Low speed maneuvering significantly improved, high speed sustained turn rate increased…
Low and medium speeds (0.35 - 0.6 mach) STR was reduced…
Depends on how you look at it. I don’t report things just to nerf them, I only report discrepancies.
1 Like
Oh I understand that, the FM should be as it is IRL, was just wondering how this translates in game, so it seems medium speeds are hit but low speed is better and high speed is also better.
Is the low speed manoeuvring only improved if flaps are deployed?
A buff in my book for ARB players
1 Like
Very good, gonna go bonk more flankers while they dump all their speed in one turn
But why 11GHz if you know the operating frequency and it’s gonna give you a difference. If you use at 11GHz the 3058Hz rejection(±150 kph) filter at 10GHz, its gonna filter anything to ±165 kph, at 9GHz thats gonna be ± 183kph.
And looking at the On-Board Complex Aircraft Navigation, Aiming and Armament Control. Its a mess to read, but it look to even have a rejection filter at all
signal before processing is sent to mixer/heterodyne which might be why its all so expanded(60kHz for the clutter region?) but quite complicated to understand. There’s no info about a simple rejection filter around the MBC/Fighter speed but it seems to only look in the clutter free region with a separation between the clutter and the bands.
I meant that if it’s telling you that you can’t track targets below 150kph when the antenna is below 3°, then it might imply there’s a filter. Preventing you to track targets under that speed.
2 Likes
I didn’t mention the source I used, so it doesn’t matter if there is rejection filter for some area or pass-through filter for the rest area. I think we understood each other. You can take filters position do some calcullations and have the same values for speed for the same operating frequency.
No, this means only that you can’t track targets below 150kph (relative MLC) when the antenna is below 3° due the some reasons. Ground clutter presence may be such reason - logical.
3 Likes
It would be awesome if the flight model devs were more communicative like you are. Is there any chance you could discuss with them about talking to the community more frequently about hotly debated topics?
8 Likes
fair enough. But thing is on a manual and its there for a reason. 210-180 kph
Do you think MLC clutter would be able to reach that far into the clutter free region? I can only think of an antenna being angled down enough so that sidelobes offer a return with a higher frequency to it. Made me think and see why from your point of view for what you say, especially for tracking targets.
Take into account:
- main beam width
- first sidelobes (which may be strong enough, for examplem to be accounted in doppler filtering in search modes)
- speed gate width
- antenna possible elevation angle: the more the angle below the horizone - wider the dopper speed range of MLC spot is.
- processing: ground clutter not in the gates, but nearby may affect
- e.t.c…
You may find that the no-tracking area of the closing speed scale is wider than you think.
3 Likes
That’s all cool and all, but what’s up with the reason you guys are keeping the AWG9 nerfed beyond all hell?
What’s up with the intentional nerfed ACM range on the F-16C & D.
3 Likes
VSN used to do it frequently on the russian forum:
1 Like
They would never because that would only reveal they artificially buff and nerf aircraft depending on circumstance such as balance and above all in the name of sales figures. I have no issue with it as this is still a business. The only issue I have is the fact that they intentionally neglect certain models.
The only reason @k_stepanovich communicates with the community is because the study of radiolocation and telecommunications is a relatively new and very complex feature to the War thunder and video games in general. None of them have a formal education in regard to the military applications of the technology.
Especially in the highest technical domain of the United States Air Force.
He most likely has very few to zero colleagues in his department to refer to in radar operation and modelling. He is probably one of the first developers in the industry of this specialized area.
It is ideal to communicate with the WT community in this regard.
2 Likes
What are your winrates in F-15A people? Trying to spade the eagle (at least unlock 9Ms) and currently i have whopping %21 WR at 14 games total. It is %70 (37 Games) in Mirage 4000 and %54 (41 Battles) In Su-27. I’am playing on the EU server by the way.
1 Like
44% Right now, the thing is that even if the F-15 has a good FM, it is not a meta aircraft. So in the current set up of 16v16, you will rarely perform well.
must be bad luck then. Since this patch whenever i play top tier usa jets my team magically vanishes…
F5C players are going to become f15/f16 players eventually. What do you expect. From my experience the team that has the most usa aircraft loses, this happened even before the update
2 Likes
Of course, you didn’t. Why would you?
I love how there is a developer and a customer splitting hairs over a notch filter when there are many 4th generation radars (mostly western) that can’t hold a lock in the most ideal atmospheric conditions at a pathetic range of 6km at altitude.
Are people harassing the devs over non-existent issues? Surely there’s evidence to support a report if there was a real issue… And it would be so so easy to make if it’s obvious, no?
Calm down junior game developer.
3 Likes
