Jump to content

gyrovague

3rd Party Developers
  • Posts

    189
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by gyrovague

  1. I took another look, I don't think this is a bug. Just make sure the readout source window above TID shows blank, and not "OWN A C" or a waypoint. If it shows something other than blank, just use TID cursor half-action and release to clear the hook. With nothing hooked, and navgrid enabled, the lat/long entry applies to navgrid reference point, otherwise it applies to whatever is hooked (which is most likely still "OWN A C" after INS alignment procedure).
  2. Hey Bankler, Check out the top of command_defs.lua (the PROXY_* commands) and proxy_device.lua in F-14 files (inside Mods/aircraft/F14/Cockpit/), they might have what you need. It's essentially a way of triggering a series of cockpit commands from one higher level proxy command from the mission editor triggers. The 10001 entry might be useful, or a combination of a few of the others.
  3. Vc switch only controls the scale of the so-called Vc "bug" on the right of the DDD, shown only in STT modes. The Aspect switch controls the scale of the main display in PD modes, essentially shifting everything up or down.
  4. I will take a look, but note that you do need to ensure you have no waypoints hooked. The TID readout source window (above TID) should show blank when entering navgrid coords, if it's showing a WPT or SYMBOL, then you have a waypoint or something hooked.
  5. While implementing the navgrid, we discovered that our TID offset was previously done incorrectly in the gnd stab mode. It's supposed to always reposition the TID overview so that own aircraft ends up at the location hook.
  6. It doesn't prevent symbology of course, BUT given that the target object only has a flag specifying whether or not it's jamming, we need to come up with some kind of model of how that jamming might affect us. We'd need to make assumptions about jamming capabilities of the target, whether it jams noise, or interferes with range or range-rate discrimination, how sensitive our radar might be to all that based on how far away said target is and how powerful its jammer might be etc. Basically it would be a lot of speculative extrapolation, all from 1 bit of data. Of course the real world ECM and ECCM capabilities of aircraft are quite heavily guarded secrets, which is probably (at least partly) why DCS just has such a simple on/off ECM model. That said, the real F-14 could detect certain types of jamming, and show a strobe on the TID (and noise levels on the DDD), and moreover those TID strobes were shared on datalink, so a few tomcats working together would be able to triangulate more or less the location of a jammer (where the jamming strobes cross) and place a spot hook there and create a waypoint on that spot. It would be cool to have this in DCS.
  7. Hah, you'd think so, but you'd be wrong :P When I worked on the A-4E, there were even parts of that which were still classified, and our FOIA request for the info was categorically denied too. IIRC it was stuff like the LABS (Low Altitude Bombing System, basically a (probably) simple toss-lofting computer) that we couldn't get (legitimate) info on.
  8. Yes. I haven't confirmed, but I think it would also work to start with low internal fuel and full external tanks, I don't think those get added twice, they follow a somewhat different path in the API. Not 100% sure though.
  9. Fixed internally, thanks for the report.
  10. It seems the error is not fully on DCS' shoulders, but a bit of both: DCS calls a certain init API (provided as callback by F-14) twice when starting on carrier, vs. only once on land. This was undocumented (and therefore unexpected by us), but upon investigation by ED (after we submitted a detailed bug report) it is apparently necessary because the carrier is moving and something to do with multiplayer... not 100% clear yet exactly the reasons, but bottom line is we need to re-shuffle some code around in the FM to init the fuel tank weight distribution elsewhere to avoid it being done twice cumulatively (and ensure with thorough testing that it doesn't break ground/air refueling etc.). This fix won't make it in the current update cycle unfortunately, so might be a week or two before it lands. Unclear how long this issue has been present, as we don't know when that init API started being called twice by DCS. For now, just be aware that if you spawn on the boat and take-off, your weight will be too heavy (up to 7348kg too heavy, if you had full internal fuel). The way the DCS catapult API works automatically takes care of this issue (otherwise it would of course have been noticed immediately), so it basically gives you the extra oomph to make you still take-off correctly, but the extra weight is noticeable when landing or just trying to fly on-speed etc.
  11. Unfortunately we've had to remove the new AIM54 active code at the last minute, as some things ED provided don't seem to work correctly in multiplayer based on our extensive testing. This has also impacted TWS-A work a bit (indirectly), so that also won't be in the next patch cycle. There are a bunch of other nice changes though, watch the press for details.
  12. To add to that, we requested this feature about two years ago from ED, but it was denied unfortunately.
