While this is anecdotal, as someone who’s interacted with signal processing/DSP in my job, I’d like to emphasize that using one sensor’s data stream to meaningfully affect another sensor gets very difficult, very quickly. It’s not as simple as “why wouldn’t they just do the same thing on the Eurofighter, the data is there” - you need a profound amount of computing power to do real-time analysis on complex signal inputs, which scales exponentially with the number of inputs and the size of input (resolution/depth), so if the plane wasn’t designed with that in mind, retrofitting it would be a very intensive process. There’s a reason the computer module in the Rafale is so huge - I wouldn’t be surprised if it’s nearly packed full of silicon.
3 Likes
That makes sense.
I believe @DirectSupport actually had a source stating that SPECTRA (which handles the data fusion) was more complex technology than the RBE2 radar. Or something a rather.
2 Likes
Did you see anything in sim ?
No, but it was identified in the “radar green” text and at beyond visual range (15-20km out was what I saw, I think?) It was like the radar box with “MiG-15bis” by the box.
I also checked on the Rafael, in 3rd person its only written above the radar lock box, but not on any MFD Screen (Atleast I could not find anything regarding NCTR)
Thats not true EF Instruments are interconnected so they can talk and support each other.
Spoiler
why cant we all be friends
Translated from your own source:
The attack identification system AIS (Attack Identification System) evaluates the data collected from all sensors and creates a tactical situation picture that is displayed as standard on the middle MHDD. The advantage is that the pilot no longer has to compare individual displays with each other and deviations are also ruled out.
The individual sensors don’t ‘talk’ to each other at all. The outputs from seperate sensors are compared to (it states right there) rule out deviations.
On the other hand, the Rafale will provide the pilot with only the most accurate data by cueing seperate sensors to each other. For example, by using the TV sensor for higher precision 3D tracking than the radar which is simply not possible on the Eurofighter. Or how Spectra would be able to cue AASMs to a specific target model (i.e. an anti-air battery) without necessarily having a visual contact.
2 Likes
Yea and now translate the rest
Translate what? It just talks about reducing pilot workload by minimising the amount of information presented to the pilot.
“Cooperation” of the separate sensors only refers to ruling out deviations.
I mean c’mon, how the algorithm for PIRATE functions is publicly available. At no time does it actually mention using other sensors to filter out false positives - instead this is done by the pilot.
3 Likes
I dunno, but I’m blaming the English, they’re easy to blame.
(This is mostly a joke)
1 Like
Seems to be a common theme among modern aircraft. F-22 program manager said that the AN/ALR-94 (ECM suite, like SPECTRA), was the most technically complex piece of equipment on the aircraft.
Of course, they are also among the most classified
1 Like
Maybe its a Language Barrier thing.
But for me it talks about the Sensor working with each other.
If for example the Radar cant see a target but the Pirate can maybe because its a Stealth plane.
the Pirate gives the Radar the location so it knows were to look.
Atleast thats what i get from it.
And then it gets send as one Information package to the Pilot yes.
Rafale wrong medium speed acceleration
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/hF6LlLpuJey0
4 Likes
Well, the output of results from PIRATE would be delivered to the pilot and weapons system which could cue the radar to look in a certain direction. But it wouldn’t be able to improve the accuracy of the tracking in any way.
For the Rafale, it will cross-reference the seperate tracks from the IRST and radar prior to delivering the more detailed information to the pilot and weapons system.
In the case of the Rafale, this will result in shorter reaction time, improved accuracy, robustness to countermeasures, masking and environmental conditions.
This is especially not possible on the Eurofighter since the only sensor that can provide accurate localisation data is the radar.
7 Likes
Weren’t there discussions in this thread a while back establishing pirate can give “good enough” positional information? Radar generally lacks the limitations to my understanding, but pirate can perform adequately under some circumstances from what I remember reading?
It is entirely possibly I’m misremembering though, I usually only peruse this thread when I’m mostly asleep. Makes dealing with certain individuals easier.
Since it’s IR (iirc), I don’t think Pirate can see through clouds or any weather really. A clear day is probably the circumstances it’s talking about
It depends on your definition of “good enough”. According to the UK’s Defence Research Agency, the kinematic ranging algorithm only guarantees an accuracy within 20% for ranges up to 100km.
Thales themselves also state that a laser rangefinder is necessary for accurate ranging:
10 Likes
Right, seems remembering “Good enough” is a bit of a stretch
2 Likes