Yeah, Idk why they still say that Rafale has worse MAWS, even J-11B’s MAW sees missiles earlier than RWR, so if enemy fired and spammed without datalink, you can dodge their missile by MAWS and get out of the IOG path.
Thing is, i’ve had MAW detect SA-2 at 20km+, but SA-2 burns for 2-3 business days which suggests its related to the fact that the buk stops burning after about 10 seconds the absurd level of underperformance of IR MAW entirely aside.
Obviously IR MAW should detect it too, but the launch distance shouldn’t matter anyways for the EF.
It could do with a lot of work though. Looks like someone snapped a highlighter and poured it over the HUD. Or more likely re-coloured some of it in MS Paint.
Also not to mention it being invisible from the front and from inside.
3 Likes
Invisible from the one place we need it :(
1 Like
Agreed.
I think the real concern is what you are listening to
the horses are stuck in my head.
sidenote, is it possible the tint not working is a result of it… only having an effect horizontally for some reason?
The effect only appears while at an angle to the side, which would explain it being useless from the pilot’s pov (or frontally) despite being at an angle vertically.
I’m still curious where gaijin got the ±45° elevation number from. Azimuth is ±60° for each antenna otherwise a full 360° coverage would be impossible with only three antennas. And we know that at least the tail antenna is a square/circle (tail pin under the rudder) which should be more than enough indication that the elevation coverage is the same as the azimuth: ±60°.
1 Like
I mean additionally it’s advertised as having a “small cone” above and beneath the aircraft where the AMIDS is blind. 90 degrees is not a small cone.
1 Like
Yeah, that’s only 50% coverage in elevation (90° above and 90° below missing)…
I guess you are supposed to IR MAW (since you supported my mention of PD MAW ahah). To me, it seems it’s just really inconsistent just like PD MAW. I’ve had some times were I detected burned out AIM120 from 20km away, sometimes where i don’t get warnings when a r73 is shot from 3km away.
As for burned out missiles, the Rafale latest MAW (found on F3 and later variants) for example has the capability of detecting missiles through only skin temperature with a range of about 25-30km if they travel at Mach 4.5+. Obviously, it uses an IIR sensor, so it’s going to perform better than other systems in game, but it gives a good benchmark for modern systems (say f35 for example)
The PD MAW has been vaguely consistent for me up until this dev, where it simply fails to detect SAMs launched at extreme ranges. I had issues along those lines before but as I mentioned only in the very very rare case of an exceptionally long range R-27ET launch, which I imagine is because missiles before couldn’t really go this far.
Where is that stated? People have been looking for elevation coverage for ages and found nothing.
1 Like
That’s what I mean. We know it’s ±60° in azimuth but we don’t know the elevation. So instead of assuming that elevation = azimuth (which would be logical for symmetrical radar antennas) they chose ±45° with no basis whatsoever.
No we don’t. In fact we know it’s not +/-60° in azimuth. The wing antennas have different coverage to the rear antenna, they are not all +/-60°.
If all three antennas were +/-60 in azimuth then the wing antennas would end up looking through the wing.
2 Likes
It would boil down to how the antennas are placed inside the wing roots. Parallel to the 53° leading edge or 7° outward looking (so it makes 60° from 0° degress). If parallel they could also be ~±70° in azimuth (which is possible but technically very complex and signal quality suffers quite a lot at these high angles).
I remembered seeing it here a while ago but I can’t seem to find it now.
Recalculated ΔV using CAMM as a reference, but subtracting 11 kg from the launch mass and mass without fuel (I saw information everywhere that the mass of ASRAAM is 88 kg, and the mass of CAMM is indicated as 99 kg). ΔV was 1336 m/s. Overall, it is exactly in the target range that I expected. It will be a great missile. Especially if you compare it with competitors (Although ΔV is greater than even all ARH missiles except Fakour 90).
- ASRAAM — 1336m/s
- Python-5 — 1252m/s
- Python-4 — 1124m/s
- R-27EТ — 1138m/s
- MICA-IR — 1102m/s
- PL-9 — 946m/s
- IRIS-T — 940m/s
- AIM-9X — 878m/s
- R-73 — 870m/s
wouldn’t asraam have less delta v because of the drag of seekerhead? Or is that offset by weight?
ASRAAM has a little more drag but also weight less. But they use the same motor so will have the same delta V
1 Like