[CORRECT AS IS] Litening Offset Purpose?

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

[NOT CORRECT AS IS]

 

Hi,

 

Updated litening pod questions: I noticed the offset cursor in Point TRK or Area TRK drifts (does not lock on to offset target). So what is the intended or useful purpose of it? Are we suppose to do an SCS lock in Point TRK to lock up the offset target in Normal TRK mode so we can lase the target? Also, this doesn't work for Area TRK (SCS sends it to Point TRK mode), so what is the use (in terms of weapon deployment) for offset in Area TRK?

 

Many thks

Edited September 6, 2020 by GrEaSeLiTeNiN

[Fri13]

I don't really get it.

 

In the Wags video there were few good questions about the functionality, but I still don't get it how to use it.

 

Sometimes it locks on off-set, sometimes nothing. And if the laser is always firing in the center of the TPOD view and NOT to the off-set crosshair, then it can't be used as Wags said in the video where it would be used easily to designate new target for laser bombing.

 

 

Edit, if the laser would move with the off-set crosshair, I would completely understand its usefulness. Like keep the TPOD tracking the moving target and then correct for the speed and wind with the off-set crosshair so the laser guided bomb would drop correctly on the tracked target instead fall-off by wind and motion....

 

Same way it would be easy to track a moving target by keeping TPOD view stationary and move the off-set cursor around inside the view....

Edited August 24, 2020 by Fri13

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

I tried to manually keep the offset crosshair on the target but the LPod screen will spin eventually as the plane nears the target, making lasing impossible. But I'm not sure that's the purpose of offset. Or maybe it's still in development. The only use of the offset right now that I can see is an SCS lock on the Pt Trk offset target which will lock it up in Normal Trk mode.

[Swift.]

 

The ATFLIR offset makes a lot more sense, you can see how you would use it to track the high contrast object but then lase onto something else. My assumption would be that ED might have misinterpreted things, but I have been reassured to the contrary.

[noisy_lightning]

 

The ATFLIR offset makes a lot more sense, you can see how you would use it to track the high contrast object but then lase onto something else. My assumption would be that ED might have misinterpreted things, but I have been reassured to the contrary.

This does make a lot more sense.

[nickos86]

I've opened a thread about the same question

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=283850

 

I think the correct statement is not:"The ATFLIR offset makes a lot more sense"

Rather "The current implementation is probably wrong".

 

Again, ED- with most respect (and believe me when I say that! You showed a VERY professional approach toward the AIM120 and FM) - please show documentation or explain the logic... The offset and PTRK - make no sense

[Fri13]

 

The ATFLIR offset makes a lot more sense, you can see how you would use it to track the high contrast object but then lase onto something else. My assumption would be that ED might have misinterpreted things, but I have been reassured to the contrary.

 

That actually does make more sense.

 

The laser is always pointed at the center of the TPOD view, but you can use off-set marker as tracking point to point TPOD center around it

.

So just like in the video, one can keep tracking the vehicle while moving laser spot elsewhere.

I assume that this way the designation for the weapons is the off-set marker position and not the TPOD center cursor.

 

Interesting that the ATFLIR has so radically different behavior compared to LITENING II.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

Title now says “CORRECT AS IS”. So this logic where the offset does nothing useful for the pilot (as far as I can tell) is correct? Could ED please help clarify? Thks!

[Fri13]

So this logic where the offset does nothing useful for the pilot (as far as I can tell) is correct?

 

Seems so then.

 

If this is correct what is said: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4465450&postcount=4

Then AV-8B N/A Harrier LITENING II (TPOD) sounds more useful.

 

I don't see reason to use a off-set in Hornet if all I can do with it is go through multiple targeting modes each time just so that I can re-center TPOD to a new position.... It is about easier to just slew the whole thing each time again.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

Seems so then.

 

If this is correct what is said: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4465450&postcount=4

Then AV-8B N/A Harrier LITENING II (TPOD) sounds more useful.

 

I don't see reason to use a off-set in Hornet if all I can do with it is go through multiple targeting modes each time just so that I can re-center TPOD to a new position.... It is about easier to just slew the whole thing each time again.