  13. We still have not had a response from ED to our multiple queries on this subject, but in the meantime we've tweaked values a bit to at least fix the most egregious things you noted in this post. At least launched phoenixes won't now leave a negative drag behind, and the shoulder sidewinder/sparrow drag is more reasonable, and the tunnel (recessed) sparrows are less draggy and the tunnel phoenix rails have some residual drag. It's not perfect, but it's better than it was. Should be available in the next OB patch, whenever that is. Thanks again for taking the time to do this!
  14. I don't think the error is on our side, it seems to come from DCS.
  15. I looked at this a bit, it seems like DCS is adding the internal fuel mass twice when on the carrier. Odd, to say the least :P DCS tells our FM what the mass of the aircraft is, as well as center of mass, moment of inertia etc. etc. When I set internal fuel to 0, the mass is identical on land and carrier. When I set it to non-zero, the extra mass on carrier is double the extra mass on land, and the extra mass on land matches the fuel weight as set in the mission editor.
  16. It will continue guiding towards the held track, not the "new" target track. If the new track is the same target that the old held one was representing, it means the target changed course/velocity since the previous observations (prior to losing him on radar). The missile won't magically be guided to the "new" target track since the TWS doesn't realize it's the same target anymore at this point. Once the new TWS-Auto is merged in, you'll find that target tracks under missile attack are automatically held, even without "track hold" selected.
  17. From the info we have, the above is incorrect. The TCS will slave to radar STT only if the TCS is not tracking. When it is not tracking, and ACQ mode is not MANUAL, and TCS slaved to radar (TCS slave mode), it will acquire (and thus start tracking) a target. If a new target is locked by radar, but TCS is still tracking the previous one visually, it won't automatically drop the tracking and jump to the new STT target. I think we just need to add a Jester function to drop TCS track (effectively make him press and release half-action on TCS mode HCU).
  18. It's because the pairs logic only releases pairs in specific station combinations, namely stations 1&8, 3&5 and 4&6, for weight&balance&separation reasons. AFAICT from the docs we have, this would mean that if one of those stations in a pair is empty, it will only drop one bomb (but this is not clearly spelled out, like many things in the F-14 docs where edge cases apply). This logic might change if we get solid contradictory information, but for now I'm sticking with that. I haven't seen anything which indicates that it would skip to a non-paired station if one of the paired stations is empty. A fix for the ripple count is in the pipeline though, should be in next OB patch (whenever that is). Specifically, it won't count empty stations anymore, so the total released will be what is selected on the ripple count (assuming you have that many left, and stores release was held in throughout the sequence etc.). If you have pairs with ripple, and your 10 bombs loadout, and you select 10 or more ripple sequence and hold in pickle, it will now drop 2, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1 for instance.
  19. From feedback so far, it sounds like it had the capability to detect whether or not the hooks holding the bomb lugs were open or not, so could indirectly tell whether a particular station has bomb/s remaining or not, so would thus make sense that it should skip trying to release (and count) stations that have no more bombs left. Still a bit unclear what the pair behaviour should be when one of the two paired stations is empty, since the docs we have specify that pairs are only ever dropped in certain station combinations for weight&balance and separation reasons (1&8, 3&5, 4&6).
  20. I know what's happening now. For that final ripple of six, it's trying to release stations 3,5,6,4,3,5, but only 6&3 still have bombs left, so it only drops 3,6,3 (i.e. three bombs). We have some queries out to SMEs about whether the WCS had any feedback about whether bombs were still remaining on stations, docs we've seen thus far don't indicate that such capability existed, hence why currently we're counting release pulses towards ripple count and not actual bomb drops.
  21. Could you paste your exact loadout please? Edit: I reproduced it with 4x Mk82 on stations 6&3, and 1x Mk82 on stations 4&5 (i.e. 10 total). The single drop after first two pair drops is expected, but not the non-release of all remaining once ripple is set to more than what's left.
  22. Upon re-reading the last two pages of this thread, I think I need to state some further clarification: The AUTO and AUTO SRCH ACQ modes will indeed automatically try to get a TCS contrast lock on a target IF you're in the TCS slave mode (i.e. TCS slaved to radar, AND radar has STT, and TCS not already tracking). The MAN ACQ mode together with TCS slave and radar STT will only follow the radar and not acquire a TCS lock by itself, and this is the combination used for boresight trim alignment. In the independent and radar slave modes, it requires half-action to slew TCS and full action to initiate an AUTO or AUTO SRCH or MANUAL acquisition. The next patch also includes a small fix, the TCS LoS was accidentally not displayed on the HUD in the TCS slave mode.
  23. We've added the latest DCS AIM-7M as well as the 7F to our F-14 now, should be available in the next openbeta release. Source on that AIM-7MH ? I haven't seen that mentioned anywhere.
  24. I've left a note for the documentation guy, he is currently not available. Will probably be fixed by the next release patch I guess.
×
×
  • Create New...