correct as-is FCR Detection v Lock Range - Wait for Radar White Paper

[JarrodR5]

刚才，BIGNEWY说：

Thanks we will take a look and try to reproduce. 

Many thanks

[Comrade Doge]

Hello everyone,

In this post I'd like to talk about some unusual behavior of the F-16 radar, following the latest 2 patches.

At the moment, TWS System Targets (empty squares) cannot be promoted to Bugged Targets until you hit a certain range.

From publicly available documentation, this is incorrect, as System Targets are already established as valid, quality, Doopler-correlated radar tracks, that can be promoted to Bugged targets via TMS Up. Currently, there is an artificial delay that prevents this promotion from taking place. The evidence is present in the MLU M1 Update Manual pages 129 and 130.

I have attached a trackfile showing this behaviour, repeated promotion attempts via TMS Up on System Targets being ignored for a good while, in a co-altitude, hot aspect scenario at 30k ft, with an Su-27.

With that being said, I wish all the readers and the ED team an easy day.

TWSbug.trk

Edited May 30, 2022 by Comrade Doge

[Northstar98]

Same kinda thing going on with SAM - you can't designate a target until it's within a certain range, despite the RADAR presenting it as a processed track.

[NineLine]

Hey guys, this is correct as-is, we reviewed the reference and it does not say that detection and lock range are the same.

We are doing a Radar White Paper that should explain more how this works and is modelled in DCS.

[Comrade Doge]

13 minutes ago, NineLine said:

Hey guys, this is correct as-is, we reviewed the reference and it does not say that detection and lock range are the same.

We are doing a Radar White Paper that should explain more how this works and is modelled in DCS.

The reference says the System Target is promotable to a Bugged Target, which doesn't happen in the trackfile. This is not a search target I am talking about, System Targets are established radar tracks, not simple detection targets.

Edited May 30, 2022 by Comrade Doge

[Frederf]

System tracks are just radar tracks promoted. If it's a track within the APG then it can be promoted to system wide. There's no quality requirement between the two.

[Comrade Doge]

14 minutes ago, Frederf said:

System tracks are just radar tracks promoted. If it's a track within the APG then it can be promoted to system wide. There's no quality requirement between the two.

Correct. Once Doppler correlation occurs (it takes just 2 sweeps for TWS over Search contacts), the contacts become radar tracks: Tank target - System target - Bugged target.

There is no reason to artificially limit the ability for System radar tracks to be bugged, they can be promoted right away as the manual says on the quoted pages, they are quality radar tracks.

I and the community kindly ask ED to investigate this further @BIGNEWY

Edited May 30, 2022 by Comrade Doge

[NineLine]

7 minutes ago, Comrade Doge said:

Correct. Once Doppler correlation occurs (it takes just 2 sweeps for TWS over Search contacts), the contacts become radar tracks: Tank target - System target - Bugged target.

There is no reason to artificially limit the ability for System radar tracks to be bugged, they can be promoted right away as the manual says on the quoted pages, they are quality radar tracks.

I and the community kindly ask ED to investigate this further @BIGNEWY

 

As I said above.

We are doing a Radar White Paper that should explain more how this works and is modelled in DCS.

[Comrade Doge]

7 minutes ago, NineLine said:

As I said above.

We are doing a Radar White Paper that should explain more how this works and is modelled in DCS.

Well, however it works and is modelled right now, goes against how the official documentation details the system should work. Perhaps this discrepancy maybe worth a closer look? 

[BIGNEWY]

5 minutes ago, Comrade Doge said:

Well, however it works and is modelled right now, goes against how the official documentation details the system should work. Perhaps this discrepancy maybe worth a closer look? 

Please wait for our white paper on the subject. 

thanks

posts merged

[Digitalvole]

I posted the other day in the F 18 forum about an experience I had comparing the 18 & 16s radar in bvr. It got moved btw. 

It was surprising to find the F18 out performing the F16 in BVR and it seems quite a few people are finding the F16 radar to be “underperforming” and ED say it’s correct as is and they must have good reason to not just say that, but also are going to show us a white paper on why that is.

This got me to thinking, (my wife immediately asked if something was burning) I remember a similar thing with the Hornets radar a while back. Then Wags (and 104th Maverick) posted a video on how to use it properly. This made all the difference to me and normal service was resumed. 

