Not saying it should or shouldn’t, but I just don’t see it happening
They will likely leave the current mechanical radar Typhoons with the current HMD
In essence to create more of a difference between the current Typhoons and the higher BR AESA ones …
Sure, everything can change (“No afterburning jets will be added” etc)
But what I linked is k_stepanovich (radar dev)'s response saying in his view “AESA have better reliability and lower energy loses than PESA.” (I.e. in the game PESA will be essentially the same as AESA)
Again, they havent done that with the Rafale, so why the Typhoon?
Any way, what I reckon they should actually do is add the Typhoon F2 they skipped with CAPTOR-M, Aim-9M and Aim-120B and then just upgrade the FGR4 as and when appropriate.
Things like Striker II and Spear-3 can come immediately
CAPTOR-E ASAP, especially if CAPTOR-M wont be fixed
Symbology wise, it would look exactly like it does currently, when a target is detected by radar, but would instead display information gathered by DL, just like the Rafale and A-10C
Not on the Typhoon at the very least it wont (im 95% sure), but might be able to on F-35/Tempest, maybe (at least i’ve never heard of that on the Typhoon)
You can see the Striker II really well here:
Main upgrades are:
NVG intergration (this is the really big thing IRL)
Wider FoV (40°)
Colourised display
Lighter than the Striker 1 (not really anything to note within WT unless we get slightly better G tolerance/stamina? )
More sensitive/accurate headtracking and also dual mode tracking (Again not relevant to WT)
threat system displays (SAM radars, etc) (But im not sure if this is a Striker II upgrade or something also on the Striker I, but is something that should already be on our MFDs at the very least)
Virtual MFDs (Augmented reality stuff)
Noise Reduction + 3D audio (For things like RWR warnings)
Edit:
Yes Stirker II can be used to see through aircraft
The highly advanced Striker II supports the display of high resolution sensor systems such as a distributed aperture systems, which allows pilots see through the body of the aircraft - Source
But I dont beleive the Typhoon has the necessary cameras for this at this time and even if it did, doesnt mean it has to be modeled, a lot of the Striker II wont be by the sounds of it (Main thing that would be nice is the QoL from the colourised display everything else sounds too complicated to be added to WT at this time, except maybe a limited selection of MFDs to display in the HMD)
There are other differences between the PESA RBE2 and AESA RBE2 beyond the type of ESA used (which would be noticeable in game). For example, off the top of my head:
PESA RBE2 has significantly worse range.
PESA RBE2 only has half the data link channels of the AESA version.
Unless I’m mistaken Rafale did not have any other HMD before the Scorpion
So it was a choice between no HMD or Scorpion
But with Typhoon it will be a choice between a decent HMD and a better HMD …
Again, not saying it should or shouldn’t get Striker II, but I just find it unlikely that the devs will give it to the current mechanical radar Typhoons as well …
Speaking of the range, I suspect they don’t model scan loss for ESA radars in the game.
I don’t have anyone to test it with, so given that you guys hate Rafale, if you want to bother with testing and reporting it, it could result in reduced range for Rafale’s AESA radar in off boresight angles especially given that it has a fixed antenna …
Such this is not present in game. 99% it is game limitation, as radars in game are, well, quite simple from range standpoint. Be it this, or SPAA radar lacking altitude limitations.
Hi guys. long time no see.
I’d like to get some sources about inner pylon for AIM-120.
cause there is some guy who insist eurofighter cannot carry 8*AIM-120s.
To put it quite frankly: he’s probably right and you won’t have much luck trying to argue otherwise with the evidence that is currently available.
There is some evidence that the ability to carry AIM-120s on the inner pylons was considered at some point. But currently there is nothing to suggest it is any more real than this:
