I might have been misinformed then. My friend told me that this specific option is responsible for it. Sorry then
1 Like
Well, if they want to present the information again to dig through for veracity, then that’s great. But from what I’ve seen so far, most documentation points to the modifications for the indians, or tests for the standard to follow. I’ve no issues with being wrong on this front, just have yet to see compelling documentation on it.
Yeah… GG… why not add IRST to radar PRF settings. JESUS, why cant we turn IRST off.
Yeah it was this one :
He still got banned by the people that take care of bugs if i followed well, so ideally another person should try.
And from what i see the main thing against it was well, french army did not use it even if dga certified it with dassault so it is quite weak argument against it.
I’ll read through it after a nap.
If I strapped my grandma in front of the jet and gave her a microwave, she would be a better radar than whatever Rafale currently has
13 Likes
I’d like to point out that the radar seems very good, but i noticed 2 things that seemed strange :
- On the 80 nm setting only, you need to move the cursor further than where the terget is (my cursor is supposed to be over the filled red arrow, but is not displayed as such)
- The radar possesses a 100 nm setting, but seems to be hard capped at 80-90km (as seen on the game’s radar on the right) which would be very surprising for the RBE2AA)
As many pointed out, it also seems fairly buggy in HMD lock, but since i don’t have the aircraft yet, i can’t pronounce myself on that one
1 Like
Why are the vectors wobbling so much
Also why is the search still mechanical like
3 Likes
I mean we have to accept the fact that the radar will be a placeholder for quite some time.
Currently it lacks range, the fact that it is supposed to be LPI, and probably a fair chunck of scan patterns
It seems to be working like how a PESA should, but it should be AESA, correct?
Well, search sweep is. Once you establish track, it will keep it even otside of said sweep. What takes long is getting all those tracks, but once the bug with repeating pattern is fixed, even that should be decent.
I actually enjoy the radar now.
It still cant compete at range with stuff like EF and to be fair, you can say whatever you want but meta is long range BVR missile, not short-medium ranged off bore missile.
EF is broken with its ability to spam super quick amraams. Once its TWS is fixed, it will be insane compared to rafale.
It is AESA irl yes
I doesnt even match PESA radars in game
you know that one is bull?
only MICA NG variants reach 100km
and what we currently need, is for MICA-EM to actually reach the 80km advertised
1 Like
Great TWS tho
Well… it would be nice if it had kinematics and ability to reach its supposed 80Km range.
1 Like
I just want a better radar and smart flares :(
and better MICA or more MICA
Once I needed to shoot down an MQ-1 drone that was 10 kilometers away. I launched MICA, and it took a whole minute to reach the drone. As if the missile was flying with a speed of hellfire for whatever reason😭
The french models of the Rafale with HMD were the F4.1 standards per the bug report, not the F3R we have in-game.
You just want the Rafale to conform to what your idea of what it should be is, which is fine, thats what were all arguably doing, but pretending you’re opinion is the only right one is silly.
- Id rather it be modelled in its historically accurate config. No HMD, 6 accurately modelled MICA EM’s.
- You want it modelled to get what is ideally the best it could likely have in-game. Unhistorical HMD and 6x accurately modelled MICA-EM’s.
- They want it modelled at the absolute peak of its potential. Unhistorical HMD, 8 accurately modelled MICA-EM’s. (Really they just want an F4.1)
Disagreeing with others is fine. Chill a little.
6 Likes