to tell the AIM-54 what direction to go in. After that it's exactly like a normal pitbul shot.

For the AIM-7 it uses the same illuminator as the normal AIM-7 engagement but it's pointed in the direction of the TCS. Basically it's kinda like flood but more focused on the TCS track as it uses the normal illumination antenna and not the flood antenna.

It's not a silent "sneaky" mode once launched though. The AIM-54 is still active and give a warning as it uses it's seeker and with the AIM-7 the rwr will still see that the AWG-9 is illuminating it for a missile shot.

[Panny]

5 hours ago, Naquaii said:

Yes, that's already possible.

For the AIM-54 it's basically a pitbul-shot with the difference that the WCS uses the TCS to tell the AIM-54 what direction to go in. After that it's exactly like a normal pitbul shot.

For the AIM-7 it uses the same illuminator as the normal AIM-7 engagement but it's pointed in the direction of the TCS. Basically it's kinda like flood but more focused on the TCS track as it uses the normal illumination antenna and not the flood antenna.

It's not a silent "sneaky" mode once launched though. The AIM-54 is still active and give a warning as it uses it's seeker and with the AIM-7 the rwr will still see that the AWG-9 is illuminating it for a missile shot.

Would this scenario only work if you had the radar slaved to the TCS? Or would it work if TCS had AUTO ACQ on something and you did not have a radar lock

[Southernbear]

What this boils down too...is it means for the most part it makes notching useless and jamming much less effective. If you lock someone up provided their within TCS range you can keep the dish pointed towards the target while they do their notch ect and then re lock them once they've finished.

 

Me and a friend abuse the <profanity> out of this using what her father's F-14 RIO's friend said to do, that being, lock a target up with the radar and TCS and as soon as the bastard tries to Notch, turn off the clutter filter on the radar, the TCS will guide the radar through the notch and keep the lock because while there is now plenty of ground clutter coz your in CW search mode, the TCS keeps the radar locked to the plane.

Then bang the AIM-7 hits its target. TL:DR you get the positives of a Pulse Doppler radar and the positives of a Continuous Wave radar without the downsides of either. 

[Naquaii]

13 hours ago, Panny said:

Would this scenario only work if you had the radar slaved to the TCS? Or would it work if TCS had AUTO ACQ on something and you did not have a radar lock

Yes, this only works with the radar slaved to the TCS as the radar is needed to guide both.

4 hours ago, Southernbear said:

What this boils down too...is it means for the most part it makes notching useless and jamming much less effective. If you lock someone up provided their within TCS range you can keep the dish pointed towards the target while they do their notch ect and then re lock them once they've finished.

 

Me and a friend abuse the <profanity> out of this using what her father's F-14 RIO's friend said to do, that being, lock a target up with the radar and TCS and as soon as the bastard tries to Notch, turn off the clutter filter on the radar, the TCS will guide the radar through the notch and keep the lock because while there is now plenty of ground clutter coz your in CW search mode, the TCS keeps the radar locked to the plane.

Then bang the AIM-7 hits its target. TL:DR you get the positives of a Pulse Doppler radar and the positives of a Continuous Wave radar without the downsides of either. 

Yes but it does have disadvantages still. If you fire without radar lock the WCS has no range and you don't get full guidance functionality. It is useful still though and will be even more so if we fix the radar lock from slave thing.

[QuiGon]

9 hours ago, Southernbear said:

Me and a friend abuse the <profanity> out of this using what her father's F-14 RIO's friend said to do, that being, lock a target up with the radar and TCS and as soon as the bastard tries to Notch, turn off the clutter filter on the radar, the TCS will guide the radar through the notch and keep the lock because while there is now plenty of ground clutter coz your in CW search mode, the TCS keeps the radar locked to the plane.

I don't really understand what the clutter filter has to do with it. If the TCS directs the radar, then ground clutter should be irrelevant, should it not?

[Naquaii]

1 minute ago, QuiGon said:

I don't really understand what the clutter filter has to do with it. If the TCS directs the radar, then ground clutter should be irrelevant, should it not?

When you have the TCS directing the radar without a radar lock you have no range/rate information so the missile engagement capability is degraded.

If you have a TCS lock and a radar lock you can fire the missiles with full capability.

