Is the RWR complete?

Are we getting any improvements to the RWR, EW or EW elements of the SA page?

As it stands it only allows us to guess the bearing to the threat, but no signal strength is given like the F-15C.

Will this be added to the SA or EW page?

the SA page is not your RWR page its married but not the same

the SA page is not your RWR page its married but not the same

Sure I understand that. But I am asking if any enhancements on signal strength will be added to any of those screens (the rwr analog display, EW page or SA)

Right now if a target decides to bluff and takes a long-range shot unless he is on your radar scope you have no way of knowing if it is a legitimate threat; the RWR will treat an R-27ER shot from 60nm the same as one shot from 3nm. Especially if no one else has eyes on him for the contact to show on the SA page

I do find it odd that the RWR doesn't show relative lethality like most of the other Western jets, it's useless for making any judgements of threats. I guess you're wholly dependent on AWACS/SA Page/Radar.

I do find it odd that the RWR doesn't show relative lethality like most of the other Western jets, it's useless for making any judgements of threats. I guess you're wholly dependent on AWACS/SA Page/Radar.

It is puzzling really. The RWR antenna can tell signal strength according to Heatblur, the F-14 uses that to identify the azimuth by checking signal strength between each antenna.

Alright, so a bit of digging shows that the RWR is still missing something.

With all due respect to ED, I will be using data from the F-14 manual. (The Tomcat uses the same AN/ALR-67 class of RWR, either the same version or actually older)

The tomcat uses the older logic of displaying threats on the edge but the point I make below are on which band the threat should be sitting in.

Currently, the Hornet's RWR functions as follows;

A threat which doesn't have you locked and is not within their firing parameters is placed in the non-lethal band. This is correct

A threat which can lock you and fire but has not locked is placed in the non-lethal band. This is not correct, such a threat should actually be moved to the lethal band.

A threat which has you locked but has not fired is placed in the lethal band(seemingly regardless of range, need to test this better). This is not correct as well, it should be moved to the critical band instead.

A target that has fired is placed in the critical band (regardless of range as well). This is correct

;3844213']

Hello Maverick, I understand that the way the Tomcat and Hornet show the threats is inverted. My qualm is that the Hornet is actually placing targets which are lethal to you (have the potential to fire) in the non-lethal zone.

If you place an enemy F-15C 7 nm in front of your nose the RWR will place it the non-lethal band(outer most band for the hornet) (very easy to replicate in the mission editor), despite the fact that it a potentially lethal target (and it actually is if it is using TWS). The only time it will move to the lethal band is when it locks you.

Here is a quick example I made; I placed an F15C 10nm in front of me (basically it can fire)

While it is in TWS mode this what it looks like in the Tomcat and Hornet:

The cat has correctly recognized this as a threat and placed it in its lethal band. However, the hornet has incorrectly placed it in the non-lethal band (If the tomcat's behavior was the same it would have been placed in the center or the RWR)

When the eagle fires the result is correct both jets mark the missile as a critical threat.

The Hornet seems to have a bug here as the F-15 which is in TWS becomes a critical threat despite there being no lock.

The same exercise can be done with Mig-29S, once it locks you the Tomcat will place it in the critical band while the hornet will place it in the lethal band.

The point of all of this is that the current logic gives no value to target lethality. We have no way of knowing if an enemy Mig-29S using TWS is in firing range for us to maneuver preemptively.

I agree that something is not right with the Hornets RWR logic.

It should mirror the logic of the Tomcats.

There's no reason the target should move from the non-lethal to the critical ring (skipping the lethal ring)

Theres also no reason a fighter radar that close would be put in the non-lethal band

It makes no sense for it to be called a lethal band in this case...

I am considering creating a bug thread for this but I'm worried it will be dismissed

I've read somewhere to somebody explain the logic in the Hornet has changed over the years. With regard to DCS, actual real Hornet pilots discussed one saying that it was right while other saying it was wrong, until a third pilot chimed in and explained that it's correct because he'd flown both ways and it changed while he was in the model so mystery solved.

Also wags said something about they were aware the RWR logic change in the life of the Hornet and probably they were meant to change it in the future to the more recent known one (centre is the higher threat IIRC). I think maybe that discussion was in the comments section of the RWR Wags' video.

Tomcat on the other hand is an old bird so that's why it's different.

S!

I've read somewhere to somebody explain the logic in the Hornet has changed over the years. With regard to DCS, actual real Hornet pilots discussed one saying that it was right while other saying it was wrong, until a third pilot chimed in and explained that it's correct because he'd flown both ways and it changed while he was in the model so mystery solved.

 

Also wags said something about they were aware the RWR logic change in the life of the Hornet and probably they were meant to change it in the future to the more recent known one (centre is the higher threat IIRC). I think maybe that discussion was in the comments section of the RWR Wags' video.

