![]() So if you build a track/ellips it will remain visible for up to 4 minutes even while out of scan limits. A emi tter will only turn green if no emission has been detected for 2 minutes (per manual p. So it will remain displayed on the HAD but the ellips will probably not be refined. But once the HTS establishes a track or ellips it will remember that even though the HTS reached it's scan limits. Now for your experiment I can only guess. This again demonstrates that the HTS scans only +- 60°. All 4 emitters are seen by the AN/ALR-56M. ![]() Again the -65° and -90° are not registered by the HTS and the 0° and -60° (+- 2° (ref 298°) at some points) are registered. ![]() Once at steerpoint 1 I active freezed DCS to obtain static results. The F-16 was spawned in the air at 25.000' due south (true) from steerpoint 1. Aligned at give angles from steerpoint 1. I took a F-16 up in the air with a similar setup as on the ground but simplified. I flew all the way near by them, and I saw at least 9 if not 10 constantly all the times, even behind. I did a test yesterday, I had 10 radars along one side of mine in the length of 80nm. Take the plane up in the air, and do a proper test, not from the ground. It correlates with what I’ve found in my much less scientific observations. At the same time the AN/ALR-56M shows all 11 emitters. k TEST-HTS-FOV.miz Edited May 2 by Sinclair_76Īfter selecting a radar on the HAD I cycled through the various emitters and it looped through the 360° / 030° / 060° / 300° / 330°, ignoring the other emitters. Nevada because I needed as flat terrain and large LOS as possible.ĮDIT: since my bug report has been merged. Track replay as well as miz included for verification. As anything less than 90° requires the platform to fly towards the target/threat at some angle.Īfter testing the HTS FOV within DCS I came to the conclusion it is 120°, 60° left and right.Ī HTS mounted F-16, hot on ground, with 11 Clam Shells (for elevation guaranteeing LOS) at 360° / +-30° / +- 60° / +- 65° / +- 75° / +- 90°Īfter selecting a radar on the HAD I cycled (with TMS right) through the various emitters and it looped through the 360° / 030° / 060° / 300° / 330°, ignoring the other emitters. It does not seem realistic to not have the ability to maintain standoff in a more modern version. Although the HTS variant described is not the R7 (but the R5?). The HTS FOV according Aerospace Power Journal Summer 2002 p11 ( ) is 180° forward sector. So the FOV should be the same (( or more ?)) but more accurate, faster, etc. ![]() I dont know what revision "R" hts was in use at that time, but the latest update to my knowledge was around 2007, the revision 7, HTS R7. Volume 16, Number 2, Summer 2002. Talk about the Kosovo War and the continuing sead challenges, 1998-1999. That en- abled the aircraft’s HARM Targeting System, which provided only a 180-degree field of view in the forward sector, to maintain 100 percent sensor coverage of a target area" "SEAD operations conducted by F-16CJs almost invariably entailed four-ship formations, the spacing of which ensured that the first two aircraft in the flight always looked at a threat area from one side while the other two monitored it from the opposite side. However, according to publicly available information, the HTS has a wide-angle, stabilized sensor system that provides a FOV of approximately 120 degrees in azimuth and elevation. FOV for the HTS AN/ASQ-213 may vary depending on the specific implementation and configuration of the system.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |