Fri13

That is another annoying thing in DCS that we can't have automatic doctrinal operations between APC/IFV and infantry squad they are supporting. Even a trucks would become dangerous when transported squad would unmount and scatter for defense against spotted air threat. Having quickly dozens of MANPADS and HMG spread around the area, moving their location depending your actions and situation. While every destroyed vehicle would become achievement, there would be far more danger for helicopters and low level planes than ever. One moment you see a column moving on road, each vehicle having a good 300-1000 meters spacing (instead current 20 meters), suddenly they all pull over and disappear to nearby forest, towns and such. You curse that they were alarmed about your presence and are prepared to engage you in 15-30 seconds from now. Then you would notice that some idiot fighter pilot was flying at high altitude looking at them with TPOD and was detected by a EWR some 100 km from your position. Suddenly couple MANPADS are launched at it and is required to perform some maneuvers and maybe even drop heavy ordinance load to survive. Your capabilities to engage couple of those trucks became near zero as you have no idea where they are, and how well they are defended.

M113 gunner is that brave, standing right there half body exposed and killing everyone with its M2. Downside we have is that engagements ranges are typically at maximum, instead closer to minimum, because there is no ground clutter and no ways to get in cover and hide.

All modules in DCS suffer from oversensitivity in trim buttons. They are too fast and don't have any acceleration for rate longer you hold. Even by programming a button to send a 25 millisecond press is too much and will over correct planes. So you are constantly trimming opposite directions and adjusting speed to get somewhat stable flight without AP.

Unlike now in Razbam upcoming changes, the TPOD is interference with all mavericks. With the IIR and Laser. It doesn't matter as Mavericks utilize same video feed and same control standard and all. The TPOD in the Harrier is used via Maverick emulation. The system handles TPOD as it would be Maverick missile to get it video and to send controls to it. And systems allows only one Maverick video to be active at the time. And this is why when TPOD video is shown in one MFCD then it overrides the Maverick video when you try to press uncage when Maverick is selected. What you need to do is to switch away from the TPOD video by pressing MENU or SSS Right (if TPOD video on right) to switch to NAVFLIR for the moment you uncage a Maverick, acquire a lock (laser or contrast) and launch it, and then you can switch back to TPOD that has continued to operate at background for 15 seconds (laser is armes and firing 15 seconds after switching away from TPOD video). You don't need to set TPOD to standby mode (disarms laser, boresight itself) as Razbam has now made you to do it. The key difference is that you can't hold TPOD on right MFCD all the time and just select Maverick, uncage it, lock and launch and continue using TPOD simultaneously. This is not a major problem if Razbam would implement as well proper Maverick logic. That when you have Maverick missile selected and you uncage its seeker, the Maverick video will appear automatically to left MFCD or to right MFCD if the STRS page is open in it. Right now you can't have a Maverick video visible unless you have STRS page open on left MFCD. And it is incorrect. Currently the logic is like on second time using same Maverick. As in first time a maverick is uncaged the video appears to left MFCD automarically. But if you switch away from it by pressing MENU or SSS Left to open EHSI/EW then Maverick video is running at the background and is not recalled by uncage button. Now you need to do MENU -> STRS -> Uncage to get Maverick video back to left MFCD. So at the moment Razbam has implemented Maverick uncage and video logic as it would be already opened previously and you always need to do this MENU -> STRS -> Uncage dancing. So how would you utilize the Maverick with TPOD? 1. Search target with TPOD. 2. Select Maverick and A/G mode. 3. Track target with TPOD. 4. Master Arm On, create mark point or laze the target. 5. Switch away from TPOD video with MENU or SSS Down 2x + Right/Aft. 6. Uncage Maverick. 7. Confirm lock/track for Maverick to laser or contrast. 8. Launch Maverick 9. Open TPOD on right MFCD with MENU -> TPOD. Do this under 15 seconds and TPOD continues firing laser on target undisturbed. The Litening is a standalone unit, it performs at the background its own things and is not part of the aircraft sensors. It just has these safety features like 15 second disarmed for laser when TPOD video is not shown. Because for optimal "keyhole" launch for Maverick, you need to anyways fly toward target for launch. This allows you to use LMAV search pattern with HUD mode what is smallest. You acquire quickly the laser if you are in range etc, and get to launch. But likely the missile will block your TPOD video with smoke or heat waves and E maverick will lose lock and go dud. While E2/L variant will survive the launch for few seconds lack of laser and will acquire laser again. Making possible to self-designate.

