so it should just scan ~180 degrees infront of the dish
not just 1 line (which is weird anyway)
but calling that back-scan is just a bit of false marketing then xD
If you look even closer, it’s not the full 180° in front of the radar, but only like a 5-7° sector centered at the direction where the physical array is looking at. I wouldn’t call it false marketing still, but yes it’s not very impressive. It’s really just because it lacks phase shifters for azimuth scanning.
This is I think mainly because the Sentinel is adapted from the TPQ-36, which is only made for tracking munitions. The TPQ-36 is 90° rotated, so it instead has very poor elevation steering instead, but that is fine design wise, because you don’t need to keep track on munitions flying high over you, because you only have to track them for a small sector and then you could calculate the entire ballistic flight path from that, so adding extra phase shifters to steer in elevation for that wasn’t needed. But I suppose for the Sentinel this isn’t super ideal.
No, that’s not how that works.
Back sczn is correct, as it scans backs to where it was before.
And back scan purpose is not to create a second set of beams positioned against the normal aperture rotation, it’s purpose is to send a smaller dedicated beam away from the radar rotation, first to confirm if the target is there, so a situation where the radar detects something using it’s main beam, and after it swept away, it sends a dedicated beam to the location of that target, to check if something is still there, or if it was a false. When it is tracking something already, it is using back scan to update that target more frequently than only while sweeping with the main beam.
In case of of Sentinel, it is a very small areas, mentioned here TRML-4D can do it in a 100 degree arc, but the purpose stays the same.
Actually in this instance I did update a report internally regarding the incorrect specifications for the radar in question with information regarding the correct interpretation of what “back scanning” meant in this context.
So while yes I cannot direct the devs to do anything, I did ensure this information was on the report.
8 Likes
Would be cool if possible :P
So like some sort of backwards SAR / DBS, using the relative angular movement of the target against it?
No imaging takes place, it means increasing radar ability to diffirentiate between doppler signals
Additionally to above, increasing CPI to increase doppler resolution comes from fourier analysis, where tau = 1/f_d.
So in order to distinguish closer delta f_d, we need a longer observation time.
Was more reported on it? Like it not being supossed to cover the full 65° elevation range in a single 2s rotation. I don’t think it’s beneficial for game balance, but it’s technically ahistorical currently.
Yeah it’s basically a non-update: by doubling its scan speed but removing the the backscan,the NASAMS and the CLAWS retain their old scan speed lmao
1 Like
I think it might actually be a slight nerf
because iirc it was at 16 rpm not 15
the rpm now is 30
It was 15
4s per rotation so 15rpm
ok, idk where I heard the 16 rpm from
yes on live, on dev its 30 now
but backscan is gone
Yes, and that is correct now. Rear facing beam was should not have been a thing.
1 Like
idk how it should work exactly
but back-scan is mentioned plenty in documentation about the radar so that seems weird to me
Back scan is not the same as read facing beam, it was explained here.
Back scan is radar sending a beam in the direction opposite to the antenne rotation. In case of Sentinel, that will be up to 5,5° away from the antenne norm.
That feature is not in game right now.
There is no rear facing beam on a real radar, that was corrected. Why devs did it, they probably misunderstood what back-scan, but they corrected it now.
if thats true its still missing backscan, though i (and many others) had misinterperated what it meant doesnt mean its not missing