So I’m wondering if it is the same or a similar thing with the F16s? Are there some techniques required to get he most out of the FCR and increase lock range and/or reduce the likely hood of dropping the lock?

I’m most definitely NOT trying to start a debate on whether or not it is how it’s supposed to be, just wondering if there is some piece of the puzzle I’m missing as there was with the F18.

[Sacarino111]

Hi.

To me:

Reduce azinuth and/or Bars to reduce the scan zone and time to complete scan, specially in TWS. Other han that, no trick.

Saludos.

Saca111

[Exorcet]

Reduce azimuth and bars to what is needed as stated. This will give you a few extra seconds of earlier detection if you know where to look.

Once you do have a target, don't let it get too far below you. As of now ED's radar model has very poor BVR lookdown capability. If your target dives after you fire a missile, you will probably have to dive too.

Always keep track of your targets range, altitude, and azimuth. If you do drop lock, you need to know where to put the TDC to find the target again.

[Digitalvole]

1 hour ago, Sacarino111 said:

Hi.

To me:

Reduce azinuth and/or Bars to reduce the scan zone and time to complete scan, specially in TWS. Other han that, no trick.

Saludos.

Saca111

Hi and thanks for the tip, I’m currently using 30 degree scan and 2 bars.

29 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Once you do have a target, don't let it get too far below you. As of now ED's radar model has very poor BVR lookdown capability. If your target dives after you fire a missile, you will probably have to dive too.

That’s something I hadn’t considered, I’ll bare that in mind in future. I always thought standard practice was to get up to 40+k ft to increase range (missiles & aircrafts) but I guess that isn’t always the case?

29 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Always keep track of your targets range, altitude, and azimuth. If you do drop lock, you need to know where to put the TDC to find the target again.

That’s the thing, I can visually see 4 mig 29s flying straight and level towards me and still I’m dropping the lock. (Edit: That being said I’m 10kft above them so maybe it’s the look down thing). I was wondering if there was something like the Hornets, I want to say PRF but I’ve no idea if that’s right, where you set it to Hi Med or auto depending on the aspect of the bandit. Or if the radar be if it’s from you being a bit offset from the bandit rather than head on?

Edited May 31, 2022 by Digitalvole

[Aquorys]

2 hours ago, Digitalvole said:

It was surprising to find the F18 out performing the F16 in BVR and it seems quite a few people are finding the F16 radar to be “underperforming” and ED say it’s correct as is and they must have good reason to not just say that, but also are going to show us a white paper on why that is.

The AN/APG-73 in the Hornet is partly related to the radars of the F-14 and F-15, so it isn't much of a surprise that it is more capable than the AN/APG-68 used in the F-16. It has been implied by several experts of the respective airframes that the F-16 and F/A-18 radars are underperforming in look-down situations (in DCS), and that is about as much as you'll hear from anyone, because the details concerning radar technology are one of the most closely guarded secrets in fighter aircraft. It sure is nice of ED that they're going to show us why they modeled the radar as they did, but then again, it's still going to be a white paper about their own fantasy world, it's still not going to tell you any hard facts about the real world AN/APG-68 or AN/APG-73 performance.

Quote

Are there some techniques required to get he most out of the FCR and increase lock range and/or reduce the likely hood of dropping the lock?

In RWS, you can use spotlight search (hold TMS up) - although I'm not sure it really does much in DCS, it hasn't been effective when I tried to use it.
You can narrow the scan azimuth and vertical scan angle using the settings on the left side of your FCR display ("A6", "4B").

If you are using TWS, always narrow the azimuth, or it will drop your system tracks every few seconds (just doesn't work well with the +/- 60 degrees scan angle). Once you have bugged a target, it will go into A2 anyway. Additionally, you can narrow the vertical scan angle by reducing the number of scan bars (that's the 4B .. 2B .. setting on your FCR display).

I'm not sure how close to the real world the radar simulation in DCS is, but in general, a radar in RWS mode should have a higher chance of detecting new targets than one that's in TWS mode. Therefore, you could e.g. spotlight search in RWS near a datalink target until you get a contact, then go into SAM, or if you want to see more about what the other targets are doing, go into TWS from there (although with the datalink targets provided by an AWACS, that seems redundant).