Technically you should be able self-designate E same way as E2/L, but it likely will not survive the launch and you waste the missile. There is no checking in Maverick that do you have a TPOD and is it firing a laser or not. The E Maverick doesn't care from where the laser comes from. Based to the marketing and explanations the E2/L just has timer between losing a lock to laser spot and deciding it is lost and time to pull evasive maneuver to avoid impact. This is what should be simulated in all modules capable launch Mavericks, not just Harrier. And it is not to do with the TPOD itself as others don't seem to have a such a emulation.

All five stations. 2,3, 4B, 5 and 6 wired for TPOD. Razbam said almost two years ago that they are included but didn't.

You know what are differences to others in VKB design? Sure the collective would be a nice one from VKB, but it is not so big demand even when it is now popular. VKB has schedule problem, they should had the throttle out 2018 but..... What can be done?

I hope they add as well special option to have mavericks aligned if hot started. As it will make testing easier and many user happy when they don't need to deal with alignment each time they respawn or start their own mission. Just like navigation systems alignment, have option to have targeting systems too...

Some vehicles does have a remote control for their roof gun. Example T-64 is such that allows commander remotely control it. Similar is with the BTR-82 and similar ones where modernization has come to play. But if you are under fire, then you are not there to sit and return fire if you don't know your threat. As you are seen and there can very well be a AT missile flying toward you and hit you any moment. And being inside a armored vehicle that is under fire, it is not a pleasant experience. I recall it is M2A1 that is in the game. Yes please, more variants. But this is where the Battlefield Studios company approached ED that is there interest for such.... Even a 12.7 mm AP round is dangerous to a APC like M113 or BTR-60 and BTR-70 and like from couple kilometers. Question is not really what will happen when it hits, but can someone hit at you with it? As if you are on the move, you are very difficult to hit. But if you for some reason get hit, then it would require good angle and after that a good part in the vehicle where to hit so it does something. Like air inflated wheels are very vulnerable, the side armors are vulnerable. The windows are vulnerable when not closed the armored plates. You can do a lot of damage with just couple lucky shots as you can injure the crew or infantry squad inside and that way deny their combat efficiency. Up that weapon system to something that can accurately deliver hits and it becomes dangerous from 12.7 mm and up. Especially a 20-40 mm autocannon becomes a very effective. Having a such 30 mm on the helicopter is fancy thing. And that is the great thing in Mi-24P that we get that amazing single fire capability that allows to snipe individuals nicely. Everything would change if the ground units would have basic instinct to try to survive, seek cover or suppress the attacker. The combat is not such that it is over in few seconds, but it could very well take hours if in small scale engagement as well prepared defender will have massive advantage on their side (3-6:1) against attacker.

One thing that ED could do to really improve the gameplay in DCS. Allow AI aircraft to designate targets for you, or you for it. It would be great to have already a Mi-24P Petrovich like AI intelligence for Night Missions where you could paint an area with TPOD laser marker (or dual-marker/laser) and the AI would look at that area and search target there. Or you to launch a flare rocket or bomb on area and AI would search inside that area, or otherway around. It would be even so great to have the AI fly and designate targets with a smoke rocket. This would make Su-25 and KA-50 or Mi-8 far more useful when you could put rocket on area and AI would search and engage targets there visually. Hopefully we need to do aligment for the DMT too. Just like for the NAVFLIR already. The Laser mavericks limitations should be on all modules, but it seems that Razbam has just overcome now the TPOD <-> E2/L limitation as well that should be there same way as it is with E or F Mavericks. That was surprising addition. I still hope they could slip in the much needed proper TPOD stations on the proper ones. That I missed totally.... Wow.

You are not incorrect. It is so that for the plane it doesn't matter what a video feed there is received from the weapon, it is just shown as standard tells. The laser maverick video is just artificial one where the seeker head position relative to gimbal limit is drawn without any live video. Where the IR maverick draws that same seeker angle relative to gimbal but with a IR camera video at the background. Just as you say. Only thing I can come up is that the storage codes would be removed so the ordnance ground crew can not enter the proper weapons code (1.14.5.1 Stores Management Preflight Programming.) to the system when loading the IRMAV from the panel inside main wheelwell. But then again why would you if you don't have them in the storage anyways? It would be interesting to get that evidence (like example in Chapter 3 of complete list of codes). I would come up with two reasons: 1) To decrease used computer memory for some new weapons loadouts. 2) To minimize the possibility to select IRMAV for the LMAV. But neither one does not make really sense.

