Mica is only strong because of an artificial electronic resistance (I say this based on the way the game is designed and balanced)
idk why they felt the need to give it an electronic advantage since its a short to medium range missile compared to the AIM-120, R-77-1 etc. what about the other missiles that are only usable at close and medium range like R-darte, Derby and base R-77 model?
Which Gaijin wont remove, or change.
And imrpoved models of AMRAAM have been incredibly disappointing including SLAMRAAMs C7
And R-77-1 is a noticeable upgrade over R-77.
I do not see new ARHM for a long time which will continue to make MICA the best missile in game.
I know why,
2 Likes
This is the real crime. Justice for my Fulcrum boi
1 Like
The countries that made them wouldn’t have had any idea about stuff that advanced, by the time they did both jets were far into development
They could do a Gripen E or NG, it has a moving AESA
2 Likes
Not even close to a true 5th gen
So, got some good news and some bad news for y’all Su-35 fans.
I went through the Irbis-E radar video linked here and used frame counter to get some more exact info regarding the time it takes the radar to complete an 8 bar scan, along with the time between updates for the target.
As for update rate (taking time between each visible target update), I took 10 consecutive measurements;
Update time dataset:
0.933s
1.417s
1.867s
2.2s
0.55s
1.45s
1.367s
0.75s
1.217s
0.467s
Highest time to visibly update was 2.2s, lowest time was 0.467s, average of the dataset was 1.2218s
Using this info, alongside the N011M’s narrow scan beamwidth of 2°, here is how the Irbis-E stacks up vs current in-game radars (and a minimum model for the CAPTOR-E when added):
Few things to note:
-
I can’t do the same or extrapolate for other scan zones because the N011M, unlike other top tier radars, does not have a standard beamwidth or scan speed. Its beamwidth is 2/1.667/1.875° for narrow/medium/wide scans. Its scan speeds are 125/163.64/213.33°/s for narrow/medium/wide scan.
-
Despite being an upgraded N011M, the Irbis-E’s performance in the video actually shows it as performing SIGNIFICANTLY worse than the N011M Bars we have in-game, having less than half the lowest scan rate of the N011M (125°/s vs 60.38°/s), while the lowest update rate for the Irbis-E of the dataset I pulled is significantly longer than the update rate of the N011M in-game (0.011s vs 0.467s), suggesting the Bars in-game may actually be significantly overperforming in both scan and update rate.
-
I took 5 datasets for the time to complete the 8 bar scan, all of which took right around the 2.65s to complete.
-
The 10 datapoints regarding update rate are only a fraction of the total update rates in the video. Its possible there are faster ones, but I’m not digging through the whole video to get every datapoint.
-
The Irbis-E in the video has a lower scan rate than that of western mechanical radars, but is slightly superior to the N001VEP found on the Su-27SM.
At the scan rate seen in the video, it would take the Irbis-E ~4 seconds to scan 1 bar of its full ±120° azimuth, which is absolutely atrocious…
Let me know your thoughts.
4 Likes
not surprising, but at the same time, there’s probably options for irbis to scan faster but with less resolution/range.
Also, both n011m and irbis are both pesas mounted on gimbals/slew able pesa. 40 electronic 30 hydraulic for n011m
captor e is insane
2 Likes
Yeah. If possible it would be nice to see APG-81 on there as a reference since there are videos of it available
1 Like
Maybe, but until proven otherwise, this is the verifiable max scan rate…
I’ll correct that, ty
Thats actually the bare minimum scan rate too. The actual wording on the source was “E-scan reduces the time needed for a typical 4-bar priority track from approx. 8sec with a mechanical system to considerably less than 1 second.” So what I did was use 1 second, since thats what gaijin has done in the past.
I can give it a shot when I get home.
Edit: Tried to give it a shot, but its basically not possible to eyeball imo. Theres nothing indicating any kind of scan patterns, and its seemingly random how long it takes for it from initial detection to a full track file on the target.
What I’m thinking considering the E-scan source and the Irbis-E video is that gaijin is likely significantly overestimating PESA radars scan rates, and significantly underestimating AESA radar scan rates, since the CAPTOR-E at minimum blows all other airborne AESA’s in-game out of the water, while the in-game N011M significantly overperforms its irl upgrade.
5 Likes
Not quite both the Irbis and bars have multiple transmitters.
The Irbis has 6 iirc and the bars 4
I think thats because its got 60° of electronic scan, and when you get to 120° thats where the mechanical part of the radar kicks in, it might be some specific radar mode, my own conclusion is that it could be that in this recording, maybe the test was just to see how the radar handles running multiple modes at once, since the target detected wasnt even engaged or anything.
At least according to own NIIP, Irbis has an radar architecture thats twice as good and faster than Bars, and it even has an extra receiving channel totaling 4 reception channels, that means it gets way better antenna array data than Bars, no matter the situation or mode, Irbis also has a more complete set of modes and way more ability to run modes at the same time or switch between those modes than Bars, other specs like peak power and average power of the radar make it hard to believe its scan would be worse if we’re talking about the same radar modes…
This aged really well with today’s packs lmfao
The test doesn’t include multiple different modes though, the entire test appears to be done with the 20° x 8 bars scan, with the only changes being that they cycle through 4 different targets at different ranges.
- Target 3 at 268km
- Target 2 at 225km
- Target 4 at roughly the same spot as target 2 (possibly testing radar resolution with these 2 targets?)
- Target 1 at a little less than 100km (the target that ends up being locked)
Unless they specifically say that its scan rate is twice as fast as Bars, this could (and likely does) just mean that the radar has a new superior processor that is twice as fast as the Bars’. I also want to point out that I did state theres a good chance Bars is overperforming in scan rate in-game, seeing as, afaik, there is no actual source on Bars scan rate, and it lowkey looks like whoever came up with the scan zones and scan speeds for Bars was drunk, since unlike all other top tier radars in-game, Bars is the only radar I can think of with both non-standardized beam widths, and non-standardized scan rates.
I’m not saying Irbis-E should be worse than Bars, I’m saying Irbis-E is worse than Bars as depicted in-game (in scan rate).
Peak power and average power have nothing to do with scan rate, and once again, Bars is likely overperforming. Not that we can report Bars off a video of Irbis-E…
1 Like
One of the Brochure you posted the other day said that its 19000 but it have a * and its said that THAT weight depend on what Equipament the customer want. The only Equipament we know about are the Khibiny pods. So better start digging how much these Pod weight… I have only read that its around 550kg for both pylon. So the True Empty weight its around 18500 kg.
IDK if true but that video its from when IRBIS was tested on Su-30mk2. Also StealthFlanker make some guesses of IRBIS in this post NIIP Bars and Irbis series of radar for Su-30/Su-35 | Page 2 | Secret Projects Forum
For what i have read the Scan rate get slower when using high power mode.