 

I suspect we will see a correction update as this can't be right because Wags tutorial video implied that the offsets were to lock up another target for weapon designation such as lasing for LGBs. But it doesn't work at the moment in Area Trk (as described in OP) and only works somewhat in Pt Trk if you SCS lock it back into Normal mode which is a bit pointless.

 

Interestingly, the F/A-18C manual at Hoggitworld (https://wiki.hoggitworld.com/view/F/A-18C#FLIR_Operation) writes that offset is only available in Pt Trk and works in the manner one would expect:

Offset Cursor Designation - In Point Track, the TDC can be depressed to display an Offset Cursor in the form of a "+". This cursor can then be used to designate a target other than what the Point Track is tracking by depressing the TDC. Bumping the Sensor Control Switch toward the FLIR format will center the Point Track on the Offset Cursor location.

 

In any case, from Wag's video, I can't see the use of offset in Area Trk even if it worked because the Normal mode would do the same job more quickly. In the case of Pt Trk on moving targets, offset might be useful if it worked as described in Hoggit's manual.

[dorianR666]

I suspect we will see a correction update as this can't be right because Wags tutorial video implied that the offsets were to lock up another target for weapon designation such as lasing for LGBs. But it doesn't work at the moment in Area Trk (as described in OP) and only works somewhat in Pt Trk if you SCS lock it back into Normal mode which is a bit pointless.

yep, currently there is no use case for point track offsets whatsoever. if you make a point track offset, you still have to switch to inertial mode, which itself allows you to move the reticle. that simply cannot be correct behaviour, that would make offsets entirely pointless and useless.

 

 

 

Offset Cursor Designation - In Point Track, the TDC can be depressed to display an Offset Cursor in the form of a "+". This cursor can then be used to designate a target other than what the Point Track is tracking by depressing the TDC. Bumping the Sensor Control Switch toward the FLIR format will center the Point Track on the Offset Cursor location.

i really hope ED double checks their documentation. these threads keep getting marked CORRECT AS IS which would be super disappointing.

[NoJoe]

The way I read it is that I could have one target being lased for my first bomb (for instance, the first C-130 in the video). Then while that bomb is falling and being lased on the first C-130, I can use the offset to select the second C-130.

 

As soon as the first bomb impacts, press Sensor Select Switch toward the FLIR display, and the pod (and laser) immediately moves to the second target, for the second bomb.

 

Seems pretty straight forward; it gives an easy way to immediately switch from one target to another, without having to manually slew the pod.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

The way I read it is that I could have one target being lased for my first bomb (for instance, the first C-130 in the video). Then while that bomb is falling and being lased on the first C-130, I can use the offset to select the second C-130.

 

As soon as the first bomb impacts, press Sensor Select Switch toward the FLIR display, and the pod (and laser) immediately moves to the second target, for the second bomb.

 

Seems pretty straight forward; it gives an easy way to immediately switch from one target to another, without having to manually slew the pod.

 

 

That might work with the current point trk offset for laser mavs but probably not for LGBs because the offset drifts and the video spins by the time the first LGB hits.

[BarTzi]

The way I read it is that I could have one target being lased for my first bomb (for instance, the first C-130 in the video). Then while that bomb is falling and being lased on the first C-130, I can use the offset to select the second C-130.

 

As soon as the first bomb impacts, press Sensor Select Switch toward the FLIR display, and the pod (and laser) immediately moves to the second target, for the second bomb.

 

Seems pretty straight forward; it gives an easy way to immediately switch from one target to another, without having to manually slew the pod.

 

What you are describing is the equivalent of using markpoints. This thread is about wether or not the implementation of the offset in the DCS LITENING is accurate, especially since it doesn't offset the pod at all.

 

A better example of this is the ATFLIR offset, as shown in the video Swift linked.

[Fri13]

Offset Cursor Designation - In Point Track, the TDC can be depressed to display an Offset Cursor in the form of a "+". This cursor can then be used to designate a target other than what the Point Track is tracking by depressing the TDC. Bumping the Sensor Control Switch toward the FLIR format will center the Point Track on the Offset Cursor location.

