Jump to content

Al-Azraq

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    388

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Al-Azraq

    Confused about Magic use with Radar ACM modes

    in M-2000

    Posted · Edited by Al-Azraq

    Hey people,

     

    Yesterday I had 30 minutes free so I decided to go to the dogfight server for some quick action but the behaviour of the ACM radar modes coupled with Magic missiles got me confused:

     

    My flow goes like this:

     

    1. Master arm ON

    2. CM to program 4

    3. Select Magic with HOTAS

    4. Radar ACM mode to boresight using CMD forward

     

    However yesterday, my radar wasn't locking the contact despite being very close and within the boresight symbology. The Magic IR seeker mode was picking up the contact before the radar and weirdly, upon the Magic Slave button press, the radar was locking the contact.

     

    So it was like the other way around. I was picking up the contact with the seeker head first, and then pushing the slave button for radar lock

    Is this a bug? Was I doing something wrong?

     

    EDIT: so it is SOLVED!

     

    I asked on the Discord and Helljumper and other guys were super kind replying me. So basically with the Magics you have another sensor to search which their IR head seeker. You can change the pattern by pressing Magic Unlock button. Also you can use your Radar Search patterns using CMS switch. You can use both at the same time and the first getting a lock, will prevent the other one locking as well this is to prevent locking onto different targets and also in order to get sneaky kills.

     

    Then, by pressing Magic Slave button, you will slave the radar to the IR lock or the IR seeker head to the Radar lock.

    • Like 1

    [REPORTED] "Caucasus - M02. Introduction to the INS" - Unable to progress past the overfly INS update

    in Bug Reports

    Posted

    On 7/30/2021 at 12:13 AM, m4ti140 said:

    As of July 30th 2021 this issue still occurs in the NTTR version. The instructions are correct now, but the mission still fails to progress past overfly update. The instructor does not acknowledge that the update took place.

    Additionally, the coordinates of the waypoint are completely wrong and do not correspond to the landmark discussed (Hoover dam)

     

    Same here, wasn't able to complete it as it doesn't get passed the dam part.

    Incorrect fuse action on SD2 bomb

    in Bugs and Problems

    Posted

    This a long due bug since almost the introduction of this ordnance. If there are other reason to not correct it (like a complete overhaul of cluster munitions) please let us know, the Anton is the only period accurate German plane for Normandy and right now it is full of bugs.

    • Like 4

    F-14 AIRIO Map Markers to Steerpoint issues

    in VAICOM

    Posted · Edited by Al-Azraq

    7 hours ago, Ghost Dad Recon said:

    You can do it using "Jester, options" and navigating the menu. That's how I've done it.

     

    Oh, I didn't know about that command that's great! Thanks man.

     

    EDIT: When I command JESTER, OPTIONS this is the result:

     

    Screen_210311_111229.png

    • Like 1

    F-14 AIRIO Map Markers to Steerpoint issues

    in VAICOM

    Posted

    Hi all,

     

    I'm having issues with the map markers to steerpoint function while on Blue Flag server. First, I had the issue that the VoiceAttack command only supports up to Map Marker number 10 but the simple modification of the voice command writing 1...50 allowed me the use higher map marker numbers.

     

    However, on Blue Flag (haven't tried other servers), I put a Map Marker and let's say it is number 20. I issue the voice command, it is recognised by VoiceAttack, but then I have a text on screen saying there's only 8 map markers on the map.

     

    I thought it maybe that Blue Flag removes previous Map Markers so despite my map marker is numbered as 20, it is not really the map marker 20 as the previous ones have been removed. So I guessed that maybe AIRIO or the module itself (I don't know which is the source of the issue) sees that map marker as Map Marker number 8 in our example but I issue the command to make Map Marker 8 to Steerpoint 1 and it inputs wrong coordinates.

     

    Do you guys have any tip on this?

     

    Thanks!

