Does RCS Modifier really works?

[Erwin_Hans]

We had a eel WIP,really a stealth eel...In this eel..we got a problem.

 

I mean,in Per-patched WOE,there are only F-22 Mod is stealth aircraft,with BaseRCSModifier=-0.000001

 

so this meaning never be detected by radar,and this meaning F-22 Mod is a Full Stealth aircraft.

 

But in Patched WOE,the F-117's BaseRCSModifier=0.0000005 and F-35's BaseRCSModifier=0.0010

 

And these two aircraft are stealth too.

 

So,are F-117 and F-35 are able to detected in close distance?

 

And,is this meaning RCS Modifier work crroectly?

 

BTW,EELs

 

http://www.tudou.com/programs/view/uKK4LBP2Ryk/

Edited February 14, 2009 by Erwin_Hans

[+JAT81500]

Hi Erwin, about RCS modifier, i mad many test and i can assure that it works !!

 

It decrease the range of the radar.

[Erwin_Hans]

Hi Erwin, about RCS modifier, i mad many test and i can assure that it works !!

 

It decrease the range of the radar.

 

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

So HeatSignatureModifier=0.0010 works too?

[+JAT81500]

Thanks!

 

 

 

So HeatSignatureModifier=0.0010 works too?

 

I never test it sorry

[Erwin_Hans]

I never test it sorry

 

Also thanks

[+Fubar512]

The RCS value we chose for the F-117 is based on testing it in-game against ground-based missile systems, and against airborne interceptors. A powerful radar will "see" the F-117 at 25 nm, but cannot acquire it (achieve "radar lock"), until it's within 4-5 nm. The only ground-based threat that is deadly at close range, is the SA-10 (S-300).

 

The heat signature value likewise renders that model invisible to all but the closest threats, and even then, 70-80% of IRMs that do manage to initially acquire it, go stupid and lose lock, just after they're launched.

[+lindr2]

BaseRCSModifier=0.0010 is square meters? or multipler coeff for aircraft surface?

 

According russian data

 

RSC:

 

Su-27 Earlly = 15 m^2

 

Late = 10 m^2

 

Su-33 = 12 m^2

 

Su-30MKK = 4-6 m^2

 

Su-35BM ~ 1.5-3 m^2

 

PAK-FA > 0.5 m^2

Edited February 14, 2009 by lindr2

[+Fubar512]

The RCS value used by the series may have been originally intended and coded to use square meters as a reference, but this means nothing to the current avionics code. Effectively, radar can still "see" a target well beyond what it should be able to, so we needed to compromise in this area for game-plays sake. The value we used limits the ability of a radar to lock onto the target, as stated in my earlier post.

[+76.IAP-Blackbird]

Thanks for those interesting infos, never thought this game supports heat detection in this way. RCS was known but not in such a detail. Will it be worth to recheck some planes (all) and add a RCS entry for each?

 

How works ECM, do KI use ECM? Don`t want to hijack this thread I can open a new one.

 

@ Erwin very nice plane, Have this week free time to work on your stuff you`ve send me years ago :-P

[+Fubar512]

Will it be worth to recheck some planes (all) and add a RCS entry for each?

 

Based on my observations, a value of 1.0 is seems to be the standard figure used for F-4 and F-15 sized aircraft, and is quite possibly the default (hard-coded) value in this series.

 

How works ECM, do KI use ECM?

 

 

From what I've seen so far, ECM strength corresponds directly to radar track strength. In other words, if radar track strength is 40, an ECM value of 40 would jam it completely. This would of course be quite unrealistic. In real life, a radar would eventually burn through a jammer's output, mostly due to the focused nature of a radar beam as opposed to the omni-directional signal from a jammer.

 

The AI makes effective use of whatever ECM capability its given.

[Erwin_Hans]

BaseRCSModifier=0.0010 is square meters? or multipler coeff for aircraft surface?

 

According russian data

 

RSC:

 

Su-27 Earlly = 15 m^2

 

Late = 10 m^2

 

Su-33 = 12 m^2

 

Su-30MKK = 4-6 m^2

 

Su-35BM ~ 1.5-3 m^2

 

PAK-FA > 0.5 m^2

 

 

I guess this must be the F**k Economic issues .........

[+lindr2]

I guess this must be the F**k Economic issues .........

 

Accordig FUNDAMENTAL AND APPLIED PROBLEMS STEALTHS-TECHNOLOGIES by A.N.Lagarkov, M.A.Pogosjan

[Lagarkov Andrey Nikolaevich - the member correspondent of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the director of Institute of theoretical and applied electrodynamics of Incorporated institute of heats of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Pogosjan Michael Aslanovich - the member correspondent of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the director of State Unitary Enterprise of an aviation-industrial complex "Sukhoy".

 

RCS:

Tornado F3 - 10 sqM

F-15A - 10 sqM

F-16A - 6 sqM

Mirage-2000C - 6 sqM

F-15C - 4 sqM

Mirage F1-C -3 sqM

F-16C - 3.5 sqM

EF-2000 - 1.5 sqM

F-18E/F - 1.2 sqM

F-35 - 0.07-0.15 sqM

F-22 - 0.06-0.12 sqM

[Silverbolt]

OMG it's the JXX!

you guys are bad!!!!

[+76.IAP-Blackbird]

Jop JXX very nice bird

Edited February 16, 2009 by 76.IAP-Blackbird

[+AleDucat]

So, going back to RCS and IR signature, the BaseRCSModifier=1 equals to a RCS of 10 sq. meters, right? It seams to be the right proportion that will fit the RCS of an Eagle or a Phantom. But what about a much smaller A-4? Or a bigger Tu-22? There is not a RCSModifier at their stock DATA.ini.

