Eurofighter Typhoon (UK versions) - Technical data and discussion (Part 1)

Machinery of War Discussion Aircraft
,
8006

Thank you very much :)

1 Like
8007

Yep, it’s me with a saudi camo haha, but no IRST, clearly

That would be @Tyρhoon who helps me taking these screens xD

1 Like
8008

Worst ive had was when i was in a tornado dog fighting another tornado, we were going at it for a while off the side of the map when my team came in to finish him off after i clipped him. I thought, bastards, just to get killed by the enemy team who were chasing them. So what happened was that my team saw an easy kill 20km away and focused on it just to bring the WHOLE enemy team with them and not give me a crumb of help… I refuse to help team mates purely because i know all well theyll rather run away than help me finish the guy off.

8009

Nah it’s not as much for all aspect than to allow the radar to lock at faster missiles. Seeing how much radars like to pick missiles instead of the enemy when they fire their missiles, it might as well be a nerf

8010

I think i found out what the issue is with the TWS+ radars.
Instead of updating the target whenever the radar beam passes over it, the target gets only refreshed when the whole scan pattern finishes.

So the target gets only refreshed by the TWS+ updates and the radar dosent give normal target updates anymore

8011

That would do it

8012

Yeah leave it up to Gaijin to create more issues, while trying to fix an issue

8013

I cant think of a time where Gaijin has actually fixed a problem without creating a new one

8014

best example of that is the whole Mig-29 situation

8015

@Morvran have an more Up to date one

Accepted
Suggestion
Fixed
Not a Bug
No Label / Info Requested
1 Like
8016

*Duplicate

1 Like
8017

Still have no idea why they pretend they cant just use the AESA code to model P-Track for CAPTOR-M and PS-05/A Raven. Its incredibly easy to do…

8018

because that way they have to set the refresh manually for every scan pattern, for every mechanical radar that got TWS+

8019

Lmao
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/N9ck4GwNv7ol

8020

Yeah… But apparently that would be unfair according to the French guys because it would have to have latency modeled. Not that I really understand why it would cause any latency actually

8021

See, still wanted to add more Internal reports which Gunjob said here…

8022

Would be cool to see everything submitted. Even if not an specifics, just the title

I also wonder whether you should include BOL related reports on that list too

https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/B8OvCzjZ7E91

8023

I am pretty sure I got that allready

Turned out it was in an diffrent Collection of the DC…

1 Like
8024

Well, know its on the EF as well

1 Like
8025

I mean, not really, it would work literally the exact same way as the devs have the ESA radars modelled, but would just have an increased time between updates due to the lower scan speed. They already have the entire code laid out for them, all they need to do is input the appropriate CAPTOR-M and PS-05/A values instead.

Heck, in the most recent major update, they improved the priority track code for the RBE2-AA allowing it to track stuff outside its current scan zone. Thats quite literally what the bug report for priority track for the CAPTOR-M states it can do:

image
image1177×95 37 KB

Also, afaik the only 2 mech scan radars capable of P-track are the CAPTOR-M and PS-05/A Raven, so they cant even use the excuse that too many radars would need changes. They’re either being outright lazy or biased.

This reminds me a lot of when they swore up and down that they could not make the MUSS soft-kill APS on the Puma IFV react to threats, saying they “did not have the code for it”. I suggested they should just use the code from the hardkill APS’ already in-game but just make it so the effector was the laser jammer instead of a projectile. 2 years later thats exactly what they did.

They have the code, they’re just too lazy to do anything with it.

4 Likes