Jump to content

AvroLanc

Members
  • Posts

    1189
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by AvroLanc

  1. The recently 'fixed' Offset aimpoint logic is still not working correctly I'm afraid.

    The OA logic was recently fixed to now always provide CCRP steering (and TD box SPI) to the target Steerpoint rather than the Offset location. Which is correct...thankyou...

    ....however any slews you make to the OA1 point now don't behave right. The expected behaviour is that any radar slews you make in OA1 will have a matching and corresponding slew movement to the Steerpoint (i.e TD box/target) location. This is the very essence of offset bombing and the very reason for the OA1/2 feature.

    What happens instead is that the selected Steerpoint remains fixed in location and the slew you make now defines NEW offset location data in the DEST page. This is obviously completely opposite of what should be happening - the OFFSET data should be fixed and the slew should move/define the new target location.

    In my test the offset is at the tip of the island, the target is SP1. From measuring in the ME, the offset is at a distance of 20142ft and 222M from the planned target. You can see that when I slew over the desired island tip, those OA figures are updated when they shouldn't be - but the Steerpoint refuses to move.... (I've purposely set the Steerpoint away from the true target in the ME, to simulate INS drift and the actual need for radar correction).

    (Also, I believe the OA data should be in degrees TRUE, but the system is working in MAGNETIC, but that doesn't affect the above behaviour is just an observation.)  

    Thanks.

    F16 OA Bug.trk

    • Like 1
  2. There seems to be errors with the ALTITUDE HOLD functions with the latest OB patch.

    1. The box around the RADAR ALTITUDE digital readout (IHADSS and FLT page) now doesn't appear with ALT HOLD engaged.

    2. BARO HOLD doesn't work at all. No engagement, no EUFD advisory, no box around altitude readout. 

    3. RAD ALT HOLD is now rubbish, doesn't really work well.

     

    Screen_220728_175156.jpg

    • Like 8
  3. 1 hour ago, Raptor9 said:

    This isn't correct behavior. The one and only time that the Pilot's range source mirrors the CPG's is if the CPG has actioned rockets on the TEDAC grip and the pilot has actioned rockets as well in COOP mode. Under these conditions, whatever the CPG's range source is (laser, nav, auto, manual, default) that range source/value will be mirrored in the Pilot's symbology.

    All other instances the range sources should always independent.

    Reported. Thanks.

    OK, thanks. Nice to know.

    So my hunch about COOP mode was correct. Clearly it was feature ED intended as a COOP mode feature but the code got passed along to every instance of CPG ranging.

  4. COOP is a Rocket mode and not Gun, so there's the first issue. When you WAS the GUN you get ROUNDS XXX. This alone tells you that you've got GUN selected (at least IHADSS indication).

    ACQ SOURCE is irrelevant to the SIGHT and aiming weapons so you can ignore that too. You can't have TADS as sight as the Pilot, so you can't fire at the TADS target as the pilot.

    I imagine the issue is that the GUN is automatically selecting MANUAL range when you WAS it (this is correct behavior), so the 'boresight' value is something like 1500m by default. You can change your manual range to match the target range, or just let CPG handle any targets seen in the TADS.

     

  5. With the latest OB there's a new bug with the Range Source sharing.

    With the TADS Laser firing/active, the laser range now overrides/has priority over any range the PILOT has selected. This should not happen. The PLTs range source should be independent from the CPGs and the PLTs IHADSS should never show an active laser range. 

    You can see in my track this independent behavior is definitely not the case anymore. You can only get control of the range when the laser stops firing. At this point any other range can be set normally (Manual or NAV range for example). 

    This is a problem because you now can't simultaneously engage a target with GUN (with Manual range), while the CPG works a TADS target. WASing the GUN with the laser firing now has a grossly incorrect range. (In the future the pilot should be able to use FCR Range for his own target independently as well, this bug will prevent that every time the CPG shoots the laser.)

    Initially I noticed this during CO-OP rockets. This is the only particular case when the laser range sharing makes sense, and would actually be quite useful. I initially thought maybe it was an intended feature, and maybe it still is for COOP rockets (the bug being it got carried over to all ranging), but it most likely isn't.

