Radar Expected Detection Range and Elevation?

[pauldy]

In BVR modes I don't quite understand what the expected target detection range and antenna elevation setting do.

Usually at longer distances like 50km an above, yes i can track targets but on shorter ranges like 20km or less, I'm having a hard time detecting targets... or my radar can't detect them until too close that, ..using the CAC modes like vertical, boresight or Helmet is more practical..

I've made a track file wherein i setup 4 ship Eagle targets around 20+ km from me. I moved my azimuth to scan on the right, switched my PRF settings to High, changed my detection ranges to more than 20km and adjusted the elevation settings of the radar antenna to +5 or +6 looking up.. since the 4 ship is above me.

None of the F-15s appeared on radar until i was well within the visual range.. Am i missing something here?

 

n001 no track.trk

Edited July 6, 2024 by pauldy

[Mike_Romeo]

24 minutes ago, pauldy said:

In BVR modes I don't quite understand what the expected target detection range and antenna elevation setting do.

In soviet Russia, fighter pilots are usually guided by a GCI who tells them distance and altitude to the enemy. Because of that, they built the radar in such a way so that you basically only set the range and altitude difference between you and the target. Based on the expected range and altitude difference, the radar will then looked at the expected place in the sky. Here a visualization:

 

[Ironhand]

53 minutes ago, pauldy said:

In BVR modes I don't quite understand what the expected target detection range and antenna elevation setting do.

Usually at longer distances like 50km an above, yes i can track targets but on shorter ranges like 20km or less, I'm having a hard time detecting targets... or my radar can't detect them until too close that, ..using the CAC modes like vertical, boresight or Helmet is more practical..

I've made a track file wherein i setup 4 ship Eagle targets around 20+ km from me. I moved my azimuth to scan on the right, switched my PRF settings to High, changed my detection ranges to more than 20km and adjusted the elevation settings of the radar antenna to +5 or +6 looking up.. since the 4 ship is above me.

None of the F-15s appeared on radar until i was well within the visual range.. Am i missing something here?

 

n001 no track.trk 195.32 kB · 1 download

 

I never bother with the expected target range setting because it makes your life more difficult than it needs to be. If you leave it alone, unless there’s a huge altitude differential, the most you’ll need is +1 for the target elevation…+2 if they’re right on top of you.

In your scenario, if you want to use “expected target range”, increase the target elevation +1 for each kilometer the targets are above you. +4, +5, means that they are 4000 or 5000 meters above you at 20 km distance. If they’re 2000 m above you, it’d be +2.

Edited July 6, 2024 by Ironhand

[Ironhand]

Just checked your TRK. The closing rate is much to fast to be playing around like you were at that range. By the time you set yourself up with what you thought was the right elevation, the range was down to something like 8 km. So they were now well under your setting.

I took control of your TRK at the start and flew it without changing the expected target range. Take a look. That's a pretty intense scenario and I was more concerned with surviving than making kills. But picking them up wasn't a problem. TRK attached.

Ironhand-n001 no track.trk

[Skuva]

The concensus is, unless you know the enemy's distance and altitude, leave the range at 10km. Now what I can add is a visualization of how narrow the scanning zone is compared to our intuition, and how to read the elevation relative to the little vampire teeth on the right-hand scale that move up and down as you pitch.

In DCS this is the vertical range for the Su-27 radar scan zone (at zero elevation):

which in your HUD would look like this

Whenever you align the vampire teeth to the elevation bar, it means the scan zone is positioned relative to the hud just as shown in the picture. At the 10km range scale each tick on the vertical scale (...,-2,-1,0,+1,+2,...) is equivalent to lowering or rasing the zone by about 6° (at least for the smaller tick values). What I do is use a dial to control the elevation and set its curve like this,

With this each "tick" now move approximately 10°, making it so each zone slots right below or above the previous one with little overlap. This reduce a lot of processing power my smooth brain need to do bvr. In this particular case I for sure lose a lot of the vertical range (120° -> 50°) but, from my experience, if the enemy is outside these angles I'm either way too high, or the enemy is way too close for me to still be trying to bvr and should already start using vertical scan.

Edited July 6, 2024 by Skuva

[Wyvern]

all the setting does is point your radar, while the distance is just there so you can finetune the elevation a bit more

 

[Ironhand]

This was something I was working on years ago. I had uploaded it to YT to see what the start looked like. But life overtook me and I never finished it. There are no arrows pointing to what I’m referring to but you’ll know where to look. It might be somewhat helpful.
 

