Subferro
-
Posts
152 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Subferro
-
-
Looks like a combination of two things:
1) Can’t say 100% on Hornet, but for other documentation I’ve seen laser should continue to fire ~5ish seconds after TTI hits zero
2) For moving targets, manual lazing is probably a better option for multiple reasons.
-
There's a bug in the current OB where selecting a JDAM and TOO mode creates a "diamond" that can't be removed, it'll be fixed
Any input on how the logic is supposed to work around JDAMs? Both in PP and TOO.
I assume with no designated target in either mode, pod is snowplowed/VVSLV depending on pilot input. With a TOO designation pod looks at designation, but can be slewed or offset? Allowing redesignation or designating a new spot for a different station (STEP)? Once the last bomb falls does the pod immediately snowplow or does it remain on the last system designation? The latter makes more sense (as the system designation presumably remains even if the bomb is gone), then can be snowplowed with undesignate?
Similarly PP mode - it’s been said a WPDESG shouldn’t be able to co-exist with a valid PP designation (though currently this is possible), does this mean a PP TGT is treated by the AC as a system designation? Does that mean the Pod then slaves to it as it would any other system designation? And again what happens after the last bomb is gone?
The TPOD integration with the Hornet is a little different from our other modules, so just trying to get a sense of how it’s intended to function.
-
That was the first thing I tried... no dice.
Were you able to undesignate your last target after all GPS weapons were fired (in TOO)?
Cycling back around to OPR will at least make the pod responsive to WPDSG so you can bring it back to a target area, but doesn’t restore undesignate function. Also can’t get it back to OPR if the pod is masked so that can complicate it.
-
I hardly think it’s unusable. But definitely some weird behavior.
1) Re: JDAMs
- in PP mode without a target TGP is in snowplow. Entering a valid PP target doesn’t change this. Hitting WPDSG with or Without a PP target slaves the pod to the WP.
-In TOO mode with no designation the pod slews to some mystery location far away. Designating a waypoint slews the pod to the waypoint. After that the pod will not undesignate back to snowplow unless you select PP mode. If you drop your JDAMs in TOO, you can no longer undesignate. You can still reset it to a waypoint (with a caveat), but no more snowplow. This stuck designation persists if changing weapons
- If the pod is masked and MEM is displayed, you cannot exit ATRK or PTRK. The pod will only reset to a waypoint if in OPR (no tracking mode), so once masked you’re essentially bricked. This may be related to the pod getting stuck looking at 180.
- Last, kind of unrelated. LMAV will not pick up the laser if you’ve dropped a different weapon. I haven’t tested this much but in the previous tests I dropped a GBU-38 then tried to use my LMAV. L/TDR was displayed, codes were matching, Mav would not pick up the laser. It seemed to grab it as I broke off my approach, but only once the target was near or past the seeker head circle on the Mav video display. It also lost lock quickly. If I tried to use the Mav before using other weapons, it worked.
I need to check my tracks this evening to see what I captured, but I can post them later
-
The correct cage/uncage behavior is toggling LST mode. What is the designate/undesignate confusion?
Confusion is probably just on my end since it originally seemed like cage/uncage and undesignate had overlapping functions. Hearing this is the cage/uncage plan makes more sense.
-
Now that we’ve gotten some clarity on the symbology, can we get an update on the cage/uncage and designate/undesignate confusion? @Nine your post in the bug forum suggests there’s more on this behavior coming in the next update? Right now it doesn’t make a ton of sense.
-
This has been a long-standing issue that there haven’t been any steps to correct. It seems intermittent, and inconsistently related to fxo/metashaders and chimney smoke. More commonly with burning wrecks or bomb impact. I haven’t seen it affecting sunrise/sunset but maybe it’s growing.
-
I think I’ve had the same issue. I don’t get it all the time, but have had it consistently on the Dire Straits mission. As soon as I pull up TWS it locks a memory target no where near my scan zone. Reset doesn’t clear it. Haven’t tried turning the radar off and back on
-
Thanks for the kind comments. As of now the campaign goes on forever.
I’ve been toying with revisiting this and may do so when the super carrier drops. I structured it the way it is to add some randomness to the order of strikes, but with only ~10 different targets if you keep playing it will repeat. Maybe better to sacrifice some random order to have a more linear campaign that ends eventually. I also need to update loadouts now that the LITENING can go on the side hardpoints, and maybe move AWACS to the tactical channel instead of guard, with the caveat that you won’t get calls when on carrier or tanker frequency.
EDIT: Also due to popular demand I may add some type of debriefing message to indicate successful strike on the target. But only after you land! Still not going to add a “Mission Complete, RTB” to the strikes. I want to preserve some fog of war;)
-
Sorry I haven’t been really active on this. Regarding questions:
I recently purchased the PG map. Would love to convert this to that setting. No idea on ETA though, probably not soon.
