Jump to content

What's going on with Hornet's radar?


oldcrusty

Recommended Posts

I was really hesitant to update to latest OB, besides there was nothing new there for the Hornet... or was it:dontgetit:

The radar overall took a little step back. Also, can someone explain what is it that downgrades the radar even more when looking up.

In this clip, the radar is looking up at 2 Mudhens, loaded with Mk84's and fuel bags. Radar tracked at 15nm :thumbdown:

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been wondering also. I have thought maybe it is me because I read a thread about radar use and realize I don't understand some of what is discussed. But I fly missions and have both radar and EW running. I see an enemy plane on both screens and try to lock it up on the radar. The dang thing disappears off the radar screen but is still on the EW. Also, I have the IFF and DL running, so I see a plane in red on the radar. I try to lock it but, if it doesn't disappear, it changes and loses the red coloring. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, I didn't watch 'like a boss' video...  I rarely use more then 4 sec. and if I do, I only go to 8 and yes I'm aware of incorrect modelling of track age. The main issue here is the APG73 detection range. First, the decreased performance compared to the previous OB build. Second, the significant difference between 'high/co-altitude/hot' detection range and 'lookup' max. detection range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, since this was not posted in the right thread (should be in "bug"), they likely never look at it.

Secondly, if you don't provide a track, they won't be able to work on it. 

Thirdly, this happens to me from time to time.

  • Like 1

i7 8700K @ Stock - Win10 64 - 32 RAM - RTX 3080 12gb OC - 55 inch 4k Display

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, wilbur81 said:

First off, since this was not posted in the right thread (should be in "bug"), they likely never look at it.

Secondly, if you don't provide a track, they won't be able to work on it. 

Thirdly, this happens to me from time to time.

I like to get some opinions on occasion about possible issues, not necessarily bugs, a confirmation perhaps that others are seeing the same thing. In this case I wanted to focus on 2 questions:

1. Does anyone else see the significant drop in Hornet's radar performance between the last 2 OB's?

2. Why the lookup detection range is different from level?

Now, what happens to you from time to time? and... I provided a track yesterday in the bug forum, related to a different issue... it still says 'needs track' and is happily sliding down the page into oblivion. :closedeyes:


Edited by Gripes323
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

have  you set  the  data  to  the max   32  instead  of  4  that it  shows  on the  radar before it  disappears
 
heres is  a good  video on how  to use  the radar
 
That video is poor, full of wrong statements, and an incorrect understanding of most system logic.

There are some good techniques mentioned.
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Hulkbust44 said:

That video is poor, full of wrong statements, and an incorrect understanding of most system logic.

There are some good techniques mentioned.

What’s wrong in the video? Making sweeping statements like that isn’t helpful to those of us who are new to the hornet radar. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What’s wrong in the video? Making sweeping statements like that isn’t helpful to those of us who are new to the hornet radar. 
I made a lengthy comment explaining most of it.

Basically the biggest issue has to do with talking about the differences between RWS and TWS. A good chunk of it is true for other aircraft, but in the Hornet RWS and TWS have the same missile and tracking capability. There's no difference in entering a STT from TWS vs RWS for example. Similar thing with LTWS. LTWS isn't a radar processing mode, it's just a display filter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are still discussing the techniques.  I would still focus on 1 question:  Why is the detection range only 15nm (target F15E loaded with junk) when the only background behind the target is the sky.  Scanning radar is at 1k ft AGL/5k ft MSL and pointing up at the target at 21k, hot and descending.

I think I still might have a track from previous OB version showing common intercept scenarios (not just lookup). Sometime later I'll try to run the identical setups in the latest OB. The radar performance 'should' show a downgrade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK... I give up on the question about differences between last OB and the previous one 🤐 .  I must have messed something up in one of my old 'creative' missions that I used for testing.

After creating a brand new mission today and setting up identical flight profiles for all jets involved, everything worked the same way as in previous OB.

With all jets above 30k, hot aspect:  Mudhens detected at 44nm.,  Vipers around 42nm.  

So... only one question remains related to lower lookup detection range.


Edited by Gripes323
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Gripes323 said:

OK... I give up on the question about differences between last OB and the previous one 🤐 .  I must have messed something up in one of my old 'creative' missions that I used for testing.

After creating a brand new mission today and setting up identical flight profiles for all jets involved, everything worked the same way as in previous OB.

With all jets above 30k, hot aspect:  Mudhens detected at 44nm.,  Vipers around 42nm.  

So... only one question remains related to lower lookup detection range.

 

Apart from the fact that you really should be using HI PRF on a hot target I cannot see any mistake on your part, actually. Also, you correctly adjusted the radar elevation setting and as your targets are already close to 20nm it should not pose any problem to the radar to detect the targets in Interleaved PRF. Very strange, indeed.

Gripes, can you please post a track of your mission here, so that other guys can try it out? Most importantly, this would surely help ED to see what possibly went wrong...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, Tango3B said:

Apart from the fact that you really should be using HI PRF on a hot target I cannot see any mistake on your part, actually. Also, you correctly adjusted the radar elevation setting and as your targets are already close to 20nm it should not pose any problem to the radar to detect the targets in Interleaved PRF. Very strange, indeed.

Gripes, can you please post a track of your mission here, so that other guys can try it out? Most importantly, this would surely help ED to see what possibly went wrong...

Sure, the only tracks I can provide right now are the lookup and lookdown setups. They are fairly short and simple. My actions were a bit chaotic since there were other people in the room and there was concurrent yapping going on. In one of the tracks, the lookup one iirc, toward the end, there was some 'flailing around' since I stumbled on the 'ghost' track bug and it looked like part of this bug might be related to HMD and the radar definitely was going nuts. This problem has been reported numerous times already. I didn't play around with PRF in these 2 hops. Even if you try high PRF at the start of intercept, it would not make that much difference, at least not here. 

