(missile lock indicators were bugged back when i did this test and the missile lock circle often showed up tiny and on your plane, but i very much could fire this missile, though it didnt have the range to hit)
Not my greatest bug report, but i figured gaijin could figure out that an R-60M being able to lock through 33km’s of clouds is not working as intended, but apparently they cant and the bug report was closed as “not a bug” and the thermal signature was considered “correct” https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ll7pOaGaWnna
what the hell kind of logic is this lol… They have the data but they wont use them ??? So if the gauge would read up to 5000 F then I guess the devs would go with that… Great stuff
There are literally afterburner plume heat charts in the manuals we could use for F-15 and F-16, I’m sure if someone pointed to those they could demonstrate the temps are too high. It would be a report on engines in general, not just the F-14 tho.
Its a similar issue to how they don’t directly use data from Firing trials to model Shell performance, but run it though a bespoke performance calculator to equivocate performance (which itself has a number of issues, which is basically never going to be revised).
There is simply not enough details known to even begin to guess at IR performance metrics for most of the engines in game, let alone the specific chemistry of IR countermeasure compositions that would be needed to fully implement a similar solution (also various airframes are in configurations that never existed / flew so there is a lack of data for them).
Yes, there are methods that could be used to fairly approximate performance(e.g. implement GASRAD, or alternately anything discussed in the handbook), but it would require significant work to get going, and even then there are likely a few edge cases where things fail due to a lack of data.
It’s really weird how they over-model heat signatures and at the same time under-model IR detection ranges such that everything’s too hot but you still can’t see it from far enough away I don’t get it
Regarding the previous discussion about OLS and potential fixing of the AN/AXX-1 TCS will lead to it having a proper sensor interface like radar an IRST…
Obviously, the most important function would be allowing the TCS to slave the radar if the radar itself couldnt maintain a lock, but I find one of the things that bugs me the most about TCS (particularly since ive migrated to sim air) is the fact that the only 2 ways for me to see its display are in the actual pod view, or the un-zoomed MFD view in my cockpit, which makes easily identifying targets while maintaining your situational awareness and flying near impossible. They could either make it so they TCS view in the cockpit MFD can be zoomed, or maybe replace the radar window with an optical TCS view window when the TCS is acting as master sensor, similar to how IRST has its own sensor window when switched to IRST as main sensor.
This would also be a step in the direction of future IIR IRST such as the AN/AAS-42 on the F-14D, or the PIRATE IRST from the Eurofighter
Man I love that the F-14’s manual says that if the engine goes over ~935 °C, that it will be damaged. Gaijin solution: give it an extra 200° temperature.
electro-optic views in cockpit in general right now are awful. the lack of ability to slew the and lock them from cockpit view alongside the terrible resolution from cockpit view makes for an insanely frustrating experience using them for literally anything in sim especially
