Aquorys Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 As some people have complained about the F-16 currently being useless in BVR against aircraft like the JF-17, I did some test flights, just in single player against AI aircraft, and tried to dig up some information on how the F-16 compares to the JF-17 in real life. Here is what I found out. My test flights Situation: Initial distance 54nm, advantage JF-17, F-16 (me) at 30k ft, M0.97, JF-17 at 36k ft, M1.04. 5 Sorties I decided to fire at more conservative speeds between M1.1 and M1.2, because you'll probably not be able to go M1.4 all the time. The JF-17 fired between M1.2 and M1.5, typically around M1.45. The maximum range that I could get the target bugged was 33 nm, and the longest range missile shot I could realize was 31.5 nm. The radar contact was unreliable. RWS pretty much didn't work at all, so I did almost everything in TWS, but TWS would take between 13 and 25 seconds between first indicating a radar contact to actually being able to bug or lock the target. The JF-17 typically fired around 32 nm, the longest range shot was 38.5 nm. It could fire first every time. Since the JF-17 had a tactical advantage regarding speed and altitude, that put me very close to the no-escape zone of his weapons before I was able to launch. The bigger problem however was that in most of the cases, AMRAAM guidance failed, and the JF-17 escaped with absolutely ridiculous defensive maneuvers. It would typically change course by only about 5 degrees to starboard for a few seconds, descend to between 14k and 20k ft, and then resume on the original heading and climb again, and the AMRAAMs would immediately go completely stupid and fly straight into the ground several miles in front of the target, and that was not a kinetic energy problem, it was a guidance problem. This was also confirmed by the one time where my first AMRAAM didn't fail, and the JF-17 even defended much more effectively by turning left about 100 degrees while diving to ~10k ft, because when that one hit him, it was still doing M1.3 despite his several course changes. The final outcome of these 5 sorties was that I ate an SD-10 once, but could still win the other 4 fights. The best one was a single-shot, the others required 3 or 4 AMRAAMs before one would actually work properly. The real world aircraft I am not sure which version of the JF-17 is supposed to be modeled in DCS. If it is one of the earlier models, it would have a KLJ7 V-1 mechanical planar array radar, not too different from the one in the F-16. The general consensus among the aeronautical engineers and radar guys seems to be that the F-16 should be able to detect the JF-17 before the JF-17 detects the F-16, with a roughly 15-20% range advantage for the F-16. However, if it is a pretty recent version (we're talking 2018+, more likely 2020+), then it could have a KLJ7A radar (retrofitted or as standard), which is a completely different beast, because this one is an AESA radar. I would not be surprised if that one were able to detect an F-16 first. So if you're complaining that the F-16 struggles against the JF-17 in this case, that could be quite plausible, and there would not be anything wrong with that at all. Conclusion From everything I could figure out, my final impressions are: Assuming we're dealing with pre-2018 JF-17 models, detection ranges are backwards between the F-16 and the JF-17 RWS in the F-16 currently is virtually unusable TWS in the F-16 has significant functional/usage problems, tracks are unreliable AMRAAM guidance currently fails almost always against targets that perform even just moderate maneuvers in the vertical plane Better tactics still wins, unless you run out of missiles (which might be due to bad tactics though) Nope. F-16 / Su-33 / Ka-50 F-16 Checklists (Kneeboard compatible) F-16 BVR training missions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skywalker22 Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 On this version of JF-17 we have KLJ-7 V-1 radar. I went through some extensive testing on these same 2 aircrafts, but the conclusion was that radar, specially on F-16 is fine. Not sure anything about chinese radar, so can`t say anything more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team BIGNEWY Posted June 27, 2022 ED Team Share Posted June 27, 2022 Please also read Wags mini update on the Viper regarding radar 1 Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, PIMAX Crystal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nighthawk2174 Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 39 minutes ago, Aquorys said: As some people have complained about the F-16 currently being useless in BVR against aircraft like the JF-17, I did some test flights, just in single player against AI aircraft, and tried to dig up some information on how the F-16 compares to the JF-17 in real life. Here is what I found out. My test flights Situation: Initial distance 54nm, advantage JF-17, F-16 (me) at 30k ft, M0.97, JF-17 at 36k ft, M1.04. 