Jammer penalty
-
So its been a long time i noticed this since 4.32 but given that it still persists in 4.33 i decided to post about it.
Scenario 1: F-16cm b50 vs su27.
He is jamming and you aswell. In acmi you can see that he acquires burnthrough and lock at 23nm’s. The f-16 radar (radar type 1) has a range of 35nm(vs 1 rcs) and a jamming penalty of 0.480. This means that you should see him at 16-16.8 nm’s. In acmi, versus an f-16, i see that he indeed locks me at 16. But when i am flying the f-16 i never see anything up until 13.5-14 nm’s. I assumed this delay has to do with the radar sweep rate and the radar not updating instantly what it picks up, BUT,
scenario 2 F-16b52+ (HAF) vs su27.
We are both jamming, in acmi he locks up at 23nm’s (correct according to his jamming penalty) but now i have a better radar (radar type 144). This radar has a range of 50,5 nm’s (versus 1 rcs) and a jamming penalty of 0.480. This means that i should burnthrough at 24nm’s. Versus a HAF f-16 in acmi the f-16 burnsthrough at 24nm so the calculation is correct. But when i am flying the HAF f16, i never again see anything beyond 14nm’s!! This time, considering that i should be able to see him at 24nm, no mater the sweep rate delay, there shouldnt be anyway that i only get to see him at 14miles. And yet thats exactly what happens. Am i missing something here or is it a bug?
EDIT, due to incorrect calculation the f-16cm b50 burnthrough vs the su-27 is 22,4nm, not 16. I did not take into consideration the rcs modifier of the su27 (1.33)
-
Curious, good investigativery work, brother. I, too, would like to know.
-
@Master:
So its been a long time i noticed this since 4.32 but given that it still persists in 4.33 i decided to post about it.
Scenario 1: F-16cm b50 vs su27.
He is jamming and you aswell. In acmi you can see that he acquires burnthrough and lock at 23nm’s. The f-16 radar (radar type 1) has a range of 35nm(vs 1 rcs) and a jamming penalty of 0.480. This means that you should see him at 16-16.8 nm’s. In acmi, versus an f-16, i see that he indeed locks me at 16. But when i am flying the f-16 i never see anything up until 13.5-14 nm’s. I assumed this delay has to do with the radar sweep rate and the radar not updating instantly what it picks up, BUT,
scenario 2 F-16b52+ (HAF) vs su27.
We are both jamming, in acmi he locks up at 23nm’s (correct according to his jamming penalty) but now i have a better radar (radar type 144). This radar has a range of 50,5 nm’s (versus 1 rcs) and a jamming penalty of 0.480. This means that i should burnthrough at 24nm’s. Versus a HAF f-16 in acmi the f-16 burnsthrough at 24nm so the calculation is correct. But when i am flying the HAF f16, i never again see anything beyond 14nm’s!! This time, considering that i should be able to see him at 24nm, no mater the sweep rate delay, there shouldnt be anyway that i only get to see him at 14miles. And yet thats exactly what happens. Am i missing something here or is it a bug?
You simiply left out from the equation two things…
1. Every AC in DB have uniuqe RCS value.
2. The general aspect modifier. (You can see in RP5 manual.) -
i mentioned the RCS. The f-16 has a default of 1, the su27 has 1.3, meaning that i detect it at 130% range of my named radar range. I dont see how this changes things when jamming, the burnthrough’s behave in acmi as predicted and calculated with regards to the jamming penalty. It seems only the player suffers from that delay. With regards to aspect, i always keep them withing jammer gimbal limits and they seem to do the same.
CORRECTION: my methodology is probably flawed, I tried multiple ACMI tests flying HAF f-16 vs similar and vs su27’s, turns out i detect them at the calculated burnthrough range minus 2-3 miles (sweep rate?)
EDIT: The rcs plays a role when jamming, i didnt apply the rcs modifier to my nominal detection range vs the su-27 and then apply the jamming penalty modifier. I simply applied the jamming modifier to my nominal radar detection range. incorrect.
-
@Master:
i mentioned the RCS. The f-16 has a default of 1, the su27 has 1.3, meaning that i detect it at 130% range of my named radar range. I dont see how this changes things when jamming, the burnthrough’s behave in acmi as predicted and calculated with regards to the jamming penalty. It seems only the player suffers from that delay. With regards to aspect, i always keep them withing jammer gimbal limits and they seem to do the same.
CORRECTION: my methodology is probably flawed, I tried multiple ACMI tests flying HAF f-16 vs similar and vs su27’s, turns out i detect them at the calculated burnthrough range minus 2-3 miles (sweep rate?)
I do not know the exact radar equation of BMS but in RL RCS is not linerally porportional to detection range so I guess in BMS/Falcon maybe also is not.
-
…what you’re missing is which radar mode you are using, and how much time your radar actually spends looking at the target as opposed to somewhere else in the scan volume.
Stevie
-
…what you’re missing is which radar mode you are using, and how much time your radar actually spends looking at the target as opposed to somewhere else in the scan volume.
All the tests where done in both RWS and TWS, i even tested in spot scan. Very small differences.
