[NO BUG] MSI Wrong Data Button

[theinmigrant]

I wanted to ask ED and the community about whether we should see the altitude and mach when hovering over datalink HAFU in the radar page.

 

I thought about this as I find it strange that we see a contact datalinked in the radar attack format page but we cant know its information unless we change our focus to the SA page.

 

Another thing I find strange is that if the HAFU is outside our radar beam we cant command a lock until we paint the target.

 

 

Thoughts?

[theinmigrant]

[NO BUG] MSI Wrong Data Button

 

Attached a track showing that pressing LTWS in the data page of the radar makes the MSI symbology to dissapear.

 

Cheers!!

MSI wrong button bug.trk

[Jak525]

Pretty sure this is correct. MSI only works in RWS with LTWS on

[theinmigrant]

Pretty sure this is correct. MSI only works in RWS with LTWS on

 

MSI doesn't have anything to do with LTWS, two different animals.

 

I wonder why they marked it as no bug.

 

ED, care to explain?

[Beamscanner]

1. yes.

 

2. Not sure, but even if we cant we should still be getting "Spotlight Search" which will allow us to very rapidly search a narrow azimuth to either build a trackfile or lock on a target.

[theinmigrant]

1. yes.

 

2. Not sure, but even if we cant we should still be getting "Spotlight Search" which will allow us to very rapidly search a narrow azimuth to either build a trackfile or lock on a target.

 

Cool, thanks BeamS!

 

Looking forward to ED implementing point 1 since it is quite annoying currently.

 

As for the point 2, I'm pretty sure I heard about it in the fighter pilot podcast.

 

Cheers.

[Beamscanner]

MSI and LTWS are separate entities. MSI should be available without LTWS.

 

MSI gets sensor data from whatever inputs are available. Technically, even in RWS with LTWS turned off, trackfiles are still processed. LTWS button only changes if a few of them are displayed (L&S, DT2, and TUC).

 

I imagine that if ED is against this, it has to do with their own coding struggles and not real life functionality.

[theinmigrant]

 

I imagine that if ED is against this, it has to do with their own coding struggles and not real life functionality.

 

That would be very disturbing if true. ED has always stated that the only thing that comes before realism is confidentiality. So if they really marked this as no bug because of how difficult it would be to code, then I would be very dissapointed.

 

I still think this was an honest mistake from a new dev or mod. There is no way ED would put software difficulties before realism.

Edited August 4, 2019 by theinmigrant
too harsh

[Beamscanner]

That would be very disturbing if true. ED has always stated that the only thing that comes before realism is confidentiality. So if they really marked this as no bug because of how difficult it would be to code, then I would understand why Wags started calling DCS a game since last year.

 

to clarify,

 

With MSI selected, LTWS not selected, you should see all of your hidden trackfiles (which are fed into datalink, which is why you see them), plus all other donor tracks, plus your own radar bricks.

 

However, because the radar considers datalink input as 'off-board', you would only see lower HAFUs + radar bricks.

Edited August 4, 2019 by Beamscanner

[theinmigrant]

to clarify,

 

With MSI selected, LTWS not selected, you should see all of your hidden trackfiles (which are fed into datalink, which is why you see them), plus all other donor tracks, plus your own radar bricks.

 

However, because the radar considers datalink input as 'off-board', you would only see lower HAFUs + radar bricks.

 

Right. But the bug I was trying to help ED identify is still an issue. Currently if we turn off LTWS we lose all MSI in radar.

[NineLine]

 

I imagine that if ED is against this, it has to do with their own coding struggles

 

I sure hope this was just purely worded, otherwise it's coming off quite insulting.

 

At any rate, what I hear is that MSI should not work in RWS or STT. Only in LTWS/TWS.

[Jak525]

Ahh I see what you mean, Beam - although, I think it could work either way in the real aircraft (unless you're speaking from actual information); your description of onboard bricks and offboard HAFUs would still work, but I could see it being programmed IRL to not work that way. I assume what NineLine hears is based off ED's info though. Still, no MSI in STT seems exceptionally odd to me, and in the last patch it actually shows in STT (just only if you use AACQ).

[theinmigrant]

I sure hope this was just purely worded, otherwise it's coming off quite insulting.

 

At any rate, what I hear is that MSI should not work in RWS or STT. Only in LTWS/TWS.

 

I just checked real quick and during STT we still have all the MSI info, which I think is awesome! Are you saying that it should not happen and in the future ED will remove that? :(

[Jak525]

I just checked real quick and during STT we still have all the MSI info, which I think is awesome! Are you saying that it should not happen and in the future ED will remove that? :(

I reported the fact MSI was NOT in STT a bit ago, it got marked not a bug, then in the next patch MSI is now in STT (with some inconsistency as part of a larger problem with trackfiles).

 

Basically the patch added what we were told was not a bug just a bit before it came out, so I'm quite confused. Frankly I highly doubt the MSI indications go away in STT in the real system... just makes zero sense.

