It does IR, I guess its meant to also slave AMRAAM
Also, PIRATE is both a tgp and IRST, they finally modeled that correctly
Because we wanted to open it up also for community ideas and suggestions. Given this was a community made report that highlighed it in the first place.
As I said all options for a Tranche 2 from TLG-31 would be taken into account.
4 Likes
Didn’t Gaijin say that the radar of the Typhoon was not completely made?
The Tornado F.3 had channel losses of 4%.
Installed thrust from the manual:
Uninstalled thrust from the datasheet:
8 Likes
You would be surprised what’s possible with todays “fluid dynamic simulation” tools and the development of todays engines in conjunction designed for that specific air intake.
1 Like
Another bug that idk was ever addressed was that, in vr the TWS locks in the hud would move with your head instead of staying in the hud like they’re supposed to. Not the HMD btw, the hud. The hmd worked fine for showing those tws locks.
1 Like
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xY5nY2hMWExk
Welp, there goes the “war setting” engine power…
Reports based on static thrust values can’t be accepted.
Reports based on assumptions and calculations can’t be accepted.
So if we would have a report about the insalled thrust values in “war setting” it would be able to go through but guessing by how difficult it is to generally find something about this setting, I wouldn’t get my hopes up.
Maybe somebody has the time/motivation/etc. to ask the Bundeswehr, RAF, etc. directly if they ever tested or used the EJ200 in their Eurofighters in their “unlimited” mode, even if just for testing, but I doubt they would answer that at all.
Funny part: “Reports based on assumptions and calculations can’t be accepted.”
Of course Reports on assumptions is clear, but based on calculations? So that would mean we could simulate and calculate everything with valid given data and known/proven formulas to get the (even if just approximate) values but they wouldn’t accept it as math and physics don’t seem to hold any weight for the devs lol
Edit: The more I think about it… It doesn’t matter if we report the thrust values static or installed as the devs modify and substract the intake losses as they see fit anyway, so it should be valid to report static thrust values. I don’t get these answers to reports concerning engine power… (Of course reports concerning that the shown thrust in game differs from static thrust are stupid as they’re shown with intake losses substracted from them)
3 Likes
Yeah… given they call mica long ranged in rafale dev blog and flankers maneuverable, we are getting blue vixen copy pasta.
2 Likes
I doubt it will be a straight up copy pasta. Just how much better it will be than blue Vixen? That’s a good question
Idk about the RBE2 but the Captor-m is going to be insane.
-fast scan rate
-200° of gimbal limit side to side
-able to track stationary ground target
It can basicly do some of the AESA shit while being a Mechanical Radar
The issue for me is mainly speed of scan.
Iam fine with ranges as you cant use current detection ranges anyway but i care about how fast i can refresh TWS for SA.
The radar has features and functions for which you need really high scan speeds, something it lacked on dev server. Sadly we wont see those features but having fast TWS is really nice in tornado.
Captor-M is 70° (140° total) horizontal , 60° elevation/depression.
Fast scan rate, yes, but can gaijin get to same conclusion based on functions of said radar and somehow extrapolate its scan rate? On dev, it was meme.
Radar was pitiful in the dev server, needs improvement to really be representative of captor.
2 Likes
And then we have issues of wrong scan patters that repeat itself just from opposite side.
Instead of jumping at the start of scan (doesnt matter if its on the bottom or top), it repeats the pattern from end to start, instead of JUMPING from end to start.
Some 2 bar scans even repeat 1 bar twice AND then jump to second bar. Its comedy how it is still present.
Example - should be, is literally scan of F-15. It can do it up to 6 bars like that.
Western planes (most of them), can compensate by quicker speed of antenna or ability to use less bars or narrow multiple bar scan where it jumps bars quickly. Russian planes cant do it and its terrible.
If fixed, it will buff western sets even more but atleast makes russian ones usable… now they are next to useless.
11 Likes
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/IAn04WC3aGHd
The next try to get MRAAMs for the inner pylons on the EF…
2 Likes
Almost all radars repeat top and bottom bars in scan
Been like that for a while, sadly. And all because of a single line of code (or lack of it), namely "barsOneWay" = true
1 Like
@Smin1080p_WT Could you answer why Germany isn’t getting AIM-9L/I-1 or AIM-9M to put it on par with the other two nations?
2 Likes
Cheers that’s more than just a performance issue, I’ve let a Dev know.
10 Likes
Because it’s German. XD
2 Likes