Surely refresh rate is inverse to exposure time, which would mean that by scanning and therefore only exposing the sensors in each line for a short period, you automatically limit the sensitivity the sensor can achieve? This would reduce range no?
Yep, but it also means you its much less likely to be permanently blinded by laser systems
Range also isn’t much of an issue for IRIS-T seeing as it is still a dedicated short ranged IRAAM, unlike ASRAAM/MICA with their much larger rocket motors. Saab states the seeker is capable of all-aspect target acquisition throughout the missiles full kinematic range, which fundamentally is all the missile seeker needs.
interesting wording, could mean its suitable for the full kinematic range… i.e within the first few seconds it attains lock.
In practice that should be minimal because targets are CW (continous waves or continous unmodulated emitters) and the energy reaching the missile seeker is the same. Only the integration time is shorter so the overall energy transfer is less but that can be compesated by adjusting the scanning speed (should be also a reason the scan speed is just 80 Hertz and not >100 Hertz to have a balance between sensitivity and scan-speed). Line scan is also less susceptible to thermal noise because there are fewer pixels and they can be better cooled.
But the most important part I think which is also the reason why a line scan for the IRIS-T was used is, that line scan can handle movements (of the seeker and the target) much better. Line scan cameras are for example used for imaging and analyzing moving things like stuff on a conveyor belt. Interestingly you get problems with motion blur on fast moving targets in a focal plane array, but they can use pixel binning to enhance the sensitivity while simultaneously sacrificing resolution.
It’s also valid to assume that the moment a target is detected with a line scan device, the seeker could only scan the lines with the target and a few above and below instead of the full height → higher scanning speed because of less lines scanned or better sensitivity at same scan speed (additionally less distraction from outside and background heat sources which enter and leave the smaller FoV faster).
Yoink.
14 Likes
Only minor shame is it seems to be outer most pylon, which means giving up extra AMRAAM/Meteor/ASRAAM in-game.
Would’ve been more peak if there was a su-27 escorting the bear in the shot as well, usually they’re escorted by a su-35 irl.
Still peak tho
I mean its on a standard ejector and using the MIL-STD-1773 hook-up, there is zero reason reason it couldn’t be fit to any of the six ground stations.
4 Likes
Are they otherwise cleared for ejecting a rocket pod?
Fair, but which is the Pylon Gaijin is most likely to actually put it on if they do at it in-game?
True that could be an unseen limitation, physically though, no reason it couldn’t.
My suggestion was for all six wing air to ground stations.
9 Likes
It’s the same with Brimstone IRL currently. But that hasn’t stopped the one ingame having more than 6 of them
For all EFs or just UK?
(Asking for a friend :P)
Affected Vehicles
- ef_2000_block_10
- ef_2000_fgr4
- ef_2000a
- ef_2000_aesa
- ef_2000a_aesa
- ef_2000_typhoon_aesa
8 Likes
Yeah only so much I could do with how bad of a state the CDK is in. Took me 4 crashes and about 20 freezes just to get the Tu-95 into the mission.
3 Likes
Tomorrow everything will be easier, a custom lobby will be just enough :)
4 Likes