ILS Question

[Delareon]

Hey,

 

i think i allready know the answer but i ask it anyways: is it possible to display the Glidepath information in the HUD?

 

With an F-16 Background its kinda ugly to scan all the instruments, including the HUD, when you know it would be so easy if you can just have that 2 bars in the HUD.

[Destroyer37]

Negative sir, as the HUD isn't certified for use in instrument conditions.

[razo+r]

If you have the data showing that it is used in the A-10, why not...

[Snoopy]

If you have the data showing that it is used in the A-10, why not...

 

It is not.

[Delareon]

Well its not funny to do ILS Landings in this Plane due to the fact that you have to do a Heads Down Landing.

But anyways, since i read the answers in my other Thread where i asked how to bom with JDAMs in Bad Weather, where the conclusion is...well you cant really, i dont see much of a point to take off in bad weather with this plane.

When you cant see your target you cant fight it. And this plane is lacking Sensors to find and fight targets you have no visual contact.

 

Pretty sad for a specialized AG - Plane i think. The F-16 is much more versatile in AG even if its "just" a multirole fighter and not specialized.

[AMEDooley]

I’m not sure what plane you’re flying but the A-10C is very good in all weather conditions. With JTAC or a FAC(A) giving you coordinates, JDAM drops are very simple. And IFR is meant to be heads down. Eyes can be deceiving. If you’re flying the plane correctly you don’t need your eyes until about 100 feet of the ground on landing. If you can’t do an ILS Lansing without the HUD you shouldn’t be doing ILS landings at all.

[Delareon]

Well, try a ILS Landing with an proper Plane (e.g. F-16) where you can do it with the HUD then we can talk again buddy.

I dont say im not able to do it with the Instrument its just not very convenient and no you dont do an ILS Landing completely Heads Down, simply because you need to find out if you can see the Runway/Ground allready and you can now land visually or do a missed approach. This is especially true in a Simulator where you cant check your surroundings without directly looking at it.

So you have to scan the instruments, then look up, can i see the ground? no? check Altitute, still above decicion altitude? yes? scan again... and so on while you just can look forward and have all you need without any Head Movement.

 

And ofc, you need a JTAC which gives you coordinates and stuff, but you cant do it on your own.

While when in a lesser specialized Plane i can do it alone. Im mising basic stuff like an AG Radar to accomplish such an task.

 

So if you see this Plane not as an specialized AG Plane but as an specialized "Troops in Contact Supporter" things change a bit.

 

nevermind, i was thinking the A-10 is more versatile as an AG Plane but it isnt. Still fun to play, my expectation just where different from what this plane is.

[kylekatarn720]

why do you need to move your head? you can see your hud and instruments all at the same time

[MikeMikeJuliet]

Well, try a ILS Landing with an proper Plane (e.g. F-16) where you can do it with the HUD then we can talk again buddy.

I dont say im not able to do it with the Instrument its just not very convenient and no you dont do an ILS Landing completely Heads Down, simply because you need to find out if you can see the Runway/Ground allready and you can now land visually or do a missed approach. This is especially true in a Simulator where you cant check your surroundings without directly looking at it.

So you have to scan the instruments, then look up, can i see the ground? no? check Altitute, still above decicion altitude? yes? scan again... and so on while you just can look forward and have all you need without any Head Movement.

 

And ofc, you need a JTAC which gives you coordinates and stuff, but you cant do it on your own.

While when in a lesser specialized Plane i can do it alone. Im mising basic stuff like an AG Radar to accomplish such an task.

 

So if you see this Plane not as an specialized AG Plane but as an specialized "Troops in Contact Supporter" things change a bit.

 

nevermind, i was thinking the A-10 is more versatile as an AG Plane but it isnt. Still fun to play, my expectation just where different from what this plane is.

 

Does this mean all aircraft prior to incorporating a HUD are not proper aircraft? I believe you may have been spoiled a bit...

 

Though I do agree it would be way more convenient to have it projected on the HUD.