IMHO it has not been discussed almost at all. Almost everyone else is just discussing about F being removed or not to be removed. But the TPOD overriding all Mavericks simultaneous use is barely mentioned by anyone else than me. The "Lock On Before Launch" is critical part of the Maverick. You can't launch the Maverick unless it has a track. With the IRMAV that tracking is that seeker has locked to either HOT or COLD contrast based your selection of the polarity (the crosshair color changes its color between black and white depending which you are locking on). With the LMAV the track is when the maverick seeker has scanned the decided pattern and it find first laser spot that corresponds to the laser frequency code. When the maverick seeker is locked on the target, it is tracking it. You can launch the maverick outside of the "keyhole" but the seeker likely can't maintain the lock because launch shake and acceleration etc but will lose a lock. And when it loses the lock it is then lost missile. The lock might not always be lost, it can shift something else midway of flight, like a moving target moves through a "hot spot" on terrain and Maverick seeker locks on it and flies there while original target continues moving elsewhere. Or you locked on nearby hot bush or something that you couldn't see from IRMAV seeker video as it is so low resolution and it will fly at it. Or there is a shadow or something else like a dust cloud that is the locked part and missile will fly toward it closer it gets as it couldn't separate the detail at the distance. The problem with the self-designation is that your laser beam is aligned with the seeker LOS. The laser beam angle can be bad that it is not strong enough to allow seeker maintain the lock after launch. The smoke or heat plume can block the laser line of sight and missile loses lock because of that. The LMAV has been launched by the designating aircraft itself, but it very likely doesn't survive the launch parameters. I have never seen LMAV in DCS to lose a lock unless laser firing is stopped. And the crosshair should inform pilot that if seeker estimates too weak lock that it can't maintain lock after launch by having the crosshair shaking or staying little wide. The real Harrier manual explain these well. The E2/L seeker is just better, designed to withstand the launch from the designating aircraft so even if the laser is blocked for moment or missile shake because launch, it doesn't lose the track but can acquire it again. It is not developed for Harrier and its TPOD emulation in mind, but for all aircraft. You can slave the Maverick seeker on that Target Designation, but you need to acquire a lock with the seeker itself. Again what we need is proper DMT/LST scanning behavior first. We should have Wide, Narrow and HUD. The Wide and Narrow will by default center to 5 miles ahead of the Harrier by reading the Harrier radar altitude and concentrate search pattern to it. The scan pattern is a box that you can move around with TDC, the Wide is full DMT gimbal width so you can move it just up and down and the DMT/LST will scan around pattern inside its search box. The Narrow is much narrower and little taller box that you can move around the whole DMT gimbal area. And the HUD is the Instant Field Of View area of the HUD and not slewable. Meant to be used when you know that laser spot will be inside the HUD. The IRMAV seeker scan pattern is suppose to match these by the limitation of the Maverick Seeker FOV. The DMT/LST is more sensitive and higher resolution than LMAV seeker why it can detect and lock on laser spot at further distance or weaker signal, and this way it can help LMAV to concentrate scan on proper position. But this way we can have LMAV search pattern moved around by using DMT/LST TDC. We likely should have only a roll stabilization and need to fly steadily to get IRMAV seeker on the target and then try to acquire a lock with it on wanted target. So you would use the TPOD just to create the Mark Points or Target Points and use them as Target Designation (T0) to get a maverick seeker on that position but it is always stationary position, so no moving targets so easily. Now you can do it with TPOD that you have to have either Target Designation or you will just uncage maverick and it will be movable by the TDC in LMAV/IRMV mode and looking the video area. You can't have TPOD page open at the same time as it will overcome any maverick video. So you should press MENU on TPOD page to shut off the TPOD video. But your point is valid, it doesn't matter where the Target Designation comes, as long you just have one to slave Maverick seeker to it if so wanted. TPOD video just is not visible same time.