 

Edited July 7, 2024 by Ironhand

[AeriaGloria]

On 7/6/2024 at 1:29 PM, Skuva said:

The concensus is, unless you know the enemy's distance and altitude, leave the range at 10km. Now what I can add is a visualization of how narrow the scanning zone is compared to our intuition, and how to read the elevation relative to the little vampire teeth on the right-hand scale that move up and down as you pitch.

In DCS this is the vertical range for the Su-27 radar scan zone (at zero elevation):

which in your HUD would look like this

Whenever you align the vampire teeth to the elevation bar, it means the scan zone is positioned relative to the hud just as shown in the picture. At the 10km range scale each tick on the vertical scale (...,-2,-1,0,+1,+2,...) is equivalent to lowering or rasing the zone by about 6° (at least for the smaller tick values). What I do is use a dial to control the elevation and set its curve like this,

With this each "tick" now move approximately 10°, making it so each zone slots right below or above the previous one with little overlap. This reduce a lot of processing power my smooth brain need to do bvr. In this particular case I for sure lose a lot of the vertical range (120° -> 50°) but, from my experience, if the enemy is outside these angles I'm either way too high, or the enemy is way too close for me to still be trying to bvr and should already start using vertical scan.

 

I appreciate that you specify the elevation scan area. I assume this is sourced from the Su-27SK manual? 
 

As for the vampire teeth as you say, it is my understanding that only shows pitch elevation. If flying nose level, and radar vertical line is right next to it; then yes radar is looking right in front of nose. If you pitch up 45 degrees, the “vampire teeth” will be near the top of the vertical HUD line that covers +/-60 degree pitch. But the small vertical line showing radar scan will still be level and stabilized pointing forward. Or rather, vampire teeth are showing nose pitch and the vertical line the sensor scan elevation, on a +/-60 degree scale. Is that basically what you mean? 
 

If you wanted to set target range for each delta H increment to equal 10 degrees, set it to 6 km. 

With a full fidelity it would be harder as the delta H increments are coarser the farther from 0 you are. So I think in full fidelity, like coming MiG-29, we might have to play with larger expected ranges and smaller scan zone increments in order to get consistent coverage with only -6/-4/-2-1/0/1/2/4/6/8/10 delta H options 

For OP, you can keep the target range at 10 km and just manually move the scan range up. It takes 3.6 seconds for one scan, so maybe move scan up or down every 5 seconds or so. 

If you set expected range to 6 km, there will be almost no overlap between elevation steps, and you will get the most coverage with the least amount of button presses 

[Skuva]

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

I appreciate that you specify the elevation scan area. I assume this is sourced from the Su-27SK manual? 

Its sourced from in-game measurements.

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

I appreciate that you specify the elevation scan area. I assume this is sourced from the Su-27SK manual? 
 

As for the vampire teeth as you say, it is my understanding that only shows pitch elevation. If flying nose level, and radar vertical line is right next to it; then yes radar is looking right in front of nose. If you pitch up 45 degrees, the “vampire teeth” will be near the top of the vertical HUD line that covers +/-60 degree pitch. But the small vertical line showing radar scan will still be level and stabilized pointing forward. Or rather, vampire teeth are showing nose pitch and the vertical line the sensor scan elevation, on a +/-60 degree scale. Is that basically what you mean?

If you set the elevation to values other than 0 and align the teeth you will have the zone right in front of you again. Eg. you set at +5, pitch up until teeth align, now the zone is yet again going from the bottom of the range scale to the top of the glass.

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

With a full fidelity it would be harder as the delta H increments are coarser the farther from 0 you are. So I think in full fidelity, like coming MiG-29, we might have to play with larger expected ranges and smaller scan zone increments in order to get consistent coverage with only -6/-4/-2-1/0/1/2/4/6/8/10 delta H options 

Its already like this, at higher elevation values the tilted angle gets smaller (because trigonometry). But I don't see much use searching that much higher or lower, because the target is already too close, and the time it takes for a full scan is so big the target might just get in and out of the zone meanwhile.

