I somewhat remember a spiel from stepanovich on the RBE2 ESCAN speed being this « slow » because he claimed that the radar had to wait for the return of the signal at the speed of light across its entire range or something like that - basically a discretisation of the sky coverage in small sectors the size of the beam that need to be scan individually and only when the radar gets a return from scanning the area can it move to another. Considering the ECRS have higher ranges than the rafale that’s why I asked.
I found his explanation dubious because to me the whole point of ESCAN is that you can scan one point of the scan while receiving signals from others simultaneously…
Is the influence that big? The speed of light is 299.792 km/s, for a 200 km range (400 km travel per impuls) it would mean around ~750 impulses or sectors per second (if only one sector is scanned per pulse but AESA can do multiple in parallel AFAIK). Double that at half the range and so on.
It has a turnover pack to angle the missile after it has been pushed out of the tube, but the turnover pack does not provide any actual propulsion to the missile, just lateral thrust to get the nose pointing in the right direction.
Also I should note that diagram has been shown time and time again to be laughably inaccurate when it comes to the sizing of missiles and their rocket motors.
Pretty sure thats slower than it actually is and was only done that way for visual purposes, but its a touch faster than the minimum 560°/s we have from @Flame2512 source on the E-scan vs M-scan.
More like ~120-150°/s, N011M being an outlier at 213°/s at its fastest.
ECRS, if modelled according to available sources, will scan ~4.5x faster than the other ESA’s in-game, and ~2.25x faster than the fastest scan rate for the N011M.
Refresh rate for the ESA radars in-game is independent of scan speed.
I was not arguing the propellant amount from this diagram. I also know it’s highly inaccurate in the amount of fuel, but they do give information on where the fuel tanks globally are
CM disclosure made no mention of new air-to-air, air-to-ground or new EW systems, AESA is amazing don’t get me wrong, but how is that gonna change the meta by itself…
Who knows, maybe even those legendary twin AIM120 pylons as well.
But yeah I find it a bit disappointed that they don’t step up the A2A missile game. We’ve had mostly 1.5 year of the exact same META at top tier, when before they switched a bit faster between radar and IR missiles rework (R27ER excluded)
2x the amount of a mid missile still gives mid results. Or the F18s would be at a higher BR than they currently are (even with their equally mid flight performances)
Amount is an important factor, i do quite well in the F-18/C purely because of that reason, just shoot at every person in range and put pressure on them.
While on the EF i don’t even do BVR anymore they’ll dodge it anyway, if you do bvr you need to have a degree to analyze and find the player that’s turned their brain off and kill him.
