How about an report for missing 1500L drop tanks? (Outer pylon)
Well that was a prime case of me being blind
1 Like
Why is Gaijin deathly afraid of making educated guesses?
don’t know if this is a good way to test tws, can’t test it in battle cause i haven’t researched fgr4 yet
but based on my test german eft have worse(easier to lose lock) tws than uk eft
german
uk
1 Like
This is a bit confusing, how somethings that aren’t present in documentation can be added but also those with some documentation cannot. And I know what we tried to use as proof was not as strong as what gaijin would like would it not be fair to place it under the same category as planned weapons?
1 Like
“Electronic scan” is the type of radar, it’s not necessarily talking about scan mode.
Priority track means that the radar can “jump” to a target very quickly, scan the target, then jump back to where it was scanning.
See here: Community Bug Reporting System
As I said scanning at 333°/s may well give the radar inadequate dwell time to actually detect things.
2 Likes
They have the exact same notch widths…
uk_captor_m_pirate;
"mprfSearch": {
"groundClutter": false,
"aircraftAsTarget": true,
"friendFoeId": true,
"mainBeamNotchWidth": 60.0,
"distance": {
"presents": true,
"minValue": 500.0,
"maxValue": 74000.0,
"width": 500.0
},
"dopplerSpeed": {
"presents": true,
"minValue": -1500.0,
"maxValue": 1500.0,
"signalWidthMin": 2.0,
"width": 30.0
}
},
"mprfTrack": {
"groundClutter": false,
"aircraftAsTarget": true,
"angularAccuracy": 0.05,
"distanceAccuracy": 15.0,
"mainBeamNotchWidth": 40.0,
"mainBeamNotchMaxElevation": 4.0,
"track": true,
"distance": {
"presents": true,
"minValue": 200.0,
"maxValue": 74000.0,
"width": 150.0
},
uk_captor_m
"mprfSearch": {
"groundClutter": false,
"aircraftAsTarget": true,
"friendFoeId": true,
"mainBeamNotchWidth": 60.0,
"distance": {
"presents": true,
"minValue": 500.0,
"maxValue": 74000.0,
"width": 500.0
},
"dopplerSpeed": {
"presents": true,
"minValue": -1500.0,
"maxValue": 1500.0,
"signalWidthMin": 2.0,
"width": 30.0
}
},
"mprfTrack": {
"groundClutter": false,
"aircraftAsTarget": true,
"angularAccuracy": 0.05,
"distanceAccuracy": 15.0,
"mainBeamNotchWidth": 40.0,
"mainBeamNotchMaxElevation": 4.0,
"track": true,
"distance": {
"presents": true,
"minValue": 200.0,
"maxValue": 74000.0,
"width": 150.0
},
"dopplerSpeed": {
"presents": true,
"minValue": -1500.0,
"maxValue": 1500.0,
"signalWidthMin": 2.0,
"width": 20.0
}
},
1 Like
They would depend specifically on each case. There is no one size fits all answer here. Some maybe balancing decisions (if something is too much) or may be a type of weapon we don’t have in game currently.
hmm weird why the uk one don’t lose lock but the german one does, based on that they should be similar
But you have to count with time of that jump scan jump. And it can do it up to 6 times. If it was this slow, even quick jumps would result in too long refresh rate for remaining tws tracks.
Your test isn’t 1:1 they are identical in performance.
Because this opens up the floodgates and Pandora’s box to a whole spam of new reports with low quality sources for all vehicles that provide no detail or specifics and simply make broad statements such as “better” or “improved” which can have multiple meanings.
Therefore everything in game follows the same standards for acceptable values.
2 Likes
Passing the beam at 333 over a target at max range might very well not result in enough time to get a return, as you say.
But there is no “priority scan” mode available in game. The game does not to threat detection and classification like the computers on the EF does. I imagine the rral CAPTOR ripping at 333 moving the beam from target to target amd then slower across the target.
Such a mode isnt available in game, I dont think.
Edit: actually, isnt this just what TWS is supposed to do? To track and scan at the same time?
Perhaps a new mode should be made? Priority TWS. Where the system simply takes the 6 closest targets as the most dangerous and does jump scan jump?
If yiu wanna get really fancy you could do this with the 6 closest targets that the game classifies as fighters or interceptors
Well this approach incurages people to post those secret documents.
1 Like
ah yeah i tought it is close enough between the both of them, still confuse me why german eft often losing lock on tws compared to other top tier plane like f15c/e, f16c, f4f ice, gripen etc
It certainly doesn’t. Because our standards are very clear: Source Material: Restrictions on Classified and Export Restricted information (“Military Restrictions”)
All that will happen is that user will be banned and we cannot use that information.
Gripen has the same notch gates on its PS-05A as Blue Vixen and CAPTOR-M. I think you’re experiencing selection bias.
1 Like
I know but those rules sadly didn’t stop them bc it is the easiest and fastest way to proof your point when you have the document for some reason.
I mean the last time it happened was last week.
Proving a point is rather meaningless if it’s illegal and leads to no changes being possible.
So no reasonable individuals should be even contemplating that.
Nothing will change and nothing positive will happen.
2 Likes
Tbh there are a lot of people on this forum who aren’t reasonable/logical that would do anything for there favorite vehicle to be buffed.
(Me included, don’t have secret documents tho,
So pls don’t send me any)