Stinger and Mistral were both originally implemented as having 18g overload. It was actively nerfed by the developers after they found a manual stating Igla was 10g. Here is a quote from the developers in response to someone reporting the Mistral in 2020:
Can you provide better reference? In the beginning all MANPAD missiles in WT (Stinger, Igla, Mistral) had ~18G lateral acceleration.
We suspected that it is wrong, but finally one user found manual for Igla MANPAD system, which claims only 10G lateral capability.
No wonder: the missile is narrow and its wings and fins are very small, no thrust-vectoring. The same for AIM-92 Stinger and Mistral.
We found datasheets with 30G, but it looks strange. We suspect that 30G is axial acceleration, not lateral. Anyway we woulbe be happy to find better reference, like the reference for Igla.
There you go. The Devs acknowledge knowing the manufacturer’s datasheet states 30g maneuverability (it is clearly written that the 30g figure refers to maneuverability not axial acceleration) but kept it at 10g because they couldn’t believe it was that much better than Igla.
Likewise my report on the Stinger this year is not the first. I just had new information become available.
All of them, pretty much? You need range gating to establish a proper lock on a target. There is ambiguity because of HPRF but you still have a range gate. That’s then disambiguated with HF ranging techniques.
Does the F-14 do so in real life or does it rely on the CW transmitter? I’m aware of the F-16s ability to do so. iirc the F-15 was the first aircraft to test this.
I don’t agree. iirc the AIM-7M can be guided with the continuous wave emitter as well. I think instead of compatible you meant the AIM-7F was the last missile that required a dedicated continuous wave emitter initially for guidance. (At least, until aircraft were given a proper high PRF mode capable of doing so).
Any reason why if the mods have access to data like this, the F-14B’s TCS is still missing all its functionnalities? Its been reported and accepted since the first dev server the F-14B was in and at this point I’m genuinly considering submitting a new bug report with all the updated info, since the missing TCS functions and the overall TCS modeling is a travesty…
It seems like the issue is just getting outright ignored at this point
Television Camera System aka. the AN/AXX-1, its basically the same systems as the ASX-1 TISEO found on the Israeli F-4E. It replaced the AN/ALR-23 Infra-Red Search and Track System that earlier F-14’s had, and was replaced by later the AN/AAS-42 IRST which was an IIR system
It’s already in game and currently acts like a Targeting pod instead of an IRST (e.g. the AN/AAS-15 found on the F-8E, though it’s an Electro Optical system, not IR) for some reason it should work in concert to make the AWG-9 able to hold tracks through notches and ignore Chaff completely.
At the moment it gets in the way constantly and causes massive issues with TWS and sorting tracks as it can be difficult to manages as an additional system.
The reciprocal of PRF (or PRR) is called the Pulse Repetition Time (PRT), Pulse Repetition Interval (PRI), or Inter-Pulse Period (IPP), which is the elapsed time from the beginning of one pulse to the beginning of the next pulse. Within radar technology PRF is important since it determines the maximum target range (R max) and maximum Doppler velocity (V max) that can be accurately determined by the radar. Conversely, a high PRR/PRF can enhance target discrimination of nearer objects such as a periscope or fast moving missile leading to practices of employing low PRRs for search radar, and very high PRFs for fire control radars,
Did you read that? Can you comprehend it?
A radar system determines range through the time delay between pulse transmission and reception. For accurate range determination, especially over great distances a pulse must be transmitted and reflected before the next pulse is trnsmitted. Low PRF is for range detection.
a
Don’t ever disrespect me by coming at me with this preschool, daddy day care logic.
Is that how you think radio waves work?
Do you know what CW is? Do you know what ICW is? They are both of frequencies above 30 kHzThey are HPRF, One is continuous.
Continuous wave has **no minimum or maximum range, although the broadcast power level imposes a practical limit on range. The AWG9 should have the furthest range of all fighters when it locks a target at all aspects with the strongest field strength/broadcasting power Continuous-wave radar maximize total power on a target because the transmitter is broadcasting continuously. or pulsing repetitions so fast it’s called HPRF aka Interrupted Continuous Wave.
The drawback of Systems using PRF above 30 kHz (High PRF) is that it becomes increasingly difficult to take multiple samples (radar return) between transmit pulses at these pulse frequencies, so range measurements are limited to short distances longer range targeting requires radars capable of emitting a combination differing PRF simultaneously to target at long ranges and having the digital processing power to interpret that and guide the missile.
I know this, I said it.
You just contradicted yourself.
Also what is the reason? What is the reason the AMRAAM will go in the Med PRF in terminal. The RF at which it takes on all the disadvantages of both Low PRF radars and High PRF radars? Interesting.
When HPRF undeniably proven. CW is the best for targeting, period. that is because the signal for a radar missile in unbroken & continuous. and direct velocity can be measured up to 4.5 km/s
Then he proceeds to contradict himself and ultimately agree with me.
It’s not necessary to complain about “daddy daycare logic” and then proceed to do the exact same thing back. This conversation COULD have been a lot more productive had you not gone and put that in there.
You said “CW is the best for targeting, period”… to which I ask why did they go away with continuous wave illumination for SARH missiles? iirc the F/A-18 dropped the CW illumination device solely in the effort of reducing maintenance costs on the radar by simplifying the hardware portion as much as possible and relying more heavily on advanced electronics components to pick up the slack… not because of any performance improvement.
F18 did not drop a CW illuminator. it never had one. 4th gen radars do not need a separate CW illuminator.
They can produce high PRF pulse Dopler waveform and many other RFs to pull ambiguity if they had to.
We do not use sparrows anymore. We do not guide radar missiles all the way to impact either. Since before you were born. But guess what? To this day HPRF is always required to successfully guide radar missiles to target. There is still nothing more reliable.
Let me see your source the brevity Pitbull. Lol I know exactly where it came from.
The Pitbull brevity existed before the AMRAAM, and it’s used to refer to any radar missile going active. the term is used defensively as well. That is why the Navy and Airforce developed specific tactical brevity’s for Aim-120 when it enters the terminal and specifically states to HPRF ACTIVE RANGE.
HUSKY (Navy) Air intercept missile (AIM)-120 supported to HPRF active range CHEAPSHOT (AF) Air intercept missile (AIM)-120 supported to HPRF active range
Pitbull is used to describe any radar missile going active its actually used defensively more. Why would Pitbull be the specific brevity for the MPRF? The worst RF to guide missiles in especially?
Medium PRF has unique radar scalloping issues that require redundant detection schemes. This phenomenon also has detrimental effect on moving target indicator systems, where the detection scheme subtracts signals received from two or more transmit pulses. Med PRF Pulse dopler radars: this system would fail to detect reflections at 50 km and 100 km that are moving 600 km/s or 1,200 km/s. It would also fail to detect reflections at 37.5 km and 75 km that are moving 450 km/s or 900 km/s.
Show me the source, that the AIm-120 uses the Med PRF in the terminal. Under what circumstance would the aim-120 be better off using Med PRF over the most reliable RF for targeting and fire control radars? Do the pilots make the switch in flight and yell “bit bull!” lol why?
Pitbull already means any missile going active. lol fake and made up.
Aren’t you the next senior tech moderator?
There is a difference of locking targets in 4th and 3rd gen. Because you locked someone in the F15A does not been they are being illuminated. Do you know what radar illumination is? its continuous wave.
Anyways the Aim54. there is no illumination with a TWS lock. The Aim54 does not ever need illumination of the Awg9. When it gets to the terminal phase it switches its own radar on and Pitbull’s to target. The target had no idea he was be targeted (F14 radar emissions were very difficult to detect an attack) It’s really high-tech stuff, but that WT brain.
You are incapable of seeing the technology and capability beyond the F-4. WHY? immediately refers to his WT education. “High PRF? WT taught me head on only! Head on mode! The F15 can only kill you in a head on.”
Thinks the F14 has an additional transmitter. Why would it need one? At the same time, you will say the AWG9 is a high PRF fighter… Which is it? lol does it need one or is already a high PRF radar? omg lol.
Of course, the AWG9 is a High PRF Radar. Higher than the APG-63 of the F-15.
The AW9 is a phased array CW radar. You cannot see that radars can change RFs and are dumbfounded how high PRF is used for radar missile.
The AN/AWG-9 offers multiple air-to-air modes: long-range [continuous-wave radar] velocity search, range-while-search at shorter ranges, and an airborne track-while-scan mode with the ability to track up to 24 airborne targets, display 18 of them on the cockpit displays, and launch against 6 of them at the same time.
