Frederf

I have heard that commonly the kinematic range of the missile exceeds the seeker track range, especially for point targets. Kinematic is going to depend on speed/range.

It should be automatic and in fact it should be impossible for TGP to track anything while GM/GMT/SEA radar is slewed. It should be slaved to the radar LOS. Until it's fixed there is a workaround where you cycle the sighting point rotary. Every cycle the TGP will point toward the SPI. Since most times you only have "TGT" in the rotary a simple TMS right with FCR SOI will do it.

The descriptions of those rockers are they "adjust the display intensity/contrast" respectively. If you have information that the lock performance of the missile depends on the BRT/CON rocker settings I'm interested. I have never seen anything that would indicate that is the case. If the missile lock performance in DCS depends on the MFD bright/con settings then I would submit that as a bug.

This would be a request for two axis controls, an absolute one and a relative one. I assume Winwing controllers can be programmed for absolute output in the meantime.

Listen for the localizer id tones to confirm operation. When the system picks a runway it only runs ILS gear for that runway. If the runway only has gear for one direction and the system picks the opposite direction then no gear will operate.

If TMS aft returns missile slave to TD LOS then it should be slaved to TD LOS. You're saying that it instantaneously returns to TD LOS but drifts away after?

Changing the MFD contrast doesn't change the seeker contrast. Usually the range limit on point targets is they are tool small to be lockable. Not enough pixels. In this way something is lockable in NFOV farther than WFOV.

I'm not aware of any anti-radiation capability in any Harpoon missile. Perhaps there is confusion between AGM-84 Harpoon and AGM-88 HARM?

The pitch command used to work for PRMG guidance before, but it doesn't now. The PRMG signal zone has been a tiny fraction of its real life size since release and it's too steep. MiG21 PRMG pitch guidance needle.trk

There are time scale data in the track file but you can override that during playback. There is only acceleration forward 1/64x at slowest and 2x, 3x, 5x, etc. faster. It is not possible to rewind a track or to start a track from anywhere but the beginning.

With FCR GM (or GMT, SEA) and AUTO scale set the range should decrease and increase based on cursor position according to the following rules: Increase when cursor range is greater than 95% current range setting Decrease when cursor range is less than 45% current range setting for cursor laterally centered, less for cursor laterally displaced Equation for range of decrease is 45% times cosine of azimuth, i.e. Azimuth Range 0° 45% 10° 44% 20° 42% 30° 39% 40° 34% 50° 29% 60° 22.5% F16 GM AUTO scale not decreasing.trk

What do you mean "doesn't do"? Is the EXP label not boxed or is the display not changed or what? Does it say SCAN RAID when you turn RAID on? I see you're at a 10nm range scale so EXP isn't going to expand the display since it picks a 10nm block about the target which is going to be 0-10 min-max without EXP and looks like roughly 5nm centered with your targets which would also be 0-10. I don't know if the display does odd numbers like 1-11, 2-12, 3-13, etc., manual certainly suggests so. Ah yes a 5.1nm EXP goes from -4 to +5 range. Looks like EXP isn't available below 5.0nm. The box won't highlight. I guess that makes sense that if you close to within 5nm with EXP on it stops being useful and kicks off. What's really weird is that if you SCAN RAID on a target, the BRA figures at the bottom count down like you're scanning a stationary point in the sky. The L&S target was ~6nm away but SCAN RAID was just scanning where the target was when I started. Since I'm flying forward this range decreases and when it hits 5.0nm SCAN RAID auto quits. I don't know if that's intentional behavior. All of these quits or no-go's with EXP and RAID seem to occur when the range drops below 5.0nm. With EXP that's the current range. With SCAN RAID it's the static point in space when you started the scan so you run over it pretty quickly.

If the input is body vertical then 1g level flight with a 1g trim is impossible. It must get AOA modified.

I'm assuming cruise gains AOA less than 10 where pitch command is not AOA blended at all. AOA is irrelevant in this case. What I'm asking is that if F-16 is ZSL at +2° pitch and FPM at 0° pitch (level, 2 AOA), does the G meter read 1.000 or the cosine of 2°?

It is aspect as shown in the screenshot in post 1. You just aren't 180 "tail" (or 0, AA and TAA are 180 apart and who can remember) aspect to the targets to the front left as evidenced by the tick marks not pointing up. Measure the angle from the tick mark left/right to the down direction and that's your aspect left/right off his nose. For example you're about 140 right aspect off the target's nose (or 40 right off his tail).

It follows from the math that any flight path has an orthogonal acceleration of cosine of the flight path angle. For flight path angles of -90 to 0 (non-inclusive) that causes a positive turn radius in the vertical plane. For flight path angles of 0 (non-inclusive) to +90 that is also positive turn radius. Only exactly 0 FPA flight allows non-divergent behavior. I hope that the G sensor is measuring the vertical component of gravity along the axis which is orthogonal to the flight path and not "out the top" of the airplane. If the latter is the case then non-divergent 1g level flight is only possible at 0 AOA.

