JF-17 and SD-10 RWR symbology.

Can we have this added to the ALR-67 in the Tomcat soonish? :)

RWR signatures for 2007 aircraft in already retired bird?

RWR signatures for 2007 aircraft in already retired bird?

No, but it would be still stupid to not add them imo (not calling you stupid, Draconus, I hope that's obvious). While this ofc is not realistic, we still need to take the environment it can be flown in seriously. Else we wouldnt have recorded Jester calling out a spitfire if you lock it either, etc etc... It's still created for DCS and thus it needs the rwr symbology of its opponents and the capability to VID (Jester) any airplane in dcs, etc.. It may not reflect the environment it flew in, but it reflects the environment it flies in today, and that's DCS.

We will add it asap.

I would like to criticise that

While this ofc is not realistic, we still need to take the environment it can be flown in seriously.

contradicts

I can assure you that everything we implemented, we did from the viewpoint "recreate Tomcat as accurately as possible" regardless of how it would influence its environment, or be influenced by it, positively or negatively, within the limits of DCS.

from

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4006691&postcount=6

I would like to criticise that

Surprise surprise

I would like to criticise that

 

 

 

contradicts

 

 

 

from

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4006691&postcount=6

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk

I would like to criticise that

 

 

 

contradicts

 

 

 

from

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4006691&postcount=6

What a waste of time, space, electrons, and life.

I would like to criticise that...

lol

After a second thought I am satisfied by an explanation that IRL the Tomcat's RWR would probably be updated before the mission if such aircraft are expected and if it's possible.

Otoh Jester could at least try to be more surprised by Spitfires flying around ;P

I would like to criticise that

With that level of expectation when it comes to realism, I can only hope that you live by your own rules and dont fly the tomcat in DCS, since it is retired irl. Flying a US tomcat in DCS in 2019 is just not realistic. However you can still spawn it on the ground and look at it, if thats what you are into.

Also stop quote mining please.

In a realistic scenario Jester would know Jeff and the systems would be updated aswell. That simple and no realistic way to doubt that.

I would like to criticise that

You literally complained the F-14A isn't getting an IRST that was stricken the instant the TCS was available fleet wide- and for aircraft that never had it installed in the first place.

Remove your pan from the burner and simmer down.

Yes, the -B Tomcat never really had the chance to meet a JF-17 IRL but as has been stated an advanced RWR like the AN/ALR-67 has a software defined library which is used to identify detected emitters. This library would be updated according to current threats in theatre and as DCS allows for these two to meet it's logical to add symbology for it as that's what would happen very quickly IRL if they had ever been anticipated to meet each other.

Let alone Iranian 14A's are still flying around and can meet a 17 in theory.

Else we wouldnt have recorded Jester calling out a spitfire if you lock it either, etc etc...

wait are you saying that they didn't see spitfires? next you would be telling me the final countdown isnt real at all and the tomcat never fought a6m zeros!

why is this even being humored at all? this is a video game where aircraft from all sort of times are mashed together. almost every aircraft in the game would not be able to identify the jf 17 with that sort of logic

for example the f16 is set to 2007 and is national guard which is the year the jf 17 was introduced

does that mean the f16 should not be able to identify the jf 17 in its rwr?

with this line of logic aircraft like the f-5 would not be able to identify almost every single aircraft on its rwr

It would be added if the Tomcat was going to be in a situation where it was fighting JF-17's. So there's no reason why they shouldn't.

No, but it would be still stupid to not add them imo (not calling you stupid, Draconus, I hope that's obvious). While this ofc is not realistic, we still need to take the environment it can be flown in seriously. Else we wouldnt have recorded Jester calling out a spitfire if you lock it either, etc etc... It's still created for DCS and thus it needs the rwr symbology of its opponents and the capability to VID (Jester) any airplane in dcs, etc.. It may not reflect the environment it flew in, but it reflects the environment it flies in today, and that's DCS.

 

We will add it asap.

So whats the NATO identifier for the JF-17? (i.e. flogger for the mig-23 etc)

It would be added if the Tomcat was going to be in a situation where it was fighting JF-17's. So there's no reason why they shouldn't.

Tomacats (2006) were retired before the JF-17 made it into service (2008). So there is that bit of "realism" to consider. But for fantasy scenarios where the Navy budget would have permitted a later retirement or earlier JF-17 development its a good idea. At any rate, I have no problem adding them to the RWR.

wait are you saying that they didn't see spitfires? next you would be telling me the final countdown isnt real at all and the tomcat never fought a6m zeros!

 

 

why is this even being humored at all? this is a video game where aircraft from all sort of times are mashed together. almost every aircraft in the game would not be able to identify the jf 17 with that sort of logic

for example the f16 is set to 2007 and is national guard which is the year the jf 17 was introduced

 

does that mean the f16 should not be able to identify the jf 17 in its rwr?

with this line of logic aircraft like the f-5 would not be able to identify almost every single aircraft on its rwr

Wait, do we have AI zeros? Cuz well... Reasons...

Yes, the -B Tomcat never really had the chance to meet a JF-17 IRL but as has been stated an advanced RWR like the AN/ALR-67 has a software defined library which is used to identify detected emitters. This library would be updated according to current threats in theatre and as DCS allows for these two to meet it's logical to add symbology for it as that's what would happen very quickly IRL if they had ever been anticipated to meet each other.

Would the SD-10 show up as an R-77? Or is it different enough?

What would the JF-17 radar show up as? Is it unique enough or is it used by earlier aircraft?

After a second thought I am satisfied by an explanation that IRL the Tomcat's RWR would probably be updated before the mission if such aircraft are expected and if it's possible.

 

Otoh Jester could at least try to be more surprised by Spitfires flying around ;P

They should re-record any ww2 planes to be comical identifiers the first time he does it. like "wtf is that? are we at an airshow? Thats a spitfire" or something more humorous"

Tomacats (2006) were retired before the JF-17 made it into service (2008). So there is that bit of "realism" to consider. But for fantasy scenarios where the Navy budget would have permitted a later retirement or earlier JF-17 development its a good idea. At any rate, I have no problem adding them to the RWR.

Agreed.:).

With that level of expectation when it comes to realism, I can only hope that you live by your own rules and dont fly the tomcat in DCS, since it is retired irl.

Got a real laugh out of me :megalol:

A scenario with an F-14B and a JF-17 isn't realistic to begin with, so who cares if the RWR library is updated? If you don't like that, just don't put those two aircraft in missions together.

For those of us that participate in PvP on servers that allow any module, this is vital and would be perfectly reasonable that the RWR library would be updated on the real jet if it was still in service.