[CORRECT AS IS]"undesignate" will send TPod back in caged position

[hein22]

You can create a waypoint at the target area and WPDSG to observe after pickling. When markpoints are there you could do the same by saving one of the targets into a markpoint then WPDSG'ing the markpoint. You can also use VVSLV to get the pod on the target area again too.

 

Santi, I'm afraid I must let you know that you are wrong. You see, when you create a waypoint and designate like you said, you are then obligated to undesignate and lose situational awareness again, otherwise after pickling the next TOO will be overwritten by the waypoint you designated. Bottomline, with the current implementation of the hornet we CANNOT observe target area unless you look for it manually (absurd). First press of the NWS will not snowplow in the real aircraft. I trust that your intel says different, but what can I say. I love DCS and the Hornet, but I don't agree on this one... Not that anyone cares hehe

[Santi871]

Santi, I'm afraid I must let you know that you are wrong. You see, when you create a waypoint and designate like you said, you are then obligated to undesignate and lose situational awareness again, otherwise after pickling the next TOO will be overwritten by the waypoint you designated. Bottomline, with the current implementation of the hornet we CANNOT observe target area unless you look for it manually (absurd). First press of the NWS will not snowplow in the real aircraft. I trust that your intel says different, but what can I say. I love DCS and the Hornet, but I don't agree on this one... Not that anyone cares hehe

 

Yes, you'd have to wait until you've pickled the last bomb to WPDSG.

 

It's not a matter of agreement nor opinion. If you have any reputable source that says otherwise, feel free to forward it to any ED team member and it will get looked at. I've checked about 4 times now and the wording is very clear.

[hein22]

Yes, you'd have to wait until you've pickled the last bomb to WPDSG.

 

It's not a matter of agreement nor opinion. If you have any reputable source that says otherwise, feel free to forward it to any ED team member and it will get looked at. I've checked about 4 times now and the wording is very clear.

 

I find a very nice practice to challenge ourselves everytime we can. That is why I would love to see ED revise if maybe there was a interpretation issue here. Mainly because there are numerous posts and threads about this and is starting to get old. It would not be the first time ED says firmly "this is the documentation we have" and three weeks later they change the behavior. So that's good, I hope this is one of those cases. Thanks for your feedback.

[NineLine]

I find a very nice practice to challenge ourselves everytime we can. That is why I would love to see ED revise if maybe there was a interpretation issue here. Mainly because there are numerous posts and threads about this and is starting to get old. It would not be the first time ED says firmly "this is the documentation we have" and three weeks later they change the behavior. So that's good, I hope this is one of those cases. Thanks for your feedback.

 

If in that three week time someone supplies us with new information or we find new information that we should need to change how it functions, then yes, it will change, otherwise, we are happy with the sources we have on the subject, and as mentioned, it is working as intended.

[hein22]

If in that three week time someone supplies us with new information or we find new information that we should need to change how it functions, then yes, it will change, otherwise, we are happy with the sources we have on the subject, and as mentioned, it is working as intended.

 

Roger and thanks for the feedback. I hope my comments haven't been disliked or interpreted as negative. Thanks.

[maxTRX]

I find a very nice practice to challenge ourselves everytime we can. That is why I would love to see ED revise if maybe there was a interpretation issue here. Mainly because there are numerous posts and threads about this and is starting to get old. It would not be the first time ED says firmly "this is the documentation we have" and three weeks later they change the behavior. So that's good, I hope this is one of those cases. Thanks for your feedback.

 

Currently the only issue I see is mixed loads for instance 2 LMAVs and 2 IRMAVs. If you fire IR Mavs first the LMAVs will not lock on the LTD/R. Cage function is faulty too. No issue if you select LMAVs first.

 

Slewing the Tpod, designating targets and watching them blow up is no problem whatsoever.

If your targets are vehicles for instance, how do you find them without JTACs? Do you know approximate location? Slew your Tpod either by using SA with the map to get you there or put VVSLV on it and ground stabilize. Then just orbit and search. Do have wpt in the area? WPTDSG then keep slewing until you find the targets. Lock the first, get in range, fire. Slew to the next one. No need to un-designate or uncage. Lock and fire. If they are not too far apart you can zoom out to keep them in sight. After you have fired your last weapon there is no need to keep your last target locked. You can slew away from it say toward the center of the group and just leave it ther, ground stabilized. (unless lasing)

There is a bug though when slewing away from WPTDSG point. The Tpod will slew and lock the new position as target but the "square" on SA page and the HUD diamond will remain on the WPTDSG point. The weapon will follow your Tpod designation. Yes, there are quirks but as far as slewing the Tpod, designating/undesignating multiple targets I don't have any issues.

