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.
Me say Gib RBE2-AESA Mirage 2000B
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.
Even if they can’t add 2+2 they can simply see there are 2 values, one for CW and another for PD. ON 3 SOURCES
And there’s no language barrier to this level. He knows the issue, as you can see, yet refusal to do anything about it.
Like the apg 59 radar range report, 1.3 years of it and 3 months since “fix will come next update”. Yet nothing.
Just refusal to do it
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
Do you have any other suggestions for how to get them motivated? Trying to stir up the community?
No, just calling their BS out. by spamming here (and a few reports inbetween). You know their bs when they don’t reply, like the one above.
They don’t even try to defend the dev actions because the reports/issue is clear
As for the other, there’s no point. As you have have seen, you can count with the fingers of your hands those who are active and know radar stuff. And the guy that confuses CW, HPRF, illumination knows more than the playerbase…
sadly PDI isnt modelled right now the F-16’s sparrows are guided by a CW illuminator that doesnt exist (they dont even have a high prf tracking mode to even pretend its PDI lmao) hopefully in a future patch PDI is done proper so lock ranges can be tweaked, though I find the current sparrows lock range satisfactory Ive never had a need to go beyond 45km
With the implementation of “MPRF” on earlier APG-66 in DevClient we can see they are now more accurately trying to represent these missiles and their guidance. I’ll pester some more about CW vs CWI (HPRF)
I suspect its just a nomenclature change since before it used terminology sorta based off the MiG-29s radar, same with the UI.
But hopefully so, seems they are doing a lot of neat stuff like modelling rise time and going more into depth with IRCCM so im decently optimistic
I think the RWR, MAWS, IRCCM, Flares, etc are all being re-worked ahead of the implementation of FOX-3’s. Simulator mode might need an overhaul too after this, it’s going to be fun.
Not finding 530D that much better ,the missile seems to just want to fly to anywhere but towards the target, it has insane trouble diving down even if the target is very far
I’ve had the same issue, the 530 is somehow worse. Who could have imagined that.
Yes, they overdid the guidance restriction. A simple dive will cause the missile to miss now. Report should be made shortly. As of right now though, if you fire within 15km, guidance should be fine.
It says the 2000-5F has an HMD but i’ve scrolled through every radar setting it has and i cant find it. Am I misinterpreting what hmd is supposed to mean here?