    MK 20 Rockeye (Is it done?)

    in DCS: F-14A & B

    Posted

    12 hours ago, Hextopia said:

    This is a straight up fabrication, and you can check this yourself by looking at the weapon definition in the lua:

      

    
declare_bomb("ROCKEYE", _("ROCKEYE"), "rockeye", wsType_Bomb_Cluster, "bomb-cassette-2", {
fm =
{
    mass            = 222.000000,
    caliber         = 0.335000,
    cx_coeff        = {1.000000, 0.390000, 0.600000, 0.168000, 1.310000},
    L               = 2.340000,
    I               = 101.298600,
    Ma              = 0.197848,
    Mw              = 1.987409,
    wind_time       = 1000.000000,
    wind_sigma      = 100.000000,
},  

launcher = 
{
    cluster = cluster_desc("Bomb_Other", wsType_Bomb_Cluster, combine_cluster(MK118_DATA,
    {
        cluster = {
            count        = 247,
            effect_count = 20,

            wind_sigma  = 50,
            impulse_sigma = 2,
            moment_sigma = 0.0001,
        }
    }, 
    "cluster"
    )
    )
},

control = 
{
    default_delay       = 1.2,
    default_open_height = 457,
},

     

    The rockeye is modeled as having 247 heat projectile submunitions.   The problem is the damage of the submunitions is very low, meaning they usually don't score enough hits (and thus enough damage) to actually kill the target they hit.

     

    The mk 118 submunition weapon data:

      

    
warheads["MK118"] = -- Mk-20
{
mass = 0.59,
expl_mass = 0.25, 
other_factors = { 1.0, 1.0, 1.0 },
concrete_factors = { 1.0, 1.0, 1.0 },
concrete_obj_factor = 0.0,
obj_factors = { 1.0, 1.0 },
cumulative_factor= 10.0,
cumulative_thickness = 0.25
};

     

    I'll admit I'm not 100% certain of how these values work, since I haven't done extensive testing, but I believe the low explosive mass of the submunitions is the cause of the problem.

    They appear to have good armor pen damage bonus (cumulative_factor of 10) but the thickness of only 0.25 I believe means they do very little damage on anything with moderate armor.

     

    To complicate things further, the way armor is modeled in DCS is some really confusing code that appears to compare the incident angle of the projectile to the center of the object being hit, then applying an armor value based on that angle.  Here's the relevant generic schemes from the code for example:

      

    
-- armour scheme
unarmed_hull_elevation = { {-90, 90, 1 }, }
unarmed_hull_azimuth = { {0, 180, 1 }, }
unarmed_turret_elevation = { {-90, 90, 1 }, }
unarmed_turret_azimuth = { {0, 180, 1 }, }
unarmed_armour_scheme = {
										hull_elevation = unarmed_hull_elevation,
										hull_azimuth = unarmed_hull_azimuth,
										turret_elevation = unarmed_turret_elevation,
										turret_azimuth = unarmed_turret_azimuth
									};

tank_hull_elevation = { {-90, -45, 0.1}, {-45,11,1}, {11,19,2.9}, {19,40,1}, {40,90,0.15}, }
tank_hull_azimuth = { {0,10,2.9}, {10,30,1}, {30,150,0.67}, {150,180,0.20}, }
tank_turret_elevation = { {-90,18,2.9}, {18,90,1}, }
tank_turret_azimuth = { {0,10,2.9}, {10,30,1}, {30,150,0.67}, {150,180,0.25}, }
tank_armour_scheme = {
									hull_elevation = tank_hull_elevation,
									hull_azimuth = tank_hull_azimuth,
									turret_elevation = tank_turret_elevation,
									turret_azimuth = tank_turret_azimuth
								};

IFV_hull_elevation = { {-90, 30, 1 }, { 30, 90, 0.6 }, }
IFV_hull_azimuth = { {0, 30, 1 }, { 30, 150, 0.6 }, { 150,180, 0.5 }, }
IFV_turret_elevation = { {-90,18, 1 }, { 18,90, 0.5 }, }
IFV_turret_azimuth = { {0,180, 1 }, }
IFV_armour_scheme = {
									hull_elevation = IFV_hull_elevation,
									hull_azimuth = IFV_hull_azimuth,
									turret_elevation = IFV_turret_elevation,
									turret_azimuth = IFV_turret_azimuth
								};

