Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'guidance'.
Found 7 results
-
Is it possible to create a very simple (best guess / fake) GPS jamming unit in game?
-
Hi Everyone, I was doing some tests with the Rapier and it seems that when firing at low altitude targets, the Rapier missile will do an extreme yoyo, going high, and then rapidly diving, only barely managing to pull-up and avoid a collision with the ground. In the first track I have a Mi-24V flying near enough perpendicular (but not notching), a launcher and an optical tracker, with no blindfire. The Mi-24V is @200m AGL (ΔH ~ 195m), flying at 200kph - well within the engagement parameters for Rapier (according to the Rapier_FSA_Launcher.lua the minimum altitude is 50m). The first missile climbs, then performs a steep dive, only barely managing to pull-up to avoid a collision with the sea, and eventually hits the target. The target descends, another Rapier is fired, this time crashing into the sea. The third missile repeats what the first missile did, and barely manages to avoid colliding with the sea. In the second track I have everything set-up exactly the same, only now the helicopter is set to an altitude of 100m (ΔH ~95m), which should still be inside the Rapiers engagement altitude; this time every missile ends up flying into the water. It should be noted that the missile behaves the same when paired with Blindfire or not. Now this could be caused by probably 1 of 4 factors: The missiles are initially elevated too high - unlikely, the missiles should elevate based on range and altitude. The missiles are too aggressive in trying to centre themselves in the operators reticule (this is broadly what an optical SACLOS guidance scheme tries to do) - unlikely as this might play a part into reducing the minimum range, which is probably a good thing for a short ranged system. The missiles aren't responsive/manoeuvrable enough - not sure, I can only base on my expectations (which may well be off). If you draw a line between the optical tracker and the target I'd expect the missile to follow that line more closely (like the Tunguska), not loft way high above it and then make an excessive dive past it. The AI operator - here I think lies the issue, the AI operator most likely keeps the reticule as centred as possible on the target, this makes sense, however it is most likely (from my reckoning at least) causing this issue, if not for the above 3; a possible remedy is to have the operator aim high (at a similar elevation to the one the missiles are fired at), and then slowly bring the reticule down (so that it is on the target after about 2 seconds). Hopefully, this will result in a more gradual descend and the missile won't perform such an aggressive dive that it can barely climb away from. This should also increase the amount of energy the missile has, which is beneficial for achieving a hit. There is this video of a Rapier launch failure (here the system is the much more modern FSC variant, but AFAIK the command-guidance scheme is the same, just instead target tracking is done automatically via EO/IR and/or RADAR). In DCS it seems to do something similar every time it's launched at a low-altitude target. Can anyone confirm what's going on here, and how Rapier should behave? I've done some digging but can't find much, other than basics. [sidenote: @Tippis contrary to your excellent reference wiki Rapier in DCS will in fact launch with just the optical tracker and without Blindfire, under an optical SACLOS guidance scheme, as it should IRL]. Rapier_FSA_Guidance_(200m_AGL).trk Rapier_FSA_Guidance_(100m_AGL).trk
-
Hi everyone, Found a small bug with the G7a T1 torpedo, fired from the S-130 Schnellboot; when fired past a certain distance, the G7a T1 enters a snake search pattern, where the torpedo turns left and right - this is inaccurate as the G7a T1 is the most basic G7 torpedo, with only gyroscopic guidance. What happens when these torpedoes are fired, is that they initially run straight for a few metres and then will turn to a predetermined course (called a gyroangle, which can be +/- 90° from the launch bearing) and will climb/dive as necessary to reach and maintain a pre-selected depth (1-12m); after that the torpedo runs straight, until it either explodes (with fairly unreliable impact and/or magnetic proximity fusing) or runs out of steam. In the track below, the torpedoes start the snake pattern at around ~6m20s into the track - corresponding to a distance of a little over 7.3km from launch. The only WW2 torpedoes that should perform a snake search pattern (EDIT: nope) are the G7es T4 Falke and G7es T5/T11 / Zaunkönig I / Zaunkönig II; these are electrically powered, passive acoustic homing torpedoes. The behaviour of these at launch is similar to the G7a T1, in that after a short distance they will climb/descend and turn to a predetermined course, then after 400m of travel, the torpedoes will activate, performing a snake search pattern until they hear something - they then essentially use 'bang bang' guidance to home in on the loudest thing they hear, using 2 hydrophones (one on each side). EDIT: they don't actually perform a snake search pattern - it's an effect of the 'bang bang' guidance, which causes the torpedo to oscillate left and right as it is guiding. There are a few other issues with the torpedo, which are detailed below but they are not the focus of this thread. Latest OB, specs down below, clean DCS build (only changes are default payloads, templates and countermeasure programs). G7a_T1_Torpedo_Snake.trk
-
Hello, I've recently come across a bug that seems to be related to the guidance of cluster glide bombs. I have done some testing with the JSOW-A and the GB-6 SFW and the results seem to be consistent across the board. While the normal variants of these weapons (JSOW-C and GB-6 HE) guide perfectly fine when launched within range, the cluster variants have a way higher descent rate and therefore fall short of the target. They also appeard to keep on making small corrections during flight, while the normal variants glide perfectly still. With the GB-6, the issue can be circumvented by setting the impact azimuth. This does not work with the JSOW-A however. I have attached following tests as track files: 2x GB-6 SFW with impact azimiuth set 2x GB-6 SFW without impact azimuth set GB-6 SFW and HE being launched in one go JSOW-A and C being launched in one go 1x JSOW-A with impact azimuth set and one without jsowaVsJsowc.trk jsowAWithAndWithoutAzimuth.trk gb6SFWvsHE.trk gb6WithoutAzimuth.trk gb6WithAzimuth.trk -
As per the title, the Rb-04 ASMs self-destruct if the shooter is killed. Observed this in MP so far, steps to repro are: launch Rb-04 at any hostile fleet, and then climb and let yourself be shot, your missiles will vanish
-
Hi everyone, Long-standing issue - the SM-2 has the guidance of the SM-1 (SARH, illuminating at launch), instead of having its proper guidance, which is INS/DL mid-course + terminal SARH (with the illumination coming from the AN/SPG-62 on the Arleigh-Burke and Ticonderoga - unfortunately said radars appear to be non-functional in DCS and "patriot str" is defined for presumably the AN/SPY-1A/D and the AN/SPG-62). Incidentally, the missile accurate for the Ticonderoga and Arleigh-Burke should at least be the RIM-66M-5 SM-2MR Block IIIB (though AFAIK, early M variants are still in the inventory), which incorporates an IR seeker in a small fairing on the side of the missile: There is an unknown version of the RIM-66M in the files but it isn't an M-5. -
The old AIM-9B had a very simple spin scan seeker that caused its characteristic 'sidewinding' motion. Later variants had different seekers that conferred different behaviors which are not currently accurately simulated; countermeasure resistance, multi-aspect behavior, etc. Radar-guided missiles that used conical scanning also exhibited these not perfectly straight paths. Accurate missile seeker simulation would greatly improve the behavior of weapons in DCS.
