False statement.
Pantsir
CS/SA5
Tor-M1
HQ-17
Buk
They are not TWS ESA as on air radar however, I believe these just work by scanning in like a regular M-scan radar but really really fast to simulate TWS ESA (using regular TWS logic) before it even was a proper mechanic (with the Pantsir or Tor-M1, don’t remember).
By all means they are currently not working realistically, believe last time I calculated, the Pantsir is scanning an entire frontal sector (with the tracking radar) at 10000°/s+ scanrate. No radar will have any functional range at such short dwell times.
You missed an update, they were migrated to ESA some time ago.
Cant open the game rn, but code part from pantsir
Normal scan speed was increased to 1s, and 0,05 for Pantsir/CS/Buk, and 0,025 for Tor/HQ ESA was added.
(To be frant, Buk was already on ESA code, so no migrating took part there)
It cant be anything but a ESA unless they don’t want to call it “electronic back scan”.
Given other sources for the system state a mechanical scan rate of up to 30 RPM such is accurate.
Thats the only definition at play, its the exact same as other system offerings.
Thats the 3d beam forming function, back scanning abilities is a rear facing array and has always been that.
Its a rear facing “Electronically” scanned array.
Hensoldt calls it “Look forward and look back” its functionally identical and the terminology is also functionally identical.
You did read the source you posted … right?
It means that it’s volume at play is equal to and opposite to the main array, aka it is fixed and faces backwards, and thus, scans at the same rate at the main array’s FOV but backwards.
So funny bit about that, it might actually be this.
Tiny little hydraulic ram that would just move the mount a bit. Out radar in game seems to lack this.
And just for further clarification, the rear panel is physically bolted to the array, there is no way for it to acuate, it’s ability to see is predicated on the angle of the main array and it’s ESA abilities.
1 Like
Also managed to find the respective changelog
(the reduction talked here never happened, update time on the ESA is the same as it was before, detection time of the new targets increased, due to searching increasing to 1s)
1 Like
Wow how did I miss this, well I stand corrected then. It scans at a more “normal” rate now then. Well anyways, sucks ass that Gaijin hasn’t added it to other radars. Probably their excuse now is that it’s limited to just “tracking” radars.
They added it on dev to TanSAM for one patch iirc, it worked, but then they just removed it.
That’s not how I read it. How I read it is: mechanical scan is say 180°/s clockwise and the electronic back-scan (scan)rate is equal (=180°/s) and opposite (anticlockwise) to the mechanical scan. This is the only way to make sense of the “beam ~ stationary” statement. Only by counteracting the mechanical scan by electronic backwards rotational scanrate (electronic back-scan) can we create a momentary stationary beam on a target of interest.
Also here is some more clarification to how they used the backscanning ability. Apparently they mechanically elevated the radar as well as using the arm to scan left to right. Weird but I guess it’s for a completely different purpose here. Anyways here is it very clear backscan does not mean rearwards scanning, but scanning in the opposite rate of the mechanical scan.
Spoiler
Now how far this all applies to MPQ-64? Up for debate. But afaik they didn’t change the radar itself.
1 Like
Are we like ignoring the elephant in the room.
The rear antenne is much smaller than the main one, like VERY much smaller.
You seriously think that with such smaller aperture, it can preform in the exact same way as the main radar?
No, back scanning is scanning away from the radar rotation
For example TRML-4D brochure, you can be sure it does not have a rear facing array.
Back scan is used in look back
ADA432370 btw if you want to look through it.
Anyways, the rear antenna just also fits the bill for IFF antenna for me. The front just has no other antenna other than the ESA, leaving only that backside antenna. Not sure how to prove it as I have nothing which explicitly says it’s that, but I can at least compare to for instance TRML-3D
You have 3D brochure? Could you share it, i have been looking for one for a while.
Huh so they do use that term too. I couldn’t find it for some reason. Ngl, when I first tried just looking up the term back-scan all I got were results for physical rearwards facing detectors. But I kinda disregarded that because I was pretty certain it was indeed the same as look forward/backward.
I mentioned this too earlier. But it is not as important in case of finding out if it’s some secondary ESA or IFF. Because if it was for instance just for revisiting detected targets only (and not search), I could see it getting away with being smaller and less powerful. How Gaijin implemented it is in any case 100% incorrect with 2 identical strength beams. It’s just if it has 2 beams at all.
No idea if you can send a pdf file here, but that image is basically all there is. You can find it on Scribd. Scribd is a pretty good source of such stuff… including some not so eligible documents for reporting, if you catch my drift.
1 Like
You can send PDF on the forum, and thanks.
Huh, i guess no more then :)
I wonder why… this community surely would never leak restricted documents.
1 Like