 

Then again I do know that my selected course shows up on the HUD, and I also know that a standard ILS glideslope is 3 degrees, so why would I need to see the cross on the HUD when I really just need a super quick glance to see that the bars are centered, and continue to fly the approach with my HUD despite not having the indicators up there.

 

Problem solved.

[Destroyer37]

Well, try a ILS Landing with an proper Plane (e.g. F-16) where you can do it with the HUD then we can talk again buddy.

I dont say im not able to do it with the Instrument its just not very convenient and no you dont do an ILS Landing completely Heads Down, simply because you need to find out if you can see the Runway/Ground allready and you can now land visually or do a missed approach. This is especially true in a Simulator where you cant check your surroundings without directly looking at it.

So you have to scan the instruments, then look up, can i see the ground? no? check Altitute, still above decicion altitude? yes? scan again... and so on while you just can look forward and have all you need without any Head Movement.

 

And ofc, you need a JTAC which gives you coordinates and stuff, but you cant do it on your own.

While when in a lesser specialized Plane i can do it alone. Im mising basic stuff like an AG Radar to accomplish such an task.

 

So if you see this Plane not as an specialized AG Plane but as an specialized "Troops in Contact Supporter" things change a bit.

 

nevermind, i was thinking the A-10 is more versatile as an AG Plane but it isnt. Still fun to play, my expectation just where different from what this plane is.

 

Technically speaking, you shouldn't be looking outside anyway until your DA/DH depending on what your doing. The a-10 is an all weather aircraft, it is safe and efficient, in the right hands. Find ways to work around the so called short comings, instead of just saying its impossible or difficult.

[AMEDooley]

Well, try a ILS Landing with an proper Plane (e.g. F-16) where you can do it with the HUD then we can talk again buddy.

I dont say im not able to do it with the Instrument its just not very convenient and no you dont do an ILS Landing completely Heads Down, simply because you need to find out if you can see the Runway/Ground allready and you can now land visually or do a missed approach. This is especially true in a Simulator where you cant check your surroundings without directly looking at it.

So you have to scan the instruments, then look up, can i see the ground? no? check Altitute, still above decicion altitude? yes? scan again... and so on while you just can look forward and have all you need without any Head Movement.

 

And ofc, you need a JTAC which gives you coordinates and stuff, but you cant do it on your own.

While when in a lesser specialized Plane i can do it alone. Im mising basic stuff like an AG Radar to accomplish such an task.

 

So if you see this Plane not as an specialized AG Plane but as an specialized "Troops in Contact Supporter" things change a bit.

 

nevermind, i was thinking the A-10 is more versatile as an AG Plane but it isnt. Still fun to play, my expectation just where different from what this plane is.

 

I have flown sims like that, specifically the F-16, so I guess we can keep talking. So airplanes don’t really care about convenience. Not to mention if your HUD goes out you’ll be lost. Hence why pilots train the way they do. And if you want ILS info in your HUD, you better not buy the Hornet. It doesn’t even have ILS. Although it’s HUD is instrument rated. As for finding targets, the A-10 has a TGP that works really well. And if you think Radar is going to be an answer you will be fairly disappointed. Most pilots used the radar just to get in the ballpark and then use the TGP to get more accurate coordinates. And don’t take my work for it, read Hornets Over Kuwait. The author discribes that very thing. So even those jets with A2G radar will have there own limitations. The A-10C is an excellent airframe in all weather conditions. Does it have limitations. Of course it does, no jet is perfect. But saying this plane is worthless in bad weather speaks to the skill of the pilot, not the airframe.

[Yurgon]

But anyways, since i read the answers in my other Thread where i asked how to bom with JDAMs in Bad Weather, where the conclusion is...well you cant really, i dont see much of a point to take off in bad weather with this plane.

 

What do you mean? Of course you can use GBUs in bad weather, you just need to know the coords, either by getting them from your sensors or from some outside source, like the F10 map, or pre-set waypoints, or pre-briefed intel, or someone on the radio. I really don't see the problem here. It's not like DCS is lagging behind real life in this regard, except that the mission planner (very, very roughly comparable to the data cartridge) is not available in MP. Is that such a big deal?

