Joni
-
Posts
556 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Joni
-
-
I see people confusing aspects about how an INS works. One thing is position and another different thing is orientation.
For the INS to know its orientation in space, it needs an alignment, which is a incredible complex process to understand, but for all intended purposes let's say it just needs to learn what the north is and how it is positioned in relation to it, as well as knowing its absolute position in 3D space. Absolute, not relative.
Next we have the position part of the INS which it can never learn on its own. That's why it needs a manual input of relative position like coordinates, just XY. Or it can have it input by an external source like GPS.
Now, drift in an INS means the accumulated errors made by dead reckoning. Minimal errors that get accumulated and bigger as time goes by.
So drift only affects the position keeping abilities of an INS, but no its orientation part.
Therefore, an INS that is able to suck data from an external source like a GPS can have its position updated each N period of time, and calculate for other purposes what the accumulated error was.
Wags video only applies for GPS denied situations. That's all.
Hope it helped.
-
18 hours ago, HWasp said:
If they'd add the FC3 15 second delay for now, I'd be ok with that.
What does that do? Why a delay makes that the bug dissapears?
Thanks.
-
2 minutes ago, Lurker said:
Yes. You would have trashed the missiles. Also, the main reason why it's become such a big issue now is because recently the Hornet got a big ECM update and Hornet drivers figured out that they could do this.
Then I can't believe this issue was never resolved. It's incredible.
-
5 hours ago, yaga2 said:
There's not a difference in ECM effect. It was an issue. It still is an issue. As more FF aircraft get the ability to run ECM, the effect of the issue on gameplay increases.
Apart from that, the more people that are aware this issue exists, the larger the issue becomes as the occurence of the problem naturally increases in the wild.
Further more, when someone previously unaware of a problem learns about a problem, it's effectively a new problem from their perspective. Because for them, it is.
Seems a lot of people suddenly found out. Perhaps partially due to publication pertaining to competitive events banning ECM use because of the bug, perhaps partially due to the ever increasing qty of ECM-using aircraft not subject to a 'warm-up' time to start jamming. Or perhaps a large volume of people en-masse just decided to start testing stuff coincidentally. Who can really say?
Regardless of if this answers your question, it's fairly separate from anything relative the topic on hand:
-ECM is not working as intended.
-Given this, ECM can effect gameplay in dramatically negative (and again, unintentional) ways.
-This issue will be felt more as ECM is added for more modules in its current state.
Is there anything about that you disagree with?
Thanks, only fifth posts and you were much more helpful than the other guy.
I always turn ECM on and leave it on in the mirage for example and never trashed an amraam without having to manouver hard. Would the issue have occured if I had turned it on and off a few times?
-
38 minutes ago, GGTharos said:
Everything adds up. ED never meant BVR to be erased by ECM, that's what the fuss is about - and they understand this very well, despite your trolling attempt to somehow tie the lack of ED's response to this particular thread to them not acknowledging that this is a problem.
Not only I am not trolling in any attempt to cover anything, I am not a fan of eagle dynamics's working methodologies, in fact I think DCS is in its worst state ever. So you missed everything.
I just don't understand the difference between today and a couple of months ago, that's all.
I don't know why it takes you so long to get it.
-
6 minutes ago, QuiGon said:
Because it's still an issue and with more and more non FC3 aircraft that are ECM capable, but don't have the 15 sec warmup this issue becomes bigger and bigger. Also I think the F-14 and or F-18 ECM does blinking on it's own, which drastically increases the severness of the issue. It actually has revealed the issue after all AFAIK. At least I was not aware of this issue before this thread came to live.
Something doesn't add up IMHO. If the mirage, f14 and don't know what other FF module could always trash amraams like candies I would have noticed it, and it would have exploaded way before this thread.
I still don't understand the issue, and probably because of the same reason why ED hasn't showed up here yet.
-
1
-
-
13 minutes ago, GGTharos said:
The quote answers your question ...
If it had you wouldn't have had to post that "reply".
Again, why all the fuss?????? Why this post? Why complaining if it was always like this?
-
1
-
-
2 minutes ago, GGTharos said:
Because it was never intended to be used this way, it was never meant to trash all missiles consistenly ... this is why the FC3 birds gained a 15 sec 'warm up' to ECM but FF modules don't have this, so this stop-gap no longer applies and it needs to be fixed in a different way.
QuoteSo if I for instance would have blinked the ecm on and off in the mirage months ago I would have trashed all active missiles?
So yes? I could have done that? Why is it an issue now? Why all the fuss here in this post if it was always this way?
-
1
-
-
1 minute ago, GGTharos said:
It has nothing to do with the hornet specifically, it has been this way for a decade.
Why all the fuss then? I thought this was a new bug introduced.
Im sorry I may be missing the point here.
-
1
-
-
22 minutes ago, GGTharos said:
The ECM blinking on/off (programmatically, the flag saying true/false) is causing a problem because every time ECM goes from TRUE to FALSE, radars drop lock, 100% of the time. This makes it impossible to guide RF missiles onto an aircraft that is doing this.
