[NOT REALISTIC] TWS bump azimuth and range

They say it isn't a thing.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=256326&highlight=bump

Hmm.. talked to a block 15 pilot, guess that is something that changed from the block 15 to the block 50, thought it would have been the same as most of the systems in both planes are very similar/identical.

It's modeled correctly thanks.

i do not think so , please review you documents and resources

In TWS you can change bar scan the same like RWS with the cursor

Three scan patterns are available in TWS. They are:

± 60, 2 bar

± 25, 3 bar

± 10, 4 bar

AND

Spotlight Scan the same like RWS

Depressing and holding the TMS to the designate (up or forward) position for longer than 1 second will command the radar to spotlight scan (±10 degrees azimuth by 4 bars elevation). Spotlight scan is initially centered about the acquisition cursor and antenna elevation knob setting and can be slewed. The radar attempts to acquire and track the target within the acquisition cursor at release of the designate position of the TMS.

kind regards

Three scan patterns are available in TWS and must controlled by cursor like in RWS

They are:

± 60, 2 bar

± 25, 3 bar

± 10, 4 bar

Without a bugged target, the azimuth scan centers on the cursors and elevation is controlled manually. When a target is bugged, the azimuth is biased to keep the bugged target in the scan and the elevation is centered on the bugged target. If the antenna elevation is tilted while the pilot has a bugged target, upon dropping the bug, the elevation scan will move according to what the pilot commanded to reflect the position set by the antenna elevation controls.

in addition Spotlight Scan must occured

Depressing and holding the TMS to the designate (up or forward) position for longer than 1 second will command the radar to spotlight scan (±10 degrees azimuth by 4 bars elevation). Spotlight scan is initially centered about the acquisition cursor and antenna elevation knob setting and can be slewed. The radar attempts to acquire and track the target within the acquisition cursor at release of the designate position of the TMS.

Three scan patterns are available in TWS and must controlled by cursor like in RWS

 

They are:

± 60, 2 bar

± 25, 3 bar

± 10, 4 bar

Without a bugged target, the azimuth scan centers on the cursors and elevation is controlled manually. When a target is bugged, the azimuth is biased to keep the bugged target in the scan and the elevation is centered on the bugged target. If the antenna elevation is tilted while the pilot has a bugged target, upon dropping the bug, the elevation scan will move according to what the pilot commanded to reflect the position set by the antenna elevation controls.

 

 

in addition Spotlight Scan must occured

Depressing and holding the TMS to the designate (up or forward) position for longer than 1 second will command the radar to spotlight scan (±10 degrees azimuth by 4 bars elevation). Spotlight scan is initially centered about the acquisition cursor and antenna elevation knob setting and can be slewed. The radar attempts to acquire and track the target within the acquisition cursor at release of the designate position of the TMS.

As far as i know, this is how it should work. As long as you dont have a bugged target, you can change range and azimuth by moving the cursor to the edges of the screen.

correct Falconeer

Hmm.. talked to a block 15 pilot, guess that is something that changed from the block 15 to the block 50, thought it would have been the same as most of the systems in both planes are very similar/identical.

Other radar v66 vs v68

Sure. It makes sens of course. Unless you can check by yourself or have someone to check in the real stuff (aircraft or real trainer/simulator). This is how we realized that some info from -34 are not always 100% accurate or up to date among tape updates/changes.

Slight necro because I stumbled on this thread trying to figure when I can and can't range bump via the cursor. As a former technical writer of aircraft engine manuals, what Dee-Jay is saying does not surprise me at all. Updating the manual gets more difficult the older a system gets. Brand new manuals often have missed details since equipment and users do things engineers never imagined. Also engineers don't always "speak" writer. Then writers aren't always explaining in a way the end users will understand. End users just go doing their job finding a way to get it done, even if the book says to do it a way that doesn't actually work.