Looking for information on the MAWS for the EFT, seems if it is active it should quite literally appear to be a constant ping on some people’s radars within a certain distance that a Typhoon is in the area.
Staff removed my comment about the Typhoon being a strobe light, but honestly it was completely on topic.
This is true, the EFT and other aircrafts with radar-based MAWS should remain on RWR of nearby aircrafts even if the main radar is turned off. All stealth aircrafts in service to this day uses IR-based MAWS because it doesn’t have radar emissions, from the F-35, F-22, Su-57, and J-20 for good reasons.
UV/IR MAWS for F-22 and F-35, idk about the rest
My MFD
MAWS is designed to counteract targets that are many times smaller than aircraft. Perhaps such systems have a very short wavelength. Something like K-band or L-band. In this case, almost all RWRs simply will not “hear” them. 0% proof. 100% pure reasoning
L band is certainly detectable and aircraft or systems looking to detect modern fighters will more than certainly be looking for these types of signals on RWR
Example of MAWS with L-Band
Example of RWR with L-Band detection
It has been well known that radar based MAWS downside is constant emissions;
Source (page 252 of pdf)
Any questions?
In War Thunder? I mean… We talk here about game, i guess?
IRL, I think if the radar goes into stealth mode, then the MAVS turns off (good luck see someone like that in WT). I doubt that the people designing the planes are idiots.
You can turn countermeasure slaving off for the MAWS, should also have an option to turn the MAWS off in favor of reduced emissions in the game. It would be a simple addition imo.
I’m sure they have a reason for using PD based MAWS, maybe @Flame2512 has more knowledge of the development that led to that decision.
Just like removing the crooked radar scanning pattern, which for some reason doubles the time it takes for the beam to return to point 0. But, as you can see, it’s not that simple. And this report is at least six months old.
You should have some faith that Gaijin will implement nerfs quickly /s.
I found a message on the Chinese website that someone sent an unpacking message saying that the .38 version will fix CAPTOR-M, do you have any news about this
好像只改了irst，雷达没修，bvvd真司马了
It seems that only the IRST was fixed, and the radar was not repaired.
I can’t find any indication that the Eurofighter MAWS is AESA - nor any indication that it is L band. All I can find is that it is active, all three sensors are radar based and must have some form of emission at all times if it wishes to see incoming missiles.
Does anyone have pictures of the sensors themselves without a cover?
This appears to be the system used on the Eurofighter part for part; Source
The components for the active MAW are almost identical;
Flame has a report stating that the MAWS should have accurate prediction of time until impact for incoming ordnance - citing the aforementioned source afaik.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/BPqI5EdaVuSH
The distance and speed can be found, but the specific angle of attack for the incoming munition cannot. These are three wide-beam antenna that each need to cover at least 120 degrees for full lateral coverage.
The rear sensor alone is trying to cover a full 180 degrees;
As seen in any papers covering active MAWS, a wide-beam antenna is required to have the full coverage required of a MAWS. This means it will have poor measurement of missile angle-of-arrival as stated; Source
That is not the missile approach warner.
Additionally, the Eurofighter’s DASS system will be emitting large amounts of radiation likely in L-band that modern Flankers such as the Su-35 are specifically designed to pick up and hone-in on.
This defense suite may actually be the undoing of a Eurofighter in modern air combat against the aircraft it was designed to fight. @BBCRF Any thoughts on that?
The eurofighter MAWS operates in the Ka-band.
Happen to have a source for it?
Well it must be some type of ESA (and lets be honest, the difference between the PESA and AESA at this antenna size is basically academical). The modules in the wingroots are certainly no mech scan (so its extremely doubtful that the rear one is), and a fixed antenna would require ridiculous energy draws to detect small missiles at enough range.
Just look at the WW2 German air radar sets to see how wide scan angles reduce range
I also have doubts in your assumption that it cannot accurately detect angles. As I have already assessed, its probably an ESA type, which means it can also calculate the angle of arrival from the phase difference of the antenna array no matter the beamwidth.
Additionally you have BAE saying this about the Typhoons HMD
The helmet works by having a number of fixed sensors around the cockpit area. As the pilot moves his head, the sensors on his helmet move in relation to the sensors on the aircraft ensuring the aircraft knows exactly where and what he is looking at.
Imagery projected onto the pilot’s visor gives, amongst other information, speed, heading and height – and crucially, it also gives the precise position of any enemy aircraft or missiles.
As you might be aware, to display the accurate position of enemy missiles, you first need to know the position of enemy missiles.