With regards to scan volume, i stated that i suspect the sweep rate to be the factor for the slight delay between burnthrough and the target showing up on b-scope. -
I do not know the exact radar equation of BMS but in RL RCS is not linerally porportional to detection range so I guess in BMS/Falcon maybe also is not.
I suspect that that is not the case, since if the opponent is not jamming, he is in an su27(1.3 rcs modifier) and i am in an f-16cm b50 (radar type 1-detection range vs rcs of 1 at 35nm) i always detect him at 45 miles. That stays true for many matchups. The HAF f-16 has a named detection range of 50.5 vs rcs of 1 (radar type 144) and i always pickup su27’s at 65nm.
-
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?12402-Radars-in-F4&p=168848&viewfull=1#post168848
Take a look in this old post and you will understand how everything works. “Tiag” was my old user. If you have any questions afterwards, ask me, please.
If the file does not work for you, send me a PM with your email and I will send you the complete excell table. -
@Master:
All the tests where done in both RWS and TWS, i even tested in spot scan. Very small differences.
With regards to scan volume, i stated that i suspect the sweep rate to be the factor for the slight delay between burnthrough and the target showing up on b-scope.Just spec’ing TWS or RWS isn’t enough…what scan width (20, 30, 60), how many bars, etc.?
It really depends on what both radars are doing…so if the bogey is mixing up tactics/geometry on you - which he should be - then your results are going to vary.
Stevie
-
Just spec’ing TWS or RWS isn’t enough…what scan width (20, 30, 60), how many bars, etc.?
.
on all possible azimuths and bar scans.
-
@Master:
on all possible azimuths and bar scans.
You should get something different for each…in reality.
Stevie
-
i do, like i said above with regards to sweep rate, 2-3 miles earlier or later detection depending on azimuth (and bar scan)
-
Isnt there an aspect modifier to RCS though? Head on might be decreasing the listed RCS below what it shows, which would cause the disparity in detection range.
-
Isnt there an aspect modifier to RCS though? Head on might be decreasing the listed RCS below what it shows, which would cause the disparity in detection range.
Dont know if this is simulated in BMS, but all my tests are strictly head on to maintain jammer gimbal limits.
-
I had thought the RP5 manual reckoned it was simulated; seeing as it also reckons an IADS is simulated though, perhaps a more reliable source would be a team dev weighing in.
-
I am starting to suspect something here:
In all my tests vs the su27 he always burnsthrough at 22-23nm’s. This respects the burnthrough calculation provided by tbuc’s excel (the values within the excel are outdated, i use the bms editor ones). What happens when he locks up, is that he shoots vertically to about 36kft. We both start at 23kft and we remain that way until he locks me up. This happens literally ALL the time (ace ai).In order to anticipate this move, i set my antenna to cover the altitude that he climbs to. Now, based on burnthrough calculation i should see him at around 16nm’s, but i dont. Here is the interesting thing. Since i detect him at 13,5 i suspected that perhaps i suffer from the look down penalty although i am lower than him. I run the look down and jamming calculation and behold, i end up with 13,5nm’s. I try it again. same result. Try again and again. Same. The su-27 doesnt suffer from the lookdown penalty because he locked me when we where at the same altitude. But i am lower. I shouldnt suffer from it either. And yet, the value produced seem to indicate that i do. So i try a new thing, when we reach 22nm and i know that he locks and goes up i go up with him. Guess what? I burnthrough at JUST the calculated burnthrough range!! In conclusion: is it possible that the game has a “look up” penalty??? -
@Master:
i do, like i said above with regards to sweep rate, 2-3 miles earlier or later detection depending on azimuth (and bar scan)
It’s not so much rate, but time to complete bar from end to end and closing velocity that is the factor - how much absolute time is involved (and the geometry) as the two jets are closing. Longer the time, closer they get.
Stevie
-
Someone else was talking about having a lookup penalty recently too. Possible bug maybe?
-
@Master:
I am starting to suspect something here:
In all my tests vs the su27 he always burnsthrough at 22-23nm’s. This respects the burnthrough calculation provided by tbuc’s excel (the values within the excel are outdated, i use the bms editor ones). What happens when he locks up, is that he shoots vertically to about 36kft. We both start at 23kft and we remain that way until he locks me up. This happens literally ALL the time (ace ai).In order to anticipate this move, i set my antenna to cover the altitude that he climbs to. Now, based on burnthrough calculation i should see him at around 16nm’s, but i dont. Here is the interesting thing. Since i detect him at 13,5 i suspected that perhaps i suffer from the look down penalty although i am lower than him. I run the look down and jamming calculation and behold, i end up with 13,5nm’s. I try it again. same result. Try again and again. Same. The su-27 doesnt suffer from the lookdown penalty because he locked me when we where at the same altitude. But i am lower. I shouldnt suffer from it either. And yet, the value produced seem to indicate that i do. So i try a new thing, when we reach 22nm and i know that he locks and goes up i go up with him. Guess what? I burnthrough at JUST the calculated burnthrough range!! In conclusion: is it possible that the game has a “look up” penalty???You may have hit on something - this sounds totally backwards in application…like it’s actually being applied as a “look up” penalty. But at least it’s on the sim’s numbers and could be an “easy” fix…in 3-4 weeks…