Edited May 31, 2022 by Aquorys

[Exorcet]

3 hours ago, Digitalvole said:

That’s something I hadn’t considered, I’ll bare that in mind in future. I always thought standard practice was to get up to 40+k ft to increase range (missiles & aircrafts) but I guess that isn’t always the case?

High and fast is still best for missiles and high altitude is where your engine will be more efficient, but since your radar has reduced range when looking down after a certain angle, it provides a weakness for your target to exploit. If it's possible to launch at 40,000 ft it's still fine to do so, but you should be ready to dive to keep your radar range at the maximum.

3 hours ago, Digitalvole said:

That’s the thing, I can visually see 4 mig 29s flying straight and level towards me and still I’m dropping the lock. (Edit: That being said I’m 10kft above them so maybe it’s the look down thing). I was wondering if there was something like the Hornets, I want to say PRF but I’ve no idea if that’s right, where you set it to Hi Med or auto depending on the aspect of the bandit. Or if the radar be if it’s from you being a bit offset from the bandit rather than head on?

 

The F-16 only has MED PRF, so there is no switching. If you can visually see the targets, consider switching to dogfight mode where you can direct the radar visually with the HUD. The range is limited to 10 nmi.

[SCPanda]

16 hours ago, Digitalvole said:

It was surprising to find the F18 out performing the F16 in BVR

F-18 does not out perform F-16 in BVR. F-16 has higher acceleration, top speed, climb rate, and better high altitude performance. Energy is essential in BVR. F-16 can chase down anything that tries to run away from it and run away from anything that tries to chase it. Equal pilot skills, slow Hornet does not stand a chance. F-15 is the only jet close to compete with the F-16 but that thing does not have datalink. F-14 needs a human RIO to explore its full potential but notching AIM-54s is too easy tbh. 

You don't really need a video from Wags explaining how to use F-16's radar since F-16's FCR and HOTAS is much easier and straightforward to use that Hornet's. 

BTW, in the current state of F-16's radar performance and in different radar modes, use RWS and forget about TWS in the F-16 unless you are trying to engage more than two targets. SAM/DTT is so much quicker and easier to use. I almost never drop locks. Unlike Hornet's RWS, soft lock in F-16's RWS does not give lock warning or launch warning in case you didn't know. 

Edited June 1, 2022 by SCPanda

[Digitalvole]

Thank you @Aquorys @SCPandaand @Exocet for the advice and info. My mistake appears to be my reliance  on TWS when there are better options, DTT is what I should be using by the sounds of it. This is just the kind of info I was after!

6 hours ago, SCPanda said:

F-18 does not out perform F-16 in BVR. F-16 has higher acceleration, top speed, climb rate, and better high altitude performance. Energy is essential in BVR. F-16 can chase down anything that tries to run away from it and run away from anything that tries to chase it. Equal pilot skills, slow Hornet does not stand a chance. F-15 is the only jet close to compete with the F-16 but that thing does not have datalink. F-14 needs a human RIO to explore its full potential but notching AIM-54s is too easy tbh. 

I feel the need to stand up for the Hornet a bit here, it’s really not as slow as people make out. Well it can be slow if you try and carry too much stuff, but with 6 Amrams and 3 bags I have no trouble getting high and fast, takes a little longer to get going though. For my tests (I call them tests, others would call them buffoonery) I don’t find much difference.

Granted in a GS type setup the Vipers speed is a clear advantage but I find in scenarios closer to “real life” ie had to travel 200 miles before the engagement begins, then have 200 miles to get back home again. I find the Vipers speed advantage is negated somewhat due to fuel concerns. I would add radar lock range as a factor too but I need to start using the radar properly before I can comment on that.

Just to be clear, I’m not a Hornet fan boy, In fact I want to be a Viper fan boy, I’m just in a transitional process at the moment trying to move from one to the other. The differences between the two aircraft are not as pronounced as I thought they would be. The end results are very similar. But man sitting in that Viper cockpit is a pleasure in its self, and I prefer the way you interact with the avionics too (didn’t at first) though it’s taking a bit of getting used to.

