If you have those research studies, i would really like to take a look at those. i’m aware of the possibility of guiding sparrows in HPRF mode instead of CW horn/antenna, yet i haven’t seen any country (besides Egyptian Blk30s?) even a testbed vehicle with such upgrade (availability of AMRAAMs very likely diminished the funding of those projects anyway.)
As for the mirage, it is understandable considering they didn’t go far and gave 6 A/A capable pylons. given that micas are too advanced for the game, they gave Fictional 530Ds. But i don’t really think Sparrows were needed on Blk 50 and Barak, They can already carry 6 very potent IR missiles with IRCCM. Hell, i would definitely choose 6x 550II loadout over 2x 550II and 2xS530D if they let us do.
All F-15’s and F/A-18’s that launched Sparrows guide them without a continuous wave antenna.
The F/A-18 dropped the continuous wave transmitter in favor of HPRF guidance. It also stated that this was first shown on the F-15 in the same source. (Source)
honestly i dont see the problem. Mirage 3C is subjected to fight aim9l without flares then the f16 can fight missiles that are slightly more difficult to flare than the average ir seeker
we arent talking about an unflareable missile here. Neither one that every plane can carry 6 of. I don’t see why russia should get basically 6 thrust vectoring magic 2’s while france gets 4 on a worse platform and has to trade bvr combat for them. Magic 2 could atleast be the best ir missile then flare resistance wise
If devs know that the f16Cs guide sparrows through HPRF. Then why we still have f4 phantom CW illumination ranges for it DESPITE NOT USING CW FOR GUIDANCE. Community Bug Reporting System
Its stuck with 40km to a 2m² target when it should be 56 km for the same size target.
The F/A-18 document states no advantages / disadvantages for the F/A-18 radar to guide in CW or HPRF as such eliminated CW… not sure if this applies to the other radars as well.
Again, its a power issue. You can do the simple math. HPRF on the mainradar puts more power downrange than the 200W illuminator.
And again, 7F SMC and CS give 2 values, one for continuous waveform( 200W) and another with a pulsed one(hprf)(power not given). Simple logic, after looking at the radar equation, tells us that range also depends on power.
The HPRF signal(F4J) has a peak power of 1-2.6kW(1.65kW average) and 50% duty cycle, 800W (Average power). Knowing the range for 200W, we can do a function depending on power. You can work the math around with this.
Now guess what 10.2 kW HPRF peak power awg 9 gives…
I understand, but my statement is more in line with what Gaijin will ask. They don’t like doing that kind of math it seems, or have other reasons unbeknownst to me… they’ll want a primary source or many secondary sources stating hard numbers. iirc we had some, but until such things are reported in depth it will go un-fixed. Mind you, it also has to be pretty elaborate because there does seem to be a language barrier and they misinterpreted the roll stabilization of the magic 2 for example.
We can bring it up repeatedly until it is fixed or be patient. I’m not too concerned about it since the missile will hardly ever be reaching targets at max range anyway.
I don’t know that it was an argument, I’m just being realistic and looking at it from their pov. In doing so I’ve gotten several reports passed so far that were otherwise denied. You’re not taking my recommendations seriously.
I’ve passed reports aswell, I’ve done it with (math or clear sources) or both. This is just refusal to do so from them. You haven’t given a recommendation other than, repeat and wait. Get serious, there are things that can’t be defended