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.
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?
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?
This report suggests EFT already has a PD MAWS and should have other properties of that. Currently, we do not have PD MAWS in game. As per the answers posted earlier above in this topic: Eurofighter Typhoon (UK versions) - Technical data and discussion - #3916
DASS functioning on IR detection rather than PD - Currently all MAWS operate via IR means. The functionality for PD / Radar sensor does not currently exist, but will be studied further in the future, and its possible it may come.
Once PD MAWS becomes available, then such reports will be possible to submit. But until PD MAWS functionality is implemented, reports wont be accepted on additional features of that, that are not part of the current MAWS functionality in game.
6 Likes
The MAWS on the Eurofighter is a wide-beam pulse doppler antenna. Is it not possible to simulate the reduced angular accuracy of the MAWS until such a time as they can properly model it? The aircraft only benefits from the decision otherwise, having all the advantages of passive MAWS with none of the disadvantages.
This is also extremely unfair for all the other aircraft that have PD based MAWS but are not yet simulated in the game.
The MAWS on the Eurofighter is a wide-beam pulse doppler antenna.
No it isn’t - stop making up complete hogwash. You haven’t the faintest clue what it does or doesn’t have.
Your posts in this otherwise informative thread have more or less boiled down to a torrent of:
‘Waaaah! The Typhoon cannot possibly do this, that, X or Y because I, MiG-23M - decree it cannot! If I don’t know how it works it must be impossible!’
The people who put these things together know more about aircraft that you do. That isn’t insulting, it isn’t denigrating - it’s just the facts of the matter.
7 Likes
There is no other way for the sensor to gain the required coverage and maintain reduced weight, complexity, and size.
We currently have one type of RWR in game. All aircraft are treated equally in that regard.
If you wish to report other aircraft missing an RWRs system, you are more than free to do so.
1 Like