 

So again question, as the Off-Set can be used to designate a target other than what is tracked, does it mean the laser would be pointing where Off-Set is pointing and not to Point-Track (center) position?

[Swift.]

So again question, as the Off-Set can be used to designate a target other than what is tracked, does it mean the laser would be pointing where Off-Set is pointing and not to Point-Track (center) position?

 

The laser always fires along the pods LOS, so in the video I posted you can lase a target other than the track, but in DCS you can't.

[NoJoe]

What you are describing is the equivalent of using markpoints. This thread is about wether or not the implementation of the offset in the DCS LITENING is accurate, especially since it doesn't offset the pod at all.

 

A better example of this is the ATFLIR offset, as shown in the video Swift linked.

 

I was simply replying to the OP's question: "So what is the intended or useful purpose of it?", giving an example of how it could be used.

 

Cheers.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

So again question, as the Off-Set can be used to designate a target other than what is tracked, does it mean the laser would be pointing where Off-Set is pointing and not to Point-Track (center) position?

 

Good question, it's not clear what it really does.

Edited August 30, 2020 by GrEaSeLiTeNiN

[BarTzi]

I was simply replying to the OP's question: "So what is the intended or useful purpose of it?", giving an example of how it could be used.

 

Cheers.

 

That's my point. If what you are saying is pretty much using a mark point, why does offset exist in the way that it is right now? It's redundant for no reason, which might suggest the way offset was modeled is not 100% accurate.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

That's my point. If what you are saying is pretty much using a mark point, why does offset exist in the way that it is right now? It's redundant for no reason, which might suggest the way offset was modeled is not 100% accurate.

 

 

I think there is an error in implementation because for example the MAV E seeker triangle will follow the offset TDC depressed target but the laser stays on the FLIR display centre crosshair.

[BarTzi]

I think there is an error in implementation because for example the MAV E seeker triangle will follow the offset TDC depressed target but the laser stays on the FLIR display centre crosshair.

 

I think the designated target will be updated if you use offset. It's jus the pod LOS that won't move.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

I think the designated target will be updated if you use offset. It's jus the pod LOS that won't move.

 

 

I did some testing and the missile or bomb will always fly to the ground where Pod LOS is pointing at and not the TDC depressed (newly designated) offset target.

 

The only time offset is remotely of any use (at this moment) is to SCS bump a Pt TRK designated offset target into Normal TRK. But that's kind of strange.

Edited August 30, 2020 by GrEaSeLiTeNiN

[Swift.]

Yeah the way its done now (and the way it apparently is in Spanish litening) is useless, the way its done in ATFLIR makes a load more sense

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

UPDATE Summary:

 

Purpose of Area TRK and Pt TRK offset and how it currently works (likely bugged for LG weapons).

 

For MAV F (uncaged). Put the '+' over a FLIR target, depress TDC and MAV F seeker will lock onto the offset target. This works in Area TRK (non moving target) and Pt TRK (includes moving target). In Pt TRK, the '+' will not follow a moving target but the MAV F seeker will when it successfully locks onto the target in the MAV display. The only thing that follows a moving target in the FLIR page is the Pt TRK '||' while its '+' just tags along at whatever offset and isn't tracking anything.

 

With MAV E, the seeker triangle in the HUD will always move onto the offset designated target (diamond) but the laser however remains focused on the FLIR LOS (line-of-sight or centre of display) and never moves to the designated offset target. As such, the MAV E (and LGB for the same reason) always hits the LOS target and never the offset target.

 

A review of Wag's video shows he mentioned that the offset in Area TRK might be used to "set up a LGB attack". We know that doesn't work at the moment so the current implementation is likely bugged and not "Correct As Is". At the end of the video, Wags also mentioned that offsets are a "really handy function when you are switching targets". But again, we know that only works for MAV F where lasing is not involved.

Edited September 2, 2020 by GrEaSeLiTeNiN

[oldcrusty]

Yeah the way its done now (and the way it apparently is in Spanish litening) is useless, the way its done in ATFLIR makes a load more sense

 

Can't argue with that... at least I can't:D