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.
4 Likes
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.
1 Like
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?
1 Like
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
Is there not Radar conformity in Typhoons?
Are there any russian jets that can? Or US? If not, forget about getting radar with which you will notch enemy radars - missiles while guiding yours. we will be gaijined.
Pretty much everything in link-16 can provide data, fighters, ground radars, sam sites, ships via gates, awacs. Unless you are able to fully jamm datalink channels, you simply cant shut it down. Some planes are more limited in donating data than others like F16 donating only target which is being tracked but then stuff like hornets can donate their scan. You can reduce range, sure, but not the advantage it gives.
Apologies, it is getting harder and harder to make a point to you freeaboos about anything anymore, I stated why 14.0 should include both F-15c and E and if you aren’t willing to give me a constructive or valuable point against then stop bothering
Before adding more modern military vehicles, why don’t we change the way war thunder is played. Both in game modes and also in new bigger maps that would allow our newer and more advanced jets to employ there systems to their full extent instead of point and shoot sub 50km missile spams.
1 Like
We need a single dynamic mode for BRs 12.0 and above, working like EC but with an AWACS and SAM
sights to provide zones of hostility within the map, and residing in those zones can be strategic targets that require bombing/destroying (thus giving CAS/Interdictor aircraft a role in top tier) and then a role for fighters/interceptors to allow those strike aircraft to hit the targets without dying to enemy fighters, while destroying enemy strikers and fighters.
Kind of a rough proposal but it promotes teamwork again, a trait all but forgotten in air rb, alongside a more dynamic and interesting match for everyone involved.
1 Like
I posted a combined arms mode in my newest post that would have this only in more details and evolving over an entire military operation carried out by two teams 50 each of actual players.
since eft will be significantly better than the current ingame f15c and e in air to air, it should be at a higher BR than them. whether this is leaving the f15c/e at 13.7 and putting EFT at 14.0 or putting F-15C/E at 14.0 and putting EFT 14.3, in their current implementation they should be lower than the EFT in BR