Mirage Radar dropping tracks in multi-bar search mode.

I have the same absurd behaviour with the radar, thanks for taking your time to upload this video.

Moving the antenna to a far side blinks contacts on the opposite side.

I simply cannot understand how this is realistic or an accurate reproduction of the RDI.

I can't imagine this being realistic behaviour, or else the AdA pilots flying this plane need to have amazing skills and/or glue their eyes to the radar screen; blink at the wrong moment and you miss a radar contact.

TWS working in 4 bars?

And 15-degree scan which works like a 60-degree scan?

Yeah, the new radar implementation still has a lot of WIP bugs.

It's horrible at the moment and takes away a lot of fun. :/

I cannot understand how this is normal. Is any real m2k pilot confirmed? Because this is quite dangerous in case you are not stick on the radar. What is the benefit of the 4 bar scanning? I have an uncle who used to be an instructor on m2ks. If i will meet him i will ask him!

The only way I'm able to somehow use RWS/TWS/STT for fighter size target is 1-bar scan with 15-degrees azimuth scan cone and loooots of antenna movement (azimuth and especially elevation). Multibar scan can be scratched completely, wider azimuth scan cones are also seeming ineffective.

I can not understand the logic behind the real radar engineers if that is exactly the correct way how it operates.

Why? Because regardless the targets altitude or range, you never see them than a second. Your 4-bar mode is completely useless really. Why?

1) You have no memory mode, like instantly the radar sweeps back to perform the other bar (comes from 2nd bar with targets and completes 3rd bar scan) the targets found are gone when 4th bar scan starts. Why does the radar reset its memory so quickly?

2) If 1 and 2 bar scans are not overlapping, who does design then a 4th bar scan pattern to be such that every bar scan overlaps each other by a half? Like seriously? Doesn't the engineer want to maximize the volume height that the radar is scanning, as that is likely the reason why the fighter pilot wants to do in first place? And then make the radar sweep second time the same volume, ignore all the targets that it has found on the previous volume it is overstepping and then not memorizing what it detects on this round.

Like, if you are going to overlap by 50% the previous scanned volume height, why you do not then simply show the echo/ghost of the previous one regardless is it the same or not, and let pilot then decide to scan that area more carefully with 1 or 2 bar mode?

Why to waste the time scanning same volume by second time, while limiting the total volume height radar can scan without starting to change the radar tilt angle up/down? That is more like a 2.5-bar scan that 4-bar scan, with blinking targets that are unusable for any target detection, situational awareness assessment, target tracking, target locking and not helping pilot to do anything else than use just 2-bar mode!

So question really is, did the Dassault engineers (or who designed that radar) be so bad in their job that as they couldn't get their radar logic work past 2-bars scan (one time left to right, drop one beam height down and go from right to left) to meet the required specifications for 4-bars, so they made a half-baked "2.5-bars" scan mode that is not doing anything else than forcing pilot to keep using 2-bars, but at least they got "The radar features a 1-, 2- and 4-bar scan modes. But only on paper!"

Please notice, this is not at all against the Razbam as they do what someone tells them to do, this is query about the logic for Dassault radar engineers that what has been the reason and logic why that radar 4-bar functionality works completely differently than 1-bar or 2-bar modes? You can't even see any of the added new symbols (target being reached or getting away by arrow direction, additional wing tips if target is at first or last bar detection).

There is an ongoing discussion about how Elwood is implementing the radar operation on the Razbam Discord server for several days now. You could find there the answers you are looking for.

Wasnt it a 0.5 degree overlap?

And yes you can see the new symbols, Ive encountered them multiple times.

I wonder if this is actually a bug? With memory on the contacts, then especially in close range and heavy maneuvering, this/these contacts would not be a very true representation, until the next sweep/update, and you could be trying to lock ghosts. At least with the current functionality, you always know what you get, and in close (where the party is at with this bird) when you have selected your target, you just go into narrow azimuth and 1 bar scan, and its not disappearing, plus you wont be chasing ghosts.

