its receiver is not so sensitive to see jerboas in the desert at night. These are modern IRSTs that can do this
1 Like
EXACTLY.
They cannot calibrate the camera to be too sensitive that is why it is ineffective at targeting at long ranges. Can it see something out there? Yes, but targeting is a whole different story.
Additionally, you cannot tell the camera to look for a specific electromagnetic radiation but at the same time tell it not to see that same exact electromagnetic source that is literally everywhere in the universe and world around us, even air molecules right in front of it. That is called distortion. It is more prevalent the farther a perceived target is.
We’ve stayed from the original topic quite a bit.
Discussion of emissions is cool, it still seems implied to me that you think the sun hampers IRST performance sufficiently to be the primary reason it limits their range… I disagree. The sun is only blinding in a very small wavelength and all missiles in the game that are IR guided should be mostly resistant or immune to it when in the presence of an afterburner iirc. If not all of them, certainly anything following the magic 2 aside the AIM-9M technologically.
And especially the MiG-29s IRST.
While some clouds irl would have sufficient water droplets and density to scatter the IR emissions, an afterburning jet flying through the cloud should still be giving off significant enough IR emissions to be tracked. If you have a cloud fully blocking view of a target flying in the distance on the other side, I can understand it blocking the IRST.
I agree to a certain extent but talking about it should lead to reports. Because the IRST is overperforming at range and nerfed where it should not.
The IRST should be hyper powerful at close range at least up to 10km, through clouds as well. It is more powerful than the IR seeker on any missile. That capability should be an ace in the sleeve of the SMT. But it should degrade further out.
Afik the IRST was upgraded as well on the SMT?
I really don’t agree that it’s overperforming at range. The detection range of larger and hotter targets is already pitiful even in clear conditions imo.
We can address that later then.
But the IRST should at least be able to see through clouds further than any IR missile can.
Can IRST guide the R27Ts and ETs once launched the seeker takes over average IR seeker? Does anyone know?
The sun is a giant obstacle, but everything on planet earth emits infrared as well. Additionally, the suns light reflecting on objects compounds the distortion at long ranges. Weather is specifically an issue and mentioned on IRST wiki too. There is way too many obstacles & variables that distort the ability to see specific IR signatures at range.
But it is hyper clear at closer ranges. Angular resolution is greater than even radar.
Last note on the overperforming aspect. I can barely find targets on the actual search and track function, but I can immediately lock ab targets up to 25km in head ons in ACM with the helmet mounted sight??
I do not even use the search and track function ever. I use the HMS to detect and prosecute targets.
My helmet mounted sight is the best at detection and targeting over the radar search modes and IRST search and track. It is a little silly.
2 Likes
Agreed. Compared to the DCS version of the MiG-29, IRST we have in MiG-29 is really underpowered. it should be able to detect aircraft at higher altitues without cloud cover up to 10 miles, in War Thunder you are lucky if you can detect someone 3-4 miles away from you.
3 Likes
I personally think the actual search and track function should have better range as you mentioned, and the helmet sight should maintain the 10km, but be far more potent within the 10km range and easily see through most cloud formations depending how close the target is. The closer the target is, the more the IRST can see the light source.
1 Like
I think the function should remain the same. Search and track / HMS modes are using the same sensor. There should be no limitation in the HMS mode for target acquisition range as there is not one in the manual.
Yes, we know that. However, HMS is nothing but a crosshair on a piece of glass attached to these rudimentary helmets. Why is it better than the actual search at track of the mig29? It completely defeats the purpose of using the radar and the IRST system. Its overperforming.
Ever since this exploit came along with the release of the SMT I have never used the actual radar unless to guide the R27R and ER. Why? when I can just lock a target with my magical glass sight at 25km totally undetected and only switch to radar HMS when they get into a favorable position with little to no chance to defeat the R27ER.
How is this legitimate?
The fact that we already know where target’s exact position in the sky and their exact distance and closure rate simply because a friendly “spotted” them is exacerbating the issue. “Crew sighting” is really taking away from the realism of Realistic Battles. IRST HMS exploits the game mechanic.
But you are not in favor of lowering or removing crew sight on enemies last time I checked. GJ slowly reduced crew sights in the last 4 updates and that was something you were not happy with. Has your positioned changed since?
Removing crew sights would be a better solution to this IRST exploit without touching the IRST of the mig29 itself. It will also force players to actually rely on their radars and IRST to find targets beyond visual range. Making WT a more realistic game at top tier overall.
I think that in air RB the detection ranges of fighters is bugged, it has been reported multiple times in the past and never properly fixed. You’ll have a target shooting an R-73 at you from 0.5 miles and doesn’t show up on the minimap and doesn’t have a visible name / tag on your screen. The worst part is that when this happens it also almost always is associated with a similar bug (likely a server related issue)… where the missile they launch doesn’t appear (is completely invisible) until it’s 0.001m from your aircraft and already exploding. No markers.
Aside from those issues, I think the HMS with the IRST and the range it offers is a fantastic benefit of the aircraft. There’s no reason to change that. Rather they should buff the detection and tracking ranges to a realistic figure. The in-game IRST using HMS doesn’t allow you to maintain a radar lock outside 10km anyway when you switch… which as far as I’m aware… it should allow you to. In real life you’d simply lock what the radar was pointing at / tracking with the IRST… it’s a feature.
and that’s why the OLS Su-27 and Su-35 sees a target at a distance of 100km
Its a “benefit” no doubt that renders the radar and its other modes useless.
Some Mig29 fans are pushing the notion that the Mig29 IRST is now infinite which is scientifically false and simply explained even on Wikipedia. But sure, let’s run with that.
You love talking about the F16 so much on the mig29 thread, can I get your opinion on why they lowered the ACM of the most advanced F16s to 9km distance when the oldest F16s retain their 19km range?
Why is the F-16C and Barak II ACM nerfed to 9km? The radar can technically and very successfully detect and target opponents at 148km regardless of weather conditions. It’s an absolute unfounded nerf.
Does the F16 need a little magical glass sight on the pilot’s helmet to target opponents further than 9km? Is that what it is?
MiG-29 IRST was infamously bad IRL, DCS one comically overperforms
MiG-23 IRST was superior to the MiG-29 IRST because MiG-23 IRST uses InSb while MiG-29 uses PbSe. As a result it had extremely poor detection ranges for front aspect targets nonafterburning. The MiG-29 also had aggressive clutter filtering which impacted range performance aswell. From discussions and interviews with MiG-29 pilots the IRST is rarely used and when it is used it is only in ACM ranges
1 Like
Interesting, I never knew that.
it was basically a glorified pointer for R-73s (remember not every pilot used HMS)
1 Like
Within 10km, which is the primary purpose of the HMS is for WVR combat. Yes, so the system itself is not useless otherwise there would be no advantage to it slewing the IRST / radar.
Where?
I don’t know, is it not accurate? If so, is there a report?
Likewise the all powerful AWG-9 is limited in ACM mode distance. Why? Because that’s what it did irl?
The MiG-29s can’t, why would a helmet mounted cueing system on the F-16 be similar to that on the MiG-29 though?
Im happy to inform theres an active bug report on that acknowledged
2 Likes
Do you mind sharing the source used to bug report it? I’d like to know what the actual lock-on range for the F-16 ACM mode should be for comparison.
Oh, and do you know what the lock-on range would be for the radar when using the helmet mounted cueing system on the block 52?
Would be useful to compare the two against each other, if the MiG-29 gets a HMS with similar capability I see no reason to give it to the F-16 as well.