DCS: MiG-23MLA by RAZBAM - Page 77 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-24-2019, 11:11 AM   #761
pepin1234
Veteran
 
pepin1234's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,061
Default

It is different. Not same construction technology. Because you see weakness point in western old technology that doesn’t mean this must be present by general rule in Soviet technology. As ECM resistance for example. Exactly the things ED doesn’t simulate 100%.
__________________
pepin1234 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2019, 12:09 PM   #762
foxbat155
Member
 
foxbat155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beamscanner View Post
By western definition, it is a clutter-referenced MTI.

Much discussion of it can be found here: https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/thr...3-avionics.25/ (read down the whole page, and you can see the conclusion is that its not really PD but a unique MTI pulse radar)

Big notes from the link:

-Uses low PRF (True pulse doppler doesn't do this, and low PRF makes doppler completely ambiguous)

-Uses novel MTI technique to separate clutter from moving targets.

-Using a Low PRF means it cannot distinguish doppler or target velocity. Thus, it can indicate moving targets on the scope, but not determine or track doppler. Hence, its not a Pulse Doppler radar.


I know this discussion and I know Mr.Detonator, we had lot of interesting discussions about MiG-21 and 23 on polish forums ( he is from Czech ). You only picked up one of this discussions points of view: which terminology is more correct - Western or Soviet, because in many cases both sides use the same words for differents things. According Soviet terminology RP-23 is a coherent pulse-doppler radar with external coherency. It's uses doppler filters to analyze/process signal, some people says that only radars with internal coherence can be called pulse-doppler but this is only matter of terminology. Technically this radar use doppler techniques only implemented different way, but without those techniques wasn't possible achieve development targets and because doppler filters playing here main role so radar is doppler-pulse.

Last edited by foxbat155; 08-24-2019 at 12:12 PM.
foxbat155 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2019, 01:49 PM   #763
Cyrus
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 35
Default

The external coherence method was one of the weaknesses of the design wasn't it? Quoting Dildy and Cooper's book (Osprey Duel 72) again:

Quote:
For closing targets at or above the “Flogger’s” altitude, the radar could track (“lock onto”) a target inside 18.9nm (35km), which was approximately the maximum range of the R-24R missile when fired head-on at high altitude. To detect targets below the radar’s altitude, the AVM-23 computer used an “external coherence method” to detect a target passing across/through the “clutter” caused by the earth’s radar return (called
“moving target indicator”). This computer process had severe limitations due to numerous “blind zones” in multiples of the radar’s PRF, being able to only detect targets in the duration between successive pulses, and was limited to much shorter detection ranges (16.2nm/30km).
Interesting that the US fielded the much more advanced AN/APG-63, a true pulse-Doppler radar, at the same time.
Cyrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2019, 03:34 PM   #764
Harlikwin
Veteran
 
Harlikwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Living rent free in your mind
Posts: 6,771
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pepin1234 View Post
It is different. Not same construction technology. Because you see weakness point in western old technology that doesn’t mean this must be present by general rule in Soviet technology. As ECM resistance for example. Exactly the things ED doesn’t simulate 100%.
I'd be happy if ED simulated 10%... Just sayin...
__________________
New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)
Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Harlikwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2019, 03:36 PM   #765
Harlikwin
Veteran
 
Harlikwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Living rent free in your mind
Posts: 6,771
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
The external coherence method was one of the weaknesses of the design wasn't it? Quoting Dildy and Cooper's book (Osprey Duel 72) again:


Interesting that the US fielded the much more advanced AN/APG-63, a true pulse-Doppler radar, at the same time.
Based on what I read it also depended on which version of the radar you were talking about. The improved the filtering as time and model numbers went on.

Not really interesting about the APG-63, the US was way ahead in terms of electronics and miniaturization compared to soviet union for the entire cold war. Probably the better comparison would be the F4 radar system.
__________________
New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)
Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Last edited by Harlikwin; 08-24-2019 at 03:41 PM.
Harlikwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2019, 04:44 PM   #766
foxbat155
Member
 
foxbat155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 332
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyrus View Post
The external coherence method was one of the weaknesses of the design wasn't it? Quoting Dildy and Cooper's book (Osprey Duel 72) again:


Interesting that the US fielded the much more advanced AN/APG-63, a true pulse-Doppler radar, at the same time.

I think that biggest weakness of this design was analog computer, probably much slower like digital, but this is radar from end of 60's so complaining is misplaced. F-16's radar is 10 years younger at least, and over that time digital techniques did big step forward. Lot of info in Osprey Dual 72 and many others is just bullshits, even today is hard to get access to full RP-23 documentation. R-24 had almost 50 km range ( not used in Iraq ), target like F-15 was tracked "head on" from distance 60 km ( at med and high altitude ), and one more thing: weapon system of MiG-23MLA is a combination of two systems - radar and IR, and basic metod was hidden observation by IR supported by special low profile radar mode. During tests IR was tracking aircrafts with afterburner typically from 90 km, kind of champion was MiG-25 when flown with afterburners, because TP-26 was able see her from 120 km.
foxbat155 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2019, 07:15 PM   #767
Cyrus
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 35
Default

Given that the opponents encountered by the MiG-23 in real life had much better radar systems, I do not think one should skip over this. BTW, the early versions of the AN/APG-66 appeared already in 1974 following development starting several years prior.

While reliable data is indeed hard to come by, I remain cautious towards the real life ("non-test") implications of these figures, given narratives such as in this well-known interview about the meager performance of the much newer S-31E2 and the R-27R.

BTW I have read that a MiG-25 in afterburner was seen during the Gulf War at a distance of 70 nm by the mk1 eyeball.

Last edited by Cyrus; 08-24-2019 at 07:19 PM.
Cyrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-24-2019, 10:06 PM   #768
foxbat155
Member
 
foxbat155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 332
Default

According pdf you attached, initial serial AN/APG-66 were delivered in June 1978, for comparison RP-23 development started in 1964 and first production radar show up in 1969 with MiG-23 "model 1969" production (RP-23L).
foxbat155 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2019, 03:11 AM   #769
Harlikwin
Veteran
 
Harlikwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Living rent free in your mind
Posts: 6,771
Default

Yeah not a real good comparison to the APG-66, it started development a decade after the Sapfir.

Realistically the best comparisons are to the F4 radars.

There were multiple quantum leaps in terms of radio component/tech/computers development from the mid 60's to the mid70's.
__________________
New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)
Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Harlikwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-25-2019, 08:47 AM   #770
Cyrus
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 35
Default

One has to keep in mind that the rapid advances in electronics and computers occurred mainly on one side of the world.

Nonetheless, I feel the comparison to the APG-63 and APG-66 is fair, as 1) these systems were installed in contemporary aircraft, with the MiG-23MLA remaining in production through 1982, 2) more important, the MiG-23 of various versions encountering hostile aircraft equipped with these radars in combat.

Then, what is the point of it all? As said, I think the MiG-23MLA module will most likely shine in the Cold War MP servers instead of the general servers, given the relative obsolescence already affecting certain systems when the aircraft was only just rolling of the assembly line. Notwithstanding the previous statement, I do look forward to adding this plane to the stable.

Last edited by Cyrus; 08-25-2019 at 08:58 AM.
Cyrus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 09:26 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.