 

 

Tomcat on the other hand is an old bird so that's why it's different.

 

 

 

S!

That's not what is beeing discussed here. They are talking about the logic of when a threat should be moved to the lethal band. Not if the Lethal band should be on the inside or outside of the RWR display.

That depends on the logic :lol: .

S!

We are not discussing where the bands should be placed... but what should be placed in the band.

It does not seem right for the same RWR system to once display a threat 10nm as non-lethal while the other does.

Currently, the hornet's RWR bands are not really non-lethal, lethal, and critical. They are just not locked, locked, firing.

This is a massive downgrade in situational awareness from the Tomcat which is an older aircraft as you say.

RWR threat ring logic

Current threat ring logic in DCS F/A-18C:

----------------------------------------------------

Non-lethal = anything not locked on to you

Lethal = anything locked on to you

Critical = anything firing a missile at you

----------------------------------------------------

The logic above is not accurate to the ALR-67. The device already has specific ques to indicate a 'lock on' (lower half circle) and a missile launch (flashing symbol + azimuth line).

The rings themselves indicate:

----------------------------------------------------

Non-lethal = threat systems deemed outside lethal range of ownship or any non-threat system (ie poses no threat to ownship).

Lethal = threat systems deemed within lethal range of own aircraft but not actively tracking or engaging it. (ie no lock on or missile fire)

Critical = imminent threat to ownship. Either a 'Lock on" / STT or a missile launch.

----------------------------------------------------

This is the same logic as the ALR-67 on the F-14B/D. The only difference would be threat ring placement based on time period.

Same with sound priorities. HB F-14 seem to follow what yt videos show (new guy tone taking priority) while the F18 does not.

First video also shows the HUD RWR threat azimuth line on missile launch blinking (end of video 2-3 o clock position), that was my understanding of the correct real behavior as posted here

Are there any updates/fixes planned?

Ahhhhhh this explains why the F-18 RWR has felt weird to me for ages.

Nice spot guys. +1, put all this together and make a bug report on it. Definitely sounds B0rked

Ahhhhhh this explains why the F-18 RWR has felt weird to me for ages.

 

Nice spot guys. +1, put all this together and make a bug report on it. Definitely sounds B0rked

I did. My post was pushed into this thread

And another example of the different threat line lengths in the HUD page too supporting what is said in this post about the lethal/non-lethal band, and also that the line length in the HUD EW should depend on lethality

The video from where the above screenshot is taken (including rwr sound) can be easily found on youtube

Here is the harrier which also uses the ALR-67 displaying correct logic for the lethal band:

The Harrier seems to also be able to tell the distance of a target in the critical zone. (similar to the above picture)

So far we have real-life videos, other aircraft in the sim, and an external simulation showing how the RWR works;

ED can you kindly tell us if this will be implemented? It gives low SA in CAP and makes it hard to know which targets to prioritize when using the HARM.

Here is a photo of a "29" indication on a F/A-18 in air to ground mode.

Being that he isn't reacting in this case, its fair to assume there isn't a 'lock on'. Yet the "29" is still inside the "lethal" ring (based on the dashed line).

Meaning that:

- Lethal Ring does not equal 'Lock on'.

- By process of elimination, Lethal Ring must mean

1. 'emitters that could harm you, but are not currently trying to do so'

2. 'emitters that could harm you, but are not in range to do so'

3. 'both #1 and #2. Same as Heatblur F-14 documentation'

As it is all spread in many different threads, and for the shake of the discussion and especially the "rwr correct as is" tag, I'm posting the links to the other threads where symbology has been discussed and photos/videos have been posted:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=197024&highlight=rwr

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3347781&highlight=rwr

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=218199&highlight=rwr

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3601263&highlight=rwr

Plenty there to suggest that the current DCS symbology does not correspond.

EDIT:

Current DCS implementation shows all non-locked threats as non-lethal threat (short stem), STT threats as lethal threats (dashed stem) and missile launch as critical threat (long stem).

All the pics/videos above suggest that correct behavior would be:

- Non lethal threat (threat estimated not within lethal range): short stem

- Lethal threat (threat estimated within lethal range): dashed stem

- STT lock (critical threat): long stem

- Missile launch: flashing long stem (

Same applying to the RWR azimuth indicator in th appropriate ring. Apart from being supported by publicly available documentation, this also matches the way HB has implemented it too in the F-14 RWR azimuth indicator (aside from the F-14 not having HUD symbology), and also makes total sense from a human factors and HMI point of view.

Could a member of the ED team please respond.

I think most of us agree that incorrect RWR logic should not be filed under "wish list".

Could a member of the ED team please respond.

 

I think most of us agree that incorrect RWR logic should not be filed under "wish list".

It could be one of those things that are intentionally obfuscated or simplified. Guessing, but it's a thing and it could be the reason they choose to ignore this.