Well we can almost guarantee that as they are testing it with R Darter
People are barely used to 9M they won’t be happy when we jump to the next level
Im guessing ASRAAM will have the same flare resistance of SRAAM in game. So it will be fine
A bit of a RWR rant here.
The SPO-15 (for now only on the su-27) has received two features on DEV:
- Signal strength detection
Spoiler
this per say is obviously not a new feature for the game, but it’s kinda funny that they added it for this somewhat crude system, without first fixing it in for example the British F-4J
- Elevation determination
This one seems to be a totally new thing, and I’d like to know if current British, or for that matter any other RWRs in game could benefit from that feature
Do we know if the seeker is a CCD, IIR (FPA) or has a dual channel capabilities?
The Stingers seekers use a Rosette scanning technique, thus is a pseudoimaging seeker (similar in methodology to a (Wisk type)Scanning array, but without discrete pixels, since the seeker processes though the scan pattern continuously), which would allow for basic IRCCM via rise time detection of flares, and potentially reduced rates of sampling the edge of the field of regard (via changing the pattern when flares are detected), and so replicate FOV reduction(See patent).
The FIM-92B and later variants utilizes a new array design that splits the IFoV(Instantaneous Field of View ) image between two detectors that are sensitive in distinct bands of the EM spectrum(in the Stinger’s case; MWIR & UV), thus providing the ability to use the contrast image to additionally determine the emission profile of a black body(Wien’s displacement law )emitter, and thus make a determination on if it is a countermeasure or not, and so disregard them if the are not matched closely to the airframe. The FIM-92 RMP (-92C) and later allow for the AURs to be non-destructively rapidly reprogramed to account for new countermeasure designs.
As a proper Imaging seeker the main difference for the ASRAAM is likely just that most of the functions would be discretized, with no otherwise major difference in capability. Though performance is certainly much more impressive, and it can pull a few neat tricks like potentially ranging the target passively and using more advanced guidance laws that allow for much more efficient flight.
Earlier ASRAAM used IIR FPA. Block 6 got a new seeker that we know nothing on(or at least i cant find anything). There is also a thing about it having a bigger computer on board that works on rejecting countermeasures compared to for example 9X but i dunno about that.
Watch it get ActiveSkyflash lmao
Elevation determination is rudimentary, it shows whether the primary threat is above you, at the same altitude, or below you. I’d honestly like to see how the new SPO-15 works (and if they finally make its cockpit display functional).
Edit: Idk what you mean about fixing signal strength for the F-4 JUNK, it seems to work (assuming that’s how range is determined)
has there been any progress made towards the un-nerfing of BOLs?
most recent answer I found was the dreaded “submitted as a suggestion” from a month ago
Nothing yet, I’ll have to push for it after the update as that’s the focus now.
Wouldn’t hurt to mention it again in the hope they might be able to slot it in for this update.
cheers, best of luck
Doesnt the I-Go hold its altitude. Or is that an feature due to aerodynamics, rather than a programmable feature?
Spoiler
Its a manually guided missile, I understand Martel should be, but presently wont be. As such automatic guided missiles don’t hold altitude.
At least that’s my understanding of it.
Yeah, its manually guided. But it has an initial attiude, that is direction and altitude. When releasing the controls of the I-Go, it tries to maneuver back into its inital attitude.
Doesn’t it just auto level?
Yes, it does. But it also adjusts itself back in the same direction, in the horizontal plane.
My opinion is that if someone dont like missiles then theres a lot of planes without missiles they can play.