I’m completely okay with 9KR treatment due to gameplay balance.
But if Gaijin can bend the reality for the sake of gameplay I don’t think Gripen should be problem in this case
I wouldnt call that bending the reality. Its a simple technical capability
Technically it is as in real life they dont use those equipments.
Its a objective state, however as long as there is technical compatibility I’m fine with it.
Ahh so its a Elbit Systems PAWS-2. Which doesn’t have a LWR, so yeah seems Swedish E’s don’t have a LWR fit.
I haven’t looked much inte the in-service versions, just the pre-production and production prototypes. I don’t think i’ve seen any of the Swedish prototypes having the LWS.
There is a Gripen C thread
But to answer your question it’s because gaijin uses the older radar for the Gripen Cs rather than their historical radar like the MK.IV
1 Like
Maybe SAAB has integrated MWS and LWS into one sensor, or the Brazilian version has something that’s much more compact, and keeping the Gripen E streamlined and with little drag possible. Though without much documentation, can’t confirm if the LWS is part of the sensor or a separate thing itself.
I know the Su-30MKM in Malaysia has LWS sensors from SAAB itself, with the module being the LWS-310, though these were modified on. Probably from SAAB’s IDAS kit.
It’s not about numbers, but the QOL. Currently, the radar outright drops the tracks that fly straight and level, misalignes tracks symbols and beam position, drops then reacquire tracks out of nowhere, as if it has no mem. whatsoever. Sometimes it doesn’t plot track’s vector, just default north orientation, for 5, 10, or more passes, only to drop track altogether.
Something happened in Ninth wave and it hasn’t been the same since.
That sounds more like a bug. You can bug report it here: Gaijin.net // Issues (just search a bit first so that you don’t report something that is already reported and known about)
A guide on how to report bugs can be found here: ([Navigation] Technical Knowledge Base | War Thunder Wiki)
So they can keep ignoring the first report and don’t have to triage another more like.
1 Like
The sensors used on Gripen E are the Elbit Systems PAWS-2, which only gained LWR capability with newer PAWS-2(HR) version.
1 Like
Is it two sensors or one combining both functions
Wait the heat is melting my brain haha. I’m muddling up my AAR-47s and PAWS-2’s ahah. PAWS-2(HR) introduces TTI (time to impact) It doesn’t seem any PAWS sensors have a LWR capability.
PAWS-2 is based on the CMWS (AN/AAR-57) which also has no LWR and requires a LWR to be fit separately.
1 Like
Oh bless, thanks for the info.
Now the real question is, on the Brazilian version, what that extra sensor entails now…
1 Like
Let me know what you find out. :)
That only applies to PAWS-2 itself. Gripen E has a separate laser-warning system integrated into its EW suite if we are talking about wheter it has it or not. Saab lists MAWS and LWS as separate functions. PAWS-2 therefore does not need built-in LWR capability for Gripen E to detect laser threats as other parts of the EW/DAS can handle this.
Sorry if i am a bit confused as to what we are discussing.
Some good reading for the interested:
success-of-a-true-collaboration.pdf page 23
Yeah I don’t think you’ve followed the conversation, we know Gripen E uses PAWS-2, we’ve confirmed that has no LWR function. And Brazilian Gripen E’s have an additional aperture for the LWR near to the PAWS-2 apertures.
Due to a lack of those additional apertures on Swedish Gripen E, its reasonable to assume there is no LWR on Swedish Gripen E’s and that option wasn’t selected. (this is similar to the LWR on Typhoon which only a limited number of EFT operators selected (Spain, UK, Saudi)).
2 Likes
Fair point. I will try to attend the 100th-anniversary event this summer, so I’ll see whether I can find out anything new about it there.
1 Like
Take photos of all the little sensors and lenses :)
Better shots of this;
In theory on the Swedish E that second aperture should be missing.