I’m hoping they do it add it to the M2K so we can get any bugs ironed out and get it fixed before the Rafale comes. Neat thing about the Rafale is that the DDM on there is more situated for air to air
I hope so too.
Indeed ;D
Aight thanks for the answer(s). But wouldn’t that mean that Gaijing could just implement a similar MAW system to the one present on top tier helis ? Or is it because of the directionality of the threats (aka if the missile goes towards you specifically), which isn’t really present AFAIK on helis ?
I used to think the same, but the thing juts out and looks to the front, side, and rear. There’s a deadzone a few meters in front and back of the plane and the DDM on the other pylon covers the other side.
I think it’s not that easy to just copy paste codes over from helis to planes I guess. They probably never planned ahead that planes might also get RWR-based MAWS and to have it ready ahead of time.
1 Like
even then it would be closer to something like this:
rather than detection “bending” to the center as if it had effectively no deadzones:
It might be just a wrong scale in the pics because at range DDM would obviously see more but for me it’s just not really convincing. Especially when considering that Rafale had it moved to completely different position specifically to be more A2A suited unlike Magic-mounts on Mirage that were meant to detect mainly ground launches. Which is also one of the reasons why DDM commonly appeared on Mirage 2000N and D while being far less common with C and 5F variants.
These would presume the camera or sensor of the thing is in the back of the DDM case, rather than at the front in the middle. There’s no other reason for why the case is designed the way it is, jutting out.
I get it but we still need to consider its position on the rails/launchers which obviously blocks the FOV mainly to the front of the jet.
Well, it’s gonna be up to Gaijin I guess to determine the angles. I only forwarded info on the RWR based, trajectory warning, which planes should get it and other stuff, but I had nothing on the actual coverage angle.
Actually, I took a look over again, take a look here @Texas_Engineer_Mike
Page 26
Missile detector in service on Mirage 2000 and Rafale. Also known under the acronym of SAMIR. The system is capable of detecting the “infrared signature” of the missile during its propulsion phase while rejecting background clutter. Highly sophisticated algorithms allow a very low false alarm rate, while providing a long detection range. DDM has two IR sensors; providing passive and covert IR threat detection; with panoramic coverage. 360 deg in azimuth; location accuracy: better than 2 deg.
Cover: 20220827_161359.jpg - Google Drive
Excerpt: 20220902_131110.jpg - Google Drive
Page 17: 20220902_141821.jpg - Google Drive (Read left to right)
The DDM, also known as the Systeme d’Alert Missile Infra Rouge (SAMIR), is a passive detector designed to detect threat missiles using IR seekers. It feeds information to the aircraft ECM system for the use of flares and other countermeasure systems. It consists of two modules, the signal processing unit and the externally mounted multispectral mosaic sensor head, and can thus be configured into the airframe and electronic layout of any aircraft. Each electro-optical sensor head has a coverage of 180 degrees, and full coverage in both the horizontal and vertical planes can be obtained by using the appropriate number of sensors. Weight of the equipment is 5.6kg for the sensor head and 3.6 kg for the signal processor. Two versions of the DDM have been developed, the DDM 2000 for the Mirage 2000 and the DDM PRIME for the Rafale. The sensor head for the former consists of two head integrated into a single structure on the weapons pylon, while the latter has two separate modules.
You seem to be correct by this sensor, there’d be a deadzone straight ahead, each sensor only covers 180 degrees, giving it a “combined” 360 degree coverage but with deadzones straight ahead and to the rear.
oof
You can’t just sum up the performance of the same system mounted differently between 2 jets into one. SAMIR will not achieve the same performance on Mirage rail-mounts as it does on Rafale rudder-mount. Your own source suggests that “[…] full coverage in both horizontal and vertical plane can be obtained by using the appropriate number of sensors.”
Combined 360 degree coverage is indeed true for the sensors themselves but it doesn’t take into account the positioning of these sensors on specific aircraft. As I said previously rail-mounted SAMIR wouldn’t achieve its stated performance simply due to wing and missile pylon blocking it’s FOV.
1 Like
That is true. Also, I don’t see how the MAWS is able to look straight down, not physically possible, correct me if I’m wrong.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/ti7qZbezcxXi
MICA EM should have a focused splinters warhead
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/uZzUOzeelirO
MICA EM should have purple flames
11 Likes
I really want that purple flame ! Looks so cool
2 Likes
I would love to see it in the June patch trailer
2 Likes
I really don’t think it’s a tac view thing or a bug with it, because I also decided to test the R-60M for example and it was optimally doing 25g.
The reason the Magic 2 pulls that much is that it makes up for a difference in lead and is just very fast initially. Or the other reasoning is that it now has combined pull.
i’ll try testing it out myself later.
Only thing i can tell is that i saw :
Mistral pulling 26G while it should be limited to 16
530D pulling 42G while it should be limited to 30
The only one which is consitent is VT-1, which never exceeded 46G while i tried to make it pull as hard as possible. VT-1 is weird cause stat card says 50G while official documentation says 35G and it feels more like 35 than 50 in game, but i’m getting carried away
Thermal nerf accurate to IRL?