[Exorcet]

9 minutes ago, Digitalvole said:

I feel the need to stand up for the Hornet a bit here, it’s really not as slow as people make out. Well it can be slow if you try and carry too much stuff, but with 6 Amrams and 3 bags I have no trouble getting high and fast, takes a little longer to get going though. For my tests (I call them tests, others would call them buffoonery) I don’t find much difference.

The Hornet actually is that slow, at least compared to the F-16. The Viper is not just fast, it is basically the quickest fighter outside of things like the EF-2000 and F-22. The Hornet is not helpless in air to air at all, but it's not in the same class as the F-16. It pretty much the opposite, it's below average compared to its competition.

Dashes to Mach 1.3

Hornet 8 AAM, 1 Tank 2 min

Viper 6 AAM, 1 Tank 1 min

Viper 6 AAM, 2 Tank 1.3 min

 

The one exception is the interceptor loadout. The Hornet's conformal and wingtip stations are low drag. Everything else on it is sadly bricklike from an aerodynamics perspective.

 

9 minutes ago, Digitalvole said:

Granted in a GS type setup the Vipers speed is a clear advantage but I find in scenarios closer to “real life” ie had to travel 200 miles before the engagement begins, then have 200 miles to get back home again. I find the Vipers speed advantage is negated somewhat due to fuel concerns. I would add radar lock range as a factor too but I need to start using the radar properly before I can comment on that. 

Fuel only makes things worse. The Hornet is a horrible gas guzzler, with each engine taking nearly as much fuel as the F-16's single engine in cruise. The F-16 is vastly better at covering distance in AA configuration. In AB things get a little better for the Hornet, but because of the speed difference between the two the F-16 can actually cut back to mil and still be as fast as the F-18 in AB, cutting down on fuel use drastically. And as you can see from the images above, even if you load the F-16 with more fuel tanks, it's still much quicker. If you're performing AG then the small size of the F-16 stats to become a drawback as weapons will weigh it down, but the wing tanks are still much bigger relative to the plane than the F-18, so the 16 can sometimes keep up even when lugging bombs at less than an optimal altitude.

The Hornet's advantage is avionics, and they definitely come into play because as fast as the F-16 is, there are situations where you might not be able to get up to speed. Especially if your SA is limited by a short range radar.

 

[Aquorys]

20 hours ago, Exorcet said:

The F-16 only has MED PRF, so there is no switching.

It's a multi-mode radar, it uses both medium PRF and high PRF (high power/low duty cycle/medium PRF or low power/high duty cycle/high PRF), you just don't see it because the switching is done automatically by the system.

[NineLine]

Cleaned up a couple posts, please stay on topic, save the comedic material for open Mic night. 

[Digitalvole]

After a bit more buffoonery last night I’d have to agree with you @Exocet on the gas guzzling front, Hornet can carry more but uses more. I think I’m just used to seeing 6k gallons and thinking “oh pants, it’s home time.” But though it takes the Hornet a bit longer to do it, it can get up to a decent speed.

On the radar though, even in RWS I couldn’t lock a Mig 29 (who was about 5k above me cold) till 20miles. In the Hornet, though the Mig 29 was hot this time, it locked at 40 miles which was a bit of a surprise in its self. Doesn’t that 20 mile difference negate some of that speed advantage? 

Talking of surprises, the mig I locked at 40 miles in the Hornet had an unexpected surprise for me. I shot an Amram at it from about 25 miles, watched it defend (could see the contrails and the little black dot that is strangely gets smaller the closer you get) and then got hit. I carried on flying straight and level towards where he had been before going defensive and I suddenly blew up! Turns out he fired an R77 Adder that flew around for 18 seconds before scoring him a posthumous kill, well played sir!

I really need to do some research on what my enemy carry, I didn’t know their missiles could wait in ambush for unsuspecting buffoons such as myself to fly into.

Edited June 2, 2022 by Digitalvole

[Exorcet]

1 hour ago, Digitalvole said:

After a bit more buffoonery last night I’d have to agree with you @Exocet on the gas guzzling front, Hornet can carry more but uses more. I think I’m just used to seeing 6k gallons and thinking “oh pants, it’s home time.” But though it takes the Hornet a bit longer to do it, it can get up to a decent speed.

This is why fuel amount alone isn't a good indicator of range. Rule of thumb for range is to look at fuel fraction (fuel weight vs total weight) and that single engine is more efficient than multi engine. In the F-16 3,000-4,000 lbs is still a decent amount of fuel, even if it's less than bingo in other planes.