 

The almighty AWG-9 in the Tomcat has TWS restrictions. You wont get sufficient data in wide search pattern with 4-6 bars, you have to be in narrower search etc. Plus this RDI, how old is the one we are simulation? 1984 when fine tuned, but otherwise from late 70's? Its probably a quite limited unit, compared to what we have been used to. Plus its made for intercepts, so you would focus on a single or small group of contacts with narrow search and 1 bar probably.

 

Im not surprised if this is actually intended functionality. But Id admit, as a 'creative freedom' I would fade contacts out over say 2-3 seconds. So when a contact is updated its at its strongest and then it immediately starts fading out over set time etc. Maybe not as design function but perhaps to simulated after glow (is it a cathode tube actually?).

I'm pretty sure its not intended. Imagine this: the radar needs just a second to scan one bar if the radar has no mem function you have only this one second to actualy lock the target. I can't belive this how the french designed there radar.

There is an ongoing discussion about how Elwood is implementing the radar operation on the Razbam Discord server for several days now. You could find there the answers you are looking for.

IRC channel #dontcare on irc.freenet.org server has better information about that....

I miss mIRC.

There is an ongoing discussion about how Elwood is implementing the radar operation on the Razbam Discord server for several days now. You could find there the answers you are looking for.

Link to that server please? I'm not able to find it in the directory.

Link to that server please? I'm not able to find it in the directory.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3796528&postcount=22

FUN challenge

Hi all

In the last couple of weeks I have been frustrated just like manu of you about the difficulty to find the ennemies on the radar and to keep them visible there...

Of course, one could say that we have been spoiled with either 'magical' radars (Lockon or FC3 style) or just more accurate BUT much more modern: F18 and now F16... As some people mentioned here, the Mirage's radar is much older...

Just made a quick experimental mission with F10 menu that spawns different enemy groups (hi, medium, low alt, far, close, hot, cold, flanking, etc...) and tried the radar settings more seriously... It is very cumbersome if one has to look down on the left side to find the switches (under the throttle) in order to try 1-2-4 bars, etc... I am sure in the real aircraft, pilots do this by feel just like we use our wipers or cruise control in our car:-)

Then, I mapped 6 keys of my keyboard (close to my left hand) with 1-2-4 bar scan and 15-30-60 degrees azimuth scan! and I tried my mission again using these settings (together with the range + or - and the antenna elevation + or - that are already bound to my HOTAS) and it was great fun because actually it feels like hunting!

I start wide and with 4 bars, far in front, and contacts appear briefly but like ghosts disappear as quickly... then, I switch quickly to 30 degrees azimuth scan in their direction, adjust the antenna range and go 2 bars scan or even 1 bar scan and I can keep them now and focus on them... really a lot of fun (and challenge!)... really like hunting!

IRC channel #dontcare on irc.freenet.org server has better information about that....

LOFL...

Hi all

 

In the last couple of weeks I have been frustrated just like manu of you about the difficulty to find the ennemies on the radar and to keep them visible there...

 

Of course, one could say that we have been spoiled with either 'magical' radars (Lockon or FC3 style) or just more accurate BUT much more modern: F18 and now F16... As some people mentioned here, the Mirage's radar is much older...

 

Just made a quick experimental mission with F10 menu that spawns different enemy groups (hi, medium, low alt, far, close, hot, cold, flanking, etc...) and tried the radar settings more seriously... It is very cumbersome if one has to look down on the left side to find the switches (under the throttle) in order to try 1-2-4 bars, etc... I am sure in the real aircraft, pilots do this by feel just like we use our wipers or cruise control in our car:-)

 

Then, I mapped 6 keys of my keyboard (close to my left hand) with 1-2-4 bar scan and 15-30-60 degrees azimuth scan! and I tried my mission again using these settings (together with the range + or - and the antenna elevation + or - that are already bound to my HOTAS) and it was great fun because actually it feels like hunting!

