Unfortunately the exact frequency a radar operates at is often highly classified, as knowing it would let the enemy develop countermeasures for it. For example RAF Eurofighter pilots are told not to radar lock Russian aircraft during peace-time intercepts to stop them from capturing information on how the radar functions during a lock-on.
2 Likes
Yeah I figured as much, I just figure with some of the known data, like lower and upper limits and some knowledge of when the radar would use a certain frequency the radar bands could be set accordingly in WT.
As it is rn, it seem only the APG-76 is modelled as J band, therefore outside the russian SPO-15 detection. Most/all other radars are modelled as I-band. Another day of gaijins interpretation which seems to benefit the russian vehicles and harm NATO ones I guess…
1 Like
To be fair this paragraph from an RAF manual would imply that NATO aircraft mainly use high I band, rather than J band:
The F-4J/S will probably get an improved RWR.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/PIEbhTVAuvKA
I-J bands are usually specified for those radars which operate in frequencies on both sides of the I/J border, may be just slightly left and right, 9.6-10.2 for example. In the game only one band is assigned to them.
Usually radars of 3-4gen fighters operate in ~ 0.5 GHz wide band.
In the case of the F-14, which operates from 8-12GHz according to that document though, but is only assigned as I band in-game, isnt that an outright nerf? Particularly when dealing with things equipped with SPO-15 which only goes up to 10.3GHz.
If the SPO-15 (for example, its just the one I have off the top of my head) can only detect up to the top end of I band, which is mid-X band in IEEE standard, any X band radar modelled as I band only is being directly held back in favor of the SPO-15.
Its even worse for something like the F-16’s radar which has a minimum frequency of 9.86GHz according to the above posted document, which puts at at mid X band and up (barely sneaks into I bands absolute upper limits) but is modelled as I band ingame?
Wasn’t that part of why the F-14’s were so effective during the Iran-Iraq war, or were their victims mostly equipt with / downgraded to the SPO-10?
8-12GHz is the entirety of X band. In all likelihood the F-14 only uses a small frequency range within that band, and whoever wrote that paper doesn’t know what the exact frequency range is (beyond “X band”) so just specified the entirety of X band.
1 Like
Possible sure, but as seen for example with the F-16’s APG-68, lowest freq is around 9.86GHz while highest achieved frequency during testing was up to 26GHz. I dont think its farfetched to think the AWG-9 could operate at multiple different frequencies throughout the X band
most common RWR in soviet equipment there was the SPO-10
Is there actually a reliable source for that? All I can find is Wikipedia and various websites that have copy-pasted the specifications from Wikipedia (word for word)
But that’s the thing I don’t know what exactly was shot down, but the Iraqi Airforce likely had access to Su-17M4K’s (later sent to Iran for safekeeping and pressed into Iranian service, later modernized) and Su-22K’s I don’t think either of those would have retained the SPO-10, let alone a specialist radar hunter. There is also the matter of the MiG-25(s) that were shot down as well, they can’t all have had faulty RWR’s, and at those ranges STT would have been needed so illumination would be well within the SPO-10’s wheelhouse.
these would have SPO-15s yes
these had SPO-10s, but some (an unknown amount) were upgraded to SPO-15s as a modification though most likely after the war since most aircraft modifications occurred in the tail end of the 1980s
Upon further digging, maybe not. Idk where the exact source for the “up to 26 GHz” came from, although it seems a pretty highly specific/specialized figure to just be lying about, so I don’t necessarily doubt it either.
I have found this specific source though which would contradict the claim (atleast in combat use?)
Same place as the functionning AN/AXX-1 TCS
The depths of “gaijin couldn’t be bothered modelling it” hell
1 Like
@Ziggy1989 We should give this thread some love I think
Is there anything like pictures of the cockpit / displays that show the ability to do this stuff that we can use in a report?
I am sure it’s on a nob somewhere, but I will look into it. Give me some time.
1 Like
There’s a whole thread for this conversation over here. Y’all should give it some love, only has ~50 something comments so far.
Time to get this thread moving again (Especially since with possibly imminent AMRAAM update F14D could be on the table)
So, we have the problems with the AIM-54 as discussed in its own thread here:
AN/AXX-1 Is not modeled, should have a search pattern as @MythicPi has discussed. Overall appears much closer to an IRST than a laser designator as it is depicted in the game.
AN/AWG-9 / APG-71 Both cannot be modeled correctly because there is an artificial limit of 115 standard miles on TWS tracks using the AWG-9. It can detect, lock, and track a target using TWS exceeding that range, but it cannot actually engage until < 115 miles.
And F-14D will have the IRST as well, which should allow for seeker slaving of AIM-7, AIM-9, AIM-54, along with steering the CW emitter on the equipped radar. This functionality should also be present with the TCS.
Advanced modes present for the radar and IRST were also present IRL. IRST had a ‘raw’ output mode which appears to have displayed a raw IR image to the pilot or RIO. Radar also had the TID which allowed the Pilot/RIO to pin and quick-swap between targets.
1 Like