There is literally no information about it, only estimates (which would still make it 5x better), only information out there was probably available only privately/to journalists as some articles state that it should have the ability to detect planes, do NCTR and IFF as auxiliary functions, idk where from.
Also states that “the possible detection of emissions or the attack of anti-radar missiles is not a problem , given the millimeter frequency and LPI mode”, which rafale could probably still detect but at that close range the MAWS could possibly see the rafale too, idk.
4 Likes
The MAW should have Active Radar Cancelation if i remember right.
And shouldnt the Rafale have that aswell? I thought i read about it.
I believe eventually they’ll get rid of multipath completely, multipath is already not really reliable. Plus, this change to the MICA-EM’s seeker notch will help ensure that the Meteor’s seeker (which is based on the MICA EM’s seeker) also gets a very small notch sector, if not smaller than the MICA EM’s already small notch sector. Buffs to the MICAs will mean buffs to Meteors and MICA NGs.
2 Likes
Multipath as a mechanic would be cool to model varying with every missiles that were actually effected by it, of course the more modern missiles wouldn’t be effected by multipath.
2 Likes
Is MICA range getting fixed now that the next shortest range missile, R-77, is getting an R-77-1 variant? MICA is now the shortest range Fox 3, isn’t it?
1 Like
MICA is now the shortest ranged fox 3 among all 14.0 aircrafts. It is definitely the goal to fix the MICA’s range and the report exists for it.
11 Likes
The R-77-1 and Su-30SM are gonna be interesting balance-wise. Radar should be top 3 in-game on release from what I can tell and the R-77-1 will both be the longest ranged fox-3 and the second best WVR fox-3, and the Su-30SM gets up to 12 of them, which could make it a problem balance-wise, but at the moment with the Rafale being so dominant, and the fact the Su-30SM’s flight performance is somewhat subpar, it might still be somewhat balanced. I’m curious to see the state of top tier air when the patch finally drops.
I would think fixing the MICA should realistically be rather low on their priority list though with how strong the Rafale currently is and will remain post-update, so Im pretty surprised they’re buffing its already.
They changed the beamwidth of the antenna, not the notch width.
1 Like
This should help with the Chaff rejection. If you recall, in the past there was a bug where all FOX 3s got smaller beamwidth and were unchaffable under 10 km. People will have to turn to notch and chaff much earlier.
1 Like
Then how do you contend with the fact that Stepanovich stated AIM-54 should have a lower notch width and now the beam-width was reduced?
It’s a real one, MICA IR joined the game’s files since the same times MICA EM joined the game, it’s in the files since some times now, but not to be seen soon in game.
It’s just that it’s easy to model, just have to change the seeker visual of the EM, then they are ready with our variant of IR missile when thoses gonna join the game in the future.
3 Likes
So after some testing i currently see some problematic things with the current dev server build for the Rafale
1: with the TV sensor fusion, if you use tws, it will override your MAP MARKER if you are doing some air to ground strike. So you have to choose between losing situational awereness with your radar off (or another mode), or hoping to NOT catch something on your radar before and during dropping AGM or BOMB. Since the TV sensor will prioritize the radar target.
Possible workaround: create a new type of marker which difference Map marker from pod marker (one is red, the other is another color), and/or create a new view, to difference TGP from the TV sensor?
2: The 140x31 scan bar is problematic to use if the target is not at the same level as you, in TWS the radar will focus on the target which will create this problem, if the target is below or above you. Which make you lose WAY too much situation awereness. In this case, the TWS is not adapted for an AESA radar.
Possible workaround: a rework of tws for a specific use of AESA TWS? so TWS can stay at level while updating the target position time to time even if the target is too low or too high.
3: The current locked target displayed on HMD look like more a workaround instead of real display of locked/tracked target. If you look closely, they are currently using TGP marker “MRK A” as a reference point but you can’t still see multiple target in your HMD, only the one focused by the radar in TWS.
We are far from the same level of the Typhoon HMD, to display multiple tracked targets. (Still a very nice addition)
For reference: Typhoon Hmd multiple tracked targets vs Rafale not able to display multiple tracked targets
Spoiler
4: The current scan rate (speed scan) is abyssal for 140x31. I did lose with an AESA radar, a target (even with the new update of scan bar : 1,2,3,4 to 1,2,3,4 instead 1,2,3,4 to 4,3,2,1.), just because the scan rate is too slow to manage the 140x31. Is an AESA scan rate speed is this “low” in reality?