5 Sorties I decided to fire at more conservative speeds between M1.1 and M1.2, because you'll probably not be able to go M1.4 all the time. The JF-17 fired between M1.2 and M1.5, typically around M1.45. The maximum range that I could get the target bugged was 33 nm, and the longest range missile shot I could realize was 31.5 nm. The radar contact was unreliable. RWS pretty much didn't work at all, so I did almost everything in TWS, but TWS would take between 13 and 25 seconds between first indicating a radar contact to actually being able to bug or lock the target. The JF-17 typically fired around 32 nm, the longest range shot was 38.5 nm. It could fire first every time. Since the JF-17 had a tactical advantage regarding speed and altitude, that put me very close to the no-escape zone of his weapons before I was able to launch. The bigger problem however was that in most of the cases, AMRAAM guidance failed, and the JF-17 escaped with absolutely ridiculous defensive maneuvers. It would typically change course by only about 5 degrees to starboard for a few seconds, descend to between 14k and 20k ft, and then resume on the original heading and climb again, and the AMRAAMs would immediately go completely stupid and fly straight into the ground several miles in front of the target, and that was not a kinetic energy problem, it was a guidance problem. This was also confirmed by the one time where my first AMRAAM didn't fail, and the JF-17 even defended much more effectively by turning left about 100 degrees while diving to ~10k ft, because when that one hit him, it was still doing M1.3 despite his several course changes. The final outcome of these 5 sorties was that I ate an SD-10 once, but could still win the other 4 fights. The best one was a single-shot, the others required 3 or 4 AMRAAMs before one would actually work properly. The real world aircraft I am not sure which version of the JF-17 is supposed to be modeled in DCS. If it is one of the earlier models, it would have a KLJ7 V-1 mechanical planar array radar, not too different from the one in the F-16. The general consensus among the aeronautical engineers and radar guys seems to be that the F-16 should be able to detect the JF-17 before the JF-17 detects the F-16, with a roughly 15-20% range advantage for the F-16. However, if it is a pretty recent version (we're talking 2018+, more likely 2020+), then it could have a KLJ7A radar (retrofitted or as standard), which is a completely different beast, because this one is an AESA radar. I would not be surprised if that one were able to detect an F-16 first. So if you're complaining that the F-16 struggles against the JF-17 in this case, that could be quite plausible, and there would not be anything wrong with that at all. Conclusion From everything I could figure out, my final impressions are: Assuming we're dealing with pre-2018 JF-17 models, detection ranges are backwards between the F-16 and the JF-17 RWS in the F-16 currently is virtually unusable TWS in the F-16 has significant functional/usage problems, tracks are unreliable AMRAAM guidance currently fails almost always against targets that perform even just moderate maneuvers in the vertical plane Better tactics still wins, unless you run out of missiles (which might be due to bad tactics though) Nope. Note that the Jeff has HPRF which has better detection range. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquorys Posted June 27, 2022 Author Share Posted June 27, 2022 48 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said: Please also read Wags mini update on the Viper regarding radar Thanks for the link. I just read it, that goes mostly in the direction of what seem to be the current problem sources with regards to the F-16's radar performance and usage (as modeled in DCS). I can try to run this same scenario again after the July update and see how much impact it has, and will follow up here if I get around to doing that. 1 F-16 / Su-33 / Ka-50 F-16 Checklists (Kneeboard compatible) F-16 BVR training missions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torbernite Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 As for the detect range, the smaller size and lower head RCS of JF might make a difference. However I also tends to regard APG-68+ARMRAAM combination is underperforming instead of KLJ-7+SD-10 is overperforming. If you check the track you can find the SD-10 has a more optimized maneuvering strategy than ARMRAAM. When ARMRAAM faces an off-and-on radar lock you can find the missile suddenly turning back to some "default" attitude(I guess it might be doing dead-reckoning on target while considering only heading and speed but no overload at the point of losing track) and start to track later again, losing much more energy. This is also found on many other missiles like R-77, but not SD-10. I think this might be the reason