Yeah, Italy’s ISPA4 (MM7306) was used for initial flight test in 2020, as Leonardo were managing the sale of Typhoon to Kuwait who were taking delivery of the planes the year after.
More recent trials have been carried out in Spain with IPA4 as that’s the primary single-seat development airframe for air-to-surface weapons integration.
As far as I know full Sniper integration is still ongoing, but it’s part of P3Eb
There is way more going for the 82v1 being better than the captor e than the other way around.
It’s outright larger, is coming off of decades of US experience with AESA, and more than likely is more powerful
And to me it seems you just have a bad faith argument for eft being same BR as the current F-15
Which tranche are these?
god I’m not gay but I damn well love you for that
One definite advantage of CAPTOR-E is the repositioner giving it +/- 100 degrees of coverage instead of +/-70°.
it will be intrsting to see if they implement the tilting of the radar it self
Are the PESA and AESA radars in the game limited in their range the further they search from the 0° centerline like in real life? That’s one of the advantages the CAPTOR-E has compared to other AESA without a repositioner, after all.
it has drawbacks, makes it so the fighter is more or less completely blind on the other side
It takes literally a couple of seconds to reposition the antenna to point the other way. If you want to keep the antenna centred and have the same coverage as a conventional AESA then you can, but having the ability to move the antenna off centre when you want to is clearly a benefit.
yeah it is an interesting feature, though im sure it impacts the logistical aspect.
I believe it uses the same repositioner as the existing antennae, so no new logistics.
The ECRS Mk.2 uses a new repositioner that is just better though afaik.
the obvious benefits probably outweigh the disadvantage of allowing the radar to swivel (which mechanically is fairly straightforward compared to other kit onboard, I’d imagine)
Plus, with reference to your earlier point, D/L exists, such that other sensors can “cover” other directions and angles?
yeah, datalink lets us get complete coverage without needing mechanical components that need more maintenance and can break.
@Rileyy3437 what i meant by logisitics is that mechnaical compenents are less reliable and need more maintenance than a purely electronic system.
And if in real combat China are using PL-15 mounted on J-20s are hunting EAWACs aircraft you wont be able to depend on Data link.
Its fine to say we use this its superior when its another assets that needs to be deployed and protected
you dont need awacs for datalink though.
Gib
why is the apg-65 on there lol
i think they license built it for the f-4f ice
That or a Gen 5 airframe you need to protect the airframe providing data link
And over horizon shots you need a pretty powerful Radar
I know Meteor and JTAM have LOAL modes