 

More importantly, you're implying that the weather at take-off airfield and the weather at target location are identical. That may be the case, or it may not. The distinction is important, though.

 

When you cant see your target you cant fight it. And this plane is lacking Sensors to find and fight targets you have no visual contact.

 

Pretty sad for a specialized AG - Plane i think. The F-16 is much more versatile in AG even if its "just" a multirole fighter and not specialized.

 

Oh my, did you just say Jehova?! :D

 

I don't know what you expect the A-10 to be. Probably like an F-16, with a bigger gun. Don't act surprised there are more differences than that. More importantly, why on earth do you make it sound like you're disappointed? It is what it is, it is excellent at its job, and I believe DCS A-10C Warthog is by far the closest most of us are ever going to get to flying this ugliness. I could understand if you were disappointed by aspects that are not simulated true to IRL, but being disappointed because the simulation correctly models most aspects of the airplane, including its limitations? Jeeez, talk about expectations. :music_whistling:

 

Coming back on topic, there are primary flight instruments, and the HUD isn't one of them. Feel free to take it up with Fairchild Republic if you think that's a bad design decision.

[Delareon]

Feel free to take it up with Fairchild Republic if you think that's a bad design decision.

 

He He, thats a nice idea :D

 

So to get out of the Quote stuff, i try to answer all the things without quoting all of you.

Dont take this personal im just lazy ;)

 

My Theory is that this Plane is not as specialized in AG as it could be and also that its not very convenient to not have ILS bars in the HUD.

 

For the ILS stuff:

While having no ILS bars in the HUD might not be such a big deal in RL as it is in a simulator where you have to move your head to check any instrument or the surrounding, maybe thats different in VR, i dont know, all i say is that im not happy with this and it would be much easier for the Pilot if he has the information where he need it, in front of him.

 

To clarify this again: im able to land via ILS in this plane even if i have to check instruments where my opinion is it would be way better to have that information in the HUD.

And i mean it would be more convenient to have it ALSO in the HUD, not that the HUD is the only thing you are allowed to look at and you have to die without.

 

Somebody mentioned you shouldnt look outside of your plane before the DA/DH. The Decicion Altitute is not meant to be the only time you are allowed to look if you can see ground. Its the LAST and final moment where you have to check and decide if you continue or abort. Dont come with arguments like you shouldnt look outside of your plane all the time in instrument flight.

Because you shouldnt and i didnt say you have to fly VFR in IFR conditions.

Sometimes i think there are so many people here which just think about 0 and 1 solutions.

If i say the infos should be in the HUD, somebody tells me that you will die when the HUD is damaged, if i say you should check if you can see the ground in ILS landings someobdy tells me you have to look at the instruments. I never said you should do sight seeing, you have to check it from time to time not all the time and this is much easier if you can keep your head up.

 

Somebody say "Airplanes dont care about convinience". Well the plane doesnt care but the people constructing them should and they do, thats also an security aspect to reduce workload.

 

Someone statet the F-18 has no ILS at all?? couldnt believe that, can you point me to any sources?

I saw some videos of carrier landings with ILS Bars in the HUD.

 

 

To the "no proper AG Plane Topic"

 

What i would expect the A-10 to be? Well my thoughts where this plane is a modern Jet, produced in a somewhat similar time than the F-16 was with many upgrades in between on both planes.

So my thoughts where if the F-16 was constructed with the Pilot in Mind the A-10 should be somewhat compareable. Ofc not in every aspect but in the systems they have in common and used to achieve the same goal. Well it is true, sometimes i fly this thing like an F-16 with a big gun, just because i have many hours in the F-16 and just a few in the A-10. A lot to learn.

But i was thinking that this Plane should be able to operate on its own in a combat enviroment independent from ground support or weather conditions.

 

Someone statet you can drop JDAMs and stuff in Bad weather you just need the coords. True Story.

Now i know how to get them for an upfront planning.

