Eh, I don’t see why Mica IR’s seeker would be seduced.
BOL just appears to not emit anything in the visible light spectrum. Mica IR is either a MW/MW or a MW/LW seeker.
Mica IR is able to lock onto the specific signature of a plane and then reject anything else. This is why it would be immune to anything short of spectral flares, even then it would have better resistance than most other seekers.
How so? Datalink reduces the need for greater # of T/R modules as you’re not needing to utilize the full radar capabilities in order to track targets. But even then like I said, the RBE2-AA radar can already track 40 targets in real life, and this is also modeled in-game. Yet at best the radar will be tracking however many aerial targets are on the enemy team with no issues.
In actual warfare, much better radars would be in great need as higher T/R modules is needed to keep track of 10,000+ vehicles/equipments being used by enemy countries. But that is not the case for Warthunder.
I did say “from what i can tell”.
I’m not sure but shouldn’t the radar have better track and more of a chance of detecting a target with more t/r modules.
Also the captor e should have simultaneous AA/AG mode so i think that’s a reason for high T/R count.
RBE2-AA also has simultaneous AA/AG mode, that’s just a feature of electronically scanned radars. High T/R count especially would be important for simultaneous AA/AG modes because there would be greater numbers of air and ground units to keep track of if a war broke out. But then we’re back again to Warthunder where even in ground RB, the number of simultaneous enemy players are less than 20.
Well I mean if the typhoon is the one providing weapons grade locks through datalink to say, an F-22 with it’s radar off, that could be pretty lethal.
Then i don’t get it, what is known publicly about the RBE2-AA that gaijin could implement it.
Looks like this Gripen is firing BOL off the rail dispensers
A greater number of T/R modules would not be needed in Warthunder for that, as datalink doesn’t really change the equation on whether or not a higher or lower number of modules on your radar is important. It’s similar to how more than 4 missile datalink channels in WT is overkill in the current matchups.
Can you rephrase your question?
I’m asking what data is there publicly available that gaijin was able to model the RBE2, to know what “parameters” should be known so gaijin can accurately model a radar.
There’s information showing it can track 40 targets and have missile datalink for up to 8 targets. There’s information showing it has 140 degree gimbal in both elevation and vertical. There’s information showing it has a range of around 220km. There’s information showing it can track targets outside of the search volume. There’s information showing the different modes and combat modes and how it interacts with sensor fusion. If you want to look at the reports and the sources used, you can take a look at the thread reports list and open the links.
As of this dev server, about half of the reports or slightly less than half have been implemented
Thanks.
And i hope gaijin fully models your radar.
boy i sure love flying these silly little planes in this silly little plane game made by a giant snail.
@DirectSupport Can’t find where you said it, but didn’t you say aircraft should struggle to resolve what Rafale is through NCTR? Currently Su 30 IDs Rafale pretty comfortably, IDed it at range, got up close to make sure it was working. Does this need report? You are more familiar with it than I.
Because gaijin doesn’t give a damn about what is realistic and what isn’t. Also i don’t know completely how it works from behind but from the front Rafale shouldn’t be indentifiable. Except if SU30SM has advanced sensor fusion (Which it doesn’t) that’d allow it to identify a locked Rafale if said Rafale triggers SU30SM RWR by a mecchanic of sensor fusion SU30SM radar would be able to know location + identity of the plane but this method is out of the equation for SU30SM. NCTR is just oversimplified atm.
Did reckon this was a bit skewiff.
Also the fact Rafale should be almosty impossible to identify with NCTR has been reported by DirectSupport already. But gaijin will probably keep it a suggestion until th end of days because only Rafale would benefit from this advantage atm.
Well, that’s pretty rubbish.
I mean they didn’t implementd it’s low RCS so i don’t see why they’d give it a one sided advantage regarding NCTR. SU30SM is once more a certain example of GJ Russian BIAS even if the plaane isn’t that good it benefits from a certain favor treatment nonetheless.
I do reckon most of this Ruski bias rubbish comes from it being an easy tree to test stuff on with a large number of mostly adequate players. Though it would be nice if when implementing this stuff they brought in most reports and focused on them. Suspect that’s limited by how they do updates though.