why SD-10 often shows better terminal energy than ARMRAAM, although it's heavier and bulky in diameter. And SD-10 has no INS now and if you shoot and lose track, the missile would be wasted. You can also take advantage of this. 1 Human allowed, demon allowed, Deka never allowed. Distort allowed, provoke allowed, fight back never allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxy_99 Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Torbernite said: As for the detect range, the smaller size and lower head RCS of JF might make a difference. However I also tends to regard APG-68+ARMRAAM combination is underperforming instead of KLJ-7+SD-10 is overperforming. If you check the track you can find the SD-10 has a more optimized maneuvering strategy than ARMRAAM. When ARMRAAM faces an off-and-on radar lock you can find the missile suddenly turning back to some "default" attitude(I guess it might be doing dead-reckoning on target while considering only heading and speed but no overload at the point of losing track) and start to track later again, losing much more energy. This is also found on many other missiles like R-77, but not SD-10. I think this might be the reason why SD-10 often shows better terminal energy than ARMRAAM, although it's heavier and bulky in diameter. And SD-10 has no INS now and if you shoot and lose track, the missile would be wasted. You can also take advantage of this. Thats because the SD-10 is using the old missile API that the 120 was on. Thus has not been moved over yet to the new API. Edited June 27, 2022 by Coxy_99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Napillo Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 idk why this is posted here, if you have a problem with the F-16, then that should go in that forum, not here. You're assuming the F-16 and the JF-17 essentially have the same RCS, they do not. They have different radars, different computers attached to those radars, different frequencies used, get out of here with your 'i cant shoot down a JF-17 so something is wrong with it'. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mustang25 Posted June 27, 2022 Share Posted June 27, 2022 15 minutes ago, Napillo said: idk why this is posted here, if you have a problem with the F-16, then that should go in that forum, not here. You're assuming the F-16 and the JF-17 essentially have the same RCS, they do not. They have different radars, different computers attached to those radars, different frequencies used, get out of here with your 'i cant shoot down a JF-17 so something is wrong with it'. It actually was posted in the Viper forum then moved over here I guess by one of the mods. No idea why it got moved here though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torbernite Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 7小时前,Coxy_99说: Thats because the SD-10 is using the old missile API that the 120 was on. Thus has not been moved over yet to the new API. I don't know how is 120 earlier before the new API. But I wonder if so why it's same as those old red missiles with no API update. I think it's more likely an old problem ignored in API update. Human allowed, demon allowed, Deka never allowed. Distort allowed, provoke allowed, fight back never allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torbernite Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 5小时前,Napillo说: idk why this is posted here, if you have a problem with the F-16, then that should go in that forum, not here. You're assuming the F-16 and the JF-17 essentially have the same RCS, they do not. They have different radars, different computers attached to those radars, different frequencies used, get out of here with your 'i cant shoot down a JF-17 so something is wrong with it'. 5小时前,Mustang25说: It actually was posted in the Viper forum then moved over here I guess by one of the mods. No idea why it got moved here though. It's now moved back. It's still strange why it used to appear in JF's bug forum. Is there some automatic system or moved by some manager? I don't think they would. It's unimaginable that "that opinion" is not only among normal players but also in forum managers. I wonder if "F-16 vs. Typhoon" or "ARMRAAM vs. meteor" would also be moved to Typhoon's bug forum in the future. Human allowed, demon allowed, Deka never allowed. Distort allowed, provoke allowed, fight back never allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHOGX5 Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 10 hours ago, Torbernite said: As for the detect range, the smaller size and lower head RCS of JF might make a difference. However I also tends to regard APG-68+ARMRAAM combination is underperforming instead of KLJ-7+SD-10 is overperforming. If you check the track you can find the SD-10 has a more optimized maneuvering strategy than ARMRAAM. When ARMRAAM faces an off-and-on radar lock you can find the missile suddenly turning back to some "default" attitude(I