But what i say is you have no chance to get this coords just with your sensors in Bad Weather.

And i define Bad Weather as something you cant use your TGP, because of fog, snow heavy rain, clouds or whatever. As soon as you can use the TGP, there is no Problem but without your pretty much blind. Thats the reason i was saying that you shouldnt take off in bad weather with this plane. Not beacuse of the ILS landings but i dont see a point in taking off with a combat air plane when you cant find any targets to shoot at but maybe the AA stuff can find you instead.

 

Maybe im just wrong in thinking the plane should be able to operate on its own. Maybe its just mandatory to have somebody on the ground, finding and marking targets for you.

In this case the A-10 has everything it needs.

[Flagrum]

The A-10 was designed as a tank killer but grew into the role of a CAS plane. And in that role, you pretty much want to know exact where and what you are hitting. Luckly, by definition, there is about always someone on the ground helping you with that - and if it is just someone talking you onto the target.

 

The F-16 is an multi-role aircraft that can do things that the A-10 can not do. But for interdiction missions for example, it might not be so cruical if you hit that chem. factory tank more 2 meters on the left or 5 meters to the right.

 

What I am trying to say is, both planes are ment to be used in different roles, both have their strength in areas where the other might perform not so well.

[drPhibes]

Someone statet the F-18 has no ILS at all?? couldnt believe that, can you point me to any sources?

I saw some videos of carrier landings with ILS Bars in the HUD.

 

https://publicintelligence.net/u-s-navy-f-18-natops-flight-manuals/

 

US Navy F-18s use the AN/ARA-63 ICLS receiver, which isn't compatible with "proper" ILS. While the ICLS, technically speaking, is an instrument landing system (and is referred to as such in the natops flight manual), it has nothing in common with standard ILS. It has more in common with the TILS system used in the Viggen (pulse coded sweeping azimuth/elevation beams).

 

Land-based export models of the F-18 may be equipped with different avionics for use with civilian navaids.

[AMEDooley]

https://publicintelligence.net/u-s-navy-f-18-natops-flight-manuals/

 

US Navy F-18s use the AN/ARA-63 ICLS receiver, which isn't compatible with "proper" ILS. While the ICLS, technically speaking, is an instrument landing system (and is referred to as such in the natops flight manual), it has nothing in common with standard ILS. It has more in common with the TILS system used in the Viggen (pulse coded sweeping azimuth/elevation beams).

 

Land-based export models of the F-18 may be equipped with different avionics for use with civilian navaids.

 

https://fightersweep.com/1904/hornet-vs-viper-part-three/

 

This pilot explains that US Navy hornet pilots cannot do any precision approaches on land what so ever. The best they can do is TACAN approaches. I’ve known this for over a decade as I worked on the legacy hornets for 7 years when I was active and now work on 35’s. So I know the difference. And how lazy can a pilot be that moving their head, even in a sim, is seen as inconvenient?

 

As to the not looking out of the cockpit, I’ve been told by colleagues who have the instrument rating, that when they train for it they have blinders on so they only can look at their instruments. Your eyes can lie but your instruments don’t. It’s probably not as of big deal in a sim as I can feel anything. But I can tell you, in VR, you can get some vertigo. In really bad weather sometime it “feels” like I’m in a bank when really I’m straight and level. I can’t look at the HUD as it only makes the feeling worse. So looking at the instruments is very important.

 

I never doubted your ability, OP, to fly with just your instruments. I just have no clue as to why you would make a rediculous and erroneous claim about the A-10 based on just the lack of an instrument rated HUD and lack of A2G radar. Seems silly and sounds like you lack piloting skills. Maybe you should consider going back to basics and brushing off those skills that seemed, in my opinion, to be rusty instead of blaming the airframe, the engineers, or complaining about what an airframe lacks.

[Emuyen]

This comparison is somewhat disturbing.

 

Both planes are designed for different purposes.

 

Can the F-16 be refuled hot to minimize down times if needed? Can the F-16 sustain heavy battle damage trough a lot of redudant systems? Can the F-16 loiter for hours without any need to leave station or stand-by anchor for air2air refuling? Can the F-16 carry as much ordonance as the A10?