That was the question. Either Razbam models a realistic technical capability of the Harrier with evidence that F variant would be technically incompatible and reason to be removed from weapons loadout. And if they can't provide evidence for that it is not technically possible, then it should be kept in. But at not any position should any weapon be include in the aircraft without technical compatibility because players want so. That will lead to situation that ED has been in problems, example HARM on the F-16CM four stations instead just two. ED didn't give up with the change to have capability carry all four HARM on the four stations, because it was technically possible. ED just removed the launching capability from the extra two stations because technically there is no compatible wiring for the HARM missiles in those. So you got four HARM missiles as people wanted with evidence, but they as well got to keep technical realism where only two stations is capable launch them. That is Win-Win situation for everyone, even when some players must have bad feeling that they can't launch all four... What reason? Reasoning was "It is fun to have a real fire'n'forget weapon!" and not about realism. The main question was that what version Razbam is modeling, and answer to that is a version that was updated with a Maverick F feature removed. That would mean that F maverick should be removed. But Razbam should have needed to provide irrefutable evidence for that, and it didn't happen. So because lack of evidence for it, Razbam shouldn't deny the F maverick. And at that moment it has nothing to do that people are reasoning with emotional expression of gameplay experience with the F, as it shouldn't matter but just the technical compatibility to the weapon. So is it possible that Razbam didn't find any irrefutable evidence for F version being removed, so it would be easier to just say "okay, we give up for your emotional needs" than admit that no such evidence can be used? Now you are binding multiple arguments to one. Whatever is the fictional scenario is the whole point of the simulator. Even if we would only fly the Harriers at the NTTR map, it would need to be in proper exercises, times and ways etc. Happy gaming for ultimate history reality repetition game. As we have maps like Caucasus where we can set any module flying, doesn't mean it is a valid argument for a technically possible weapon loadout. They are separate things. Of course if you can provide evidence that because we can fly a Harrier in 2022 in a Caucasus or any map really, then it will affect to technical specifications to what a given weapons aircraft can technically handle.... This is a win for those who screams for entertainment value, and is not much different from going just for a limited political loadout option. Only thing that should matter is the technical capability. And as long Razbam can not provide documentation for IRMAV support being removed from the Harrier, the old technical evidence holds and Harrier is compatible with it. It is so simple as that. What next when the people come to say that they want to see a B61 nuclear bomb on Harrier because it would be fun? Should Razbam listen those who have emotional feelings for it, or against it? Neither one, because only the technical compatibility should matter with its logic to be used. Like you don't load a B61 nuclear bomb on a helicopter even when you could attach it and release it, because that helicopter would never survive from its release. What everyone should agree upon is that every change that module is going through needs to be based to technical capability in technical specifications of the aircraft, regardless the year, service, country etc.

IMHO Razbam should enable a special setting for the players who have springless joystick, or jittery pot or something. Being a such that no matter what is the real joystick position or situation, the AFC would get enabled when in the proper parameters for level flight etc. Then have a artificial deadzone around the current joystick position, like 10% that is to maintain the AFC until joystick is moved outside of it.