guess it might be doing dead-reckoning on target while considering only heading and speed but no overload at the point of losing track) and start to track later again, losing much more energy. This is also found on many other missiles like R-77, but not SD-10. I think this might be the reason why SD-10 often shows better terminal energy than ARMRAAM, although it's heavier and bulky in diameter. And SD-10 has no INS now and if you shoot and lose track, the missile would be wasted. You can also take advantage of this. You also have to keep in mind that the JF-17s and the F-16s radars in DCS have been modeled by different companies to different levels of fidelity where the JF-17s radar is closer to real life than the F-16. So it's not as simple as "this radar has a longer range than this radar" but rather that the two different radar systems interpret the same physical phenomena in different ways. As an example the JF-17s radar simulates probability of detection where there is no "max range" of the radar in the same sense as there currently is in the F-16. These numbers are not accurate, but as an example, in the DCS F-16, if a target with certain parameters is at 35.1nm you will basically have a 0% probability of detecting it while at 34.9 miles you'll have a 100% probability of detection. In the DCS JF-17 you might have a 50% probability of detection at 35nm while you have a 10% probability of detection at 50nm. So basically, at 50nm you might only see the target every tenth sweep which may be several minutes apart in RWS, but if you attempt a STT on that radar hit it will just blast pulse after pulse onto the same sliver of sky and start getting returns a lot quicker as each pulse has its own probability of generating a return, giving you RWS hits and a stable lock at a much further range than a radar that doesn't model that kind of behaviour at all and even has an STT range that is shorter than its RWS detection range... And don't even get me started on the AMRAAM. If we just focus on the AMRAAM issue you brought up of losing a lock, the DCS AMRAAM doesn't seem to have any form of memory function or interpolation of the last known flight path. You can notch a DCS AMRAAM for 0.1 seconds and it will most likely do a u-turn away from the target, start a descending spiral or just fly in a straight line and not even attempt to reacquire the target. 6 -Col. Russ Everts opinion on surface-to-air missiles: "It makes you feel a little better if it's coming for one of your buddies. However, if it's coming for you, it doesn't make you feel too good, but it does rearrange your priorities." DCS Wishlist: MC-130E Combat Talon | F/A-18F Lot 26 | HH-60G Pave Hawk | E-2 Hawkeye/C-2 Greyhound | EA-6A/B Prowler | J-35F2/J Draken | RA-5C Vigilante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Torbernite Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 9小时前,WHOGX5说: You also have to keep in mind that the JF-17s and the F-16s radars in DCS have been modeled by different companies to different levels of fidelity where the JF-17s radar is closer to real life than the F-16. So it's not as simple as "this radar has a longer range than this radar" but rather that the two different radar systems interpret the same physical phenomena in different ways. As an example the JF-17s radar simulates probability of detection where there is no "max range" of the radar in the same sense as there currently is in the F-16. These numbers are not accurate, but as an example, in the DCS F-16, if a target with certain parameters is at 35.1nm you will basically have a 0% probability of detecting it while at 34.9 miles you'll have a 100% probability of detection. In the DCS JF-17 you might have a 50% probability of detection at 35nm while you have a 10% probability of detection at 50nm. So basically, at 50nm you might only see the target every tenth sweep which may be several minutes apart in RWS, but if you attempt a STT on that radar hit it will just blast pulse after pulse onto the same sliver of sky and start getting returns a lot quicker as each pulse has its own probability of generating a return, giving you RWS hits and a stable lock at a much further range than a radar that doesn't model that kind of behaviour at all and even has an STT range that is shorter than its RWS detection range... And don't even get me started on the AMRAAM. If we just focus on the AMRAAM issue you brought up of losing a lock, the DCS AMRAAM doesn't seem to have any form of memory function or interpolation of the last known flight path. You can notch a DCS AMRAAM for 0.1 seconds and it will most likely do a u-turn away from the target, start a descending spiral or just fly in a straight line and not even attempt to reacquire the target. Totally agree. Let me apologize if I caused any misunderstanding. The radar difference is already there before the detection probability update of JF. I haven't tried the new radar simulation yet because several bugs in that update(already fixed in latest update). So I just focus on the old version and forget that. And about the ARMRAAM actually I want to say the violent maneuver logic. I'm sorry if I didn't focus on that point. It used to have some problem in autopilot logic and often performs sudden violent maneuver during lofting trajectory, causing energy bleeding and a shorter range. I remembered it's fixed to a certain degree in an earlier version, along with some guidance fix, but when tracking target it seems ED missiles still does that way. Or is that performance just caused by the lack of target memory? 