 

on the other hand:

 

Can the A10 do air interception mission? The A10 can't fly fast enough to change sector and support ground units in emergency that are far away. The A10 has no Radar. The A10 can't use AIM7 and AIM120.

 

Delareon please do yourself a favor and read to understand why something is how it is before you do such statements. The engineers behind the planes weren't dumb.

 

I can reccommend you the following two books:

 

https://www.amazon.com/Thunderbolt-Operation-Enduring-Freedom-Aircraft/dp/1780963041/ref=sr_1_6?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1511346164&sr=1-6&keywords=a10

 

and

 

https://www.amazon.com/Fighting-Falcon-Operation-Freedom-Aircraft/dp/1841769940/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1511346228&sr=1-1&keywords=f16+operation

 

This aren't the most detailed books. But they are a easy reading and give a good overview over the different mission profiles for both aircrafts.

 

Fly smart

 

Emu

Edited November 22, 2017 by Emuyen

[AMEDooley]

Nice books, I just download the A-10 one!

[Emuyen]

It's a pleasure!

 

Right now reading the AV-8B book about OEF. It's impressive! They were the first in theatre and flew every time from 70nm off Pakistani Shore to Afghanistan. They had to fly with both fuel bags and air refuel over Pakistan once on the way in and once on the way out. And to be able to loiter 4 hours they had to air refuel on patrol too.

 

And because they carried both bags and the short take-off from an amphibious assault ship they carried only 2 GBU-12 or MK82 and sometimes only few rokets.

 

That's why I get upset when I hear boys crying: "OMG can't work alone. OMG limited ordonance. OMG my plane can't do everything".

 

Reality is not arcade. And those damn physics don't make it easier! :smilewink:

[AMEDooley]

This in so many ways

[mvsgas]

This comparison is somewhat disturbing.

 

Both planes are designed for different purposes.

I agree

 

Can the F-16 be refuled hot to minimize down times if needed?

Yes

 

Can the F-16 sustain heavy battle damage trough a lot of redudant systems?

Yes, as much damage as an A-10? No

Can the F-16 loiter for hours without any need to leave station or stand-by anchor for air2air refuling?

No

Can the F-16 carry as much ordonance as the A10?

No, but looking at the average load out of 4 bombs on the A-10 on Afghanistan and other combat areas, is close.

[mvsgas]

Hey,

 

i think i allready know the answer but i ask it anyways: is it possible to display the Glidepath information in the HUD?

 

With an F-16 Background its kinda ugly to scan all the instruments, including the HUD, when you know it would be so easy if you can just have that 2 bars in the HUD.

 

Keep in mind not all F-16 have this ability. Also the ADI is well place in the A-10, it would take a quick glance up to see the HUD or vice versa the ADI.

[Emuyen]

I agree

 

 

Yes

 

 

Yes, as much damage as an A-10? No

 

No

 

No, but looking at the average load out of 4 bombs on the A-10 on Afghanistan and other combat areas, is close.

 

Thank you Sir! I will do my reading on F-16 hot re-arming. It seems that it's possible but it's rarely used because it's more dangerous. But nevertheless, it's possible.

 

Regarding the armament brought in battle: Yes, sometimes it's surprising how little bombs are loaded. I think "we" just use more in DCS for the sake of fun.

[mvsgas]

Thank you Sir! I will do my reading on F-16 hot re-arming. It seems that it's possible but it's rarely used because it's more dangerous. But nevertheless, it's possible.

AFAIK and IIRC, it is done twice a day, several days of the week in Kunsan and Osan AB for over 20 years to get more sorties and training. Same with A-10 in Osan AB.

[Emuyen]

AFAIK and IIRC, it is done twice a day, several days of the week in Kunsan and Osan AB for over 20 years to get more sorties and training. Same with A-10 in Osan AB.

 

Thank you again. Can you recommend a good reading/book/site about the F-16? Want to follow my own suggestion and learn more.