1 hour ago, Digitalvole said:

On the radar though, even in RWS I couldn’t lock a Mig 29 (who was about 5k above me cold) till 20miles. In the Hornet, though the Mig 29 was hot this time, it locked at 40 miles which was a bit of a surprise in its self. Doesn’t that 20 mile difference negate some of that speed advantage?

Aspect makes a huge difference. The F-18's radar range is only about 5-10% better. A hot MiG should be detected at about 40 nmi in the F-16 and maybe 45 nmi in the Hornet.

1 hour ago, Digitalvole said:

Talking of surprises, the mig I locked at 40 miles in the Hornet had an unexpected surprise for me. I shot an Amram at it from about 25 miles, watched it defend (could see the contrails and the little black dot that is strangely gets smaller the closer you get) and then got hit. I carried on flying straight and level towards where he had been before going defensive and I suddenly blew up! Turns out he fired an R77 Adder that flew around for 18 seconds before scoring him a posthumous kill, well played sir!

I really need to do some research on what my enemy carry, I didn’t know their missiles could wait in ambush for unsuspecting buffoons such as myself to fly into.

 

You want to assume that a missile is on its way if you're close enough to the enemy. After you have fired your shot, you want to crank at the very least, which puts the enemy at the gimbal limits of your radar. This makes it harder for their missiles to reach you. The closer they are, the more aggressively you want to defend. Fox 3 like R-77 isn't even the worst of it. Long range Fox 2 like the R-27ET or MICA-IR will not give any warning at all, ever.

[Digitalvole]

28 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Fox 3 like R-77 isn't even the worst of it. Long range Fox 2 like the R-27ET or MICA-IR will not give any warning at all, ever.

I didn’t get any kind of warning at all, I just suddenly went BooM!. I’m pretty sure it said R 77 but it was late and I was tired so maybe it was an R 27. Gave me a fright haha. 
 

28 minutes ago, Exorcet said:

Aspect makes a huge difference. The F-18's radar range is only about 5-10% better. A hot MiG should be detected at about 40 nmi in the F-16 and maybe 45 nmi in the Hornet.

Ah right, I was under the impression that hot or cold shouldn’t affect detection range due to the Doppler effect where as flanking does, hence the notch. Also I find detection range is the same in both but in the hornet as soon as it’s detected I can lock it, not so in the Viper. But because launch ranges are pretty much the same I suppose this is only really an issue if you have multiple targets that you need to fire on. 

I think I’m going to focus on SEAD/DEAD when I fly the Viper, that seems like what it’s best at. I find myself wanting to go back to the Harrier for AG stuff (though I’m beginning to get excited about the F15 E) and I suppose I’ll wait for the Eurofighter for AA stuff. I’m a mud mover at heart anyway.

Edited June 2, 2022 by Digitalvole

[swaps]

On 5/31/2022 at 11:30 AM, Digitalvole said:

I posted the other day in the F 18 forum about an experience I had comparing the 18 & 16s radar in bvr. It got moved btw. 

It was surprising to find the F18 out performing the F16 in BVR and it seems quite a few people are finding the F16 radar to be “underperforming” and ED say it’s correct as is and they must have good reason to not just say that, but also are going to show us a white paper on why that is.

This got me to thinking, (my wife immediately asked if something was burning) I remember a similar thing with the Hornets radar a while back. Then Wags (and 104th Maverick) posted a video on how to use it properly. This made all the difference to me and normal service was resumed. 

So I’m wondering if it is the same or a similar thing with the F16s? Are there some techniques required to get he most out of the FCR and increase lock range and/or reduce the likely hood of dropping the lock?

I’m most definitely NOT trying to start a debate on whether or not it is how it’s supposed to be, just wondering if there is some piece of the puzzle I’m missing as there was with the F18.

There are load of tutorials on youtube by many of the major players on here. I have watched them all and still find it only locks now and again. My latest problem was it not locking at all. Then the next days it with 12 bandits on radar in 2 waves a few miles away from each other  and all within 20 miles. It would lock 2 and let me change between which target to shoot at first but it should lock up to 10 and sometime locks the further away targets but not the nearer (12 miles) again only 2 of the group of 6.