 

As Lindr2 says, a multiplier coefficient will make a lot more sense, since the range a small fighter can be "seen" by a given radar is way shorter than the range for a bomber. Maybe we had to ask TK...

 

 

About that F-22 RCS number, it seams highly inaccurate, because there is not a "negative" RCS. I think the right value must be something around 0.0004, if this is a multiplier, or 0.0008 if this is sqm.

F-117 and F-35 RCS, in the other hand, looks fine. The heat signature of the first is almost none, an the second may have a higher/normal one.

 

 

Well, that IMHO.

 

 

 

Alex

[+lindr2]

So, going back to RCS and IR signature, the BaseRCSModifier=1 equals to a RCS of 10 sq. meters, right? It seams to be the right proportion that will fit the RCS of an Eagle or a Phantom. But what about a much smaller A-4? Or a bigger Tu-22? There is not a RCSModifier at their stock DATA.ini.

 

As Lindr2 says, a multiplier coefficient will make a lot more sense, since the range a small fighter can be "seen" by a given radar is way shorter than the range for a bomber. Maybe we had to ask TK...

 

 

About that F-22 RCS number, it seams highly inaccurate, because there is not a "negative" RCS. I think the right value must be something around 0.0004, if this is a multiplier, or 0.0008 if this is sqm.

F-117 and F-35 RCS, in the other hand, looks fine. The heat signature of the first is almost none, an the second may have a higher/normal one.

 

 

Well, that IMHO.

 

 

 

Alex

 

i think RCS equation algoritm must be following:

 

reference Area 78m^2 for f-22, 38 m^2 for MiG-29, 63m^2 for su-27 and divide to 4, it's will be NORMAL RCS. Su-27 : 62/4 ~ 15 M^2

 

But f-22 RCS is ~ 0.06 - 0.1 M^2 then 78/4=19.5 -> 0.1/19.5=0.003 - 0.005

 

For Mig-29SMT/Mig-35 38/4=9.5 RCS Mig_29SMT ~ 0.9 - 1 M^2, 1/9.5 = 0.1

[+JAT81500]

I made a lot of tests on the RCS, what appear is that the size has influence on radar range. Without any RCSmodifier in the data.ini, you detect a bomber at twice the range of a fighter. The range set in the avionic.ini is the detection range of a normal fighter (eg. F-15). It seems that the track range is affect to but in half proportion. I asked TK on the TW forum to know the interaction of all the parameters but he never answer

It's too bad because we could make a database of all the available aircrafts for more realism.

 

A big project !!!

[+FastCargo]

The F-22 for the ThirdWire sims was created and released before the Oct08 patch, which 'activated' the RCS and IR sig modifiers. At the time, the RCS modifier was 'all or nothing', so you had to make a negative number just to somewhat mimic stealth.

 

Now that both modifiers work, like JAT said, a review of all the aircraft are necessary. This may also require a review of radar strengths of most aircraft for the same reason.

 

FC

[+AleDucat]

FastCargo:

F-22: So a little tweak to the DetectSystem will patch that.

 

Post Oct2008 Planes: Well, the all-new Tornado F3 has a RCS=0.03 and IR=0.07... That is a little bit low, I think. Also it's radar strengh and range are too high.

 

 

 

Lindr2:

Cool!

 

So the equation will be...

 

RealLifeRCS/(ReferenceArea/4)

 

For the Tornado F3:

 

10 sqM / (26.6 sqM / 4) = 1.5

 

Auch! Far away from the 0.03... Anyway, I think that this equation is RIGHT.

Edited February 17, 2009 by AleDucat

[+lindr2]

Well, the all-new Tornado F3 has a RCS=0.03 and IR=0.07... That is a little bit low, I think. Also it's radar strengh and range are too high.

 

Do You have this? i Think is Useful Smarter_Radars_for_Hpn.rar

[+AleDucat]

Ammm... Nop, no idea of that, thanks! Looks enteristing

 

While writing my prior post I made an Excel "RCSCalc" with that formula, and with another DATA.ini helpers. I'll post it at Utilities Dowload if you want.

 

 

 

 

PS: A usefull link about Radar Cross Section.

Edited February 17, 2009 by AleDucat

[+Fubar512]

Well, the all-new Tornado F3 has a RCS=0.03 and IR=0.07... That is a little bit low

 

No 'effin way. The Torno should, at best, be slightly better than the default "1.0" RCS value, or about 0.98, and it has no provisions for IR masking (no "beaver tail" or side dam diffusers), so it's IR signature should be left at the default "1.0". In fact, from a side profile, its RCS should be greater than the default, due to its over-sized vertical stabilizer.

[Icarus999]

Great thread thanks guy's, I've been wondering how this worked.

[+lindr2]

Hey Erwin how about Su-39 HeatSignatureModifier?

 

This plane has 'Sokhogruz' Heat Jammer.

 

we can Emulate this with HeatSignatureModifier=0.1 or HeatSignatureModifier=0.05 [need some tests]

 

must something like

 

[DetectSystem]

RadarType=AIR_INTERCEPT

ReferenceName=KOPYO - 25 AIRBORNE RADAR

RangeUnit=KM

RadarAzimuthLimit=40

RadarElevationLimit=40

RadarSearchTime=2.0

RadarSearchRange=100

RadarSearchStrength=150

RadarTrackTime=5.0

RadarTrackRange=70

RadarTrackStrength=150

VisualBlindArc=6

VisualRestrictedArc=4L,5,7,8L

MaxVisibleDistance=8400.0

HasRWR=TRUE

HeatSignatureModifier=0.07

[+kreelin]

The main difficulty about all of this is nobody knows how exactly TK implements thoses values...

So using real life values doesn't make really sense until we can verify the result in game as JAT and Fubar already said (painful work unfortunately).