It's sometimes important to know that radar never knows the target's heading. The velocity tick mark represents target motion, not orientation. To radar all targets are metal spheres with no front or back. The technical name for "heading" here is the track azimuth. The radar presentation here is known as B-scope (A-scope is the suuper old display of signal intensity vs range, C scope is elevation vs range, D scope similar C, E scope elevation v range, F-P, R scope etc.). In B scope the x-y axes are azimuth and range. The whole bottom edge is zero range so the tip of your nose cone is smeared out along it. All vertical motion is radial, change of range with no change bearing. The velocity ticks can either be in this B-scope coordinate system or it can change to a non-distorted system where up is always your track az, rightward marks are your track +90, and so on. Different radars do things differently, some remain in B-scope for both plot and tick and some mix up formats between the two. It looks like F-18 radar is not mixed display. If you and all targets are going north, not all the tick marks will point up.

There is an assumption here that subsequent scans are not cooperating. If a return from a target is 90% of the level required for the radar to conclude that a signal is a genuine contact then it is below the display threshold and not shown. However if several very similar, rapid returns of 90% confidence level are received it is certainly within the imaginable design of a radar system for these sub-threshold returns to be combined into a positive contact that exceeds the display confidence threshold. It is my belief that the APG-68 operates by such a principle and that rapid weak detections can result in a displayed contact where a single will not and multiple widely-spaced returns either will take longer or may not at all. The APG-68 has enough memory to make use of such a technique. Under such a scheme a focused scan pattern may reveal a target at a farther distance and/or sooner than a less-focused scan.

No opinion yet.

That's called CCIP with delay cue. Basically if the future projected impact location is off the HUD then the PBIL (line between the gun cross and pipper) is truncated and a false pipper is clamped to the bottom of the HUD. The delay cue shows up on the PBIL (projected bomb impact line) at the % equal to the ratio of the false pipper to the true pipper. E.g. if the delay cue is 80% of the way along the PBIL then the PBIL length you see is 80% of the actual distance to the off-the-HUD future impact location. The more off-the-HUD the pipper is the higher the delay cue line will be on the PBIL. You can still attack when the delay cue is displayed, but you have to hold the weapons release button and fly the FPM through the ASL. Dumb bombs are subject to a 5 mil release constraint which is the size of the circle in the middle of the FPM. Getting immediate (no delay cue) CCIP with most cluster bombs or high drag bombs is really hard due to how they work. Since they have a large part of their flight with high drag their future impact point is going to be really low on the HUD even with really steep angles of dive.

Best way to check for two missiles tracking two targets is to use the missile step button to bounce back and forth between the stations and look at the video from each. In DCS it's currently impossible to fire two missiles tracking except when using EO PRE mode and having exactly two missiles on board. In reality this should be possible in EO VIS and EO BORE as well as having for example 6x missiles on LAU-88s. Polarity is what the missile's looking for. You're telling it to find black dots or white dots effectively. It's normal for the video feed to remain. As far as I can tell the MFD BRT/CON rockers are only for cockpit display purposes. The missile should not be affected in lock performance based on these rocker settings. In USAF Mavericks the video is automatic when the missile has timed out. The pilot has the ability to manually select video before time out with the uncage button. If there is a physical cover on the missile seeker this is also automatically ejected without pilot input. In the case of a non-timed out missile (automatic ejection hasn't happened yet) the cover can be ejected early with uncage as video is activated early by the same button press. This requires master arm ARM to accomplish. The dome covers are glass so they are optically clear (with some possible distortion) for H/K type missiles but are opaque for D/G type missiles. L type missiles have their red plastic dome covers removed before flight. 7-9nm is good lock performance on a small point object like a tank. Pretty much. You don't have to hold TMS forward during slew for stabilized behavior although it can be good technique as tracking is attempted on TMS forward release. The seeker is space stabilized whenever slewing input is happening even if TMS is not pressed.

In normal CCIP there is no small horizontal line. If there is a horizontal line in CCIP before pressing the weapon release button that means the pipper true position is off the HUD and the displayed pipper is for designating the target only. This line is called the delay cue. You will have to hold the weapon release button and fly through the solution similar to CCRP. When there is a small horizontal line on the ASL in CCRP-type display that is called the solution cue. In the current DCS (OB branch) manual (MAN) bombing mode is available. I did some tests. Currently in DCS (OB branch) the BA setting affects the actual fuze setting on the CBU-97. This isn't realistic but it is practical since we have no other way currently of adjusting the fuze physically. Setting the BA at 500' or 2000' caused the bomb to burst at 500' and 2000' respectively. I tried the AD setting. At 1.5 and 10.0 seconds the bomb was not armed until 2.25 seconds after release which I believe is correct for FMU-140 but the DCS default AD setting is 1.5s. Changing the AD in cockpit has no effect on the bomb behavior. If the BA is set for X height but the AD timer hasn't elapsed before the bomb gets below X height, the bomb will wait for the AD timer to elapse before looking if it is below the BA height or not. For example releasing at 1501' height with BA set to 1500' will cause the bomb to burst after 2.25s significantly lower than 1500'.

Sorry, they can come up with a cooperative position (normal operation) or the system can elect to choose to weight one at 100% and the other 0% in the blend. I was just explaining the difference between INS/GPS and EGI as at what point in the process from raw data to system solution they are integrated.

Yes

It's rate based but doesn't react to roll rate in that absolute manner. Why it wasn't made that way I dunno. The misconception is persistent mostly because we can imagine the system being designed so it would hold 0 AOB rate so rigidly so vividly.