Eurofighter Typhoon (UK versions) - Technical data and discussion

But priority track enables the radar to make snap jumps to keep targets tracked with sources suggesting the radar pedastal can move up to speeds of 333°/sec. If this functionality cannot be introduced due to game limitations, then a placeholder buff should be applied to maintain the performance of the radar. Currently, it is not CAPTOR-M. It is instead Blue Vixen and that is a woefully underperforming radar vs AESA radars.

To maintain competitiveness, if game limitations prevent the CAPTOR-M from being added to the game, then either CAPTOR-E needs to be added or the Blue Vixen needs a temporary scan rate buff to enable it to better represent the capabilities of CAPTOR-M.

6 Likes

The ESA radars in game have the feature, where they update the target of TWS very frequently, even if not within the current search zone. This could be introduced as the stop gap, as it is basically the same system.

2 Likes

Is that true 333°/sec… wow

If we consider only the speed on one bar - then Tornado will be faster even after this… “buff”. But to scan the entire sector Tornado will need more time. There are 6 bars of 60 degrees, and Typhoon only 4.I wonder what documents were used in the internal report.
According to my rough estimates, the speed should be about one and a half times higher than Tomcat, but this estimate is based on the “life” time of the contact of 8 s. As I was explained, this is a variable value. Either the IRL Typhoon stores the contact in memory for a very long time, or the speed should be about one and a half times higher minimum.

It’s vertical speed. Not scan-speed

1 Like

That would work, just need something better than just Blue Vixen with GMTI on the Typhoon

There’s a secondary source for early on in CAPTOR’s development that suggests so, which would make sense why many sources say ‘scanning speed making it comparable to electronically scanned arrays’. As there wouldn’t be any real noticable difference here.

Image

1 Like

Sadly just the one secondary source so far. So without a second agreeing source, it cant be used. It also directly goes against the primary material submitted showing figures of 70 Degrees per second. So its not clear from this that 333°/sec would be a constant sustainable speed.

4 Likes

I wouldnt propose 333°/sec for the scan speed. my interpretation of that source is that is the max speed in which the radar can move, but doesnt have a scan speed anywhere near that high. Instead it makes use of that speed ot enable things like Priority Track and interleaved modes. (the pressence of interleaved modes though do to me suggest the abilility to scan at a far higher rate imo)

I’d simply propose either as Devil suggested, using the same kit found in game on AESA radars for fast TWS target updates or to increase the scan speed to more like 100°/sec until such time Priority track can be added. Where game limitations prevent faithful implementation, compromises should be given to maintain performance.

3 Likes

The system is a standard wide-beam it does not need to steer and wouldn’t significantly benefit from a more complex and costly ESA.

Further, if the ESM/ECM systems are AESA, why was the radar not? Were they both upgraded to AESA at the same time?

Where does it say it is a “standard wide-beam”?

rethink about the speed

I don’t know, I have not worked on EFT, and even if someone here did I doubt they would tell us real reasons.

When there is material to suggest a rethink, that will indeed take place.

2 Likes

It doesn’t, there are three sensors and none of them have any kind of array. They’re small and simple in design, that is the only possible option.

Does this one has an array?
17352353830944546223423512095937
The fact it is not visible does not mean it is there.

This report suggests that the Eurofighter does not have a PD based MAWS - that is the only type of MAWS it actually has IRL.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/YJt6t75J63wy

So the report was labeled not a bug, but this is unfair. All other aircraft with PD based MAWS should receive it or the EFT should lose it until this type of MAWS is modeled in the game.

Of course, it should obviously retain the RWR based MAWS, but to model the PD maws as IR based is not the right solution.

Man

1 Like

I read that, what do you think I am replying to

is’t that report that people have above raising more questions for further research on this?