But it also nerfs aircraft without SARH, they may rely upon ground clutter to evade enemy contacts (such as ground attackers) or close to within WVR range. This is going to require a major increase in BR for a number of aircraft if this is too remain
3 Likes
…at the expense of aircraft that depended on being able to use terrain to survive.
If it’s not, it may be ok for AB and RB, but certainly not in SB.
5 Likes
nothing changes there - radar still can’t penetrate hills, etc
What will change is that maps will hills will be better vs now where flat maps are just easiest to play since all you have to do is stay below 500m to avoid BVR.
It will be different gameplay, not easier or harder.
Also, notching, chaffs and multipath will work as they do now.
Missiles for the most part as well the biggest difference will be SARH in cold aspect - basically missile like AIM-7 will be actually useful in cold aspect. Right now, they only work for very modern planes like F-18, etc. for everything else their effective range is limited to that of AIM9G really - maybe tiny bit higher.
People would have to learn to take chaff, would have to learn how to kinematically defeat missiles
It’s just my guess it’s not realistic but I agree.
I do not have concrete evidence to confirm or deny my feelings though.
1 Like
but missiles are not buffed - just radars. Simple notch at low alt (even w/o chaffs) would work against all SARH missile at those BRs.
There will be problem with BR compression and fact that some planes do not have RWR but BR compression is problem as old as WT and it will keep returning every 3 months regardless what GJ changes. even w/o changes we have it.
if it’s realistic or not - that’s biggest concern if you ask me.
if it is - then it’s fine. if not, then it should not be done like this.
Other than that - people will adopt. They will start using terrain, they will learn how to defeat missiles, etc
I’ve played planes w/o RWR and CMs against planes that do have PD and SARHs and it can be done.
Against planes w/o PD, even after improvement - it would also be more than possible. It just won’t be simple case of “fly 60m over flat map” anymore
1 Like
SARH are entirely guided by the launch aircraft, if the lock remains good enough, it will be guided
Notching works because it forces the radar to swtich from PD to SRC which is Susceptible to chaff. So actually, you could only defeat the radar by deploying chaff.
It likely is not. As it stands, I think ground clutter amount should have probably need to be increased to achieve true realism, not decreased.
That was/is people exploiting Multipathing, not ground clutter
3 Likes
that is fundamentally not true. they use onboard receivers. AC is only a transmitter.
also not true - for the same reason as above. you can have solid lock on target and missile will still miss or you can have lock on chaff and missile will still hit enemy plane.
it’s SARH/ARH 101 and I am sure there are plenty of resources on forum to read.
I think so too but it’s just my gut feeling. I can’t prove either side.
of course, but they do it because clutter is so strong they don’t have to use terrain to hide from radar. Simply flying in altitude that gives multipath effect works for that too.
Also - multipath on dev still works the same way I believe so you’d still be able to fly low and avoid missiles
1 Like
@Morvran btw: better radars does not mean ground clutter is gone. targets flying low are still much harder to spot.
Here I can easily lock at target above horizon at 40-45km while same target flying low is not detected at 21km.
In fact it could only detect it at 15km and lock only below 9km
And this is target flying at 700-800m AGL so not exactly low
But don’t get me wrong - I do think it’s too easy now to find and lock those lower targets
2 Likes
I am extremely enthusiastic for more of my teammates to die to the 9.7 21-S after dying to the r3r 20 times and still not getting the memo of what to do
1 Like
@Morvran - we did more testing with @RideR2 and it’s not as bad.
if you fly at 700-1000m the ground clutter does not work but at 100-200m it works as before.
basically ground clutter now works near the ground, it’s no longer sufficient to just be below enemy
He flew mig-25 (big target) at 100m and I flew F4E. I couldn’t detect him at more than 3-4km and couldn’t get a lock above 1000-1500m
his radar lost me from longer range as soon as I went below 200m
Basically, it’s still more than possible to avoid detection by flying low. The radars are simply better at detecting objects with clutter behind them if the source of the clutter is sufficiently far away. Basically distance discrimination between echoes was improved.
1 Like
2.5km and no detection, 1.6km and no track
It does feel more realistic than it did initially @Schindibee
1 Like
Great, so now, Mig-25 (and anything with a J-band radar, actually) will be able to catch even MORE people off-guard…
Like that plane wasn’t already cancerous enough
4 Likes
one more test - both F4E and Mig-25 down low, head on.
The shallower the angle the longer the detection range against low flying target.
It supports my theory that GJ improved distance discrimination or if you will distance gating for radars
1 Like
Having used the mirage 3 recently, it certainly feels that bad.
1 Like
f-4e will benefit the most from this imo
lets not 😈
i WILL nuke migs with my sparrows and NOTHING will stop me
This you?
Why do you selectively support realism only when it suits you?
In general I really do like to support realism - which however does not mean I can not make mistakes and wrong assumptions about realism (which I strongly suspect could well be the case in the topic you linked, haha!).
1 Like
did even more testing and I stand by my opinion that this change is way over-done.
It does not feel realistic to a point where finding and locking targets flying at 600-800m is easier with normal radar than with MTI and normal pulse radar is more reliable tracking “look down” targets than PD unless they fly really low because you can’t notch pulse radar - it would of course still follow chaffs
anyway - if it was 50% improvement it would be better - now it’s just strange and unrealistic
1 Like
Yeah it seems a bit much compared to MTI, but that might also be because MTI just sucks in general (in game)
Have they changed it? Or is the next update pulse radar going to be OP?