I’ve seen them used to great effect against SPAA in very close quarters, but you need to be good at placing your SPI markers in third person, its very high work load which means you’re more likely to make mistakes. But when it goes well it looks brutal.
1 Like
Any good fixes to the Eurofighter in the next patch will be welcome and appreciated. Even showing just 10% of the compassion for the Eurofighter compared to other aircraft would already be a good start
2 Likes
oh yeah its defiantly got the potential to be incredibly deadly just need a bit more skill to pull it off is all
@Gunjob I wonder, since we have the comment from smin saying that the CAPTOR-M will get its GMTI mode back, since than have what (5?) Months passed, should it be getting reported or do we thrust the devs that they know what they are doing?
GMTI is ground search radar right?
Anyone here know statistics of the PIRATE IRL? Wondering what would be the best IRST in the game (eventually after the 30km cap gets removed) from what I’ve heard it should be the best irst in the game, but not entirely sure because I don’t have any statistics on it.
For example, ols-35 of the su-35s has these statistics:
Referring to a non afterburning su-30
Head-on: ~50km
Rear aspect: ~90km
±90 azimuth, -15 to +60 elevation
Tws of 4 targets
30 km laser for ground targets
20km laser range finding for air to air targets
Imaging capability
From what Ik rn this is the best irst, anything else is just too classified to really know.
I can see stats in the original suggestion but what is it measuring against?
Yep, also known as Ground Moving Target Indicator or short GMTI
1 Like
This doesn’t seem to be linking to the whole comment I made but the TL:DR is according to Austrian MoD and UK MoD:
Head-on; 80km
Rear aspect; 150km
Photographic identification range; 50km
Azimuth and elevation limits ~150 ° × 60 °
TWS of 500 targets
Ground targeting range; 50km
Passive rangefinding; no limit on range finding distance, but accuracy would drop with range, but its good enough for a launch at max range limits but maybe not enough for a passive 2-Way-Datalink shot without the missile needing to go pitbull.
It’s also immune to flares and IR countermeasures completely.
PIRATE was tested against several targets of opportunity, these included to the extent that I know of Tornado, Mig-29, F-4, other Eurofighters, B-2 bomber, F-22, F-35, various helicopters including Chinook, Merlin, Wildcat, Lynx, numerous airliners and civilian aircraft. PIRATE is normally left in operation and constantly scans in order to update its target recognition list so basically anything a Eurofighter has been within up to 150km of it will be able to recognise and classify.
Should be noted that the system is entirely passive and does provide kinematic ranging, as far as we can tell it does this very well as the Gripen reused the same base design in its SKYWARD-G IRST however it is supposedly worse. Also afaik every other passive IRST has been suggested that for accuracy improvements pairing of multiple sensors, this has never been even suggested for PIRATE.
It’s also not vulnerable to thermal shielding, as according to things like the ADAD report on which PIRATE was based, thermal shielding creates a ‘black hole’ around the aircraft making it easier for PIRATE to detect, classify, track and even identify such targets. The only caveat here would be if an aircraft could match its thermal signature to the background, but to do that you’d need to firstly know where the reference aircraft is from you to see what it would otherwise see, and again, passive system that defeats the purpose, you’d also then have to develop thermal shielding technology that can adapt to a certain temperature. At that point just copy PIRATE but better or make a better radar that makes PIRATE irrelevant.
6 Likes
Can’t use internal FLIR when carrying TGP:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/fGiynsE5YT7T
Assuming this is correct, was this reported for the FLIR?
Since currently the FLIR is limited to ±30 in both azimuth and elevation
What kind of target? With afterburner or without?
There was a report a while back but its hard to phrase that the limitations of the FLIR should be identical to the gimbal limits of the IRST as the IRST sensor provides FLIR or something like that.
Optimal conditions so assuming at least mach and full burner for all. In sub optimal i’ve seen headon as 60km rear aspect as 92km and photo IDENT at 40km.
There is a report in for the FLIR limits to be increased as they don’t match the sensor limits. It’s a bug.
Engine limitation if I remember right.
3 Likes
Reported internally by myself.
3 Likes
As Suggestion?
While the rest of the presentation is excellent, I have some problems with that. It is pretty clear that the Pirate IRST is capable of slaving missiles like the IRIS-T, ASRAAM, and AIM9s, however there has not been proofs that the IRST is capable of giving guidance to fox 3s, 2 way datalink or not.
The system is capable of passive ranging, with a claimed error margin of 20% at 100km (is the error linear with distance or not I don’t know), and works only by doing specific maneuvers with the plane. This makes it unlikely that the plane is capable of reliably guiding the missile unless the pilot does constant ranging maneuvers, and so it’s likely that this capability was never introduced to the IRST
More likely as a bug, since it affects the performance of the aircraft. But IRST reports for modern IRST usually are sitting in limbo
bug, its the same sensor, the field of view will change in FLIR mode, but the gimble limits are identical. So yeah bug.
1 Like
Allright, moved it Up :)