Some Jester Proposals

[RPY Variable]

1. There is something that is needed to be done with the radar elevation angle. TWS AUTO won't fix this problem. Jester just leaves it on the middle, and ar 40K or 30K feet we are losing half of the radar's search volume. I bet that nobody uses the elevation selection via "LOW-MIDDLE", "MIDDLE", etc... the "middle-low" is about -16° which is way too much, it is looking only 20nm from 40K feet!. One solution would be having a -3.1° elevation and name it "Own altitude and down" which means that no matter the TID's range, the radar will search from our own altitude and down. We will use it while flying high and searching for bandits down on the mountains. Then +3.1° named "Own altitude and Up", which is the same but inverted, our own altitude and above us, and we would use this while flying low. This would give us the ability of scanning with all the radar search area potential. Then maybe 6°, 9° -6, -9°.. but with the +-3.1° is a whole other story.
   Another solution would be to give us the radar elevation and azimuth from the font cockpit and stop with this problem once and for all. Let's be honest, coding human intelligence is not possible yet, and there is not much sense of being able to tell him via awkward modes instead of just binding the axis. For the ones that say "you need a RIO"... I bought two F-14, one for me and the other for my pilot, but he is not always available. I never imagen that there would be such a vendetta against managing the whole aircraft like in any other sim. This only adds more limitations to the aircraft. For the ones that think that it is not "real"... less real is to be on an F-14 and not being able to at least configure a propper search area like in any other aircraft with radar.
    
    
   
2. On STT mode, make Jester IFF immediately, tell us the result. Sometimes he doesn't IFF at all or he takes to much time.
    
    
   
3. When on TWS mode and there are two known bandits, make him always select the nearest one, so we have the radar display information of the nearest threat. He tends to select the furthest one.
    
   EDIT:
    
   
    
    
   
4. Please give us the option of +-40 azimuth scan on TWS.
    
    
   
5. Please get Jester to start the alignment process when ground air and power is on. Or at least when engine one is on. Why does he need both engines on to start the alignment?
    
    
   
6. Make Jester start the startup procedure even if the pilot doesn't arm the ejection seat.
    
    
   
7. Please make an option to shut down the Jeste ejecting by his own means. It adds nothing to the simulation and it is very frustrating. Even if he doesn't eject, because he is making comment and threatening to eject.
    
    
   
8. Make Jester set the starting airport as homebase if there is no preplan waypoints.
   

 

 

Off-topic: any news on GBU-24 or being able to jump to the RIO's seat on multiplayer yet?

 

Edit:

 

This is a -3º and -9º example (TWS with 4 bars which is a 6.3º cone, distance and altitude are at scale). The ideal thing would be -3º, -6º, -9º, or -3º, -8º, -13º (this last one overlaps the cones). It would use the same options as today, but with a different elevation angle, if you decide to implement it should be an easy fix.

 

Edited November 18, 2019 by mikel.132

[draconus]

Ad.1. Jester is already WIP which means he'll get new features and will improve with time. You can already set elevation to the area you want scanned. Full control of the radar is a RIO's job.

 

Ad.7. Jester actually adds a lot to the simulation if you don't have a human RIO.

Edited November 18, 2019 by draconus

[Naquaii]

As for 1, 2 and 3 we'll take your suggestions into consideration. IFF is already being looked at, while it won't be instantaneous due to how it works we might speed it up in regards to how he handles it. In regards to controlling backseat stuff from the front seat, that will always be via Jester, it was never our intention to allow the front seat to work back seat controls.

 

4. This will change when TWS Auto is implemented as it will control the scan volume.

 

5. Jester follow the Natops which says to start the alignment after engine startup as the power transitions can trash the alignment.

 

6. Also Natops procedure.

 

7. We're always evaluating Jester behaviour and it can be a thin line between realism and sim, keep in mind that a human player sometimes do stuff that no real pilot would. We'll take it under consideration.

 

8. Currently it's quite quick to set it via an F10 map marker, but we'll think about it.

 

The GBU-24 is implemented as far as we can, as far as we know it needs to be finished by ED.

 

As for switching seats in MP, that's a limitation of the DCS engine in multiplayer, it's simply not possible unless ED changes this on their side.

 

Thanks for your suggestions!

[Landser]

To add to this: Once the phoenix changes go live can we get a jester command to select phoenix to active?