    Please see short track. Thanks.

     

    (Edit: I guess there's a small chance this might be correct behavior but I'd like ED/SME to confirm)

    PLT LASER.jpg

    PLT LASER BUG.trk

    • Like 3
  6. 10 hours ago, Fromthedeep said:

    The F-16 is without question the best product by ED and it's not even a comparison really.

    Lol, the F-16 is undoubtably EDs poorest module, at least of those released in the last 5 years. 
    Almost every system and feature is only partially implemented and there’s a ton of errors and mistakes in what there is implemented. It’s slowly improving but it remains the poor step child of the litter. It was rushed out on the basis of the Hornets success and hasn’t yet shaken off that dubious start.

    I want to love it, but just can’t. Fortunately the Hind, Mosquito and particularly the Apache are excellent and show what ED is actually capable of. 

    • Like 5
  7. Well you can't physically wear NVGs and the IHADSS reticle at the same time. So yeah it's realistic. The motion sensors still work even when IHADSS is stowed though- so you can still roughly point when using PHS or GHS as Acq source. Also, you can look below NVGs to view MFDs. Try using PNVS as the video underlay (even FIXED forward) with P-FLT symbology on left MFD when using NVGs. You then get both image types. Kinda neat.  

    AH-64E Apache Guardian has a newer PNVS that combines light amplification and thermal, so you do indeed get best of both worlds, but obviously not our 'D' model.

  8. 31 minutes ago, FalcoGer said:

    maybe i did something wrong. would you care to check?

    Ah yeah....the rings only work for those THREATs which come from pre-planned (not set to 'hidden') in the ME. You're trying to dynamically create a threat (with rings) in game - which absolutely should work IRL - but doesn't at the moment. ED need to correct this, I think it's been acknowledged, but not sure whether planned.

  9. 10 minutes ago, FalcoGer said:

    I did. I see the threat markers, but no rings.

    Bug report with track file here:

     

     

    The SA8 and SA15 rings are definitely in. I’ve used them. Some threat systems don’t seem to have them yet. 
    Dunno what else to suggest. 
     

  10. 1 minute ago, FalcoGer said:

    I popped down an SA5, SA8 and SA15 threat point, turned the rings on for Threat and ACQ and I get no rings.

    Go into the COORDS sub section of the SHOW menus and select THREATS there as well. 

  11. 1 hour ago, FalcoGer said:

    On the digital map, one may add shading for various points to indicate visibility, such as targets/threats. This will shade in the digital map in different colors to indicate the visibility from those points. This would be really helpful to plan routes or battle positions.

    Right now the buttons are present, but don't do anything.

    Same with threat rings. They do not appear.

     

    Agree on the VIS rings, but most threat rings are already in. Although it seems the non-radar threats don’t have rings programmed yet. 

  12. 7 hours ago, FalcoGer said:

    On the TSD main page, several buttons are missing as evidenced by [Rule 1.16]

    • RPT (Report page) to send messages and request messages
    • REC (Receive) to view received messages
    • JAM to switch jammer between standby and oper (only displayed when jammer is on)

    I'm aware those features are not yet implemented, however other not yet implemented features such as FARM reports in the COORD page are barred out instead of missing.

    As you say, the REC and JAM labels rely on stuff that hasn’t been implemented. JAM only displayed when the Jammer is powered and REC only when there’s a (unread?) message in the IDM list. So excusable that they’re not there yet and/or not displayed.

    RPT page is an important part of the datalink functionality though and I hope that it’s merely not been added yet. It’s the primary way of sending whole lists of waypoint/targets/FCR targets etc rather than just individual points one at a time. Hopefully it does get added when datalink is implemented (because ED could, in theory, simplify the IDM mechanism and not add it). 

  13. 6 minutes ago, Frederf said:

    That sounds like incorrect modeling. Once the weapon is powered it should remain powered. Selected shouldn't matter. What if a bandit pops up at the IP and you have to choose missiles for a moment?

    Again, you only loose power/alignment if you specifically ‘deselect’ using the OSB button next to the weapon name. 

    You can go ahead and select an AA weapon using the HOTAS, or even select another bomb type, you can then return to the JDAM, just don’t press the OSB next to an already boxed JDAM. ….And this seems to be correct from looking at a leaked JDAM manual online. 

    • Like 2
    • Thanks 1
  14. 13 minutes ago, JesseJames38 said:

    When ever I have this issue.   I find the easiest way to fix it is.   As a pilot ‘was’ the hellfire your self and then move your head around the target being laser.   To me what I think is happening, when George is in control of the hellfire the missile seeker head is stuck.  And for some reason when the weapon is ‘was’ by the pilot the missile seeker fallows the pilots head position tell it locates the laser energy.   
     

     


    Yeah,this demonstrates what the problem probably is.

    The problem is the the Seeker head doesn’t get re-slaved to the TADS line of sight when in DIR mode. LO/HI should look straight ahead but in DIR the next missile seeker head should get slaved to the TADS LOS….and for some reason, it sometimes doesn’t. This is one criteria for the MSL NOT READY inhibit.

    Its most obvious when the look down angle between missile rail and TADS LOS is high, I.e when you’re a few hundred feet or more above the target.

    When hovering at 50’ and the LOS is flat the seeker heads can more easily pick up the laser, even when they’re incorrectly slaved (I presume straight ahead).

    I think a lase and re-lase should force the seeker to follow TADS LOS, but it often doesn’t (or at all). I find a pitch up or down or wiggle left or right is needed, but this is not a good workaround.

     

     

     

  15. 6 hours ago, 18174019964 said:

     

    Any book name? PLZ

    By Salamander Books, Author Mike Spick

    Nothing really that revolutionary, but a nice collection of books from the 80's. Don't make 'em like this anymore.

    f14.jpg

  16. None of the functionality works. Except you can view the channel numbers you’ve entered for the AIC, FF1, FF2, MIDS A, MIDS B. 

    Only MIDS voice A and B would be of interest, and only in multiplayer….if you set up SRS to use them. There was talk of AI being able to use MIDS voice, but it came to nothing.

    Maybe….the viper might be getting the ability to configure MIDS networks and this might make its way to Hornet, but again, believe it when you see it.

     

  17. 59 minutes ago, FalcoGer said:

    It's not unreasonable to think that there are 50 manpads strewn about in a large city. And suddenly you got yourself 50 threat points on your hand. I like to fly on rotorheads. People deploy air defenses on captured positions and throughout the map. There really are a lot of units. It's also not unreasonable to deploy 2 or 3 AAAs, 2 or 3 short range sam systems and a long range sam on an airport. and suddenly you already have 7 threat points. You do that with 5 airports and place a few around in other places and you're already full on the threat file. I think you exagerage.

     

    OK, but the issue is not the Apache's system, it's the gamey-ness of DCS.

    The fact remains that the Air Defense symbols (threats) are always red, blue is not an option. Which was your original query.

    Friendly Air defense would not be plotted as threats, that's an ED thing and there needs to be a way of pre-planning CM's in the ME. No idea how this would work for multi-player, but you certainly wouldn't plot every MANPADS either. Remember there are only 50 target/threats slots available total. In real life you wouldn't plot every air defense site in the theatre (Friendly OR Enemy), only the ones likely to impact your specific area of operations / route.

    In the meantime, you can delete a few to free up space.

    • Like 2
  18. 38 minutes ago, Floyd1212 said:

    Ok, now let's assume there are 50 of them.  And to delete them you either have to type in their Txx number, or cursor click on them.  Then let's assume that the list the PLT sees is different from the list the CPG sees, and deleting them for one doesn't delete them for the other.

    Well, it's an option as a workaround currently. What kind of missions are you playing with 50 active friendly AD sites? Crazy unrealistic MP servers? There's only target 50 slots available total.

    The simple fact is that adding Control Measures into the ME isn't available yet, and who knows when it will be.

    I agree that ED needs to make FRIENDLY AD not appear on the Threats list. If you're making the mission yourself, you could set the unit to 'hidden' and that would also serve as a simple 'temporary' work around.