1 Human allowed, demon allowed, Deka never allowed. Distort allowed, provoke allowed, fight back never allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WHOGX5 Posted June 28, 2022 Share Posted June 28, 2022 4 minutes ago, Torbernite said: Totally agree. Let me apologize if I caused any misunderstanding. The radar difference is already there before the detection probability update of JF. I haven't tried the new radar simulation yet because several bugs in that update(already fixed in latest update). So I just focus on the old version and forget that. And about the ARMRAAM actually I want to say the violent maneuver logic. I'm sorry if I didn't focus on that point. It used to have some problem in autopilot logic and often performs sudden violent maneuver during lofting trajectory, causing energy bleeding and a shorter range. I remembered it's fixed to a certain degree in an earlier version, along with some guidance fix, but when tracking target it seems ED missiles still does that way. Or is that performance just caused by the lack of target memory? Ah ok, gotcha. And no, the missile behaviour is probably not just due to a lack of target memory. If that were the case I'd assume the missile would simply maintain its current control surface deflection or alternatively fly a ballistic trajectory. However, since the missile is actively maneuvering away from any sort of last known or predicted location of the target after losing lock there must be some part of ED's missile guidance code which is seriously borked. It's such an unreasonably odd behaviour. Regarding the lofting parameters, I haven't really taken a deep look at it myself so I can't really comment on it. -Col. Russ Everts opinion on surface-to-air missiles: "It makes you feel a little better if it's coming for one of your buddies. However, if it's coming for you, it doesn't make you feel too good, but it does rearrange your priorities." DCS Wishlist: MC-130E Combat Talon | F/A-18F Lot 26 | HH-60G Pave Hawk | E-2 Hawkeye/C-2 Greyhound | EA-6A/B Prowler | J-35F2/J Draken | RA-5C Vigilante Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquorys Posted June 29, 2022 Author Share Posted June 29, 2022 On 6/27/2022 at 5:01 PM, nighthawk2174 said: Note that the Jeff has HPRF which has better detection range. The F-16 does too, the AN/APG-68 is a multimode radar F-16 / Su-33 / Ka-50 F-16 Checklists (Kneeboard compatible) F-16 BVR training missions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aquorys Posted June 29, 2022 Author Share Posted June 29, 2022 On 6/27/2022 at 8:56 PM, Napillo said: idk why this is posted here, if you have a problem with the F-16, then that should go in that forum, not here. You're assuming the F-16 and the JF-17 essentially have the same RCS, they do not. They have different radars, different computers attached to those radars, different frequencies used, get out of here with your 'i cant shoot down a JF-17 so something is wrong with it'. Just to clarify: I did not post this in any of the bugs forums, it was moved there, I'm assuming by moderators. My original post was in the general DCS: F-16 Viper forum. Regarding the radar detection ranges, the different RCS was already taken into account. The difference in detection ranges that I stated is what seems to be the consensus among real world aeronautics and radar specialists, but it is important to note that those are not measurements, they are still just theories, so the actual performance may turn out to be different. Regarding "i can't shoot down a JF-17": I didn't say that. In fact, I said that I won 4 out of the 5 test engagements. I don't know why this ended up in the JF-17 bugs forums temporarily, but as I already stated, I didn't ever put it there, someone or something else did. F-16 / Su-33 / Ka-50 F-16 Checklists (Kneeboard compatible) F-16 BVR training missions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nighthawk2174 Posted June 29, 2022 Share Posted June 29, 2022 1 hour ago, Aquorys said: The F-16 does too, the AN/APG-68 is a multimode radar Never heard of it having hprf, it’s a mprf radar. It does have a lprf mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCS FIGHTER PILOT Posted July 2, 2022 Share Posted July 2, 2022 (edited) Honestly I don't find the Jf-17 to be all that challenging anymore in any of the