The AIM-54 Phoenix missile - Technology, History and Performance

And instead of pausing on targets it just scans right past and immediately transmits the data 🤷‍♂️ updates are too fast

you just said it is too slow , now you say it is too fast ?

Yes, in real life it’s too slow, in-game TWS updates are too fast. What’s the disconnect?

I don’t see you disproving the slewing speed or update speed before EVER , do you have a sauce to back it u?p

Just something I’ve heard discussed by pilots in the past, explained well in other forums as well. I’d have reported it, but I lack any good documentation on the radar. Outsider’s view describes the 2 second sweep but does not clarify if that is for 40 or 20 degree scan angle.

Maneuvering targets change gate bins quickly and can cause the AWG-9 to lose track because it tries to predict where the target will be and correlates new returns vs the expected return (TWS). If a return does not show up within limits of where it is expected it will “coast” a track. If the target maneuvered hard enough to be out of gate limits then it shows up as a new target in the new position while the old target file is coasted and on the TID the RIO will see two targets. After a few seconds the AWG-9 gives up on the target file coasting and drops the track, but that track is simply lost and will not move to the nearby track of the same physical target.
View topic - Spurts on YouTube - Flying in DCS •

I can look for F-16 documentation later, I asked and apparently there is an open internal report proving block 10s had TWS modes like the block 15s, but neither were particularly good at keeping track on maneuvering targets even for AMRAAM when that was integrated. If that’s the case I would also assume there were similar issues with the AWG-9… maybe @MaMoran20 has more information on why TWS would have trouble before PESA and newer radars came out.

It is because the (early) radars only know a target’s relative position and velocity, so when it predicts the next position it ends up way off because it can’t compensate for the velocity’s rate of change (would probably require 3 passes instead of 2 to compute). So, the analog gimballed radars simply couldn’t scan fast enough to update their target data within a reasonable time frame. And the computers of the time didn’t have the capability to quickly and reliably account/correct for these deviations.

I believe AWG-9 pauses on each TWS tracked target briefly to determine necessary information and send it via datalink

@MiG_23M So in this video the person did not update guidance for all their missiles, just one way too late. To properly use multi-launch Phoenixes in game, the pilot would have to cycle through targets they fired at in TWS continuously until the missiles obtain the lock themselves. Many F-14 pilots do not “support” their missiles all the way to the target, they rely too heavily on the inertial guidance. If properly supported, Pheonixes are suprisingly accurate and still have enough energy for one strong pull if fired in optimal conditions. My typical problems are usually people being so close to the ground that it makes them near useless.

Worth testing in that case.


BTW these are , AWG-9 and APG-71 ,
why they share designs ?

I don’t see a shared design here?

dish design is similar

Mechanicals radars can scan faster than they do but they don’t as scanning fast reduces the dwell and pulse integration time, which lowers the detection range %. It wouldn’t help even if the PESA radar scanning at 6 gorillion deg/sec, there’s not enough pulses to confirm a detection. For example, MPRF F16 requires 3/8 PRF hits for a positive return.

As long as the fighter is in the radar resolution cell, I don’t see why it shouldn’t continue tracking despite heavy maneuvering.

I have also never read about the AWG 9 stopping on a TWS track file. No need, the file is created.


Continuously switching through each target is not how the radar is supposed to opperate. The missile should be able to recieve dada from the radar as long as the radar is pointed at the target. The radar is supposed to be able to select 6 targets and have the ability to tws track them alk the way untill the missile turns on its own radar. So fundamentally this mechanic is wrong and should be changed.

What would the point be in TWS if the RIO had to Select each target every 30 seconds or so to Update the missile’s path? Doesnt fundamentally make sense.

That would necessitate one, but he’s just saying that’s an effective way of using it in-game despite the drawbacks.

It’s been modified to fit the same nose cone, doesn’t make it remotely similar radar elsewise. Shares 85% commonality with the F-15E’s iirc.

Ohhh ok i see what hes saying yeah makes sense.