In the new announcement there is written next thing (btw, was not smart or nice to delete the previous one because it is like trying to wash blood as evidence from own wrong doing. Just unpin the thread and lock it. It is the written history and your customers put time and effort to discuss about topic and with you...): "The AGM-65E will have its implementation improved with the addition of limitations linked to the TPOD integration. The TPOD video can’t be displayed at the same time as the Maverick video, this is true for the AGM-65F and the AGM-65E. Since when the TPOD is not displayed, the HOTAS controls reverts to its default settings and the AGM-65 is a lock-on before launch (LOBL) type of weapon, the missile can’t be guided by the launching aircraft. The AGM-65E2 goes around this limitation because it can be uncaged and launched from the TPOD page, or the TPOD video can be switched to the MAV video momentarily. We will also implement a particularity of the E2 that it can lock on the TPOD laser source if the laser is fired before the missile is uncaged and the TPOD is loaded on station 4." As far the information is either pointing or explaining, the moment any Maverick is uncaged, it will activate its video feed fully automatic to the left side MFCD without caring that what page is open there. Question is that will this be corrected in the upcoming patch? There is no requirement to do MENU -> STRS before uncaging a Maverick. The manual is as well very clear that this is only for the first time of that missile. So if pilot switches after that away from the maverick video on the left MFCD, then Cage/Uncage does not bring the video back to left MFCD, but pilot is required to do that MENU -> STRS and then uncage maverick to get video visible again. There is as well special note that if the STRS page is open on the right MFCD before uncage is pressed on first time, then a maverick video will be opened to the MFCD that has STRS open -> to the right MFCD. For the older Litening II pod the manual says that TPOD will keep firing laser 15 seconds after the TPOD page is switched off. Meaning that if the pilot will press MENU on the TPOD page while the TPOD is tracking, armed and firing the laser, the TPOD will autonomously continue doing so. The pilot has 15 seconds time to open the TPOD page back on either MFCD and then laser keeps firing undisturbed. If that is not done (or any other unarm action is performed like Master Arm switch operated) then the laser will unarm itself automatically, but TPOD keeps tracking the target at the background. This is the reason why the laser weapons can still be guided and used by the TPOD even when the Litening page is not visible for a while for what ever reason. Example pilot should be able to have TPOD on the right MFCD, press Uncage when Maverick is selected weapon, get automatically a Maverick video to left MFCD and on that moment the TPOD page would be switched to MENU. Not to put the TPOD in Standby mode, because it will automatically unarm the laser, stop tracking and boresight itself. Basically reset. This is against the whole manual laser safety part of the 15 second timer! The Laser Mavericks AGM-65E buddy lazing limitation is not the TPOD video via Maverick emulation, it has nothing to do with it. That limitation is the seeker and the its automatic safety feature where once the missile seeker lose the laser spot, it will activate safety mode where warhead is disabled (made dud) and missile will perform full upward evasive maneuver to avoid impacting anything on the ground in that area. The whole idea of that is that when the laser designator makes a call to abort the strike, that power is still there as long the missile has not hit the target. It is enough to shut off the laser and target is saved. Be it any reason as target is identified as friendly, that new information is received that there is too high collateral damage, civilians enter the kill zone, a target doesn't appear to be what it was thought to be. That is the last abort possibility. The problem is when for whatever reason that laser beam is cut off / lost, the E Maverick performs it. So you have a MBT as target that has LWS and it gets triggered, maverick is launched and the vehicle commander pop the smoke screen. A one that is anti-laser, anti-FLIR, anti-VIS and even anti-Radar. Boom, your laser is lost by the weapon seeker. It is not anymore seen and track is lost. And Maverick does in that moment the evasive maneuver and is dud. For a self-designation the problem is that the Maverick has very big smoke. The rocket motor heat plume as well distorts the air. So when launching the maverick in the proper "key-hole" parameters your maverick and the TPOD are aligned with each others. The missile will likely cross or enter to the line of sight of your TPOD that is firing the laser. The Maverick itself will block the laser badly enough that makes it lost the track and render itself dud. This is why the E2/L seeker was developed that fixes this problem by adding a delay for lock and unlock. So that seeker has timer to detect when it truly has lost the lock and when it is just momentarily lost it. This makes the E2/L seeker survive from that launch parameter when it blocks the laser as it knows to try to search the laser spot for moments after such scenario. When the MBT pop up the smoke screen, the pilot or JTAC has time to react to it and aim the TPOD at different position where smoke is not blocking the emission (dimishing it) and keep Maverick flying at the target, expecting the MBT to perform the tactical reverse movement behind the smoke and become visible from the air and it can be targeted again for last seconds impact. This Laser Maverick limitation for buddy lazing is not just with Harrier, it is with all the aircraft that utilize it. It is A-10, F/A-18, F-16 etc etc. Everyone has that limitation. The E2/L seeker was not developed just for the Harrier TPOD limitation but for everyone because that laser seeker variant is problematic. Now the E2/L seeker is not special one that doesn't utilize the Maverick video feed. The TPOD still in the Harrier should have its automatic page shut off with the E2/L maverick. The TPOD can not receive any information that where the seeker is looking on the TPOD video by uncaging the E2/L seeker because it will activate the video feed. The weapons system can not receive any information that when E2/L seeker has acquired a lock and is tracking properly the laser spot - Without Maverick video feed. As I quoted in the previous deleted thread the statement about the upgraded features in the E2/L compared to previous E variant, it is just more accurate to find the laser spot (increase the launch range as it can detect spot further), it has faster scan speed (faster locking time) and it has the delayed timer before deciding lock is lost. This makes it more survivable of the launch of the aircraft, and make it possible to be self-designated with higher probability of success). The manual says (1-298) other things about weapon selection as well. The ACP can be used to select maverick without doing so using MFCD. This allows the pilot to select the Laser Maverick without using any MFCD page top row that includes the max five different weapon types (last fifth, OSB 10 is dedicated for the gun and sidearm, so total of four different type of weapons for flight). This weapon selection should be available on Master Modes of NAV, A/G but not in A/A. In top row on pages of EHSI, DMT, ECM and STRS. The manual is as well very clear (1.18.1.4, page 1-366) that TPOD video is master video, where Maverick video isn't. So Maverick video doesn't appear on MFCD when uncaged as long TPOD video is shown. This means that pilot should first switch away from TPOD video by pressing MENU, and then uncage the Maverick to get it visible on the Left MFCD. There is separate question that what will happen with the TDC with the HTS mode activated in TPOD when its video is not displayed on either MFCD? This because manual says for the older TPOD that the TPOD maintains TDC mode for 15 seconds after that. So assumption would be that on the moment the maverick video is possible be opened with uncaging after TPOD video is not visible by pressing MENU, that Maverick overrides the TDC control from the TPOD. As the manual as well say that TDC is returned to TPOD when the TPOD page is shown again (1.18.4.4.2).

