8 Likes
I could give a guess, buuut I don’t want to start a witch hunt off a whim has I truly don’t know.
I doubt it, both statshark and the player search support that it’s a new account with limited playtime, hell the “active” battle time according to the player search is only 3 minutes lmao
It should be noted that every single image I provided comes directly from either the US Military, UK Military, or one of four different defence companies. So it is not me apparently using the term wrong, it is all of them. Which is a little ironic considering that a few posts back your arguement with that Hendsolt are a defence company so couldn’t possibly get anything wrong, because that would make them “incompetent”.
The universal definition of FoR is that it is the total area that can be covered by a repositionable sensor, while the FoV is what the sensor can see without being repositioned.
Here’s a book which says as much:
The field of regard is the total area that a collection platform is capable of seeing by pointing the sensor.
…
The FOV is the angular cone of visibility of the sensor, measured in degrees, as shown in Figure 9.3. It determines the surface area that is seen from a given altitude at one moment in time
Wikipedia (as much as it is not a reliable source by itself) uses the same definition:
The field of regard (abbreviated FOR) is the total area that can be captured by a movable sensor. It should not be confused with the field of view (FOV), which is the angular cone perceivable by the sensor at a particular time instant. The field of regard is the total area that a sensing system can perceive by pointing the sensor, which is typically much larger than the sensor’s FOV.[1] For a stationary sensor, the FOR and FOV coincide (i.e. FOR=FOV).
Hell even AI agrees that the FoV of a repositionable AESA radar like ECRS is the electronically scanned area while the FoR is the total area which can be scanned by moving the antenna plate.
Field of View is the instantaneous solid angle that the radar array can scan purely electronically without physically moving the antenna plate.
…
Field of Regard is the total cumulative angular area the radar can cover by combining electronic scanning (FoV) with physical, mechanical movement of the antenna array using a repositioner.
Spoiler
I’m not saying either of those last two are greatly reliable sources, but it helps show how universal the definition is.
If you are convinced that literally every source I have provided (including those from two different militaries and four different defence companies ) gets it wrong though then please do the following:
- Clearly and concisely explain what do you perceive the difference between FoV and FoR to be
- Provide 2 or more reliable sources which clearly and unambiguously support your definition. If you are correct then this shouldn’t be hard at all.
If you can’t / don’t do the above then I can only assume you are arguing in bad faith.
4 Likes
@Smin1080p_WT Could you have a look at this?Community Bug Reporting System
It was closed for “P4E” is the name of the program, not the name of the radar. Which I wasn’t stating, I was stating the ECRS MK1/2 radar is under the P4E Enhancement and the Typhoon’s should be renamed to Typhoon P4E not the radar.
But your “fixes” aren’t correct either.
German AESA = Quadriga, but it’s not the Quadriga in the game; it’s “Inspired by the IPA.7.”
These Eurofighters with AESA are more “what if” and aren’t made after one special ER. That’s why none of them have markings that point you toward one special EF.
They are more realistic than the current names given to the Typhoons at the moment, AESA isn’t a designation. Eurofighter, Luftwaffe, RAF, BAE have listed the upgrade as the P4E which incorporates the ECRS MK1/2, which is exactly what we have ingame at the moment.
I know what the IPA 7 is too, but the PIRATE on the German IPA7 isn’t limited to it, its presented in the P4E upgrade too by Eurofighter. Also IPA7 is not Quadriga, Quadriga is the set name for the Tranche 4 German Typhoon’s.
Once again no Typhoon Tranche 2 has flown with an ECRS MK radar yet (atleast being outside from a testbed), yet a Tranche 3 and 4 has…
Goood, so you know yourself that we dont have the Quadriga… as the Quadriga lacks the PIRATE
Once again no Typhoon Tranche 2 has flown with an ECRS MK radar yet (atleast being outside from a testbed), yet a Tranche 3 and 4 has…
Doenst matter as in game they arent written with a Tranche…
Also, only the UK uses the Typhoon part, sure the entire name is Eurofighter Typhoon, but Germany and Italy use the Eurofighter part instead…
At this point they should of just went with one or the other instead of mixing Quadriga and IPA together with the presented Typhoons.
However there is this
I was just summarising the Typhoon’s.
And were is the Connection to our ones?
We dont have the LTE one (which your Pic shows)
Damn man, thats quite sad
LTE applies for everyone and if LTE was added rn it wouldn’t change anything. I shown that pic because it still shows its a Tranche 4 which is what the Quadriga is atleast for Germany, as there is no Arexis or jammer pods on it too.
Is this bait?
You know what the LTE changes right? (Outside of Internal Tech)
1 Big Screen, no HUD, you know?
It isn’t bait? Cool its a cockpit, nothing else is changing if it was implemented right now, no meteor, no ecm, no jamming, no jammer pods, outside of the new hud, nothing else would make this unique until all those features were added.
The fact they gave large screen name “LAD” still makes me chuckle
Gitup lad
Atleast its not “LADY” xD
Apparently, it’s easier to argue than to actually look up the issue…incredible.
In monopulse radars the iFoV is the Half-Power Beamwidth, the smallest angular measurement unit.
What you’re quoting is stuff, most likely, from a preESA era, where scan volume (FoV) was inescapably connected with mechanical movement and it doesn’t differentiate iFoV and FoV.
I’m not sure you’re on the same page as Flame here man,
from my albeit small amount of research i’ve noticed that FoV, FoR and iFoV are all different things
iFoV is the smallest, it measures what a single section on the radar/sensor can see (think like a single pixel)
FoV is the next in the chain, it measures what that entire radar/sensor can see without moving that radar/sensor
FoR is the largest in this chain, it measures what that radar/sensor can see if that radar/sensor has been moved (think the average radar doing its sweep from left to right, top to bottom.
do with this what you will, or deny it if you want, i’m just laying those definitions out as i see them
5 Likes
I would concur with that based upon GJ04s own videos and my own background in Photography
1 Like