or maybe the r-24 manual is correct for launching the r-24
is it to hard to imagine that the radar works differently when guiding a missile
Again like I said above, BS is viewed as a submode therefor its not listed.
Also please it obviously has ground clutter rejections, in addition to MW you then have the BS modes for even more extreme conditions.
I dont see how anyone of you assumes it “cant see shit under 1500” when this specifically says that is has ground clutter rejection, and ontop of that BS modes for attacking targets under chaff/meteorological impacts.
The manual specifically says that BS mode is similar to other modes just with more capability, why exactly would it lack the function of firing on a target?
3 Likes
Well good thing MW mode exists because that’s what’s actually ment to engage targets under 1500m not CMB. I also believe that actual radar document is much much more trustworthy than R-24 employment manual, because yk it’s specifically talking about the radar itself.
Also the R-24 employment manual is 14 pages long, with the sections youre talking about being about 3 pages long. I dont mean to bash on the document but even it states that for low flying targets you should be using MB
In addition to all of this ofc the (manully selectable) BS modes are there if even MB fails modes fail.
All of this just to say that the MiG-23ML ingame is missing the manually select-able BS mode lmao
4 Likes
It’s good to be corrected, thanks g
2 Likes
its okay, I am sorry for being angry yesterday I just get very pissy when people try to argue something I think is wrong. The radar is complex and even-though german is my mother tongue even I struggle to understand the document fully sometimes.
I am very passionate about the 23 and its radars, too passionate sometimes :P
3 Likes
I mean, it was entertaining to read, at least for me. Floggers are often overlooked because of the reputation of very first models.
Maybe one day we will at least get proper scan pattern for Sapphire 23 and 25
2 Likes
Support sleep?..
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/AXrEKAky7fN6
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/dk9Mr3wX1qj9
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/vaOeW45rO68H
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/WXoTUtFUJUBA
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/b81VZz5PPgds
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/8FLItbybq5PL
Soon it will be half a year since this bug appeared…
Edit: Or maybe this is an intentional change? Can anyone explain this? :)
To be fair, it really was a terrible aircraft. So terrible that Gaijin didn’t dare to tune it according to the real documents.
3 Likes
sustained turn rate nuke moment
1 Like
What are you on about? You know a ton of jets are made up ufo flight models? Gaijin didnt dare to tune it as to why it was nerfed? You make no sense
1 Like
Gaijin doesnt care about the MiG-23 anymore. Lots of things on it are missing or underperforming but gaijin doesnt care so
1 Like
Sad… But they remember to put it on sale regularly… :/
It’s a simple bug to fix, but despite many reports, they still haven’t done anything about it…
As far as I remember, the MiG flew like a UFO for a long time. Then Gaijin accepted the report and tuned it according to the documents, but soon rolled those changes back.
2 Likes
they didn’t roll it all the way back, they did a middle ground between the 2 options. Now instead of overperforming by 1 - 2 gs across the board, it overperforms by around 0.5 - 1.5 gs now