I didn’t say they did, only that it is possible. Future missiles will use multiple seeker types and some are already rumored to.
1 Like
Thats not exactly groundbreaking at this point. Heavily limiting radar emissions is already something pilots actively do nowadays, and slaving/firing missiles off RWR warnings or MAWS sensors is also something thats long been a capability. IIRC the initial over the shoulder shots with the IRIS-T on the Eurofighters were specifically done via RWR slaving.
Anyone saying LWR and IRST isn’t really needed is insane. Passive detection or information gathering is a massive boon for any vehicles, and has been a significant disadvantage for western vehicles, air and ground, for quite a while.
When would be early enough? 7.5km (thats easily 10 to 15 seconds depending how long the missile has travelled) should be enough time to turn into a tail chase and flare at 500ish meters, or counter launch an IRIS-T if available.
LRF does not give launch warnings, only that you are tracked by a laser, so basing defensive manouvers just on that seems like a great way to waste all your energy
Yup. I think some people won’t be able to grasp how important those things will be until they come into the game and they see it with their own eyes. Having situational awareness while denying others their situational awareness is always the goal in anything militarily.
1 Like
The problem being that current IIR seekers in-game like the SPIKE and PARS3 have a seeker range of 8km against aircrafts and are practically unflareable. So the MAWS alerting you after the seeker has already obtained lock will be an issue.
Eurofighter is also capable of fighting enemy threats using only the passive esm system
At worst you get an incredibly useful frontal UV MAWS
1 Like
UV MAWS suck compared to IR and RF based
- Thats completely wrong
- PIRATE is IIR and UV
All 3 types of MAWS have their pros and cons.
PD MAWS can detect missiles even significantly after missile burnout, and through all types of weather, but increase the aircrafts EM signature, and by definition make the aircraft more visible on the EM spectrum the longer ranged the MAWS is due to the advantage RWR systems have over radar for detection ranges.
IR MAWS is longer ranged than both and entirely passive, it also might be capable of detecting kinetic heating on a missile even after motor burnout, but cluttered environment (ie the ground) mess with its detection range, and the system is borderline worthless in the majority of clouds.
UV MAWS are solar blind and can operate in all weather very well, they’re also entirely passive, so they dont give the aircraft away, and are relatively cheap and highly effective vs SAMs, but are incapable of giving range to threat and only work while the missiles motor is burning.
As with most things, all systems have pros and cons, and ideally are used in conjunction as they cover eachothers weaknesses. The ideal system, would likely be IIR for very long range clear weather passive detection, UV for clutter rejection and all weather passive detection, and either very short ranged (sub-20km, maybe even only sub-10km) or triggered/slaved PD for accurate range and time to impact post motor burnout in all weather while mitigating EM emissions (short range to allow it to be active at all times, but limit detectability by RWR to aircrafts at/near visual range already or slaved to IR/UV MAWS to only begin emitting when a potential threat has been detected, suggesting EM emission mitigation takes a backseat to pilot and aircraft survival.)
UV MAWS suck specifically because they do not have post burnout detection. they also offer no use aside from pre-burnout missile detection.
thats why you’d use that on a helicopter or other aircraft that are mainly concerned about MANPADS(
look at AN/AAR-47, 54, 57, and 60 for example).
On a BVR capable fighter jet its much better to use RF or IR based.
you use them when you can because they’re cheaper.
but a forward looking UV MAWS on a supersonic BVR fighter jet does absolutely nothing
especially in war thunder
IIR missiles can be flared (tail chase, 500ish meters, volumetric flares like the MJU-52/B used on the Typhoon’s BOL), or shot down as I mentioned.
I still also dont see the advantage of the LRF because it doesnt tell you if a missile was launched.
Lastly, the 7.5km you mentioned are made up anyways, we dont know its true range. The best I have seen is the napkin math of the German Wikipedia, putting it at 20ish km based on the size of the rear MAWS antenna and the Norwegian Eurofighter presentation showing the EuroDASS’ screen having an instrumented range of 40nm (74km)
1 Like
It does tell you if you are being targeted and from where. And given rhat the Rafale (and maybe F-14B?) is the only 4th gen aircraft with a laser designator built in, you know that there likely may be a missile launch.
In lieu of hard data, Gaijin is likely to put it at 7.5km, seeing that is the current implementation for aircraft MAWS.
Source?
I read in a book on the Eurofighter that the german versions don’t have the towed decoy of the DASS equipped. Can anyone confirm this please? Couldn’t find anything on the Internet.
they have it equipped.
this is early T1 stuff
1 Like
Thank you :)
The idea is blocking the seeker with the flares in such a way that, when the missile emerges again, the plane is no longer in its FoV
2 Likes
that pdf link is dead