[WIP] Radar can´t be notched

[Neuse]

Idk if it is on purpose or a bug but currently the Radar of the JF17 is the only radar in game which can´t be notched. You will never loose track even if the target goes at a perfect angle and low.

Can we get a statement if this is intended?

 

Thx guys.

Edited March 4, 2020 by uboats

[shaHeen-1]

You have to provide compelling evidence since I drop lock every ten seconds or so even when target hot and high.

[Neuse]

Whatever you do wrong, this has nothing to do with notching.

Edited February 14, 2020 by Neuse

[foxwxl]

Plz attach the ACMI to further support the investigation, thank U.

[AeriaGloria]

You have to provide compelling evidence since I drop lock every ten seconds or so even when target hot and high.

 

Probably unrelated I have noticed it dropping TWS track from violent maneuvers on JF-17 end, pretty cool, it’s as if the track prediction gets thrown off by inaccuracies of the INS while it is compensating for your maneuvers and calculating the TWS file position. Still a novelty to have such deeply modeled TWS:)

[Tiger-II]

Why do I sense another Jeff basher?

 

Was the RADAR in STT when you tried to break lock?

[Neuse]

Why would i bash the plane i love and fly the most? Stop such accusations...people like you are the reason many guys don´t even bother coming here.

Im simply asking the devs if its intended as the radar is quite modern.

If you lock a target soft or hard and he goes in a notch (90 degree, below you, even slow)you should loose lock and i never seem to do so.

Ans yes im aware you lose lock often...but that´s problems with the groundstabilisation like the guys above me postet and not from notching

Edited February 24, 2020 by Neuse

[Keks]

Why would i bash the plane i love and fly the most? Stop such accusations...people like you are the reason many guys don´t even bother coming here.

 

Says the dude who just states something and refuses to provide evidence like a track file.

 

 

Im simply asking the devs if its intended as the radar is quite modern.

 

Since the jet is "quite modern" I would freaking hope so. I dont even get why someone would assume that the radar shoul not be quite modern or has concerns of the radar being quite modern in a jet with a full glas cockpit :music_whistling:

 

If you lock a target soft or hard and he goes in a notch (90 degree, below you, even slow)you should loose lock and i never seem to do so.

 

First of all thats only half true, second please provide a track file.

[Neuse]

Idk what you want. People do not stay away from here because of guys reporting stuff. Its because you get bashed by random forum trolls in threads they are not even intended to write in.

I give the devs the hind. The rest is theirs to figure if intended or not. Noone asked a random 3rd party dude for their opinion...thats not the point of the reports.

Uboats knows what notching is and can easily test it without the help of a random forum dude.

There is no need to make tons of vids and files for stuff that can be reproduced without problems.

Just because the radar is modern it doesn't neesecarily mean it cant be notched but it ofc might be possible somehow or i might just be wrong...hence im asking them kindly to test it.

If they decide not to check it for a missing file so be it...still no reason for the random "dont nerf ma plane" troll to leave his irrelevant comments in the bug section.

Edited February 24, 2020 by Neuse

[Drona]

Pls provide the track file

[AeriaGloria]

Idk what you want. People do not stay away from here because of guys reporting stuff. Its because you get bashed by random forum trolls in threads they are not even intended to write in.

I give the devs the hind. The rest is theirs to figure if intended or not. Noone asked a random 3rd party dude for their opinion...thats not the point of the reports.

Uboats knows what notching is and can easily test it without the help of a random forum dude.

There is no need to make tons of vids and files for stuff that can be reproduced without problems.

Just because the radar is modern it doesn't neesecarily mean it cant be notched but it ofc might be possible somehow or i might just be wrong...hence im asking them kindly to test it.

If they decide not to check it for a missing file so be it...still no reason for the random "dont nerf ma plane" troll to leave his irrelevant comments in the bug section.

 

You should really post a track if you see it happen a lot, they should already be saved on your computer. It’s not just a blind test, the developer, perhaps Uboats, gets to see almost exactly what you are seeing. Foxwl also mentioned a tacview would help also. You started the thread, you saw all the sticky threads by uboats to attach a track and log? Sure some things can be shown with a picture, but in order to know exactly what’s happening to you it’s pretty important. If you really want to report this bug and make it easier for the devs you should post them, there’s a reason it’s stickied multiple times at the top of the sub forum to attach log and track by no other then uboats themself

Edited February 24, 2020 by AeriaGloria

[Harlikwin]

Part of the whole notching thing is that people think its an actual "real" radar behavior.

 

At best its an oversimplification. Its true on say the AWG-9, the literal first pulse doppler radar. And since its from the 60's, its got a "yuuuuge" doppler notch gate +/- 100kts or some crazy thing.

 

Modern radars, not so much. They build track files, they look for targets they loose, and the Doppler gates are much smaller, and the filtering and prediction is much more sophisticated. So it should be relatively hard to break locks from modern radars (without help from ECM, which isn't modeled in DCS to that level anyway).

 

All that being said, I've seen guys break the tws locks I have in the JF17. So its certainly do-able.

[foxwxl]

Plz do note that, modern radar DO have a COAST/MEM function, so it's not that once U met the doppler gate and the radar will definitely drop the track at once. And like Harlikwin said, the modern radar's doppler gate is much smaller than the AWG9.

 

So if U want to notch the radar, U have to be precise (to enter the gate) and hide in the gate for a moment (to aviod COAST/MEM function), this is not easy for a random MP fight.

[Tiger-II]

If you do actually own the product, then I'm sorry for assuming you to be another Jeff basher.

 

The SD-10 discussion here has been pretty wild ever since release, not least because "Blue Air" pilots were getting their asses handed to them by the first properly modeled modern Red Air.

