AGM-65E New FM ? Also Fixed

[Shrike88]

Glad to see the AGM-65E CTD is fixed.

 

Curious seems if memory serves me correctly they use to fly a direct flight path tot he Laser Spot. Now it seems the Mav holds altitude a lot longer and flies More of a level, then top down flight path (assuming for Armor penetration etc.) I always thought this would be the way they flew more IRL similar to a AGM-144 and the like.

 

Anyone noticing the new flight path being different. ?

[Zeus67]

Glad to see the AGM-65E CTD is fixed.

 

Curious seems if memory serves me correctly they use to fly a direct flight path tot he Laser Spot. Now it seems the Mav holds altitude a lot longer and flies More of a level, then top down flight path (assuming for Armor penetration etc.) I always thought this would be the way they flew more IRL similar to a AGM-144 and the like.

 

Anyone noticing the new flight path being different. ?

 

 

As I said, ED has been making changes to all missiles. That was the source of the CTD on the previous update.

[Cytt0rak]

Glad to see the AGM-65E CTD is fixed.

 

Curious seems if memory serves me correctly they use to fly a direct flight path tot he Laser Spot. Now it seems the Mav holds altitude a lot longer and flies More of a level, then top down flight path (assuming for Armor penetration etc.) I always thought this would be the way they flew more IRL similar to a AGM-144 and the like.

 

Anyone noticing the new flight path being different. ?

 

I agree and it responds to laser movement more faster now.

[Shrike88]

As I said, ED has been making changes to all missiles. That was the source of the CTD on the previous update.

 

Excellent thanks!

[bear.is.flying]

Is the previous 8 mile laser limitation also fixed?

[HawkDCS]

Is the previous 8 mile laser limitation also fixed?

 

Nope they still chase the dot stuck at 8 miles.

[Zeus67]

Is the previous 8 mile laser limitation also fixed?

This is DCS limitation. We cannot change that. Perhaps you could ask ED to increase the limit to 15 nmiles.

[NineLine]

This is DCS limitation. We cannot change that. Perhaps you could ask ED to increase the limit to 15 nmiles.

 

Hey Zeus, can you make sure that this is reported in Mantis if the AGM-65E is capable of 15 nm, but something in ED's code is blocking this, it should be reported. Will get solved a lot faster than sending anyone else to ask ED. Thanks!

[DrGarantia]

This is DCS limitation. We cannot change that. Perhaps you could ask ED to increase the limit to 15 nmiles.

You as a developer has a much higher chance of being heard than any of us "random forum users" could.

I wish anyone on RAZBAM would put a list of those limitations somewhere visible, could save a lot of time and salt on the forums on those bugs/limits of the engine/thing out of your control that affects this module.

[ChickenSim]

Before this gets too confusing, I just want to clarify some things.

 

1) The missile is kinematically capable of traveling a max of ~15 NM under the right employment conditions and still retaining enough speed and control surface authority for guidance (faster and longer for aircraft that travel faster and higher than a Harrier does).

 

2) The laser target designator in the Litening Pod is not capable of lasing a target from 15 NM that will also be detected by a weapon seeker at 15 NM (that's a 30 NM round trip).

 

The reflected laser energy should operate more like a pulley system. The closer the target is being lased from the further the seeker should detect the spot, and vice versa. If the laser's max range is causing a floating spot in the air that the missile is erroneously guiding to, that's also a problem. It should just not detect anything at all if the laser is getting too attenuated to reflect off anything.

 

Right now people are reporting on Facebook and Hoggit that they're getting 20-30 NM shots off with 250 knot terminal velocities which are indicative of problems with both the missile FMs and the DCS laser guidance system.

 

Charts for expected laser detection ranges and kinematic performance for AGM-65E/Fs are in the available Harrier TACMANs. Right now neither of the two systems work as they should.

Edited August 30, 2018 by ChickenSim

[Zeus67]

Before this gets too confusing, I just want to clarify some things.

 

1) The missile is kinematically capable of traveling a max of ~15 NM under the right employment conditions and still retaining enough speed and control surface authority for guidance (faster and longer for aircraft that travel faster and higher than a Harrier does).

 

2) The laser target designator in the Litening Pod is not capable of lasing a target from 15 NM that will also be detected by a weapon seeker at 15 NM (that's a 30 NM round trip).

 

The reflected laser energy should operate more like a pulley system. The closer the target is being lased from the further the seeker should detect the spot, and vice versa.