That is my stance. Technical compatibility goes first, and there is no much space for a personal opinion based to entertainment. Razbam says again that the IRMAV support was removed in the updates given in the 2010. It is still one SME word, with the translation from Razbam to us. Many things can go wrong right there in any point. IMHO we still need evidence for the removal of that IRMAV support, as much people would hate others for it, but it shouldn't be kept in the Harrier only because people want it. But we are in difficult situation where suddenly Harrier was shifted from 2000-2010 to 2010-2020 version, and technical compatibilities can differ. This is again one of those cases where History Filter is important, where date selected for the Mission should dynamically (by default) set the available liveries and weapons. So missions dated to earlier than 201? will have IRMAV available, but missions dated to 201? or later will have it removed. That so if it is technically so. IMHO the heat from the available weapons should be directed to mission designers and not toward module developers. It should be that players are expressing their feelings to that who runs the multiplayer server or who made campaign or mission etc. As otherwise they can just direct their feelings to themselves if they do own missions. This meaning that studios producing the modules should take only the technical capability stance, leave politics, religion and all that out of the consideration. This would lead to situation that if there is one plane, then include all the possible technical capabilities in it to module. Mark them for the year and so on, so if even one plane was tested for something (like four F-16CM Blk 50 were rewired for four HARM missiles to be launched, but everything else was without) and there is enough information for it, then implement it but be very clear for everyone that it is up to mission designer to enable such a special feature. If there is no technical evidence for something, then no-go.

Thank You, again, for causing me a wet daydreams for speculating a something amazing to arrive to Mig-21Bis.... Maybe I need to make a run for one parked nearby just to climb in the cockpit and pretend to be flying in DCS and making funny noises as a 5 year old kid...

The standard operation is that you fly 4 hours with NAV computer set to IFA and then fifth hour so it is in INS. This so that you can find out INS errors. When you have it in IFA you have tightly coupled INS+GPS and basically NAV computer is constantly updating INS with GPS. this means you can't have error in release because INS drifting. Why you hold release button for long with JDAM is that mission computer uploads aircraft GPS coordinates to bombs for initial position information. There is as well almanac sent in. So immediately bomb knows where it is on the moment of release, where it needs to be, and where it isn't. So stay in IFA all the time, don't go through GYRO as it will reset INS system.

Again would be a great addition to the DCS by speciality and uniqueness. We just need more that era aircraft.

Home version can not create Bitlocker volumes, but it can use them. The TPM can be used to encrypt network protocols or generate encryption to applications DRM. Basically anything that has to do with encryption can use TPM for it. It has been revealed from Microsoft that they do not require TPM for the use, but it is for improved experience and that likely means exactly that, of you don't have it then some applications don't work. But if you can get software based TPM installed then you get away with it.

I recall you didn't need a >0.8 sec pressing but just pressing made it happen. But I as well recall you needed first to make right MFCD as NAVFLIR and then you got HUD reject/FLIR working.

Yes it was.

Did you check any other conditions?

There start to be enough movies in DCS that too gun 2 is not needed anymore to fill the need for speed...

First when you are learning Harrier targeting systems, forget the whole targeting pod. As it is own sub-system that overrides Harrier otherwise set control scheme in the N/A. Just concentrate to DMT/LST and DMT/TV systems and INS that is "master mode" (should be only a HUD targeting, so be careful as you can accidentally move designation). And then you have finally TOO, Waypoint and Waypoint offset modes for more special targeting. Once you understand those, adding the TPOD becomes very easy as separate system to be used.