 

The RADAR in the Jeff is based off the APG-68 (hint: the US helped them develop it before pulling out of the program). This is an even better RADAR than flown in the F-16 (APG-66).

 

I would hope a modern fighter like the JF-17 had a much greater resistance to notching than you're suggesting.

[shaHeen-1]

I'm not gna lie many of the blue guys who fly on growling sidewinder server are just bots. The only time I seem to die there is when I insist on using PL5s. They haven't figured out that they can fly higher than 5k.maybe their AI will improve XD. Losing 8 f16/8s for two fox2 jeff's is not a good look. This is with radar issues and whatnot.

[Harker]

It's not an issue of the radar as much as a result of what some other people said: you're not tracking a raw radar return; you're generating a trackfile and tracking that, updating it as you get radar returns and interpolating it while you wait for the updates. At least according to my knowledge.

And so it's might appear that you're tracking an aircraft in the notch continuously, but that's just the interpolation of the trackfile on your radar scope. If the target exits the notch quickly enough and is around its expected position, you keep tracking it, otherwise you drop the trackfile. The Hornet, for example, clearly shows if a trackfile is interpolated-only, by displaying MEM on the radar scope and making the TD box on the HUD dashed. I don't remember if the JF-17 has a specific indication like that though, I haven't flown it in A2A for a while.

And btw, the APG-66 is on the F-16A/B, the F-16C that DCS models has the APG-68(V)5. And the Hornet has the APG-73 Phase II, which is even better (or at least more sophisticated).

[Harlikwin]

The RADAR in the Jeff is based off the APG-68 (hint: the US helped them develop it before pulling out of the program). This is an even better RADAR than flown in the F-16 (APG-66).

 

Um, not really sure where you are getting that the KLJ-7 was based off the 68, everything I've read says its based of various Phazatron designs from the 90's.

[Keks]

I give the devs the hind. The rest is theirs to figure if intended or not. Noone asked a random 3rd party dude for their opinion...thats not the point of the reports.

 

 

There seems to be a missunderstanding. You dont have reported anything yet. You have literally done nothing that is worth a devs time, because you did not provide a track file.

 

Right now you are a random dude just stating your opinion. If you want to report something, the way is not to call everyone else explaining stuff to you a troll.

 

At this point, you are the troll unless you provide some evidence that your issue exists. For me there is no other explanation why you dont want to do that besides the two options given allready.

 

As others have pointed out allready just because you are flying at 90° for a split second does not mean you have defeated a radar. Esp. not when there is nothing else to confuse the radar.

[Harlikwin]

There seems to be a missunderstanding. You dont have reported anything yet. You have literally done nothing that is worth a devs time, because you did not provide a track file.

 

Right now you are a random dude just stating your opinion. If you want to report something, the way is not to call everyone else explaining stuff to you a troll.

 

At this point, you are the troll unless you provide some evidence that your issue exists. For me there is no other explanation why you dont want to do that besides the two options given allready.

 

As others have pointed out allready just because you are flying at 90° for a split second does not mean you have defeated a radar. Esp. not when there is nothing else to confuse the radar.

 

I'll add that its nearly impossible to fly 90 deg off axis for any real length of time unless you are in constant turn maintaining it, which while not impossible is very difficult to do because the rate of that turn will vary based on range and angle off, both are constantly changing. Of course if you have huge gaping notch like that AWG-9 its kinda doable.

[SaNdMaN_9118]

[WIP] JF-17 radar being impossible to Notch

 

Hi

 

At this point, the JF's radar is being impossible to notch, is it a bug or something I'm missing?

 

Edited March 14, 2020 by uboats

[Bl00dWolf]

Yap, that is NOT ok.

[Oceandar]

Yeah, I have reported it while ago in a post on other thread. Someone said to me you have to consider your speed to not too fast when doing it. I havent tested it. But the Jeff has hard time detecting helo flying below certain speed so it may have something to do with it (shrug)

[Skarp]

Could be it’s just too modern. Not sure how good the latest and greatest filters are.

[AeriaGloria]

As soon as someone uploads a track the devs will look at it. It can’t see slow things like helicopters, but per foxwxl it should have a very accurate memory system https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=263310

[Mikeck]

Jf-17 Radar can’t be notched?

 

Interesting test on the JF-17. It’s radar cannot he notched.

 

 

 

Now this is my own very biased opinion. There’s just not alot of UNBIASED test data available on the JF...as far as I know. There is performance and avionics capabilities of this aircraft from the manufacturer (Chinese government) or those who benefit from the use of the aircraft and possible exaggeration of claims (or maybe not) . So I don’t know where the devs got the data to create the flight model and avionics. BUT, I have to wonder how a nation that is still not capable of building a modern high-performance jet engine (so they use a reverse engineered version of an old SU-27 export engine) can put together an aircraft that can outperform an F-16 in ACM, has a radar more powerful than an F-18 and uses missiles that seem to outperform the AIM-120. An infrared launch-detecting MWR that can detect ANY missile within 5 miles (whether or not it’s burning...See Reapers test)

 

So, we have a radar that can’t be notched (hoping it’s a bug)and an mWR that violates laws of physics and can detect missile burn after the missile stopped burning. Obviously a bug

 

I’m not suggesting China can’t build a great plane...just that they rely a lot on reverse engineering and stolen data (like half the F-35). Since there is a lack of testing on performance and -unlike every other module- any error in capability falls to the side of better performance, it seems.....hmm. The tinfoil hat part of me sees this as a way to shoe-horn in a domestic Chinese aircraft that can compete....with a little wink*wink* nod*nod* to performance

 

Again, my biased opinion taken as such. It just made me grouchy b/c of my biases and I admit that. Just curious if anyone knows where they got the performance data and if anyone else feels the same or I’m wrong

Edited March 14, 2020 by Mikeck