Chaff may be adding to the problem, but it's sort of auxiliary.
Thank you.
So if I for instance would have blinked the ecm on and off in the mirage months ago I would have trashed all active missiles?
Or this is due to the hornet's update?
-
Can someone help me understand the issue here? I can see dcs is completely broken right now but I would like to know what the specific issue is.
I saw the OP saying ECM and some chaff generated the bug, but then you guys talked about ECM blinking.
So what is the exact bug here?
-
So wags posted a mini update with a huge task list. A tremendous amount of work.
Sad to see that the MSI+LWTS simulation will continue to be broken.
I keep opening threads in hope to see it mentioned as a fix.
There are many useless things they are working on while they could be fixing big major bugs.
Coupled autopilot???? Jesus christ... do we really want that before being able to fly with the MSI in LTWS working?
Who decides priorities in ED? I'm shocked tbh.
-
5
-
-
5 hours ago, Coxy_99 said:
Its not updated tested.
Come again?
-
21 minutes ago, Skysurfer said:
Agreed, given the goals for 2020 have been broadly missed and features marked as completed are in fact far from complete, or simply wrongly implemented, a new status report and plan for this year would be indeed much appreciated.
The lack of it is creating more confusion than if the OP didn't even exist.
-
1
-
-
On 2/6/2021 at 3:48 PM, MurderOne said:
Correct; the IFLOLS used for FCLP is non-adjustable, where the shipboard IFLOLS is adjustable. "Once set up and calibrated, there are no moving parts to the unit. Shipboard units are much more complicated as they must be gyroscopically stabilised to compensate for ship movement. Additionally, shipboard units are mechanically moved (the "roll angle") to adjust the touchdown point of each aircraft. With this adjustment, the tailhook touchdown point can be precisely targeted based on the tailhook-to-pilot's eye distance for each aircraft type."
Nice stuff!
I knew about the gyro stabilization thing as I reported many times to ED that the stennis was simulating it but the supercarrier wasn't, so the SC doesn't have the torsion bar simulated and will follow the ship movement.
But I though that the adjustments based on AC type were simulated.
-
Any comments on this? I just came back from vacations and noticed that it isn't working correctly yet.
-
25 minutes ago, Teknetinium said:
Holy dodge batman!
-
12 minutes ago, Leadbottom said:
Is anyone else having difficulty with the GMT mode of the new radar update in DCS Beta? I've been testing it using BMPs and T-72s moving at 7nm and it won't detect any of them. The SEA mode works great, just can't get the GMT mode to work.
Nope, works fine here. The only thing noticeable is that it seems to be an arcade implementation, not a simulation. It just detects military targets and nothing else. It doesn't detect waves on lakes or rivers, trains, vehicles in general, etc.
But the way ED wanted it to work, works.
-
The hornet is unflyable in its current state. Amraams are useless and the radar is like it was back in 2019, it can't detect targets. Datalink is broken as well.
Maybe ED needs more than a couple of months to test the updates, current methodology isn't working.
-
On 1/26/2021 at 2:25 AM, Joni said:
I've had one of the worst MP experience in years tonight due to this bug. I hope they make the game usable for us again on wednesday.
Regards.
Is it? I haven't tried yet.
-
1 minute ago, BIGNEWY said:
Again unless it is in the change log it is not fixed.
you will have to continue to be patient
thanks
I wasn't pushing anything, I got you the first time. This was just a reply to a different user with a clarification on why I stated what I had stated before.
Thanks anyway, I know it was a huge patch and a lot of work.
-
2 minutes ago, evilnate said:
Darn. I came to this thread because I didn’t see any mentions in the change log.
Is the elevation still 0ft beyond 10mi if you take over TGP from HMD on a point higher than sea level?
Unfortunately yes, it remains bugged.
That's why I said this is a critical one.
-
4 minutes ago, Tholozor said:
As far as I can tell It seems to be fixed now in today's patch. I can easily HMD designate far beyond 10 miles without the TGT position walking.
I tried it and it isn't fixed. The thing is that they changed how it works and the bug is no longer the same. Now the bug makes that designating beyond 10nm will put 0ft elevation no matter what the actual elev is. But it won't acquire the real one when crossing the 10nm mark like it did before.
So you feel it works ok, but if you use it for weapon delivery it will always miss (unless obviously the TGT is at sea level).
-
On 1/23/2021 at 6:02 PM, BIGNEWY said:
First issue is reported thanks.
Yes, it has been reported for a while now. Why isn't it being considered as a high priority? We cannot accurately designate with the HMD beyond 10nm! You need to understand the negative usability impact this bug has.
Please don't leave this broken for years, it's a very welcome feature.
Question about Nav Fix (recent Wags video)
in DCS: F-16C Viper
Posted
Not entirely true.
Legacy Hornets that don't have EGI but separate modules for INS and GPS can also provide position based on only GPS or only INS.