[QuiGon]

2 minutes ago, Naquaii said:

When you have the TCS directing the radar without a radar lock you have no range/rate information so the missile engagement capability is degraded.

If you have a TCS lock and a radar lock you can fire the missiles with full capability.

So turning off the clutter filter allows the radar (when slaved to TCS) to get range information from a contact hidden in the clutter?

Edited February 8, 2022 by QuiGon

[Naquaii]

1 minute ago, QuiGon said:

So turning off the clutter filter allows the radar (when slaved to TCS) to get range information from a contact hidden in the clutter?

 

No. Slaved to TCS does not magically make the radar see something it couldn't otherwise.

[QuiGon]

1 hour ago, Naquaii said:

No. Slaved to TCS does not magically make the radar see something it couldn't otherwise.

Then I still don't understand what benefit turning off the clutter filter brings in such a situation.

[Naquaii]

38 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

Then I still don't understand what benefit turning off the clutter filter brings in such a situation.

It can allow you to see a target if there's not enough clutter to hide it as that would otherwise be hidden by the filter. The last question I answered was if turning it off could make the radar see something in the clutter if present which it will not.

[eatthis]

3 minutes ago, Naquaii said:

It can allow you to see a target if there's not enough clutter to hide it as that would otherwise be hidden by the filter. The last question I answered was if turning it off could make the radar see something in the clutter if present which it will not.

so a beaming target?

 

[Naquaii]

21 minutes ago, eatthis said:

so a beaming target?

 

Yes. Beaming targets are usually hidden by the MLC filter. Turning it off can work if there's not enough clutter.

[QuiGon]

27 minutes ago, Naquaii said:

It can allow you to see a target if there's not enough clutter to hide it as that would otherwise be hidden by the filter. The last question I answered was if turning it off could make the radar see something in the clutter if present which it will not.

Yes, I'm aware of that, but I was referring to this comment:

11 hours ago, Southernbear said:

What this boils down too...is it means for the most part it makes notching useless and jamming much less effective. If you lock someone up provided their within TCS range you can keep the dish pointed towards the target while they do their notch ect and then re lock them once they've finished.

Me and a friend abuse the <profanity> out of this using what her father's F-14 RIO's friend said to do, that being, lock a target up with the radar and TCS and as soon as the bastard tries to Notch, turn off the clutter filter on the radar, the TCS will guide the radar through the notch and keep the lock because while there is now plenty of ground clutter coz your in CW search mode, the TCS keeps the radar locked to the plane.

Then bang the AIM-7 hits its target. TL:DR you get the positives of a Pulse Doppler radar and the positives of a Continuous Wave radar without the downsides of either. 

I have a hard time understanding the highlighted sentence and what different it makes in this situation to turn the clutter filter off, as the radar is slaved to the TCS and thus should keep the target within its radar beam regardless of ground clutter. So I don't see what difference it makes to turn off the clutter filter in this situation.

[Naquaii]

12 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

Yes, I'm aware of that, but I was referring to this comment:

I have a hard time understanding the highlighted sentence and what different it makes in this situation to turn the clutter filter off, as the radar is slaved to the TCS and thus should keep the target within its radar beam regardless of ground clutter. So I don't see what difference it makes to turn off the clutter filter in this situation.

Well, I can't answer his intention with the statement but if you have the filter on you will never get a radar lock or return but if you turn it off you might. Having a lock or not makes a difference for weapons employment.

[QuiGon]

3 minutes ago, Naquaii said:

Well, I can't answer his intention with the statement but if you have the filter on you will never get a radar lock or return but if you turn it off you might. Having a lock or not makes a difference for weapons employment.

Well, I guess I have to try this myself, because I have the suspicion, that what @Southernbear described there might be an exploit, that allows you to get a radar lock on a target hidden in ground clutter with a 100% success rate.

[iantron]

It sounds like a knotching target can be amongst ground clutter that is not significant enough to prevent lock. The MLC filter will completely block the target, while unfiltered returns might be lockable despite having some clutter. Did I get that right?

[Southernbear]

5 hours ago, QuiGon said:

Then I still don't understand what benefit turning off the clutter filter brings in such a situation.

it allows you to keep the lock for an AIM-7 through a notch where a normal Doppler lock would be trashed.