It only scans a 110 deg arc centered on the radars current direction. Should work in both modes though.
Its not something you select in-game, its basically a background process. Its why so few people seem to understand how to properly use the Rafales radar for example, because unless you know what its doing and how it works, there’s literally no real visual indicators its doing anything.
To explain the Type 81’s, what its doing is scanning 28 2.5deg bars that are 110deg wide, centered on the current radars centerpoint, and it does it every 0.04sec. Everything it passes over in that scan that already has a trackfile has their trackfile updated.
This is why the update rate and lock stability is incredibly high on ESA’s in-game, and its why it can continue to track targets that have left the current scan zone (the scan zone being what you see/define, its the area where you can pick up new targets).
Its basically gaijins form of the radar assigning individual beams to update multiple targets simultaneously.
I mentioned i got 185mm because I modeled the missile from the picture so that’s what I had to use to stay consistent and I had to mention it cause it was slightly different from the 180mm that’s circulating in the forum.
I frequently use pixel measuring to measure APFSDS and I know finding diameters accurately is always a challenge due to their small size. I never said it is exactly 185mm.
Then you came anouncing the diameter is 177.8mm and providing two low resolution renders as evidence.
After working in engineering/product development space I gurantee you marketing renders are often slightly different from the actual product (this can also happen with marketing props but it’s more rare).
The pictures are low resolution. In the first picture the diameter is about 43pixels so the measuring accuracy is 2.3% and in the second one it is about 20pixels so the accuracy is only 5%. For reference the difference between 185 and 177.8 is 4%.
You also said you used a length of 3450mm. First, there are no reliable sources for the length. Second, in the first picture you literally can’t see where the missile ends so you can’t accurately use its length. Third if you use your second picture and the well documented length of 2940mm for the normal iris-t you get a length of roughly 3370mm for the slm, so your post is already inconsistent with itself.
Also, what does ~7inch mean exactly? 185mm is less than 7.3 inches. In my opinion 7.3 is ~7. The point is you felt the need to sloppily correct something but ended up contributing nothing.
And no I didn’t “include the launch rails”, lol.
No it wouldnt, cuz the fastTWS zone is only ±55deg wide, centered on the radars current direction. So while the radar spins, the fastTWS mode will continue to update the targets that are within that ±55deg wide zone
My guess is that the logic is programmed during the launch and depending on the type of target and distance, the aerodynamic cap is jettisoned at the most optimal time to preserve aerodynamics, but like Mythic said, there could be more than one scenario.
@Dontkev-psn I have the dev server downloaded but I won’t be able to test the SLM anywhere but the testing range. Is there anything we need help on to improve it’s implementation in the game that I could help with? Thinking submitting bug reports or looking for more research (feels like we all but exhausted possible sources).
I made a bug report for IRIS-T SLM still not being able to shoot down air to ground munitions. Please upvote it and feel free to add more clips in the comments
hey 🙂 cythraul98goat thx for your kind help and efforts and yes the SLM despite the great improvements it got this dev still can’t reach Mach 3 and won’t pull more than 25G even though it’s supposed to be a 40G missile even with or without TVC that limit is still holding it back in real engagements props to werecat888 for that solid bug report hopefully that pushes things forward