 

I'm referring to the switch on the armament panel and not the ACM cover.

[Xenovia]

4. This will change when TWS Auto is implemented as it will control the scan volume.

 

Will using TWS Auto also adjust radar elevation as well? Or do we have to tell Jester adjust elevation in TWS Auto to get him to adjust elevation?

[ebabil]

please add mouse click function. i am having neck problems while triying to use it with trackir

[Naquaii]

Will using TWS Auto also adjust radar elevation as well? Or do we have to tell Jester adjust elevation in TWS Auto to get him to adjust elevation?

 

TWS Auto when implemented will control azimuth, elevation and coverage to cover as many of the detected targets as possible.

[RPY Variable]

As for 1, 2 and 3 we'll take your suggestions into consideration. IFF is already being looked at, while it won't be instantaneous due to how it works we might speed it up in regards to how he handles it. In regards to controlling backseat stuff from the front seat, that will always be via Jester, it was never our intention to allow the front seat to work back seat controls.

 

4. This will change when TWS Auto is implemented as it will control the scan volume.

 

5. Jester follow the Natops which says to start the alignment after engine startup as the power transitions can trash the alignment.

 

6. Also Natops procedure.

 

7. We're always evaluating Jester behaviour and it can be a thin line between realism and sim, keep in mind that a human player sometimes do stuff that no real pilot would. We'll take it under consideration.

 

8. Currently it's quite quick to set it via an F10 map marker, but we'll think about it.

 

The GBU-24 is implemented as far as we can, as far as we know it needs to be finished by ED.

 

As for switching seats in MP, that's a limitation of the DCS engine in multiplayer, it's simply not possible unless ED changes this on their side.

 

Thanks for your suggestions!

 

Thanks for the reply. I know abbot the DCS multiplayer limitation regarding changing seats, I just wanted to know If there was some hope of being implemented in the future, now that there is a mi-24 being developed that will also need this feature.

 

5) and 6), I understand.

 

1) Thanks for taking it into consideration. This will resolve what I consider is the main single pilot flying limitation, and it also does comply with your design philosophy.

[Naquaii]

Thanks for the reply. I know abbot the DCS multiplayer limitation regarding changing seats, I just wanted to know If there was some hope of being implemented in the future, now that there is a mi-24 being developed that will also need this feature.

 

5) and 6), I understand.

 

1) Thanks for taking it into consideration. This will resolve what I consider is the main single pilot flying limitation, and it also does comply with your design philosophy.

 

The multicrew limit in multiplayer is on ED's side and unfortunately completely out of our hands so I have no information regarding it.

[Ignition]

5. Jester follow the Natops which says to start the alignment after engine startup as the power transitions can trash the alignment.

 

 

Is it modeled? I usually go for the quickest start up possible.

[Naquaii]

Is it modeled? I usually go for the quickest start up possible.

 

Currently not, but it is correct procedure.

[Kula66]

+1 ... all good points, especially (1)! Not all of us have the luxury of a human RIO, and multi-target BVR (the 14s raison d'être) is very frustrating at the moment, with Jester invariably loosing lock at critical moments.

Edited November 19, 2019 by Kula66

[Eldur]

Currently not, but it is correct procedure.

 

Would still be nice to have an option to do a "dirty" startup without having the need to close the canopy, arm the seat (he may start on GP connected) and Jester inputting the coords of ownship as soon as power is there and he's set up all the things, then starting the alignment process as soon as one engine is running stable. But I wouldn't see this as a priority thing. Following the NATOPS is the right step and deviations from that should clearly be optional, but never just replace the correct procedure. IIRC I've read that some Tomcat crews were taxiing at air bases with open canopies for example. Wouldn't make sense to close it first just to open it up again to replicate that.

[IronMike]

Would still be nice to have an option to do a "dirty" startup without having the need to close the canopy, arm the seat (he may start on GP connected) and Jester inputting the coords of ownship as soon as power is there and he's set up all the things, then starting the alignment process as soon as one engine is running stable. But I wouldn't see this as a priority thing. Following the NATOPS is the right step and deviations from that should clearly be optional, but never just replace the correct procedure. IIRC I've read that some Tomcat crews were taxiing at air bases with open canopies for example. Wouldn't make sense to close it first just to open it up again to replicate that.

