LastRifleRound

Rho/Theta is a pretty inaccurate way to do this. Zoom in on the ME and just look at how much of a difference 1 degree makes. You cannot get more accurate angles than 1 degree increments in the ME. I recommend using delta lat/long if you have to do this in the jet. Even better, in the ME place a waypoint over the IP, and one over the target. In the Name field for the target one, type in "#CONVERT_TO_BAD". That will automatically become a precisely offset to the preceding (IP) waypoint. I'm seeing great results at 40 degrees, but ONLY if I keep that pipper dead still for a bit before designating, just as you say. However, I find that turning RS off might be necessary. It could be in my head, so I'm going to do many more runs to confirm it. It could also be in my head and I just hold the aircraft steadier with it off due to some subconscious confirmation bias. Hard to say, as I'm really pushing the limits of accuracy with the system to obtain an ideal to work backwards from. It's fun doing it. It's very challenging but entirely possible to nail a small house-sized target when using another house-sized target as an IP. Really tests your ability to hold her steady and wings level in the dive.

The Viper bug appears to be less dramatic and different. If you are banked aggressively away from the target (say, 30 deg or more of bank) the cursor placement will be accurate. It's a lot harder to pin down, so I haven't made a bug report about it yet, but that's what I've seen so far. The Hornet bug is far more dramatic and is definitely tied to aircraft motion.

CCIP is bugged, the aiming cross is mis-placed. Additionally, if you are using Mk83's, those are bugged for all but a very specific speed and altitude pairing. Confirmed Pipper bug below. Mk83 bug also confirmed but it's old (though never fixed) so I'd have to dig it up. If you want to use CCIP, you need to drop late, past the target. You can use the FLIR as well, which does accurately place the impact point.

The above describes entering into FTT. This works fine currently because the radar map coordinates are not used for this. The problem is with INS designations. FTT is only feasible on isolated ground targets.

I know this exists in azimuth when it comes to DBS calcs, but the inaccuracy of the calculation running in reverse doesn't change over time assuming the aircraft has done a good job keeping its own position. The only thing I could guess is the documentation assumes an unassisted INS.

Good find. Seeing the same thing.

This is definitely an issue, but I'm seeing a more subtle issue as well in my testing. Designation accuracy seems to decrease once angle off exceeds 20 degrees. I can't find anything in the MLU docs saying this ought to be the case (though the MLU doc does say to slew as soon as possible after the image appears, though it doesn't say why. With the "snapback" this certainly shouldn't be done in DCS right now). I'm still testing this and will come up with a track if I can repeat it and nail it down.

This is still having the same issue. I'll cut another track but have another observation. Another easy way to demonstrate this issue is to designate point on the ground with the radar. Get within 12nm or so and 30-45 degree offset. Open up the FLIR image. Now, without slewing, keep designating the same spot in rapid succession. Watch as the designation in the FLIR slides along the opposite direction of the axis of travel, and watch as the "skip" gets larger the more angular velocity to that point increases. Not sure if that helps or not. I can also confirm that the JF17 and Viper do not share this issue.

I love the simulation of the radar ranging function for air to ground work. @myHelljumper, what are the ideal parameters for a designation, both for CCRP (low drag default mode) and PI designations? I'm getting mixed results from 20 degree dives (IP is on flat ground). What is the idealized set up one should practice when doing this (dive angle, altitude, etc)? I want to be doing this as "by-the-book" as possible.

That would be a problem of accuracy, not precision. The cursor is always above the designation exactly the same way every time, so the system as currently implemented is precise, meaning it is exactly inaccurate the same way every time. This almost always indicates a bug. Also, TACMAN indicates using the HUD to refine the point in almost all cases, and never once mentions it for areal use. I think that's how DCS players use it, but that's because with the current slewing implementation that's all it's good for. According to documentation and users like @IvanK, this is not correct and the HUD should be uses to refine the aim point all the way to release.

Track attached. The TD box itself is sometimes offset low. CCIP is working as expected, so it is likely either a designation point error or release point calculation error. Could be related to this bug: F16_mk82_short.trk

Track attached. I slew the HUD TDC cursor, ensuring the radar is in AGR. I look back and forth from the HUD cursor and the FLIR which is slaved to the designation. You can see that the designation is always below the actual cursor dot, and if the cursor is off the nose to the left, the cursor is to the right of the designation and vice versa. I also try inside and outside of active pause, and try different perspectives and zoom levels with my TRACKIR and slow zoom and the results repeat every time. I would expect, especially in active pause, that the cursor and the designation point are co-located. This holds true (shown in track_2) when designation is done the other way around, i.e. you designate with FLIR and inspect the diamond location in AUTO and find the diamond is offset in the same way. Hud_cursor_bug.trk Hud_cursor_bug_2.trk

You can do this same thing in EXP and not worry about vertical stacking and you won't have to slew the cursor to bug a target, you can use the NWS button to step as normal, though the update speed will not be as fast.