 LookDown.trk  LookUp.trk


Edited by Gripes323
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, Gripes323 said:

Sure, the only tracks I can provide right now are the lookup and lookdown setups. They are fairly short and simple. My actions were a bit chaotic since there were other people in the room and there was concurrent yapping going on. In one of the tracks, the lookup one iirc, toward the end, there was some 'flailing around' since I stumbled on the 'ghost' track bug and it looked like part of this bug might be related to HMD and the radar definitely was going nuts. This problem has been reported numerous times already. I didn't play around with PRF in these 2 hops. Even if you try high PRF at the start of intercept, it would not make that much difference, at least not here. 

  LookDown.trk 3.25 MB · 0 downloads    LookUp.trk 2.33 MB · 0 downloads

 

Ok, so I did some tests, myself. I purposely use a similar radar setup as Grimes323 and I ran into the exact same thing. From low altitude I am not able to lock my targets in excess of 20nm range. 15nm seems more likely. This cannot be right as we are in a look-up scenario here and the radar should have absolutely zero problems finding the targets. Also, we are talking about a very capable modern radar, so...

*EDIT: HI PRF shows the same results in the low altitude/look-up scenario.*

My second test is a a verification of INTL PRF working correctly at co-altitude with the same radar setup. It is able to detect the targets in excess of 40nm in this scenario which is about right, I would say. So, the problem is clearly the low altitude/look-up scenario. There seems to be some kind of "penalty" for flying down low which drastically reduces radar detection range in an extremely exaggregated way which is simply not right in this scenario. 

@BIGNEWY @NineLine Can you please forward this to the team to have a look into this? Also, please move the thread to the bug section.

F-18C APG-73 look-up problem low alt.trk F-18C APG-73 look-up problem co-alt example.trk


Edited by Tango3B
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hm.  So, we aren't really looking precisely for a radar reflection, we are looking for a doppler shift.  So for a distant target right off the nose, the faster they are going, the easier they are to see.  Not as true at medium prf but I think it's still at least somewhat true, no? 

Doppler shift varies with angle.  So, seems to me we should be comparing the look-up scenario with trying to find something at your altitude, but at some angle off your nose? 


Edited by DeltaMike

Ryzen 5600X (stock), GBX570, 32Gb RAM, AMD 6900XT (reference), G2, WInwing Orion HOTAS, T-flight rudder

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, DeltaMike said:

Hm.  So, we aren't really looking precisely for a radar reflection, we are looking for a doppler shift.  So for a distant target right off the nose, the faster they are going, the easier they are to see.  Not as true at medium prf but I think it's still at least somewhat true, no? 

Doppler shift varies with angle.  So, seems to me we should be comparing the look-up scenario with trying to find something at your altitude, but at some angle off your nose? 

 

Nah, the entire radar needs to be doppler-shifted... forward. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't been doing a lot of BVR fights in the Hornet for quite a while, so can't quite comment on previous OB vs current OB, but having returned to some AA work earlier today I can certainly concur that something has changed towards being wonky recently-ish. But then, I haven't had time to do as much systematic testing as some of you apparently have gotten into, so not a whole lot to contribute right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's well known that the Hornet radar underperforms and is acting strange in a lot of situations. Not only that, but the missing MIDS system (that makes Hornet a 4th gen) ain't helping either. It's not user error. Hopefully ED will adress some of those issues when the big Super Carrier update is released. 

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, the Hornet radar is very sketchy at the moment. Things like poor/incorrect STT range, completely unrealistic interpretation of look down that significantly nurfs detection range, and more, all need some serious improvement. And this is without even considering MSI and the work needed to improve this capability.

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I've heard the reduced detection performance of the radar when flying at low level looking UP is intentional. Reason: significant side lobe noise.

AMD R7 5800X3D | Aorus B550 Pro | 32GB DDR4-3600 | RTX 4080 | VKB MGC Pro Gunfighter Mk III + Thustmaster TWCS + VKB T-Rudder Mk4 | HP Reverb G2

FC3 | A-10C II | Ка-50 | P-51 | UH-1 | Ми-8 | F-86F | МиГ-21 | FW-190 | МиГ-15 | Л-39 | Bf 109 | M-2000C | F-5 | Spitfire | AJS-37 | AV-8B | F/A-18C | Як-52 | F-14 | F-16 | Ми-24 | AH-64

NTTR | Normandy | Gulf | Syria | Supercarrier |

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So we can’t fly low level and lookup due reduced range. We can’t fly high level and look down either for the same reason. We can’t STT at max range to avoid dropping the L&S temporarily…

Anyone more cynical them me might even start to consider there’s some quiet ‘game balancing’ going on in the background. There certainly are a lot of vocal viper drives that seem to have a beef with anything the Hornet can do better.

/s 


Edited by norman99
  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, norman99 said:

So we can’t fly low level and lookup due reduced range. We can’t fly high level and look down either for the same reason. We can’t STT at max range to avoid dropping the L&S temporarily…

Anyone more cynical them me might even start to consider there’s some quiet ‘game balancing’ going on in the background. There certainly are a lot of vocal viper drives that seem to have a beef with anything the Hornet can do better.

/s 

 

Whatever the reason is... balancing or unbalancing sounds like a possibility.  Now, Andrei brought up the sidelobes...  I don't think so.  When I have time I'll make a detailed test following some books on the subject. There's a thick layer of dust that has collected on them and that is the reason why I'm hesitant to elaborate on the subject at the moment, until I look it up. 

'Beamscanner' could probably answer this in one quick post... if he stumbles on this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...