Edited July 8, 2024 by Skuva

[draconus]

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

As for the vampire teeth as you say, it is my understanding that only shows pitch elevation. If flying nose level, and radar vertical line is right next to it; then yes radar is looking right in front of nose. If you pitch up 45 degrees, the “vampire teeth” will be near the top of the vertical HUD line that covers +/-60 degree pitch. But the small vertical line showing radar scan will still be level and stabilized pointing forward. Or rather, vampire teeth are showing nose pitch and the vertical line the sensor scan elevation, on a +/-60 degree scale.

Yes, correct. @Ironhand's video shows that perfectly.

[AeriaGloria]

12 hours ago, Skuva said:

Its sourced from in-game measurements.

If you set the elevation to values other than 0 and align the teeth you will have the zone right in front of you again. Eg. you set at +5, pitch up until teeth align, now the zone is yet again going from the bottom of the range scale to the top of the glass.

Its already like this, at higher elevation values the tilted angle gets smaller (because trigonometry). But I don't see much use searching that much higher or lower, because the target is already too close, and the time it takes for a full scan is so big the target might just get in and out of the zone meanwhile.

 

Okay I see what you mean, vampire teeth and elevation cue lines up means radar is basically boresighted. By “straight ahead” I thought you meant 0 degrees elevation 

As for the delta H values, no they are not realistic in game. You can set -3/3, -5/5, -7/7, -9/9 delta H values that are just not available in reality. So using ours or my technique you would come to basically 6-10 degree gaps where without 3/5/7/9 settings, you can’t ensure full coverage throughout the elevation range 

Works fine in FC3 now. But not how it would work in reality or a full fidelity module that doesn’t give you any number between 1 and 10 as a delta H possibility. 
 

The MiG-29 9.12/13 is the same way. If you set expected distance to 12 km, every single delta H would move it a little less then 5 degrees. and when you got above 2 and have to skip odd number delta H, every jump of 2 delta H will only move scan zone about 10 degrees. That way you have no “gaps” 
 

At that expected range, you can still scan 45 degrees up and 30 degrees down at delta H limits. In order to hit max mechanical limit, you would need expected range below 11 km got up and expected range below 7 km for down. 

EDIT: looking at it again I don’t see -1/1 delta H for Su-27. Maybe it’s there or not, I’ll have to read the manual. If this is true, you would really want 12 km distance for full coverage within +45/-30 degrees elevation 

Edited July 8, 2024 by AeriaGloria

[Ironhand]

Yes, the increment is in 2km units.

[pauldy]

Sorry for the very late reply, been busy with irl stuff and photo editing.. but yes.. thank you all for the replies.

I now just leave the radar at 10 km expected range and zero up to +/-2 scan elevation..

I always thought i needed to up the expected scan and elevation ranges or i won't see the targets.. lels

I've been reading the PDF manual but i guess i couldn't understand it i guess since im more of a visual learner anyways rip..

I mainly fly offline againt AI anyways.. At least i can now re-commit and counter attack faster when coming from the BVR phases and moving to mid and WVR ranges or so.. hhh

 

@Ironhand yes.. when i made the track i just wanted to experiment on the radar. Thats why i set immortality and labels to ON...hhh i know ill just get clobbered by that 4 ship eagles even if they only had guns hhh

Thanks for that video tutorial too  ..need to watch it again until i get how to fully use the radar

Edited July 9, 2024 by pauldy

[Ironhand]

9 hours ago, pauldy said:

i set immortality and labels to ON

Ahhh…you mean I had nothing to fear?    I never opened the file in the ME to see how it was set up. Anytime you’re having difficulty, just ask.

[AeriaGloria]

23 hours ago, pauldy said:

Sorry for the very late reply, been busy with irl stuff and photo editing.. but yes.. thank you all for the replies.

I now just leave the radar at 10 km expected range and zero up to +/-2 scan elevation..

I always thought i needed to up the expected scan and elevation ranges or i won't see the targets.. lels

I've been reading the PDF manual but i guess i couldn't understand it i guess since im more of a visual learner anyways rip..

I mainly fly offline againt AI anyways.. At least i can now re-commit and counter attack faster when coming from the BVR phases and moving to mid and WVR ranges or so.. hhh

 

@Ironhand yes.. when i made the track i just wanted to experiment on the radar. Thats why i set immortality and labels to ON...hhh i know ill just get clobbered by that 4 ship eagles even if they only had guns hhh

Thanks for that video tutorial too  ..need to watch it again until i get how to fully use the radar

 

Cool, I usually keep it at 10 km and go up and down 1. Gives a nice about 4 degree overlap to not miss too much.
 