[Santi871]

You can attempt STT anywhere, including outside the current radar azimuth coverage and of course on top of an offboard track. Like normal, the radar will attempt to track by performing a very narrow (iirc 5 degrees?) scan at your current bars setting. If anything is found, it will lock it. So in that sense, it's a poor man's spotlight search and you can use it to lock offboard tracks as long as they fall within your bars setting.

 

The real spotlight search would be a bit wider in azimuth and also spatially stabilized, but for now what I said above is what we have.

 

I would also love to know if the lack of mach and altitude of an offboard TUC on radar page is intentional or a bug.

[Jak525]

Spotlight also doesn't acquire into STT and can be slewed.

 

I agree. It seems odd you have to reference the SA for it.

[NineLine]

I just checked real quick and during STT we still have all the MSI info, which I think is awesome! Are you saying that it should not happen and in the future ED will remove that? :(

 

Yeah, I am gonna mess with it some tonight, and see what I see. I was told by the Hornet Dev team that it's not supposed to work in STT, so if it is, then it is a bug. But I will see if I can get more info.

 

Remember this is all based on available info to ED, its possible that it works differently, but we can't validate that, nor do we want to start adding in stuff that was based on information that should not be publically available.

[Santi871]

Yeah, I am gonna mess with it some tonight, and see what I see. I was told by the Hornet Dev team that it's not supposed to work in STT, so if it is, then it is a bug. But I will see if I can get more info.

 

Remember this is all based on available info to ED, its possible that it works differently, but we can't validate that, nor do we want to start adding in stuff that was based on information that should not be publically available.

 

 

Could you also find out whether mach and altitude should show upon hovering over an offboard track in radar page? Like it does in SA page. It doesn't right now.

[NineLine]

Could you also find out whether mach and altitude should show upon hovering over an offboard track in radar page? Like it does in SA page. It doesn't right now.

 

I will look into, although it sorta makes sense both ways I guess. SA page makes more sense for it. At least just on hover.

[theinmigrant]

I will look into, although it sorta makes sense both ways I guess. SA page makes more sense for it. At least just on hover.

 

Thanks NL.

 

Imagine you see one or more contacts that are being donated but your current radar cone cannot see it/them. Then the pilot needs to slew the tdc over the donated HAFU and check its altitude so he can adjust the radar accordingly and lock. If the pilot has to go to the SA page, then mentally correlate which one is the one that he saw in the radar page, then hover tdc, then go back to radar, then adjust radar settings, then lock... By the time he did all of that he's dead.

 

I strongly don't believe America wants their pilots in an aircraft that was built like that :)

 

 

Thanks anyway.

[Jak525]

Remember this is all based on available info to ED, its possible that it works differently, but we can't validate that, nor do we want to start adding in stuff that was based on information that should not be publically available.

Definitely get what you mean here but it seems like, now I guess this is subjective, this is sort of a common sense thing that one can reasonably assume is correct because of the fact the radar while in STT shows a HAFU which is supposed to be a universal symbol that is the same across the SA / RDR ATTK, so there is no reason, unless ED's info specifically states it, that it would change when going into STT on the radar format. Keep in mind on the SA format the MSI element remains for the HAFU even while in STT.

 

You guys did the same for the STEP box going away when the cursor is moved on the SA, no? Said it wasn't in ED's information but it made sense (of course again whether or not something makes sense is subjective I suppose, I tried to make objective points above though).

 

I will look into, although it sorta makes sense both ways I guess. SA page makes more sense for it. At least just on hover.

The reason it'd make sense to show on the radar page IMO is so you could quickly cursor over and see the altitude and then change the antenna elevation according so you can pick up that offboard trackfile with your own radar. Going to the SA is an extra step, having to switch TDC priority and whatnot. Edited August 5, 2019 by Jak525

[NineLine]

I will look into, although it sorta makes sense both ways I guess. SA page makes more sense for it. At least just on hover.

 

Could you also find out whether mach and altitude should show upon hovering over an offboard track in radar page? Like it does in SA page. It doesn't right now.

 

Actually, can you give me a track where you are not seeing this? I am seeing it in the dev build so either I am not understanding the conditions or it is fixed.

[Jak525]

Actually, can you give me a track where you are not seeing this? I am seeing it in the dev build so either I am not understanding the conditions or it is fixed.

What he means is, on the RDR ATTK format, when hovering over a trackfile that is offboard-ONLY (for a F/F, bottom half of HAFU only; for PPLI or SURV, a full shape but a bit smaller and no small dot in the center), you don't get the altitude and Mach on either side, unlike for an onboard or onboard+offboard track.

[NineLine]

copy will check it out.

[*Rage*]

Thanks NL.

 

Imagine you see one or more contacts that are being donated but your current radar cone cannot see it/them. Then the pilot needs to slew the tdc over the donated HAFU and check its altitude so he can adjust the radar accordingly and lock. If the pilot has to go to the SA page, then mentally correlate which one is the one that he saw in the radar page, then hover tdc, then go back to radar, then adjust radar settings, then lock... By the time he did all of that he's dead.

 

I strongly don't believe America wants their pilots in an aircraft that was built like that :)

 

 

Thanks anyway.

 

+1