Sadly they were not proven to be realised.
Not having document showing increased scan speed while everywhere being mentioned to be very quick doesnt mean its same as decade older set.
Do you even see what you are writing. Hypocrisy at its greatest.
So the Countermeasure on the Yak141 or the missiles
You know, marketing lies
3 Likes
“very quick” sadly isn’t a metric we can change anything with. Radars are all created equally and by the same standards in game.
1 Like
Yak-141 was provided with its standard planned weaponary load that it would have had as it did not progress beyond a prototype. This is the same for several other aircraft access all nations like the Horton 229, Swift F.7 guns, Kikka and others.
Eurofighter very much did and has all of its standard operational wepaonary.
1 Like
And what about the Countermeasures?
No mention of weapon in manuals isnt metric for weapon to be added just because “It maybe can be added to it”.
No meantion of countermeasures at all isnt metric for them to be unhistorically added.
Remove all countermeasures then. There is NO evidence for them and you guys made them up and their placement.
There are standards for russian TT and then standards for rest. One is fantasy and making it up. Rest needs concrete facts.
1 Like
As we already detailed at the time, Countermeasures were also planned for the Yak-141.
I would remind everyone that this is a Eurofighter Typhoon topic and not a Yak-141 topic. This seems to be getting very much off track. The topic will be closed if this continues.
“planed” Is the keyword here.
Who said that it wasn’t planed for the EF to take Amraams on the inner wing pylon?
Eurofighter is not a prototype aircraft and has all of its known loadouts. There is no need to introduce possible planned wepaonary when it has a more than sufficient real weaponary loadouts of it’s own.
Well iam gonna stop now this is going nowhere anyways
I’m still not sure if that is the actual scan speed, or just the speed it can move at to “jump” between priority targets.
CAPTOR does have performance improvements over Blue Vixen in game.
It is X band in game already. There are many different radar band naming systems. The game uses the NATO naming scheme. X Band is part of the IEEE naming scheme.
It means the antenna is capable of quick movement, but the radar doesn’t necessarily scan at full speed, it could scan at at a more modest speed and then move really quickly to get to / from the priority track updates. Scanning at something like 333°/s could actually lead to worse performance due to the radar not having adequate dwell time on the target.
I’ve spent a lot of time looking into CAPTOR and can’t find much evidence at all for scan rates above 70°/s. Which I guess is an improvement over the 65°/s we currently have, but somehow I doubt people would be satisfied by that.
They look about right compared to the real screen:
Spoiler
No it shouldn’t. Gimbal limits are ±70°. Your own image shows that.
5 Likes
Allowing the ECR -90 to rival electronic scan performance. This is more Significantly more than M-scan vlue vixen. In fact, you already have pesa and aesa in game. So where is that rivaling???
I suggest you zoom in on that image and look at the Green aircraft triangle and its orientation.
CAPTOR-M has the same 140 sweep as the Blue Vixen…
1 Like
Same article also says - rival electronic scan performance. The SCAN is main word there.
1 Like
This comes back to the issue: No one knows.
We KNOW it can move 333°/s but does it usually Scan at tht speed? We dont know.
Does it only do it when jumping between priority targets? Is that the same as scanning?
Logically speaking I wouldnt want my highly costly radar pulling massive G load and strain doing 333°sec all the time. But in game we are constantly in a combat scenario so we could argue we should just “let it rip” at 333° / sec
1 Like
MB didn’t realize that the mfd is oriented to the north and not where the nose is pointing
How about an report for missing 1500L drop tanks? (Outer pylon)