F-16 radar range
-
And here is the problem. Why everybody thinks that Falcon 4.0 should model the very latest Block 50/52…? I do not like when code rules over the DB and makes impossbile to customize the game… It is bad for all 3rd party theater.
The first problem is that you like the F-16A too much, and this title is focused on the F-16C since first day of paper design by Microprose back in '92, with relative avionics and systems for the respective C/D blocks, as rl informations became available and blocks growth through time. The second problem is, that you intent to focus your simulation-world pleasure (plus development requests) around a theater focused on 1st & 2nd generation assets, with F-16A been the superior system in it. And although me have no probs about this point-of-view, I would respect prioritization of other more vital development tasks from the devs, as you can imagine perfection to the degree possible of the current blocks/systems etc of the Viper. We are somewhat tired to continuously receive such karma since the Flare project times…
-
i am sure the BMS 4.33 will have radar& weapons fixations…. i am sure the devs have the right staff to do that… keep walking!!!
-
Is there any plan to tell the community then what is correct?
Not really. There no plan to start a document like the RP5 for BMS.
And why include the RP5 with the install?
If we remove ALL the not 100% up to date documents, you will have ZERO document for BMS.
Anyway, I’m volunteering to help document whatever changes have been made by BMS.
Great, we thank you! : … Communauty would need a UI/Sofware user manual.
-
Ok, but today’s radar are pulse-doppler radars, right? Or do they use only doppler theory based technology to detect anything?
Yep. Many radars will drop the doppler and go to monopulse mode when a previously tracked target enters beam as far as I know.
-
Problem is that the ground ALSO has a plus speed rate relative to you. A doppler filter is used to remove ground returns, which conveniently have your velocity. Someone moving towards you at the same rate as the ground can be lost in this filter. Same goes for the ALT TRK filter, someone the same distance from you as the ground can be lost in the filter.
Also, even if they are hot on you, a 0 knot closure speed relative to the ground is not the only ambiguous speed. There are a number of speeds, multiples of each other, for which the radar cannot track accurately - targets doing any of these speeds enter the doppler notch and cannot be tracked. That said, the only of these speeds which is not classified is the 0knots relative to you - which is different to a return which IS being tracked, but is removed by the ground return filters.
To add onto that there’s the funny white sideways Y shaped mark on the FCR format that refers to the blanked bit of the display due to expected return from sidelobe ground return. It’s impossible to create a single radar lobe in a finite array. There are second (and third and forth) order side lobes. Just getting return energy when the antenna is pointed a certain way doesn’t mean that the energy came from that direction, but possibly from a side direction. It takes some comparison math as the antenna scans to figure that out.
-
I spent the last 7 months testing threats in BMS for a document that I have been working on. I didn’t use math, just documented what I saw while flying using similar set ups for consistent comparisons. Below is what I found with the F-16’s flying against F-16C52 head on. The opposing groups were at around 20,000 feet and the other group at 2,000 feet to test look down capability. They also had AN/ALQ-131 jammers.
F-16A15 Up: 32nm Down: 32nm ECM: 10nm
F-16AM MLU’s and others up to around F-16C52 Up: 40nm Down: 40nm ECM: 22nmOn some of the tests I inlcuded A-4 targets which were detected around 26nm and 32nm. So as mentioned by others before, the distance varies with aspect and radar cross section of the target being scanned.
-
The solution for that nasty lock-lock-lock is the uncage button :bowd:
-
The lock lost in vertical sound logical to me. To the down, you have the ground clutter that can mess the FCR. And to the up, the closure rate begin to fall quickly, if the closure rate begin to approach to a null value (depending of the tolerance of the radar), the FCR should drop the lock, and try to reaquired it quicly in ACM bore until the closure rate is again enough to keep the track.
Not a bug to me.
-
Doesn’t the radar not rely entirely on Doppler shift, especially in ACM? I know zero radial relative to the ground is one common filter but I wouldn’t think zero radial to the plane would be all that important or any filters be especially important for a 4nm ACM lock in look-up.
-
The lock lost in vertical sound logical to me. To the down, you have the ground clutter that can mess the FCR. And to the up, the closure rate begin to fall quickly, if the closure rate begin to approach to a null value (depending of the tolerance of the radar), the FCR should drop the lock, and try to reaquired it quicly in ACM bore until the closure rate is again enough to keep the track.
Not a bug to me.
The ground clutter is NOT clutter though, precisely because its a doppler radar. The ground returns have a different range AND a different velocity than the returns of the locked contact.