That then becomes a detection advantage which is again very useful. Perhaps not in the way that I phrased it (although still technically an advantage), but in a passive detection frame it would be. For instance the Migs, Sukhoi’s Rafale, all the chinese aircraft would have a LR IRST in the search and you’d get something like a radar ping as you would in a standard game.
But I do agree, the difference is likely marginal, however Germany choosing not to mount them does not mean it isn’t a tangible advantage, they choose not to use the IRST despite the pilots preferring it to the ECRS MK.2.
additionaly to that you confirmed you yourself have no idea about IRIS-T capabilities so your whole argument is useless, they while be nearly the same in the game which strengths in slightly different fields
I though IRIS-T did too, but that’s a fair point, I believe the US ITAR was half the reason for the BLK 6 upgrade as a few sales fell through due to ITAR.
Eurofighter doesn’t use an LWS and seems to be the only aircraft I can find to advertise IRST guidance but have said IRST not use an LWS, so I presume its quite a niche thing and something Leonardo has mastered. That will definitely be a hugeeeee advantage as if the Eurofighter wants to go ‘stealthy’ (as stealthy as a non-stealth aircraft can), it’ll be able to do it better than any other 4th gen.
Yeah that’s probably fair but also the F-35 should be detecting things with its radar before they detect it with their IRST. Not entirely sure though as its IRST/FLIR is made by SELEX and at least has a laser rangefinder, whether that is used for ranging of aerial targets or just for guidance of LGB’s there is no data I could find.
I misunderstood that entire paragraph. Let me reformat.
It will be an advantage against other aircraft who may want to stealthily sneak up on the EF with their IRST as the EF will get a ping.
I think its more likely to have something attempt to use an IRST against it I agree. Not sure why it wouldn’t feature an LWS when IRST is effectively its’ hard counter by anything but an EF. I think they must just be exceptionally confident it isn’t required due to the great radar, networking, datalink and battlefield management systems etc.
source : Ingo Schwaetzer: Multiple use of an IR missile approach warning system. Proc. SPIE 5074, Infrared Technology and Applications XXIX, 10. October 2003
Ranges for the MAW (AMIDS)
There is no known ranges but it can be estimated (resoning in the spoiler)
Spoiler
The detection range can only be estimated: Since the “radome” at the rear has approximately the diameter of a seeker of an air-to-air missile, its detection range can be used as a basis. The X-band seekers 9B-1348E (R-77) and 9B-1103M (R-27AE) from AGAT have a detection range of about 10 km against a radar cross-section of 1 m². Since the directivity and antenna gain are approximately inversely proportional to the square of the wavelength, the Ka-band yields a 12.25-fold antenna gain for the same dimensions. Since this gain enters the radar equation with the square root, the detection range will be about 3.5 times higher. However, the target RCS (Radar Cross Section) also increases with higher frequency, while atmospheric attenuation reduces the detection range. Ultimately, based on the AGAT seeker family, the following detection ranges for AMIDS can be estimated:
LWS is important just for situational awareness. It would be useful in Ground RB for instance, any helis that inadvertently lasered you would be picked up, and their location would be seen on RWR. Same for any SAMs that used it’s laser. It doesn’t make sense to say that if the F-35 doesn’t have it, then it isn’t that important, because the F-35 isn’t likely to be detected by radar or IRST at long ranges like the Eurofighter as it reduced radar and IR signature. So the LWS is more necessary for the Eurofighter than the F-35.
That’s more receivers than the RWR. Wikepdia say they can find the direction (although does not give a margin eg less than a degree). However it also says it can direct the bearing which is measured in degrees so I’d say the accuracy should be to a degree. I think for the reason they’re mounted at all, we could reasonably assume they should be accurate to a degree too.
Also says there’s only 4 mountings for the LWS system but I think thats the page oversimplification as there are 4 regions in which they are mounted but these are in 6 different mounts as your pictures indicate.