Possible workaround: with the current speed scan, it will be great to have other options as 140x16 aka 7 vertical bar to scan (we already have a 30x16 and 70x16) scan or/and a 140x3 aka 1 vertical bar to scan (same as mirage 120x3) will be a great option for this.
5: Again still the same issue (eurofighter has the same issue too) The first scan in TWS has an high chance to not pick up a target even in Head-on, in many case you need still at least 2 scan in the same area for
Possible workaround: Again a scan with “XnumberX3” (a one vertical bar scan: for exemple 140x3 120x3 70x3 30x3) will nullify this problem, as a short band aid. or for the longer term fixing the TWS with multiple vertical bar
13 Likes
I can’t replicate this issue. When I set the map marker, and then use TWS it doesn’t override the map marker. Am I missing something? The TWS will only designate the map marker/TV sensor if you have not preset the map marker already. But once you have set the map marker and fired a air-to-ground missile and guiding it, you’re still able to use TWS and do air to air without disturbing the air-to-ground missile.
1 Like
Stepanovich has mentioned that ESA radars are capable of having secondary search volumes, to increase situational awareness outside of the volume of area where the target you’re tracking is, we’ll just have to wait until that is implemented.
I will look into this today and possibly report it today.
I will look into this today and possibly report it today as well.
7 Likes
I have noticed this issue as well and I believe it’s a bug, will see if I can’t report it today. I should note though that this might only get fixed for the RBE2 AESA, as AESA radars do not require a second sweep/scan/pass in order to readily update the target, so this fix may not apply to Captor-M.
1 Like
Thanks DS
For the 1. Once i come home i will redo the testing, and rewatch my video. I probably mess up something.
For the rest thanks for taking the time to do these bug report.
1 Like
What does happen exactly? Does the scan zone center move onto the detected target automatically?
If yes, this is just the way TWS currently works if you have target cycling on (if you can’t move the pipper manually). Your TWS is always centered on the selected target, and with automatic target cycling you always have a selected target. If you have it off you can move your pipper away to not have a target selected allowing you to move the scan zone wherever you want.
It would be nice to have the option to unbind the pipper from the TWS scan zone, especially considering IRL only some of TWS modes work like they do in the game (F-16’s 3 bar 50° scan is centered on a selected target, most other modes let you move the pipper without moving the scan zone).
From Datamine;
- RBE2 AESA:
- new scan patterns: full search, full TWS, fast TWS
- BVR lock search pattern: width: 2.5 → 8
- MPRF, HPRF elevation limits: -60° / 60° → -70° / 70°
- IRST lock elevation limits: -90° / 90° → -70° / 70°
- TWS max targets: 10 → 40
- SPECTRA DAR: added K band detection
- FM Changes:
- wing, 0% flap deployment zero-lift drag coefficient decreased from 0.007 to 0.0065
- fuselage adjustments:
- zero-lift drag coefficient Mach multiplier curve multiplier max decreased from 2.2 to 1.6
- zero-lift drag coefficient decreased from 0.007 to 0.0065
- thrust changes:
- at sea level, from 800 to 2000 km/h TAS increased by about 1500 kgf while afterburning, decreased by <1000 kgf off afterburner (afterburning, non-afterburning)
- at 3000 m, from 1000 to 2400 km/h TAS afterburning thrust decreased by about 1200 kgf (comparison)
- at 6000 m, from 1600 to 2400 km/h TAS afterburning thrust decreased by about 500 kgf (comparison)
- at 9000 m, from 1000 to 2400 km/h TAS afterburning thrust increased by >1000 kgf, increased by about 400 kgf off afterburner (afterburning, non-afterburning)
- at 12000 m, from 800 to 2400 km/h TAS afterburning thrust increased by about 2000 kgf, increased by about 800 kgf off afterburner (afterburning, non-afterburning)
- at 15000 m, from 1800 to 2400 km/h TAS afterburning thrust increased by about 2000 kgf, increased by about 200 kgf off afterburner (afterburning, non-afterburning)
- overall increase in drag-limited top speed (have fun with the rip speed), increased supercruise speed at high altitudes
15 Likes
This already implemented on dev no?
1 Like
I think so, from my understanding.