I managed to get datalinking in a user mission to work with IRST, honestly was suprisingly simple. All i had to do was give the ARH a designation source mask and define it as sensors.
Ik the AAM-4 can get datalink updates from IRST tracked targets, but what other ARHs can?
I know r77 can launch thru irst not sure about others.
also r77 doesn’t get datalink from irst though, just launch authorization if I remember right. lemme go digging again
Pretty sure most/all can, atleast for the modern ones.
I assume all you’d need is a radial position and range, so any sensor or combination of sensors (if you have decent sensor fusion) can provide that.
Theoretically, you might even get away with not having range, but then the missile would be being employed like a quasi SACLOS missile where the sensor in question is just trying to make the missile and target kiss without knowing how long that’ll take and what the proper lead is, so its range and energy would be heavily degraded. That’s just a theory of mine tho, I’ve never read of that being something you can do.
As for its implementation in-game, pretty sure the only reason its not done is for balancing purposes, not technical ones.
Considering that radars and IRSTs internally are the same thing, yeah. This function is actually used to give some SAMs slaving to IRSTs (the FB-10A get it with datalink!), so its deffinitly not a technical challenge.
Still nice to see it working and seemingly good to implement on arhs though.
On second thought, I’m wondering if the reason they dont have it yet is because they’re trying to figure out the code to give TGPs their air to air modes. Eastern planes tend to have built-in IRST, but most western planes have it via TGPs, barring the italian and british EFTs, and the Rafale.
As it stands, only about half the planes at top tier would be able to guide missiles off IRST, which would be a MASSIVE advantage to most/all the planes that are already performing the best…
So, there is actually already a camera target designation mask, i havent messed around with it yet though, might go do that rn actually.
Patiently awaiting the results now lol
Unfortonately it doesn’t appear to, took a while messing around with a bunch of different things, it works for slaving, but DL updates i cant tell if its doing anything or not.
Mmm, decreasing the prolongation time max and lock time out makes the AAM-4’s DL work a lot closer to how it actually should. Having it swap back to DL+IOG basically as soon as the track filter fails.
wrong pic for R-27EA, common misconception that radome should be pointy
also, here is a pic for export variant of R-77-1
@DirectSupport imo you can’t really compare air and ground launched.
For example, I derby er has a max range of 40 km ground launch, same as mica ng. But air launched it only 100km, while mica em is likely much more than that. Ground and air launch are kinda apples to oranges imo.
R77 for example has max range of 12km ground launch but 80 km air launched.
it could be reasonable to assume that the derby er is understated in air launches.
I Derby er example.
Though launch vehicle is subsonic… definitely more than 100km if it’s going Mach 2 lol
Yeah that subsonic launch does explain why it’s understated in frontal air launch ranges, although do note MICA NG is stated at over 40km in ground launch, we probably won’t know the full extent until years later.
The ground launch range doesn’t sound likely.
Yeah you can see here that they’re understating the range (12km??) when it is able to achieve 9km of altitude range. Achieving altitude range is much harder than horizontal range.
Compare it with IRIS-Ts for instance.
I am aware of all of this, the horizontal max launch range is still wrong unless the radar is limited in range itself preventing launches greater than 12km. This isn’t a primary source is it?
Nah it’s secondary… but I don’t think there’s any other mention of ground launched r-77 that still surviving on the internet