 

 

 

 

I don't think this is necessary, it would be an unrealistic half-half solution in between. You have two options, either stored heading alignment, which takes 2 minutes only (most servers use that), and you can spawn with a hot aircraft.

[captain_dalan]

TWS Auto when implemented will control azimuth, elevation and coverage to cover as many of the detected targets as possible.

 

All right, here is a related issue that TWS Auto won's solve.

 

I flew the Protect the Vicksburg mission several times this last weekend, even once tonight. <SPOILERS AHEAD>

 

As the Su-24's scramble at low altitude, i set my cone to cover low and level ahead, so i can get a good look down from 25-30000ft and launch my 54's at them with a good altitude and air speed boost. However at the ranges i wish to engage them (more then 50-60 NM away from the ship) my cone is still too wide and as a result the radar picks up the Flankers that fly top cover. And as the Flankers are also closer, the TWS assigns them as priority targets. So controlling the cone is doable with the current tools is possible if one gets versed with solving simple trigonometry problems in his/her head on the fly. Controlling what gets targeted though, isn't.

 

Solution as it is now, hop back into the RIO seat (reach back) and manually adjust the elevation to exclude the escorts. Launch the missiles, then hop back into the driver seat and maneuver the plane. Periodically hop back to adjust the antenna elevation again as the closure changes.

 

Solution two. Get a human RIO. Not possible for me as of now, nor in near future. I almost always fly after midnight, with family members sleeping next room.

 

Preferred solution (no reach back). Tell Jester to prioritize targets. Something along the lines of prioritize near or prioritize far. And the vertical equivalent of that, prioritize high, prioritize low, prioritize level.

 

Do you guys think this is doable?

Thanks in advance and safe flying! :thumbup::pilotfly:

[draconus]

As the Su-24's scramble at low altitude, i set my cone to cover low and level ahead, so i can get a good look down from 25-30000ft and launch my 54's at them with a good altitude and air speed boost. However at the ranges i wish to engage them (more then 50-60 NM away from the ship) my cone is still too wide and as a result the radar picks up the Flankers that fly top cover. And as the Flankers are also closer, the TWS assigns them as priority targets. So controlling the cone is doable with the current tools is possible if one gets versed with solving simple trigonometry problems in his/her head on the fly. Controlling what gets targeted though, isn't.

You can control the cone with the alt coverage at range set by Jester. If you see too much, just lower it more. Unless they are in the same LOS.

Apart from that Flankers pose far greater threat (especially when they are closer) to you (and possibly the fleet too) and should be taken out first.

Edited November 26, 2019 by draconus

[captain_dalan]

You can control the cone with the alt coverage at range set by Jester. If you see too much, just lower it more. Unless they are in the same LOS.

It's what i do to get that nice look down view on them, including the large enough zone of coverage to allow for a successful missile intercept. However, the Flankers are generally flying ahead of the 24's and as a result the 24's end up being in the radar "shadow". Add to that the range at which i'd engage the 24's (usually well over 60 NM) and the current controls are just too clumsy and slow. We have +/- 20000 to 30000 ft of vertical displacement. No matter how much you fine tune in this geometry, your cone is bound to pick them all up (unless you manually take control of the antenna elevation, and even then it can be finicky), or at the very least most of them.

 

 

 

Apart from that Flankers pose far greater threat (especially when they are closer) to you (and possibly the fleet too) and should be taken out first.

 

That is exactly what i did on my first run. I did get them all (lost the wingman due to bingo fuel) but the ship did take hits. During the time i'm tangoing with the Flankers, the 24's sneak in and as they are hugging the sea floor, the AWACS often no longer picks them up. By the time i fin them myself they usually score at least some hits. I'm trying to make them score none ;)

 

Besides......engaging those 24's by completely bypassing the escorts, just....... feels right, doesn't it? It plays to all the weapon system's advantages while at the same time makes the escorts irrelevant. The very thought makes me feel warm and fuzzy in my belly :)

 

But i digress. Can this mission be completed in other ways? Sure. But i never play a mission in order to complete it. I play it in order to train and explore the capabilities of the plane. And when we'll get TWS Auto, we will no longer have to fight in STT with those escorts, nor will we have to manually tell Jester to swivel the antenna around while at the same time maneuvering the plane too keep the contacts outside the doppler filters. What however will remain, is the inability to prioritize target and that IMO is an unfair loss of capability for those that don't have human RIO's. :thumbup: