The existing TGP-esque implementation already slaves automatically to Radar tracked targets, and can even be manually slewed to and independently track targets without the use of the radar.
All this would let it do is for the TCS to provide angular tracking for lost targets, which is a function of the TCS.
Materially similar functionally is being implemented with the next update, and is present on the dev server.
And as explained above, a fully independent Search mode for the TCS is not on the cards since multiple Sensors cannot (yet) be used at the same time, which is a limitation that prevents relevant mechanization from occurring and so would make the addition of IRST -like capabilities erroneous considering evident documentation.
And as such does not fall neatly into a category due to the iterative way the systems have been implemented over time.
As such partial implementation of modes available to the TCS that do align with said implemented features should occur.
In what way.
It already exists with the radar able to cue the TCS, but not the other way around, which as according to the presented sources is possible within the confines of existing and upcoming implemented features, which did not include the F-14.
Technical moderators are able to submit things a suggestions
IT DOESNT. You still need a previous either soft or hard lock and in the case that it switches automatically to the irst, the guidance is still done by the radar.
This change is specifically made for this specific issue.
Please go back and actually look at the above sources and note the “Weapons Capability” columns for the IR- and -Radar Slaved modes (PDSRSL / PRSL) include references to both SARH and ARH missiles.
It’s capability to both launch and continue to guide the missiles in flight is retained.
And so limit it similarly the tracking needs to be initiated by the radar to qualify, it’s not that big a deal. That why I was requesting the F-14B’s inclusion in said changes as it does qualify for the change as is.
And it’s sill impacted by the issue, what do you think currently happens to the TCS when a Radar tracked target enters the notch of the AWG-9 on the Live server?
I can tell you it doesn’t retain the track.
And it’s also similarly impacting a number of targeting pods that should have Air to Air tracking modes / functionality.
The TISEO is already implemented in game on the Kurnass 2000, And the US F-4E is a franken-plane, that doesn’t actually adhere to any known configuration. And Gaijin remain evasive about what it is supposed to be.
They have also refused to clarify the situation so the correct report that would bring it into line with documentation is effectively impossible, though Pending either the split into an Early & Late variant or the addition of the F-4D or F-4G, I would begin a series of reports to bring it into line with either an Early or Late configuration as to differentiate it.
A Block 53 is probably closest to what is currently portrayed.
The change keep the lock with the irst and allows to launch the missille, but still the irst doesnt help with the guidance in the notch, “EOTS supported angular tracking of target though the Notch, radar Blind speeds”, this is the “new mechanic” that im talking about.
And as far as im aware of the f14 have a manual switch not an automatic like the change refers to.
That’s not how things work, the angular error correction loop of the system is maintained until either the track is lost, the radar finds a target, or “Half-action” is commanded by the hand controller. If it does not detect a target, and the radar does, it will look at the Line of sight of the radar until it does and then assumes optical tracking.
Additionally note the specific wording of the highlighted “Slave | TCS-” function below, “During STT”, which is a radar function, thus the transition is automatic and has checks and differing logical flow pending radar lock-on state. (also as a side not it is apparent to me now that it theoretically also would be able to be autocued to a datalink target).
Something else of note is that it only has a gimbal limit of 30 degrees, so it only covers a small fraction of the searched volume, and as such being limited to only +/- 30 degrees, makes any potential Cranking maneuver, not very good at actually draining energy out of incoming missiles.
As such the actual benefit of the system is fairly limited in a 1v1 and would require you to to remain committed to a single target to benefit from the improved tracking, much more so than contemporary systems, with their much improved 60 ~ 70 degree angular limits providing a significant benefit to the effectiveness of defensive maneuvers.
For which aircraft? It’s probably not, for those installations due to the fact that their detectors tend to be fairly advanced staring / scanning arrays, with advanced image segmentation algorithms, and track files the sensor(s) produce are unified and the radar is being directed off said synthetic data.
Rather than a detector that physically tracks a target and feeds the Line of Sight back into the computer to calculate look angle that supersedes the radar’s return.
