I have no idea, you are asking the wrong person
150? Seriously? That’s fantastic. Is EvoDASS mutually exclusive with BOL, or does it simply increase the total number of countermeasures?
I didn’t come up with +/-45° and never said it was correct, it’s just the default value Gaijin uses when a better value is not supported by sources. I just (correctly) predicted that your report wouldn’t go anywhere because you didn’t provide any suitable sources, and based your report on a series of either unsupported or mistaken assumptions.
I’ve done a hell of a lot of reports over the years, so have a pretty good idea what it takes to get one accepted. If I had found anything to support the idea of greater MAWS coverage I would have reported that too. Unfortunately Gaijin need actual evidence to support a bug report, and as of yet no one has found that evidence.
3 Likes
Couldn’t have said it better myself.
5 Likes
Nope, can have both, just moves the location from the wing to the belly iirc
And how did GJ come up with +/- 45°?
Never cross your mind to question that?
Default value without evidence, I don’t think there isn’t much beyond that.
1 Like
But why 45°?
Any ESA that adheres to Spatial Nyquist Spacing has a coverage of +/- 90° in theory and +/- 60° in practice.
How did GJ come up with 45°? How is GJ’s default defined?
Don’t know, it’s just the default value, as I said I don’t think there is anything beyond that, that’s the value they picked and that’s just that.
1 Like
It is the default value used for all kinds of sensors without a known value. What point is there in questioning that? There’s no mechanism to make Gaijin change it.
It was the default used for RWRs without a known vertical coverage and it has presumably been carried forward to other types of sensor.
You can’t assume that a PESA radar will have ±60° elevation coverage. For example the Bars PESA radar only has ±45° elevation coverage (the ±70° azimuth coverage is achieved with a mechanical gimbal).
3 Likes
Yeah, but BARS also isn’t a PESA radar.
It’s a hybrid with PESA Tx, but AESA-like Rx, as it has LNAs in the elements, which then produce mutual coupling, if not insulated properly, which is most likely the case in BARS.
It does cover >60° in emission alright. Reception is another matter.
So have you got evidence to support any of those claims regarding the design of Bars? Or are you just expecting us all to believe every word you say without question?
1 Like
Sure.
It’s worth noting that N011M is not simply a PESA, but instead, it’s a transition between PESA and AESA in that it adopts technologies from both: each transceiver on the antenna array of N011M has its own receiver amplifier, which is the same as AESA, and with noise level of 3dB, which is also in the same class of AESA arrays. However, for transmitting, N011M uses PESA technology in that a single Chelnok traveling-wave tube is used for EGSP-6A transmitter. There are three receiving channels for N011M.
It has essentially a “chunky” TRM bottleneck from the 80s AESA tech.
Original bars did even less than ±45 degrees, it only used to do ±40 degrees. You can see this on old brochures and on planes in game like the su30mkm
Anyways I do think ±45 degrees isnt an unreasonable number, it’s just the default that gaijin gives to sensors when their parameters are unknown
By what standards?
Even a “low cost” 2mm thick PESA array has a +/-60° FoV.
It may not be accurate, but its also not an unreasonable ball-park either, and follows the default RWR coverage too. In my experience, its usually suffecient. I dont recall the last time I died to a Fox-2 missiles outside its coverage that I wasnt already fully aware of and defending against. Even in ASB
If you want to make a post, suggestion or bug report to challenge that default figure, I think we would all support it. But where the EFT and EFT alone is concerned, its probably not going anywhere anytime soon.
I didn’t even think about it as I thought it was +/-60° and I figured, ok, whatever…but now, that I found out, it’s a friggin’ 45°!? I just want to learn the rationale behind it. I mean, EF has been nothing but nerfed for the past 19 months, without any explanation whatsoever, while flying into the face of physics.
A man must wonder, at some point, why.
Gaijin seems to just hate or fear the Typhoon
3 Likes
We commited too big of a massacre with laser brimstones out of sheer spite.
Was so bad that they had to nerf it’s FM the next patch.
3 Likes
It kinda pisses me off how usable they are man… Even the anti heli aspect makes them a must bring.