 

Right now people are reporting on Facebook and Hoggit that they're getting 20-30 NM shots off with 250 knot terminal velocities which are indicative of problems with both the missile FMs and the DCS laser guidance system.

 

Charts for expected laser detection ranges and kinematic performance for AGM-65E/Fs are in the available Harrier TACMANs. Right now neither of the two systems work as intended.

 

 

You forgot something else: The real E is not capable of self-lasing.

[NineLine]

Thanks, CS for the clarification. Will see if we can get RAZBAM to report what they need to ED, and see if it cant get resolved.

[ChickenSim]

You forgot something else: The real E is not capable of self-lasing.

 

I'm not forgetting that, I wasn't even specifying that the lasers were on the same plane being launched from. We've spoken about that before and how for playability reasons you were treating them like E2s.

 

I'm just saying that on principle both systems are currently not working as they should, from the aerodynamic performance of the missile (a 30 NM flight is about as silly as how the JDAMs currently behave and bleed speed) to how the missile guides (detecting any spot that's fired from <8 NM of the target, regardless of how far away the missile is from it).

 

And thanks to both of you for the quick responses!

[ChickenSim]

I'd like to add that a component of the 15 NM max range is the nominal/minimum 105 second battery life on the missile. At the decaying terminal velocity of the missile and a better performing battery (up to 150 seconds), you might see ranges as great as ~21 NM under perfect conditions and a near Mach 1 launch at 33,000' AGL, but this is really scraping the bottom of the barrel in terms of both electrical power and control surface authority (Mavericks are at least a bit better off than Hellfires in the latter category).

[olivier-gaming]

they work

[Eldur]

This is DCS limitation. We cannot change that. Perhaps you could ask ED to increase the limit to 15 nmiles.

 

If anything goes, it would be asking them to increase the limit to infinity, because anything else would just be as unrealistic as it is now, just with a different number.

 

But I'd expect them to rework the laser code anyway while adding a TGP/ATFLIR to the Hornet to bring in LGBs and 65Es.

 

Hey Zeus, can you make sure that this is reported in Mantis if the AGM-65E is capable of 15 nm, but something in ED's code is blocking this, it should be reported. Will get solved a lot faster than sending anyone else to ask ED. Thanks!

 

I'll just try to help getting things together here, for that report you basically just need this video which shows and explains how the limitation works pretty well:

 

 

This issue also affects high altitude lofting of LGBs in the Harrier already - probably would be even more visible in the Hornet once it can lase.

[NineLine]

When Chizh gets back from vacation I will ask him about it, I updated my dev build today and noticed this missile was edited, so I will see if its already being addressed.

[Ramsay]

If anything goes, it would be asking them to increase the limit to infinity, because anything else would just be as unrealistic as it is now, just with a different number

Laser designators do not have infinite range (Atmospheric absorption / attenuation, etc.). However it's hard to get 'firm' TPOD stat's that list target designation ranges, etc.

 

Small hand sets are: 2.5 km designate, 10 km range find. Newer designators quote 12 miles but it's not clear if that's designation or range finding.

 

IMHO whatever designation range is chosen for the TPOD, the laser 'spot' should disappear beyond max range as the beam no longer illuminates the target sufficiently, rather than be suspended mid air.

 

AFAIK RL lasing is done within 8 nm for both GBU-12 and LMav, so, while what we see in DCS is imperfect, it is a reasonable approximation.

 

1.16

 

1.16

Edited August 31, 2018 by NineLine
Removed 1.16 violation

[Zeus67]

When Chizh gets back from vacation I will ask him about it, I updated my dev build today and noticed this missile was edited, so I will see if its already being addressed.

 

 

I told ED about the problem with the intercontinental AGM-65E.

[NineLine]

I told ED about the problem with the intercontinental AGM-65E.

 

Oh good to hear, most likely they are working on it then.

[Flagrum]

Assuming that the max. range of DCS designation lasers will be fixed, the TPOD logic should work something like this, imo:

- check that the laser spot is actually located at a position (near) the ground or an object. That would prevent that "Maverick kite-ing" where the AGM follows the "tip" of the beam from happening.

- check that the distance to the laser spot is within a decent range before allowing a stable lock.

[sirscorpion]

Oh good to hear, most likely they are working on it then.

 

 

the issue of the floating laser point is not limited to the 65E, it also has the same issue with all LGB family as well.