correction, its not anymore, guess that fix went off my radar. So ye its the scan patterns which are the issue.
I wonder Tornado F3 CSP (Capability Sustainment Programme) mounted AIM-9M ?
But I’m not sure that Tornado F3 in UK tech tree got AIM-9M ?
AIM-9M was a gulf war modification well before CSP, and CSP replaced the sidewinders all together with ASRAAM.
I dont think we’ll see Aim-9M until we get some overhauls on how CMs are handled. But I do hope we see them sooner rather than later. We could do with an upgrade over the Aim-9Ls in their current state
thank you very much, too much appreciated, you have killed my doubts, I have some videos about it, and if possible I will put it.
Regarding the Skyflash issues, I just had 2 engagements back to back where the missile just wander off to nowhere despite perfect launch conditions. I’ve saved a clip of that match and maybe @Gunjob can take a look and see if it is a bug or just me being dumb? https://youtu.be/EQWZkTUlL2Q
Don’t think the AI planes in the background were the issue here as in both cases they were at least a couple KMs behind the target and have a much smaller closure rate than the target. Had quite a few engagements now where the missile just locks onto seemingly nothing despite the radar having a good lock, this became especially noticeable after the radar buff.
It’s far harder to see in SB, but I think i’ve had situation too where the skyflash missed what should have been a relatively easy shot. If they veered off course as yours did, then that would explain why they missed.
What I think happened with the first shot is the missile despite you locking up “VanillaSoup” I think the Skyflash went for the MIG-29 who then notched which sent the missile dumb. Second shot similar thing happened it but it went for the AI, I’ve had similar issues with the missile just flying upward but I’ve not been able to make it repeatable.
There is also a possibility that its all just issues with higher latency leading to the missile going dumb, but no you’re not doing anything wrong.
1 Like
Maybe he confused units and degrees of AOA in his answer.
Unlikely, it was in an official Panavia publication and everything else was given in units.
Also it seems that unfortunately that tool is probably not much use for converting AoA units to degrees.
Looking around online, it seems that Stage 2G* is different from Stage 2G, although I don’t know if the differences would matter in game.
Regardless, the radar was certainly upgraded multiple times after the 2G.
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199900/cmselect/cmdfence/930/93004.htm
The CSP did not include mid-course correction for the AMRAAMs due to technical difficulties. So they wouldn’t be much better than superTEMPs as you would have to rely on the missile’s active seeker (won’t be shocked if GJN forces us to use a Tornado with gimped AMRAAMs tbh). In the 2000s there was the AMRAAM optimisation programme to fix this. Then there was the F3 sustainment program after that.
Official publications aren’t immune from mistakes. Him pulling 40 units of AoA would be pulling more alpha than a delta wing, surely that doesn’t make sense?
If they give us an F.3 with AMRAAMs I imagine we will get the full AMRAAM capability with mid-couse guidance.
Except @Gunjob, one of their technical moderators, just implied that the 2G we have in game should be the final radar version.
I’m not quite sure how that paragraph he screenshot confirms anything about the radar.
Read the excerpt here:
He was talking about departure testing and says the Tornado would typically depart at 28 ADD, but on one occasion they managed to reach 40 ADD without departing.
I think the key point is this seems to be an exception rather than a normal condition. Also the manual ADD limit is 21 too right?
Its likely those updates where compatibility updates for the new weapon systems (AMRAAM/ASRAAM, mid course correction, C5 AMRAAM etc) rather than performance updates (or updates that could be useful ingame) sorry should’ve been clearer when I said it wasn’t upgraded.
I’ve often seen the list below as a list of radar upgrades;
What I’m inferring is that the CSP/AOP/FSP didn’t change the radar designation. And any changes where compatibility/serviceability changes.
So since the Stage-2G was used in the “CSP” upgrade our in game Stage-2G is good enough for firing AMRAAM.
It certainly is the exception. The reason I posted it was because at the time there was tak of 1 unit = 2°. In that case 40 units AoA would mean the Tornado was flying along with the nose nearly vertical, which is obviously unrealistic.
The AoA limit in the manual varies from 15 units to “no limits” depending on wing sweep, speed, and whether SPILs is on. 21 - 23 units is generally the upper limit though.
I think that’s a pretty wild assumption to make just because one paragraph doesn’t specifically mention improvements to the Radar performance. The UK parliament source I linked suggests the opposite.
Good enough to fire them in pitbull mode*. No mid-flight guidance would make it pretty weak, especially considering what BR it will be at if it gets AMRAAMs/ASRAAMs.