It’s fine for me. Sometimes my TWS tracks random stuff which is really annoying. I use manual target selection instead of cycle selection. But when I try to track in the TWS, it will track a completely different target. It can even be a missile that’s briefly detected and the tws lock will remember that missile lock for a brief moment. Also, sometimes the acm just goes for someone with a lot less PD than the enemy I’m trying to track with a lot more doppler.
But I feel it’s better compared to the JAS39C SA and F16C. But to be fair, I do feel minor differences. Maybe the JAS39C’s TWS is a little weaker, but I don’t mind.
The tws issue is gate brackets outright jumping onto something else even on the opposite side of scan? If yeah, same issue in sims. For some reason it loves to do that even if firmly tracking. But its not like it cant be dealt with. Its just annoying af.
Yeah i got the f15c it’s like it’s slightly better than the f16c, which is strange since the MSIP 2 radar is pretty powerful if i’m not mistaken.
But even so idc that much because i’m loving the eagle, ingame it’s by far my favorite plane now. I thought the stock grind would be bad but by turning off the radar and bombing i was able to get amraams considerably fast.
I wouldn’t say that. F-15J is based on an F-15C, so it is unlikely it wouldn’t have had PSP radar.
It also later received upgrades for wiring and fuselage hardpoints to make it AMRAAM compatible, but without known radar change. I doubt it would’ve received those if it was limited to basic F-15A like APG-63 radar.
For “Air-to-Air Radar Modes for the CP-140 Maritime Patrol Aircraft”, the number is not wrong, but the units are wrong. They used kilometers when they should have used miles, this is why we had the problem.
In the paper, it mentions that the F-4 size target has a 90 km detecting range. However, assuming this is a mile and converting to kilometers, it becomes 144km. (90*1.609=144.841)
This is completely consistent with the graph in the “F-15 AN/APG-63 Radar Case Study Report”.
This graph shows a detecting range of nearly 80 nautical miles.
But, this does not match the graph in the “F-15 Design and Approach Presentation”, so there may be some confusion about this. In that graph, we see that the T-33 is almost always detected at 65 nautical miles.
However, in the “F-15 AN/APG-63 Radar Case Study Report”, they mention a 20% increase in detecting range due to the upgrade of AMP module.
For a 20% increase from 65 nautical miles, it is 78 nautical miles, which is also matched by the graph in the “F-15 AN/APG-63 Radar Case Study Report”.
Notes: “F-15 AN/APG-63 Radar Case Study Report” was written in 1983 and “F-15 Design and Approach Presentation” was written before that, so this is not conflicting.
Therefore, converting 78 nautical miles to kilometers gives 144 km. (78*1.852=144.456) This number matches the range in the paper if we assume the range in the paper is in miles.
Nice to see. But why their insistence on using that document? There’s no reference to that information anywhere and
Spoiler
What will be the RCS figure used because the F4’s RCS is larger than the T-38 (1.3m^2) and T-33(2m^2)? And the “Medium Target” in the case study is 2m^2.
Even the beamwidth mentioned is wrong. 3° to 2.5° as specified in the -34 and close to the value you get by using optical waves, 42 linear elements at half-wavelength