 

I start wide and with 4 bars, far in front, and contacts appear briefly but like ghosts disappear as quickly... then, I switch quickly to 30 degrees azimuth scan in their direction, adjust the antenna range and go 2 bars scan or even 1 bar scan and I can keep them now and focus on them... really a lot of fun (and challenge!)... really like hunting!

Interesting discussion. And I agree, I think people will be frustrated by "realism" when its less effective than FC3 or the pervious radar model. But I want realism, and I assume this 80's version radar is gonna be way less capable than an APG-73 or APG68(v5?).

In terms of tracks an memory though, it seems like it could/should have some sort of target memory since it does have TWS mode. Maybe its still WIP.

I can not understand the logic behind the real radar engineers if that is exactly the correct way how it operates.

 

Why? Because regardless the targets altitude or range, you never see them than a second. Your 4-bar mode is completely useless really. Why?

 

1) You have no memory mode, like instantly the radar sweeps back to perform the other bar (comes from 2nd bar with targets and completes 3rd bar scan) the targets found are gone when 4th bar scan starts. Why does the radar reset its memory so quickly?

 

2) If 1 and 2 bar scans are not overlapping, who does design then a 4th bar scan pattern to be such that every bar scan overlaps each other by a half? Like seriously? Doesn't the engineer want to maximize the volume height that the radar is scanning, as that is likely the reason why the fighter pilot wants to do in first place? And then make the radar sweep second time the same volume, ignore all the targets that it has found on the previous volume it is overstepping and then not memorizing what it detects on this round.

 

Like, if you are going to overlap by 50% the previous scanned volume height, why you do not then simply show the echo/ghost of the previous one regardless is it the same or not, and let pilot then decide to scan that area more carefully with 1 or 2 bar mode?

Why to waste the time scanning same volume by second time, while limiting the total volume height radar can scan without starting to change the radar tilt angle up/down? That is more like a 2.5-bar scan that 4-bar scan, with blinking targets that are unusable for any target detection, situational awareness assessment, target tracking, target locking and not helping pilot to do anything else than use just 2-bar mode!

 

So question really is, did the Dassault engineers (or who designed that radar) be so bad in their job that as they couldn't get their radar logic work past 2-bars scan (one time left to right, drop one beam height down and go from right to left) to meet the required specifications for 4-bars, so they made a half-baked "2.5-bars" scan mode that is not doing anything else than forcing pilot to keep using 2-bars, but at least they got "The radar features a 1-, 2- and 4-bar scan modes. But only on paper!"

 

Please notice, this is not at all against the Razbam as they do what someone tells them to do, this is query about the logic for Dassault radar engineers that what has been the reason and logic why that radar 4-bar functionality works completely differently than 1-bar or 2-bar modes? You can't even see any of the added new symbols (target being reached or getting away by arrow direction, additional wing tips if target is at first or last bar detection).

1) I think there should be a memory mode. But remember no one would ever need more than 640k in 1984 ;)

What I know about every other radar in fighters that has bars, the picture gets updated only after the pattern is completed. So if target is at bar 2 altitude, then radar needs to scan through 1-4 bars until it updates the radar scope.

It just doesn't make sense that the Mirage radar will scan a bar 2, include the target right away in that bar, and then after completing the bar 3 it forgets that what it saw in bar 2. And you need to wait that radar scans bars 4 and 1 again until it detects target again at bar 2 and forgets at bar 3.

What really makes 4-bar mode so terrible compared to 2-bar or 1-bar?

As 2-bar should then be flickering as well, and only 1-bar be constant update.

So it looks that mirage radar only can detect and show target data that it found on previous and current bar.

Yes guys this is not a bug but bow the radar works. Try to use 2-bar more often, you will see the difference.

current implementation is very much how real one works. So, don't expect much. You need to learn to use it or jump on more modern fighter for more help from the software.

 

 

 

Please wait for coming manual and guide, then we can talk more about RDI without having to explain the whole system in chat or here.

P.s.

 

Maybe one day someone will release the module documentation before everything else.

I too thought it was a bug but it's been confirmed by the devs that it's not.