randomTOTEN Posted September 9, 2019 Posted September 9, 2019 I know we don't exactly know how this bombing mode is supposed to work. But until (if ever) we find evidence of actual operation, I would greatly appreciate a TAKT input code which would allow me to revert Level Release symbology to the old style... where the pipper only remains at the desired target location, and does not shift to give steering commands. Thanks.
LastRifleRound Posted September 10, 2019 Posted September 10, 2019 The old style DID give steering commands if you weren't already within 50m of the commanded altitude, it would be above or below your target, commanding a dive or climb respectively.
randomTOTEN Posted September 10, 2019 Author Posted September 10, 2019 I'm talking phase 2, after unsafe (designation) but before trigger press... the pipper, not the steering order ring. Presently the designated impact point moves like a steering order, even with trigger not pressed.
LastRifleRound Posted September 10, 2019 Posted September 10, 2019 I am talking about that, too. Before it would appear above or below the target and respond to altitude. Now it responds to pitch. Either way, it was giving altitude direction, the method by which it occurs is what changed. The old sight, if you were at 300m with low drag bombs with medium safety altitude and designated a target, the sight would jump below the target, commanding climb. As you climb, the nearer to 400m you got, the more the sight crept up to the target. When you were within about 25m of the safety altitude, the sight would "stick" to the target. In this way, the sight before was still giving steering correction, just by altitude instead of pitch. I'm not against putting a TAKT option in for this, but the sight was indeed providing correction before, just in a different way.
randomTOTEN Posted September 10, 2019 Author Posted September 10, 2019 Now it responds to pitch.Yeah I don't like that. I liked it the old way. You're right it was still giving a correction, my bad. Same for lateral correction too.. if it's currently commanding a turn, I would like it to just show lateral deviation (or whatever it was doing before). I was fine with the "jump." I'm even fine with the pitch based command being active.. so long as users like me can turn it back to altitude based correction somehow.
LastRifleRound Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 I was fine with the "jump." The sight still jumps. That's expected behavior if you're not at the safety altitude. I'm even fine with the pitch based command being active.. so long as users like me can turn it back to altitude based correction somehow. If you had an option where the steering order is switched to altitude along with the pipper, this would probably work even better for you. The problem before wasn't really that pitch or altitude was used, it's that the pipper used one logic and the steering order used another set of logic, so the transition could be sloppy.
randomTOTEN Posted September 11, 2019 Author Posted September 11, 2019 (edited) If you had an option where the steering order is switched to altitude along with the pipper, this would probably work even better for you.No, I don't think I would prefer that. Just so long as there's a way to return the sight logic back to the original system I will be happy... even if I have to adjust multiple settings. it's that the pipper used one logic and the steering order used another set of logic I disagree with you. In my view this was no problem. I want the option to have this back (if that's indeed how it was working). I understand this was causing you (and likely others) a great deal of problems with following the guidance. Perhaps there were others such as myself who were comfortable with it's indications. Edited September 11, 2019 by randomTOTEN
LastRifleRound Posted September 11, 2019 Posted September 11, 2019 I disagree with you. In my view this was no problem. I want the option to have this back (if that's indeed how it was working). I understand this was causing you (and likely others) a great deal of problems with following the guidance. Perhaps there were others such as myself who were comfortable with it's indications I want to be perfectly clear. I did not have a great deal of problems using the old system. It was easy to use and I had no trouble at all hitting what I was aiming at. I simply believed the implementation was inaccurate. I hope you get what you want. I think a TAKT input for that is an excellent compromise.
Recommended Posts