T55_hull_elevation = { {-90, -45, 0.2 }, {-45, 30, 0.8 }, { 30, 90, 0.4 }, }
T55_hull_azimuth = { {0, 30, 1.2 }, { 30, 150, 1 }, { 150,180, 0.56 }, }
T55_turret_elevation = { {-90,23, 1.0}, { 23,90, 0.2 }, }
T55_turret_azimuth = { {0,30,2.0}, {30,150,1.6}, {150,180,0.65}, }
T55_armour_scheme = {
									hull_elevation = T55_hull_elevation,
									hull_azimuth = T55_hull_azimuth,
									turret_elevation = T55_turret_elevation,
									turret_azimuth = T55_turret_azimuth
								};

    So from reading this, my take would be that anything using an armor scheme (if the unit doesn't have an armor scheme defined, it uses a flat "armour_thickness" Value), should be penetrated by the mk-118 since they should only be hitting from above.

     

    For instance, a HMMWV has thickness 0.005, whereas BMP1 is 0.2, leopard is 0.125, T-72 has 0.1

    BUT each one has a different HP value as well:  HMMWV: 1.5, BMP: 4, Leopard: 32, T-72: 25

     

    Now, I don't know exactly how explosive mass and HP correlate, but I do know i've seen T-72's shrug off a MK20, while trucks and such get deleted by it.
    I think we can reasonably assume the explosive mass is close to a 1:1 correlation with HP damage (assuming a penetration), so it might require upwards of 100 submunition hits to kill a T-72 for instance, or 320+ for the Leopard (Granted, you can start a vehicle burning without totally removing all the HP and it will die, but that's another discussion)

    Given the dispersion pattern of the MK-118's, probably about ~60% of them don't end up hitting a target, which is why I think we don't usually see them killing vehicles (especially higher HP/armor ones) well.

     

     

    tl;dr:  MK-20 is accurately modeled down to the submunition, unit HP/armor causes issues, since the MK-118s don't do enough damage.

     

    That's the real issue here, the ground units in DCS are just HP pools like in an RPG game and it could be either dead, or alive with some states in between in some cases but always based on that HP pool. For instance (and I'm just making out these numbers), and SA-6 search radar will have it's radar inoperative when the HP pool down to 30%, not because you hit the radar antenna. You can hit the tracks of the vehicle and get it down to 30% and the radar will stop working even if you haven't hit it.

     

    This could work more or less acceptable, but the problem is with small warhead like the bomblets in the Mk 20 because the damage attached in DCS for this warheads is so low, that you will need many hits to a vehicle to completely kill it whereas with a proper damage model, you would have destroyed their tracks rendering it combat inoperative, killed the crew, the turret, hit munitions depot, etc. It is the same issue we have with the Harpoons, RB-04 and RB-15 work because Heatblur put a very high damage value for them in order to offset this. In real life, anti-ship missiles won't sink a ship, but they will render it combat ineffective but not in DCS where you have to sink them.

     

    The whole RPG approach to the damage modelling is just wrong.

     

    • Like 2

    VAICOM PRO plugin for VoiceAttack

    in VAICOM

    Posted

    20 hours ago, hornblower793 said:

    Yes it is

    I can confirm it works! I tried in Hoggit first and Jester wasn't inputting any coordinate. Voiceattack detected the command, but Jester was doing nothing. My assigned map marker was 21 but it wasn't working with map marker 1 either.

     

    Then I tried single player and it worked great so the failure in Hoggit might be on my side. I'm quite new to the Tomcat and I could have missed something.

    VAICOM PRO plugin for VoiceAttack

    in VAICOM

    Posted · Edited by Al-Azraq

    11 hours ago, VF2 Subsonic said:

    This brings to mind some of my map marker confusion.  When my RIO has kid dooty and I need jesterd to fill in, how exacltll does it work?

    As in, what marker numbers are recognized as 1...2...3 and so on? Is just the lowest one on the map from ANYONE, "marker 1" and then the next highest "2" and so on"

    Thanks

     

    By default, it only recognises up to the map marker number 10 which is no issue... if you are on single player. But in multiplayer you will have more than 10 almost for sure because other players will have placed theirs and your map marker number will stack up to other's. The other day, my map marker number in Blue Flag was 29 so there was no way to tell Jester to pick that one.

