Laser rockets

[foxwxl]

And aiming the ground in the front of these problem vehicles could have a better result, and fire 2 salvo shots could be even better.

[Tj1376]

You can simply move the TDC when have a point track, it will auto transfer to AERA track once TDC has input.

 

Even in area mode i still cant seem to get the rocket to hit :(

 

TJ

[Tj1376]

still playing with it a bit - i almost wonder if its a bug that even though you move the TDC (so we drop out of point mode) if the track mode is still active even though WMD says Area and the laser is still pointing at the larger target model even though Ive manually aimed it at the truck tire... The rockets miss in the same spot, so it kinda feels that way.

 

However, if I dont press target lock on the target (so it never goes into point mode) and then drag the cursor to the target, I seem to be having better results.

 

Still doing some more testing, will post more findings soon

 

TJ

Edited May 30, 2020 by Tj1376

[tees]

After some research, some vehicle models may have some problem, like the M48 has a quite LARGE bounding box defined in their 3D model, much larger and higher than actual 3D model.

 

So weapon may aim for the "target" that is much larger and taller than the actual target, thus cause the miss(impact around and behind the target). I suggest use AERA track and aim at the ground to check if it will be better.

But before last 2 patches there was no problem to hit any target

[foxwxl]

But before last 2 patches there was no problem to hit any target

 

It is possible, ED is continuously updating DCS, some time the API might have changed,or targeting mechanism might have change.

 

Since the BRM has a very small impact radius, this may be obvious than other ordinance.

[Tj1376]

See attached tracks.zip which includes a track and a acmi of a quick engagement against an avenger using nothing but area mode (point track mode was never entered.) BRM misses long of the target when it enters terminal phase. Track shows the area mode and aiming at the middle of the vehicle.

 

I limited G pull up to 4.4gs - if I attack a vulkan I can pull up 5.5gs no issue. Distance was long on firing (4.7 miles), but this would hit a vulkan no issue from this range, so i would expect it to hit an avenger the same.

 

I can repeat this and the BRM misses in the exact same spot.

 

I hope this helps and if you'd like to talk about it I am available via PM.

 

TJ

 

Tracks.zip

[J20Stronk]

It is possible, ED is continuously updating DCS, some time the API might have changed,or targeting mechanism might have change.

 

Since the BRM has a very small impact radius, this may be obvious than other ordinance.

 

Nope.

 

The Vikhrs on the Frogfoot and Hokum guide perfectly, just as always.

 

It's only the BRM that have seizures while they're flying towards their target

[Blinky.ben]

We will try adjust a profile for SALH scheme, but other values will aslo be changed accordingly so that the range does not get beyond what it should be.

 

I think there will still lots of complain about the range even after the scheme is changed to SALH.:megalol:

 

Your previous post said it has a range of about 5-8nm in real life. I will be more then happy with those ranges. But I’ll be even more excited about it being SALH

[foxwxl]

Your previous post said it has a range of about 5-8nm in real life. I will be more then happy with those ranges. But I’ll be even more excited about it being SALH

 

MAX range is 8000 meters for the original 90mm rocket (no accuracy at that range at all:D)

[foxwxl]

Nope.

 

The Vikhrs on the Frogfoot and Hokum guide perfectly, just as always.

 

It's only the BRM that have seizures while they're flying towards their target

 

If force firing the Vikhrs at 15km, same thing might happened too.

[foxwxl]

See attached tracks.zip which includes a track and a acmi of a quick engagement against an avenger using nothing but area mode (point track mode was never entered.) BRM misses long of the target when it enters terminal phase. Track shows the area mode and aiming at the middle of the vehicle.

 

I limited G pull up to 4.4gs - if I attack a vulkan I can pull up 5.5gs no issue. Distance was long on firing (4.7 miles), but this would hit a vulkan no issue from this range, so i would expect it to hit an avenger the same.

 

I can repeat this and the BRM misses in the exact same spot.

 

I hope this helps and if you'd like to talk about it I am available via PM.

 

TJ

 

[ATTACH]237901[/ATTACH]

 

Thx, acmi will be reviewed later.

But I suggest aimming at the ground in the front of the target(bottom of target), not aimming the middle of the vehicle 3D model, I saw some difference in my test.

[J20Stronk]

Ok, it seems that today's patch finally fixed the weird swerving that the BRMs had.

 

I fired a couple off at 4.5nm, at 250kts 4000ft and they didn't swerve erratically like the previous couple of patches.