FINALLY! THANK YOU! BTW, this seems localized to non-axis slewing. I don't have a TDC axis control, and the hornet doesn't allow one to use the mouse, so I added a modifier key and used my x52 to slew to see what it was like and it was MUCH better. Very, very touchy, but much better. It still wasn't as precise as it should be, but there you go.

Yes, it should see static objects and vehicles.

There is a slight difference in DCS. Use a small building, like a boiler house. Fly straight at it, one time holding INR over the top corner, the other with SCENE. As you pass the object underneath you, you can see what the pod was really tracking. You'll find INR is more likely to be looking further past the target than scene is. You can observe this same thing in all versions of litening as well (hornet, A10, viper).

There is a bug currently where all placeable objects do not appear on AG radars for both the Hornet and the JF17 introduced in the last patch, suggesting it's not likely a DEKA issue. It was confirmed in the Hornet forum. Report is here:

This is still an issue in this latest patch. Open instant action caucuses, select fighter intercept. AWACS will call out the targets, seems like they come from 115 or around 85 degrees at 60. When they get on the screen, you'll find the contacts completely unmanageable in TWS. TMS Right does nothing, TMS Up does nothing.

Here's an additional track, from Persian Gulf. I thought maybe it was just a map thing. It is not. I'm also able to get FTT tracks on the two buildings I placed here, so the FTT algo can "see" the buildings, they just don't show on the map. Objects_missing_2.trk

Track attached. This complex and it's many buildings were a practice range for me with radar bombing since the patch that allowed all objects to appear was released some time ago. The objects have all disappeared. The JF17 recently "fixed" it's AG radar as well so it may now be viewed in EXP, DBS1 and DBS2, and the objects are all missing from that display, as well, which suggests an issue outside of the aircraft itself. Right now, in terms of radar use on static targets placed in the ME (as well as roughly 50% of the native map objects), the AG Radar is entirely broken Objects_missing.trk

One issue you're having is trying to make a DT2 in RAID. RAID is basically an overscanned STT. Bugging a new target in RAID will make the new target L&S and the new scan center. Another is you say you TDC depress an already bugged target to make a DT2. This would actually command STT on that track. It sounds like you want to make two bugs on a tight group. To do this, you must use EXP mode, as RAID will only allow one bug at a time. Bug a target in your group contact in TWS, enter EXP mode. Use NWS to step to the target you want to be primary. Use TDC to manually select the target you want to be DT2. Further presses of NWS should step between them. I don't know if DCS models this, but if the targets are close enough that they won't show up as more than one contact outside of RAID, then it is impossible to do what you want.

Track attached. What happens: 1. Initiate TWS 2. TMS right to make system tracks (bug makes this invisible) 3. TMS right again to bug priority target 4. Repeated presses of TMS cycle targets 5. Move cursor to bugged target, TMS up to enter STT 6. TMS down to undesignate and return to TWS 7. FCR format will no longer respond to TMS right or TMS up. It is not possible to cycle bugged targets, manually bug new ones, or enter STT using the cursor. Expected behavior: After #6 above, TMS right and TMS up should function as they did before. EDIT: Bug appears to sometimes appear without STT. From Instant action "Fighter Intercept" in the Caucuses. TMS right and TMS up will not do anything in TWS here. Can't upload this mission as base file size is 5MB F16FCR_unresponsive.trk

Can anyone point me to some good demonstrations of these in use? I had a grasp on the old way of doing it, but I can't this new way to work at all. Also, does TOT now work from a route perspective, or is it still bugged?

Also just fixed EXP/DBS modes according to the dev notes, so next patch hopefully will have that in it!

AUTO isn't working right for QTY and/or bombs with terminal parameters. In fact with QTY it not only doesn't plot a centroid, release is entirely inhibited. Here's a post with more information: https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/225699-later-in-early-access-jdam-auto-loft-mode/ EDIT: here's another great post on the topic https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/262806-is-jdam-autoloft-already-implemented/