As for range, at high altitudes and forward aspect you’ll get 60-80 km range. Closer to 35-40 km if front aspect and on the deck

 

At rear aspect: you’ll get 30-50 km when high up and 20-30 km down low. It will depend on look up angle, RCS, PRF, and remember thar you will always detect something 25% further then you can track it. Same is true for IRST, it’s part of how the computer builds a target in memory. It needs something 25% probability of detection to display a target and track, but like 50% to actually lock. 

[pauldy]

I always find it interesting as to why the N001 has roughly the same detection range as with the Mirage 2000's RDM.. I assume the N001's antenna size is larger than the RDM. I was thinking it should be able to see targets further out..

Software and electronic advancements i guess?

Edited July 11, 2024 by pauldy

[draconus]

On 7/11/2024 at 5:30 AM, pauldy said:

I always find it interesting as to why the N001 has roughly the same detection range as with the Mirage 2000's RDM.. I assume the N001's antenna size is larger than the RDM. I was thinking it should be able to see targets further out..

Software and electronic advancements i guess?

Yes, good thinking. The radars work with the same physics but are not made the same way - antenna type and tech, quality, power, signal filtering and computing units - it all matters.

*Keep in mind it's also simulator with modules created by different parties, based on different data, not always 100% accurate and not always 100% documented in the first place.

Edited July 12, 2024 by draconus

[Ironhand]

6 hours ago, pauldy said:

I always find it interesting as to why the N001 has roughly the same detection range as with the Mirage 2000's RDM.. I assume the N001's antenna size is larger than the RDM. I was thinking it should be able to see targets further out..

Software and electronic advancements i guess?

 

If we're talking specifically about the RDM in the real world, while the ranges are similar, I believe the RMD range is based on a 5m² RCS, while the N001's is based on 3m². So not quite the same thing.

[AeriaGloria]

On 7/11/2024 at 12:48 AM, draconus said:

Yes, good thinking. The radars work with the same physics but are not made the same way - antenna type and tech, quality, power, signal filtering and computing units - it all matters. The radar table above is for DCS 2.7.16. There were some major radar changes in M-2000C module since 2.7.8 - might be worth checking. Here's the table for 2.8:

*Keep in mind it's also simulator with modules created by different parties, based on different data, not always 100% accurate and not always 100% documented in the first place.

While the look down table I posted is from 2.7 (because that’s the latest Quayle’s has made), you’ll see that my radar range chart above it is from 2.9.046, as it has F-15E included. 
 

Mirage numbers are basically identical in both charts, but many other modules are updated 

On 7/11/2024 at 3:39 AM, Ironhand said:

If we're talking specifically about the RDM in the real world, while the ranges are similar, I believe the RMD range is based on a 5m² RCS, while the N001's is based on 3m². So not quite the same thing.

I believe they are talking about the results of Quaggles testing that’s been posted above. Which shows rather equal ranges for same target and parameters. 

One thing to be aware of on our Mirage, is I think it’s highest range mode shown on the chart is very unfiltered, and if you filter it to the extent of N-001 default, results would be different. 

On 7/10/2024 at 8:30 PM, pauldy said:

I always find it interesting as to why the N001 has roughly the same detection range as with the Mirage 2000's RDM.. I assume the N001's antenna size is larger than the RDM. I was thinking it should be able to see targets further out..

Software and electronic advancements i guess?

 

 

Edited July 12, 2024 by AeriaGloria

[draconus]

7 hours ago, AeriaGloria said:

While the look down table I posted is from 2.7 (because that’s the latest Quayle’s has made), you’ll see that my radar range chart above it is from 2.9.046, as it has F-15E included. 

Thx, totally missed it. Post edited.

[Pavlin_33]

On 7/8/2024 at 10:37 AM, AeriaGloria said:

 

As for the vampire teeth as you say, it is my understanding that only shows pitch elevation. If flying nose level, and radar vertical line is right next to it; then yes radar is looking right in front of nose.

I think this term is a thing now

The teeth show where to set your radar elev in order to look straight ahead. Radar elevation angle is indepenedant of the pitch.

[draconus]

1 hour ago, Pavlin_33 said:

Radar elevation angle is indepenedant of the pitch.

Only within gimbal limits.

[AeriaGloria]

Which the reference line is +/-60 degrees. So works perfect for seeing if pitch stabilization has room, and antenna elevation compared to both horizon and nose