Cerulean - I’m not sure what the issue is. Are you ending the mission and then it sends you on another CAS/BAI from the campaign screen or are you doing this all within one mission. If it’s the latter, just end the mission after you land. If you flew to your holding point and back you have a 30% chance of getting a strike, regardless of what damage you did to targets. If you’ve gotten 50 different CAS/BAI missions from the campaign screen... then that’s a bug. I flew the campaign recently and didn’t have that issue, but if it’s persisting just use the F10 menu, there should be a DEBUG - request strike option. If you choose that and exit the mission, it should bump you into the “Strike” block when you hit next mission
-
I’m pretty sure that ED’s interpretation of this is only half correct. If the TGP is slaved to a waypoint OR a system designation exists with the TGP NOT in a track mode (ie VV slave and TDC depress) then undesignate should return to snowplow. HOWEVER if the TGP is in atrack or ptrack mode, then TGP pointing is regarded as independent of system designation. Yes the atrack/ptrack can be co-located with the designated point, but not necessarily. Thus the TGP should only return to snowplow if it’s pointing is dependent on the system designation (as when it is slaved to a waypoint WITHOUT being in a track mode). If it is in a track mode, either exit the track or cage/uncage to reset pod pointing.
This should also change JDAM behavior. If you choose PP mode while TGP is slaved to a WP - then back to snowplow as PP overrides WPDSG. However if you’re in area track, the TGP doesn’t care if you lose WPDSG. You can see this in effect by choosing a JDAM in PP mode and slewing the pod. If you then enter atrack mode the pod will be in atrack while the JDAM retains its PP designation, so clearly TGP tracking can exist independent of system designation.
-
Makes sense, I don’t understand why everyone wants this feature. ATFLIR is the better pod and only mounts on 4. So either way you’ll get a lpod on either 4 or 5. Don’t know where the fascination with LITENING specifically on 4 comes from.
I don't think anyone cares specifically about the LITENING going on a cheek, but for me the ability to put a pod on a cheek, even though not 100% accurate, opens up the ability to fly double ugly carrier ops with a loadout that's much closer to common real-world loads. Using the LITENING is just a stop-gap while waiting on the ATFLIR.
-
Thanks for the feedback! I considered a target destroyed message but felt that I get more enjoyment with a little ‘fog of war’. Plus the way I’ve randomized missions means you may get talked against the same target. It’s easier in my head cannon to accept imperfect BDA as a reason for that;). I’m not against changing that if people prefer. You do get a message on the CAS/BAI missions so you’re not hunting down a mystery tank.
To your question - absolutely feel free to start cold and dark. I struggled taxiing with the AI wingman so scrapped it out of frustration, but if you want to do that it won’t break anything.
-
https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3306562/
Sharing a “campaign”, really a loose collection of missions I made for the F/A-18:
A fictional history where Abkhazia and South Ossetia aligned after the 2008 war and staged an invasion of Georgia.
This is a faux-dynamic campaign consisting of mostly CAS/BAI over the battlefield interspersed with strikes against fixed targets.
How it works: each “stage” consists of either CAS/BAI or various strike missions with different time of day. For each CAS/BAI there is a 30% chance of moving on to strike stage otherwise you roll another CAS/BAI. After a strike you are punted back to the CAS/BAI stage. If you’re sick of CAS missions there’s a debug skip to strike F10 option. This will add 10pts to your mission score and bump you to a strike stage.
Strikes will repeat if you play long enough (or even if you play a short time), this is part of how I tried to randomize missions. Hopefully if they do repeat it's at a different time of day.
Don't pay attention to scoring, that's how I preserved mission advancement in a way I wanted to.
This concept grew out of playing Operation Titan Angel over and over and tailoring it to my own single player preferences. Combined with reading the AAR on Deliberate Force, this campaign started to take shape. Mission structure is heavily based on Deliberate Force tasking - round the clock CAP and SEAD, on-call CAS/BAI, occasional strikes against military logistics targets. Building the missions borrowed from a different 3 letter sim where AI CAP and SEAD flights will be in the air, doing their own thing while you carry out your tasks. All missions use the same framework, all that changes is time of day and player flight tasking.
Finally some notes:
1. Put one of your radios on GRCV, this way you can hear AWACS calls without being on their channel (you obviously have to change back to talk to them)
2. Your wingman can attack and lase. For CAS, use the scripted attack found in F10 radio menu, for strike you can use "Engage target and rejoin". Lasing is good if you’re struggling to find targets... still waiting on a TPOD slave function. I meant to get it working on strike packages too. Maybe next version. If you want to approach the carrier at night you can request a straight in approach from Alerax’s script, before doing so anchor your wingman 40nm away from the boat so you don’t get a signal delta. For Case I you can enter the pattern even if he’s in mother’s airspace.
3. There are no scripted events other than spawning units. No scripted objectives to follow, no radio messages guiding you to what to do next. These are simple missions, but designed to exist in a realistic framework. If you want to know if you completed the mission, compare recon photos from the briefing to BDA done through TPOD. That said, I’m not sadistic. You’ll get a radio message when you destroy all of a CAS/BAI spawn so you’re not circling the target wondering if someone is hiding. If you’re Winchester before they’re all destroyed - go home. You did what you could.
4 . Read the briefings. I made recon photos and mission data cards for you. Put them to use. (Data cards are available on your kneeboard as well). And use the mission planner to scope out where strike targets are located. Will help to have that geographical reference when looking through the TPOD. Check loadout too. On CAS/BAI, you’re carrying an asymmetric load, don’t get caught off guard by not trimming before cat launch.
5 . Do whatever you want to these missions. Want to sub out for an A-10? Go for it, if you dig through the files you may discover that I originally built that possibility in... Feel free to convert these to client flights and use this online. They would make for fun 2 player Co-ops. Someone smarter than me can open them up for even larger groups.
Huge thanks to:
1) EasyEB - this all started from me trying to build on Titan Angel (you may recognize some script variables)
2) Alerax - LSO script
3) The M00SE
-
Sooo did we change our mind about this?
-
This may be... better? I downloaded the last update and when I tested the (F-18C) TGP smoke looked okay. I went back to options and saw that chimney smoke was at 0. Before increasing that value would bring back the blobs and there was no way to get rid of them. This time I bumped chimney smoke to 5 and had no blobs. The flames are inverted (showing black when in WHOT mode), but no crazy auto gain causing a whiteout and no horrible looking smoke/explosions. Maybe progress??
-
This seems to be somewhat improved. For a while the new open beta update didnt have any issues with smoke. Then I got bold and messed with "Chimney Smoke Density" setting and the blob smoke returned. At least now it is appropriately colored (white when I'm in white hot and vice versa) and doesnt cause complete washout of the image. Would still like better looking smoke through the TGP
-
I'm trying to use this for night missions, just requesting the "Straight In" approach when I push from my Marshal stack, but keep getting blocked out by my AI wingman. Is there any way to kick them out of the queue or move ahead of them so I don't keep getting a "Signal Delta" call? I even tried having him anchor where we Marshaled but he somehow still got registered in the landing line.
If anyone else has this issue, having them anchor elsewhere works, as long as its 40 nm away from the boat. :thumbup:
-
I'm trying to use this for night missions, just requesting the "Straight In" approach when I push from my Marshal stack, but keep getting blocked out by my AI wingman. Is there any way to kick them out of the queue or move ahead of them so I don't keep getting a "Signal Delta" call? I even tried having him anchor where we Marshaled but he somehow still got registered in the landing line.
-
I don’t see this mentioned in today’s patch notes. Was it fixed?
-
Quick question about the campaign builder:
I have a short campaign made and after testing wanted to edit the missions. I opened the missions and made my changes. Then I opened the campaign in campaign builder, deleted the existing missions from their stage and added the new ones. I saved the campaign and restarted it from the campaign menu. The problem is that the missions are still the old version. My changes were not in place. I tried doing save-as for the campaign file, restarted DCS, no matter what I can’t get my updated missions into the campaign. Am I missing something on how the builder works?
-
Anyone figured out a workaround to this? Like putting an AI unit taking off/landing at roughly the same time as the player? Desperately needs a hotfix to make night missions feasible again...
-
Agree 100% and more. Why can’t development time being spent on Walleye be used finishing Harm or JDAM or TGP or Harpoon?
I’d much rather have a feature complete, rich simulation of JDAM rather than a simple limited feature AGM-62.
I just want my GBU-32s. We already have JDAM interface and MK-83s...
-
Don't understand this request/complaint at all. It works as it does on the real aircraft. Is is because of people's tendency to invert "look up and down" on many games/sims/consoles? Pulling aft on the sensor switch, pulls the camera zoom aft(out). Pulling aft on the sensor switch lowers the antenna radar elevation(down) as well. How is this not normal? Seems to be a non-issue. Especially compared to many of the other issues/features that need to be addressed/adjusted/corrected.
Cheers,
Don
Except this isn’t how it works. This is just how you have it configured. The antenna elevation is controlled by a wheel on the front of the throttle. Pulling it “aft” is pulling it up, which raises the antenna. Pulling aft or up also zooms in. See where there may be some confusion?
THE TGP really drive me mad!!
in DCS: F/A-18C
Posted
Test it first. Yes the workflow is different, but I can’t say there’s anything wrong with it. Not sure why everyone is panicking.