Edited March 27, 2020 by Gripes323

[maxTRX]

How do I slew multiple Mavericks On a target area designated through a TGP? If I undesignate to slew I loose the target area as the pod bore sights? lucky if I can get one off per pass atm.

 

Again, you don't need to undesignated to slew.

[hein22]

Again, you don't need to undesignated to slew.

 

Yes you do, he is talking about MAV F.

[maxTRX]

Yes you do, he is talking about MAV F.

 

We must have some serious differences in our setups... I have no issues slewing the Tpod + Mav F. I used it multiple times. Every time I designated the target with the pod the missile snapped to it regardless of whether the tgt was designated via WPTDSG then fine tuned with TDC or just TDC.

 

Now, if you guys are talking about using Mav F as SOI then perhaps there might be an issue. I haven't tried it yet since the Tpod was introduced. There is no comparison between using a Tpod for target search and Mav's video. With the image modes we have and the zoom and FOV in the Tpod… I wouldn't even bother using Mav's screen... unless I had no Tpod.

[hein22]

We must have some serious differences in our setups... I have no issues slewing the Tpod + Mav F. I used it multiple times. Every time I designated the target with the pod the missile snapped to it regardless of whether the tgt was designated via WPTDSG then fine tuned with TDC or just TDC.

 

Now, if you guys are talking about using Mav F as SOI then perhaps there might be an issue. I haven't tried it yet since the Tpod was introduced. There is no comparison between using a Tpod for target search and Mav's video. With the image modes we have and the zoom and FOV in the Tpod… I wouldn't even bother using Mav's screen... unless I had no Tpod.

 

We were talking about slewing the MAV not the pod. :)

[maxTRX]

We were talking about slewing the MAV not the pod. :)

 

Just tried it. Yea, the MC only designates for one Mav F at a time. After the missile is launched the MC forgets the designated point on the ground unless it's a WPTDSG. When my first missile was uncaged on the WPTDSG target, I had no problem undesignating and as soon as missile started drifting I was able to slew and redesignate. The following missiles were boresighted. Yea, I could hit WPTDSG again to get the missile uncaged on the first target then undesignate and slew to the second target but that's too much work. Designating all static targets with WPTDSG works fine but we should be able to stabilize all missiles on a TDC designated point. (remaining in MC)

 

That's MavF though not Tpod. Someone (you're good at it:) hein22) should open Mav F related thread with tracks.

[hein22]

Just tried it. Yea, the MC only designates for one Mav F at a time. After the missile is launched the MC forgets the designated point on the ground unless it's a WPTDSG. When my first missile was uncaged on the WPTDSG target, I had no problem undesignating and as soon as missile started drifting I was able to slew and redesignate. The following missiles were boresighted. Yea, I could hit WPTDSG again to get the missile uncaged on the first target then undesignate and slew to the second target but that's too much work. Designating all static targets with WPTDSG works fine but we should be able to stabilize all missiles on a TDC designated point. (remaining in MC)

 

That's MavF though not Tpod. Someone (you're good at it:) hein22) should open Mav F related thread with tracks.

 

Funny thing is, I never complained about the MAV F, all this talk I think was about the TOO mode for jdam or jsow.

[hein22]

How do I slew multiple Mavericks On a target area designated through a TGP? If I undesignate to slew I loose the target area as the pod bore sights? lucky if I can get one off per pass atm.

 

Hey ramjet! You do not need to slew the MAV itself. What I do is just slew the TGP to the target I want and designate, then the MAV will lock automatically (there are some bugs with it right now but almost works perfect). Then you chose the next target with the TGP and do the same, the next MAV will lock automatically as well. And you never lose situational awareness since you did it all with the TGP without undesignating.

[ramjet77]

hein22 ok thanks I will try that, the whole reason I mentioned Maverick Fs was because occasionally the seeker sits just to the side of the target or doesn’t lock and a slight slew of the missile head usually would generate a lock like if not using a TGP at all. But with TGP the missle just does not slew the same way.

 

Sorry for somewhat changing your thread topic but I posted here as pressing undesignate bore sights the TGP which was the thread topic. The Mav F was an added complication I found which I thought holy depended on that undesignate to work.

 

So I’ll fly later today and just try slewing TGP not Maverick at all.

 

Thanks

[hein22]

Maverick Fs was because occasionally the seeker sits just to the side of the target or doesn’t lock

 

Yeah that's the bug I reported and was acknowledged by ED, so hopefully it will be fixed. I only have trouble with it when in extreme off boresight conditions. Otherwise it seems to work ok.

[ramjet77]

Ok cool, did not know you had reported that, glad it’s known and fixable.