Rainmaker

You are trying to cherry-pick out of a report, based on a different airframe, at a different time, with a bugged OFP. That's what I mean by my initial post. This forum is built on experts that read some stuff on the internet. If you are in an effective range/slant angle to use the pod, you are going to be fine for coordinate generation. If you wanna believe it's unrealistic because 'I googled it' then so be it, don't use it beyond whatever range you think in your mind is realistic and move on.

:thumbup: Good to now. Perhaps tracking with things like PTRK when temporarily masked by smoke, terrain, etc? Maybe it becomes more important with the new FLIR implementation? I guess we'll see...

I'll call myself 'half right'. INR is basically the backup for P/ATRK when target definition is lost. This would include PTRK when trying to follow a moving target. Without testing myself, would be interesting to know if trying different options (BHOT/WHOT/CCD) has any effect on the ability to tracking moving targets. Might play around with it if I get some time as to this point, I haven't tried any of it to see exactly what happens.

Case in point, that's where I'm not sure what exactly meant by 'INR' coming later. If it wasn't implemented, I would expect the pod to move, with that being said, it could be simplified a bit until it's further developed. I'll see what I can dig up...

To your last part, I am pretty sure INR is used when the video is masked (terrain, clouds, airframe, etc) to keep the LOS looking in the right area. I thought, and I might be wrong, that it also effects target tracking of a moving target as well since the point is not a fixed target. I have some specific pod related material somewhere, would probably need to dig it up to see if it explains it all in detail. I may be right, partially right, or completely off.

I believe what you are looking for is part of INR, which isn’t there yet according to Wag’s post.

Pod knows where it's at in space, pod know's where it's looking and data like slant range, pod generates coordinates of target location. IRL, you would sweeten the accuracy with laser ranging...looks to be an unnecessary step in the sim. That pod has been used to generate coordinates for drops for 15 years now, and that's information that I personally know of, so it could be longer than that.

You are not talking about the pod generating coordinates itself, that's a limitation for talking to the aircraft. I have been around the real thing, which has been around for quite a while now, and know what exactly it 'is' capable of doing. As for talking to the F/A-18, it has already been stated that a few things were 'advanced' above the LOT 20 software for sim playability/enjoyment purposes. Don't assume that I need to assume things....

Missing for JDAM too for me...just came here to search for posts. In my case, I was interested to see if the pod could load each station independently with coordinates for a QTY release. I'm also sad, because I couldn't find out. :( :)

This is what happens when folks read things on the internet, don’t have the information for an accurate assessment, and then start trying to question it... Thanks internet...

Pretty sure he replied to that in my wish list items thread. He may have stated it more places than there too.

I brought this up way back when as I’m familiar with other MD/Boeing designs. In a common case, the -15 will allow you to move cautions to particular screens based on personal preferences or ‘box’ the cautions and minimize them off screen with use of the HOTAS castle and depressing the Master Caution button. Much to my disappointment, the F/A-18 possesses none of those functions. Just goes to show you that not all aircraft, even though they share a lot of common designs, are not designed equally. There’s a lot of nice HOTAS functions that exist in the -15 world that for whatever reason, although extremely useful, were not incorporated in the Navy’s stuff. Silly IMO, but it’s the way it is.

Perhaps it will be addressed when/if the HMD alignment option is implemented on the BIT page. In theory, it should be an option that’s variable based on how each person looks at their monitor. Time will tell I guess...

Top is a DSU...airburst 2nd...penetrator? I don’t think it hints much to the fuse, just more so the design of the bomb 3rd...looks pretty standard?

I was fortunate enough during a ride to get to do some guns BFM as we had a wingman with another GIB at the same time. As knuckle-draggers, we give ops guys a hard time sometimes when they do something boneheaded, but there’s other times when you get to appreciate how good they are with a lot of shit going on. We were offensive in a guns jink, I’m doing my best not the throw up, and there was twice where he called the wake before we ever hit it and rolled wings level to travel through it. Both times it basically felt like you were riding a bike off a small bike ramp. For sure noticeable, no question. Not sure what that would have felt like if we were still trying to put a nose on him. The guy I was with had a few thousand hours, but still impressed me that even in the middle of tossing the jet around trying to kill the bad guy, he saw it, knew it was coming, had time to roll the jet and still tell me it was coming before we hit it.

I think Wags probably needs to delete his old JDAM videos to save confusion on this one. I know that’s a pain in the butt, but it may save some further confusion.

They were not even a glimmer in someone’s eye by that point...

The statement wasn’t really directed towards you.

As Klar has already pointed out, they are fairly new, and no, haven't been around in the US inventory for very long. Just like when we changed to color displays from the mono MPDs...the old ones are being fielded out through attrition. The new ones do not have the delam problems the old ones have and they don't require the posts/nvg filter for the nogs that the old ones did. The old UFC had white lettering, new ones are green. EMD used to be white, they are going green too. Many of the caution panels have been altered to have green filters...because...f*ck velcro. It's also not related to the RMP for the radar.... The constant back and forth arguing by folks that have no real idea never ceases to amaze....

Thanks for checking...sanity check for me.

No, I didn’t mean/take it that way...hence the smiley. If I get some time, I can check again, but 100% positive I did it with no issue when ai tried it.

Yep, positive. Haven’t fired up DCS for probably 3 months before I updated. If I knew it was going to become a debate, I would have taken video. :) I did it twice when I did it, 2x on 3/7 and then 4x on 2/3/7/8. GBU-38s. FWIW, I also have a WH and no mapping.

I had zero issues, but that could also be controller related and not sim related necessarily. Does your button mapping give a continuous pulse when you press and hold or does it only press and release regardless of whether you hold or not?

It has nothing to do with the PP anymore. It can all be done under PP1. Some of the other stuff in Wag’s original video will have to be scrapped. Coords now have to be loaded to each bomb, not PP programs. And I tested it, I think Friday, and it worked perfectly. You have to select QTY and box the applicable stations after loading the coords. I would also presume you have to keep the pickle button depressed to consent all stations being released. Keep in mind I only tested with JDAMS so JSOW could offer completely different results.

Here’s the short answer. The ‘old’ way the JDAMS were programmed was incorrect. The PP was what the coords were loaded to. In reality, that’s not how it works as coords are loaded to the bomb. You now need to step through the stations and load to the bomb itself. It’s different, but it’s correct now. As far as QTY release, you can either ripple all 4 on 1 target, ripple 4 on 4 separate targets, or a mix of the two. The QTY option just allows you to do so with one pickle press instead of 4.