 

They feel just as accurate as before and don't feel OP in terms of range, absolute r_max is about 5nm

 

Thank you guys for fixing them.

 

EDIT: Nnvm it's still there when you maneuver. If you fly perfectly straight, they're much more accurate though.

 

EDIT2:

 

I give up on these things. They're needlessly inaccurate and extremely inconsistent. Besides the fact that their guidance is completely incorrect to the real one, just for the sake of making it spin, they still refuse to hit targets when fired in optimal conditions.

 

I'm begining to suspect you guys intentionally gave it that stupid bounce as some sort of artificial nerf way back on the April 16 OB patch because the Vikhr on both the Su-25T and Hokum do not have that crap, despite it being the same scheme.

 

More than that, no changes were made to the .lua for the BRM and the "bounce" is only present when you're in F1 view, which means it must've been a shadow edit in the .dll instead.

 

The adamant need to have awfully incorrect guidance and an artificial FM anomaly ultimately ruined one of if not the best, most versatile weapon in the JF-17.

Edited June 4, 2020 by J20Stronk

[Tj1376]

Thx, acmi will be reviewed later.

But I suggest aimming at the ground in the front of the target(bottom of target), not aimming the middle of the vehicle 3D model, I saw some difference in my test.

 

Mate- this is the key it appears. Im now hitting 100% even doing a hard 5.6g pullup evasive maneuver upon launch. I now use area mode right in front of the target (in front as defined by my ingress point, not the front of the vehicle) and I can hit 100%. (Or the patch fixed the majority of the issue - due to some camping this week I was unable to retest the area mode pointing in front of the vehicle until after the patch came out.)

 

Attached ACMI of the success in the event in helps someone else. First target (Vulkan) was a known good 100% success target. I use it as a control after each patch to make sure that still works. 2nd and 3rd targets are the avenger and chapparal that would always miss in Point track mode. Also of note, I no longer use point track mode at all.

 

5.6gPullUp100PercentSuccess.zip

 

Good luck folks!

 

TJ

[Tj1376]

PS- 100% isnt accurate. I re-ran my entire attack on Khasab scenario. I managed a 87% success rate... Sometimes I was being dumb and getting lazy. Sometimes I got wild misses for unknown reasons. But I think if you follow the above advice, you'll do much better with the BRM until the fixes can be put in for the guidance and profile.

 

TJ

[Terrorban]

Heh, Good to know that each time I return to this plane, it gets even more useless while other developers's jets get better. So ED was right, they did release the plane with exaggerated performance.

 

It is now a glorified stunt plane with nice airframe features and modeling but very poor combat effictiveness.

 

Very dissapointing how I see this thread full of Foxwxl constantly saying that it is Beam riding weapon and telling people to dart into the targets above Mach 1 speed for the rockets to work under 4.5nm. In his head this somehow makes sense in combat situation.

 

Bigger joke is that unguided rockets are more accurate at those ranges. Dont forget to balance those as well guys.

 

Let me know when DEKA are serious about simulating a combat fighter instead of constantly toying around with settings.

 

This thing changes drastically with each update same with DEKA's satements and opinions.

 

I used to love these developers.. I still love this jet so I might come back to it if it actually works in combat again. I am sure all weapons on this jet will now be balanced soon.

 

Not looking forward to their next module. :)

[AeriaGloria]

TB, I understand how your feel. But where did exaggerated performance come from?

 

For me I know they are just trying to fix them, I have seen so many things get broken for third parties, like how the F-14 only started using the new AIM-7 a few months ago, or how it took forever for the BK-90 to work right. Or the weird maneuvers anti ship missiles were doing last patch. Or the AIM-54 not using the new API that was designed months ago becuase of de sync in MP.

[Shiz]

I doubt that any real airforce would approve any 4th gen fighter weapon into it's service as lousy as the brms as they are represented ATM.

It's like firing the laser guided missiles from good old SU-25 (without T), but at least there it all depends on your skill, sight and maybe turbulence.

The only use for these rockets would be covering large area with a huge salvo shot. But then again unguided rockets are better in this regard.

TIP:Just stick to 2xSFV 4xGBU-12 loadout, RTB and repeat.

Edited June 7, 2020 by Shiz

[foxwxl]

Heh, Good to know that each time I return to this plane, it gets even more useless while other developers's jets get better. So ED was right, they did release the plane with exaggerated performance.

 

It is now a glorified stunt plane with nice airframe features and modeling but very poor combat effictiveness.