  19. I’ve certainly seen it. 

    It happens when TADS is the selected sight and Gun is actioned and slewed. 

    It’s no doubt related to the addition of the TSE function, since the gun does micro jerks at the same time the COINCIDENCE message flickers on the HAD. The TSE is clearly calculating lead and moving the gun, but in tiny jerky movements. Was super smooth before addition of TSE. 

  20. I suspect that in real life FRIENDLY air defense units are simply not plotted on the TSD (i.e...be part of the DTC mission load). The colour is irrelevant. Those rings are for Threats (clues in the name). 

    Friendly AD would be plotted as a friendly CM as you suggest. 

    Maybe one day (before the end of time?), we might have some kind of mission planning system with module specific options for pre-planning CM's, Threats and the like.

    Remember you can always delete any type of CM or Point. You'd have to make a note of which AD T-numbers you need and what you don't. A few minutes spent in the TSD menu's at the start of a mission usually pays off big time.

    • Like 1
  21. 11 minutes ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

    Those were static helos on the tarmac. But anyway. I have yet to have my George fire any weapon. Not just Hellfire , at any target. Static, moving armored, infantry, moving armor. I can manually , from pilot seat, fire gun and rockets. But if I fire Hellfire at TADS target, Hellfire flies up and into distance, with no guidance. I scroll GeorgeAI down the target list. Manually fire Hellfire, and it just flies off without guidance. George ain't lasing, even though it reports 'Lasing'. So go figure! I think the process is lacking. But its early release.


    This particular feature has been working since day 1 of early access, so there’s another issue…….(I’m taking suggestions everyone).
    Once you scroll the target list, you need to press AI interface right short to select the target. 
    Your problem is (partly at least) you are trying to fire when you should let George ‘WAS’ the weapon and then give him a consent to fire. 
    There are plenty of tutorials out there. 

    • Like 1
  22. 26 minutes ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

    Under Pilot for GeorgeAI there are three commands.

    Consent To Fire

    Show/Hide George interface

    Request Control

    None of which cause GeorgeAI to fire Hellfires or any weapons as far as I can tell. 

     

    Provide a track and someone will be able to point out where it's going wrong.

    GeorgeAI does work perfectly fine.

  23. 57 minutes ago, DmitriKozlowsky said:

    This is setup from pilot seat. Target selected, ARM on, weapon selected. But CPG will not fire, and I am unable to make AI George to do so. Thus IMHO this implementation  is lacking. Its confusing.

     

    So there's a few issues here.

    Firstly, you've got Missiles selected yourself as the pilot. Don't do that, that's your main problem. Let the CPG select Hellfire (look for CMSL in bottom right of IHADSS). He is the one who fires Hellfire when using the TADS. (generally, but there are exceptions).

    You've got 'Free Fire' for the CPG (green George interface), change it to the mode where you need to consent to fire each shot. I find that much more reliable. Map the 'Consent to Fire' button to a completely separate HOTAS button, don't use your trigger. 

    Get the TADS video symbology up on your left MPD. In your picture CPG isn't actually looking at a target, the TADS is still FIXED. Make sure CPG is actually designating the target. Look for the lasing cross to know when he's lasing. Maneuver the aircraft for a solid (not dashed) constraints box. Only then give 'consent to fire'. 

    (Also, you need to boresight your IHADSS, but not relevant to Hellfire)

    • Like 1
  24. There are two things here. You can transmit a SPI and you can transmit a Steerpoint. 

    AI can only transmit a SPI. Human players can transmit a Steerpoint and/or a SPI. Hopefully AI will get the ability to create and send mark points/Steer-points in the future.  

    You can slave to a Steerpoint and it’s described in a post above. There’s no way to currently automatically slave to a SPI. 

    You should be able to use FCR AG map mode and slew cursors and have the HSD cursor follow those slews, you could then overlay the HSD cursor on top on the AI transmited SPI and create a FCR marpoint. Although, this might be buggy in DCS as the radar map cursor has wrong update behaviour. Although actually I need to try, now that I’ve thought of it. 

    • Thanks 1
×
×
  • Create New...