     

    However, one Discord user (is that you, @hornblower793?) tried editing the sentence in Voice Attack to Map Marker [1...10] to Map Marker [1...30] and it worked so I will try that fix. 

    • Like 2

    VAICOM PRO plugin for VoiceAttack

    in VAICOM

    Posted · Edited by Al-Azraq

    Yesterday I had issues in multiplayer when telling Jester to convert a map marker in a waypoint. I was in Blue Flag and the Map Marker had the number 29 assigned so I told him:

     

    "Map Marker 29 to Waypoint 1" without success.

     

    Then I checked the VAICOM manual and I noticed that the command is "Map Marker [1...10]...." does this mean that if the map marker has a higher number than 10 it won't be recognised?

     

    Also I had issues with "Set Ripple Quantity Step" as it wasn't recognising the command. I issued the show options for this command order and it showed 2 | 4 | 8 | 16 and Step wasn't an option.

     

    Thanks in advance.

    VAICOM PRO plugin for VoiceAttack

    in VAICOM

    Posted

    11 hours ago, hornblower793 said:

    You do have the AIRIO licence registered and the AIRIO dll in the extensions folder

    Sent from my SM-T835 using Tapatalk

    This one is good for the next day or so

    https://discord.gg/qUBEdTvk

    Sent from my SM-T835 using Tapatalk
     

     

    Thanks for trying to help! I solved the issue. The problem was that the AIRIO voice command were not exported to the Voiceattack profile so I openend VAICOM, went to the editor tab, pushed the test button, and it that 400 orders were missing. Then I pushed the finish button and it copied the missing sentences to the clipboard, opened Voiceattack profile, double click in one of the AI commands, and copied them there. Save everything and it is now working great!

     

    Just wondering, how to I ask Jester to change between steerpoints?

    VAICOM PRO plugin for VoiceAttack

    in VAICOM

    Posted

    Hello, I'm trying to make AIRIO to work but Jester is just not responding and it seems Voiceattack is not recognising my commands. I checked the command list, and I don't anything related to Jester, it seems that the AIRIO commands are not there.

     

    I did the Export thing, but only adds TACAN and some other voice commands. Nothing related to start-up, etc.

     

    Am I missing something?

    Cold War 1947 - 1991

    in Multiplayer

    Posted

    1 hour ago, Pilot Ike said:

    Looks like you are doing everything correctly. The amount of flares dropped is crucial though, the more, the better. You should also avoid a second pass, deliver your ordinance in "one pass and haul ass." Doing so you can afford to drop more flares in your attack run.

     

    On another note, when you fly by an Avenger (at 90° angle or similar) at higher speeds (> M0.8) their Stingers are pretty harmless. Even though they track, most will not hit you.

     

     

    Thanks! I'm new to the Mig-21 so I'm sure I'm doing many things wrong and for starters, I was doing more than one run. I will try to avoid that. Also yeah, I noticed that some Stingers were missing me when shooting to my face so I'll try to stay fast, drop ordinance and haul ass with as many flares as possible.

     

    Anyways, I noticed the Avengers are way more deadly than Strelas.

    Cold War 1947 - 1991

    in Multiplayer

    Posted

    I have a tactical question for you guys: How do you deal with the deadly Avengers in the Mig-21? I tried to pre flare, jink, cut throttle, etc. but they are all aspect and they always hit me in the face when trying to perform an strike run.

     

    Any tips?

    Cold War 1947 - 1991

    in Multiplayer

    Posted

    Hey! I've been learning the Mig-21 lately and it was time to try this server. I had a great time although those Avengers had even a greater time with me 😂

     

    Congratulations to Alpenwolf, great fun server.

     

    Is there an official Discord for this server?

    KH-66 GROM Not locking or following beam

    in Weapons

    Posted

    2 hours ago, john4pap said:

    Mine works only when "realistic ASP" is set to off. When it is on, the grom won't work in either mode: lock or follow beam.

    Sent from my SM-J510FN using Tapatalk
     

     

    Same here! I was scratching my head over this. Thanks for your message.

     

    It would be great to have it fixed for the realistic ASP option or maybe rethink whether Grom should be available or not because it seems that they are behaving in an unrealistic way.

×
×
  • Create New...