 

Very dissapointing how I see this thread full of Foxwxl constantly saying that it is Beam riding weapon and telling people to dart into the targets above Mach 1 speed for the rockets to work under 4.5nm. In his head this somehow makes sense in combat situation.

 

Bigger joke is that unguided rockets are more accurate at those ranges. Dont forget to balance those as well guys.

 

Let me know when DEKA are serious about simulating a combat fighter instead of constantly toying around with settings.

 

This thing changes drastically with each update same with DEKA's satements and opinions.

 

I used to love these developers.. I still love this jet so I might come back to it if it actually works in combat again. I am sure all weapons on this jet will now be balanced soon.

 

Not looking forward to their next module. :)

 

I just told people how it works at the moment and how to use it better for current settings.

 

If you prefer unguided rocket fired at 4.8NM fine, that's your choice.:)

 

And I've witness ED's weapon change constantly from Flanker2.5,LOMAC,LOFC,FC2,DCSW1.5,DCSW2.5, yes it has been 20 years, should I blame ED for "exaggerated performance" too?:D

[Terrorban]

I just told people how it works at the moment and how to use it better for current settings.

 

If you prefer unguided rocket fired at 4.8NM fine, that's your choice.:)

 

And I've witness ED's weapon change constantly from Flanker2.5,LOMAC,LOFC,FC2,DCSW1.5,DCSW2.5, yes it has been 20 years, should I blame ED for "exaggerated performance" too?:D

 

Looks more like you guys are simply not experienced in weapon development on DCS. Reducing the range is one thing but making the rockets wobble this much is just bad coding configuration.

 

Keep playing with the code, you will eventually get lucky.

 

Also, I would "prefer" using BRM but it looks like DEKA are sticking with this change. Now I prefer F/A-18 since it has ground radar now.

 

None of the weapons are realistic in DCS but at least other developers makes sure they are effective in what they should be doing IRL.

 

At least these rockets spin. :D

[foxwxl]

Looks more like you guys are simply not experienced in weapon development on DCS. Reducing the range is one thing but making the rockets wobble this much is just bad coding configuration.

 

Keep playing with the code, you will eventually get lucky.

 

Also, I would "prefer" using BRM but it looks like DEKA are sticking with this change. Now I prefer F/A-18 since it has ground radar now.

 

None of the weapons are realistic in DCS but at least other developers makes sure they are effective in what they should be doing IRL.

 

At least these rockets spin. :D

 

IRL, BRM is just a low cost guided weapon used at low threat enviroment and maybe good at smashing some terrorist camps & tents:D.

 

Anyway, the code is now under adjustment, we will see if it works better.

[Terrorban]

IRL, BRM is just a low cost guided weapon used at low threat enviroment and maybe good at smashing some terrorist camps & tents:D.

 

Anyway, the code is now under adjustment, we will see if it works better.

 

I genuinely do not care about what your opinion on the value of this weapon is or what you believe it is used for.

 

Just try to mention the change on the update log this time. Seems like you guys forget to mention quite a bit of negative performance change in update log until someone points it out here.

[AeriaGloria]

I genuinely do not care about what your opinion on the value of this weapon is or what you believe it is used for.

 

Just try to mention the change on the update log this time. Seems like you guys forget to mention quite a bit of negative performance change in update log until someone points it out here.

 

Like what? I mean stuff is always going to go under the change log sometimes. If you just mean the rockets that was out of their control when they first changed

[J20Stronk]

 

:cry:pls:cry:

[uboats]

BRM1 is more like APKWS (laser guided but not beam riding)

Seems ED is making APWKS scheme, so it's better to wait a final solution.

 

Since now to have spin effect, only Vikhr scheme provides such visual effect.

S-25L is a hard-coded spin and non-scheme weapon.

 

So either no sharp maneuver after launch or

we may think about another option: use S-25L and use hard-coded spin (so for AI launching BRM1, no spin).

[Terrorban]

BRM1 is more like APKWS (laser guided but not beam riding)

Seems ED is making APWKS scheme, so it's better to wait a final solution.

 

Since now to have spin effect, only Vikhr scheme provides such visual effect.

S-25L is a hard-coded spin and non-scheme weapon.

 

So either no sharp maneuver after launch or

we may think about another option: use S-25L and use hard-coded spin (so for AI launching BRM1, no spin).

 

Razbam announced back in 2018 that ED is making APKWS for hornet so they will feature it on harrier as well when finished.

 

Join the waiting club then. Why not make it work for the time being instead of having a complete useless weapon available? There was nothing wrong with it before you guys completely broke it while knowing there is no alternative available atm from the head developers.