full fidelity US aircraft right now since the Jeff's radar and SD-10's were appropriately nerfed. The Viper, even though it has a weaker radar, has far better acceleration and top speed than the Jeff allowing it to more or less control the fight (i.e. it can engage and disengage as it pleases for the most part). When it comes to the Hornet its a similar story. Even though its slower than the Viper by quite a bit, its still quite a bit faster than the Thunder. In addition to this, the F-18 does appear to have a radar nearly equal in strength to the Jf-17's currently, (though the Jf-17 will detect the hornet first since its bigger but only by a few miles). I will mention however that the Jeff does currently hold one unfair (and likely unrealistic) advantage. It is able to operate its SPJ and radar simultaneously without either one affecting the other. As we have seen in the Hornet, Viper. and recently the Mirage, activating an onboard jammer will at best weaken the strength of the radar if not shut it off completely due to the power its drawing. FC3 aircraft and the Tomcat can also currently use their jammers and radars simultaneously but I would imagine that has to due with the simplistic modeling of them. I once tried bringing this issue up in the designated Jf-17 section of the forums but the fanboy's went somewhat ballistic. Edited July 2, 2022 by DCS FIGHTER PILOT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coxy_99 Posted July 2, 2022 Share Posted July 2, 2022 On 6/28/2022 at 1:17 AM, Torbernite said: I don't know how is 120 earlier before the new API. But I wonder if so why it's same as those old red missiles with no API update. I think it's more likely an old problem ignored in API update. SD-10 is by far the best performing missile in DCS right now in time, It needs to be moved to the new API,Then see what changes it has, I wouldnt say ignored but not even got round to it yet. As working of a priority list. As for the thread, Both aircraft are multi role, Both are not A/A superior fighters. You be looking at F-15 for that stuff. But we already knew that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 105 km for 5m squared RCS Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobel Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 vor 16 Stunden schrieb AeriaGloria: 105 km for 5m squared RCS is it the same in DCS? i dont have the JF17. and apart from that, this "document" is considered null void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 (edited) 58 minutes ago, Hobel said: is it the same in DCS? i dont have the JF17. and apart from that, this "document" is considered null void. It is by the manufacturer, same quality as brochure numbers you would find for any other radar. Here is Quaggles test of the radar as of 227 days ago on 2.7.8 release. RWS has a high PRF range of 107 km against Su-27 with 5.5m squared RCS signature. 118 km in VS mode. Since manufacturer number is for 5m squared, and this is 10% bigger signature, you can expect slightly larger numbers. In ILV it goes down to 94 km and 80 km in medium PRF. In addition this “brochure” number isn’t 105 km exactly, but “Atleast” 105. So seems just about right to me as far as publicly available info goes Edited July 5, 2022 by AeriaGloria Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobel Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 vor 40 Minuten schrieb AeriaGloria: Here is Quaggles test of the radar as of 227 days ago on 2.7.8 release That's a very long time, are there more recent tests? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeriaGloria Posted July 5, 2022 Share Posted July 5, 2022 7 minutes ago, Hobel said: That's a very long time, are there more recent tests? Not by Quaggles. Idk about F-16, but that is the patch after the Mirage got it’s new radar modeling and after the JF-17 had its radar overhauled to include lots of SNR studies, fluid change RCS with aspect for all airframes detected, loss of detection range in rain. I believe the only change since then in terms of detection distance for JF-17 is that, the range detection occurs is slightly randomized. Sometimes a target may be detected slightly further then max range and sometimes slightly less. So if someone is to do a test they would probably need to do an average of a couple tests Black Shark Den Squadron Member: We are open to new recruits, click here to check us out or apply to join! https://blacksharkden.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted July 13, 2022 ED Team Share Posted July 13, 2022 This is an ok discussion but not a great bug report. First 1 bug per report, if you see an issue with the F-16 and JF-17, then separate reports in those sections are needed. Also as noted by @BIGNEWY, the F-16 has had some tuning done. Please make the appropriate reports in the appropriate section, Systems are under the module, weapons are here. Thanks! Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts