Additional mask zone options

[*Aquila*]

Looks like the Litening is unable to illuminate a target farther than a few degrees on the right or left side, which makes it impossible to lase a target on the sides. Quite a problem for many kinds of GBU, missile and APKWS runs as well as for buddy-lasing. Track provided.

a-10CII-laser-angle.trk

[docWilly]

I am in no way an expert on A10C but had the same finding on a MP server. 2 F5´s asking for buddy lasing, so I circled around the AO (6 to 7NM from target location at 8k feet) and lased on given code. GBU 12´s never picked up the laser and went nuts. So if it´s impossible to lase in FOV of the TGP to the side while circling the AO....that it makes no sense to me.

I am pretty sure that A10C´s do not fly straight in and out on the AO and do buddy lasing with the main reason to avoid AAA or manpads.

[icemaker]

i noticed that prior to been masked the cross on the pod starts blinking, so we can do something to keep the laser unmasked.

[*Aquila*]

I am in no way an expert on A10C but had the same finding on a MP server. 2 F5´s asking for buddy lasing, so I circled around the AO (6 to 7NM from target location at 8k feet) and lased on given code. GBU 12´s never picked up the laser and went nuts. So if it´s impossible to lase in FOV of the TGP to the side while circling the AO....that it makes no sense to me.

I am pretty sure that A10C´s do not fly straight in and out on the AO and do buddy lasing with the main reason to avoid AAA or manpads.

Another question being : why the Litening on the F-16 & F/A-18 does not have that "correct" mask zone ? You have no problem lasing an object while circling around it with those two planes. I think that topic deserves an argued answer. Just editing the title looks a bit nonchalent to me regarding what it's about.

[Yurgon]

Another question being : why the Litening on the F-16 & F/A-18 does not have that "correct" mask zone ? You have no problem lasing an object while circling around it with those two planes. I think that topic deserves an argued answer. Just editing the title looks a bit nonchalent to me regarding what it's about.

 

Both modules are still in Early Access, while the A-10C with its Litening implementation has been feature complete for many years. Not saying that's the definite reason, but it's my best guess to explain the difference between the modules.

 

As for the nonchalentness of the mods, if you have exactly one topic you're interested in, it probably looks that way. Personally, I try to keep up with the A-10C II part of the forum, and it takes me a solid 20 to 30 minutes every day just to skim the new posts. Considering some of the mods are even doing this in their spare time, you might have to check your expectations for the kind of response you'll get on a community forum.

[hornblower793]

If you look on the net there are articles from pilots who flew the first Gulf War saying that the aircraft doing the lasing had to fly at the target the whole time but was several miles behind the aircraft dropping the weapon to allow this to happen (aircraft were F-15s).

[Dragon1-1]

Also, Litening pods on Viper and Hornet are mounted differently. On a chin station (forward and down in relation to the wing ones), underwing ordnance generally won't mask the laser unless you're carrying really big wing bags. On the A-10, the TGP is hanging off a pylon, and thus much closer to other stuff hanging off the wings.

[*Aquila*]

If you look on the net there are articles from pilots who flew the first Gulf War saying that the aircraft doing the lasing had to fly at the target the whole time but was several miles behind the aircraft dropping the weapon to allow this to happen (aircraft were F-15s).

The pods were LANTIRNs, a couple generations older than the Litening II, so off topic.

 

 

Also, Litening pods on Viper and Hornet are mounted differently. On a chin station (forward and down in relation to the wing ones), underwing ordnance generally won't mask the laser unless you're carrying really big wing bags. On the A-10, the TGP is hanging off a pylon, and thus much closer to other stuff hanging off the wings.

I'm not speaking about how the aircraft or ordnance mask the field of view but the way the laser is masked in a cone far smaller than the field of view (see track).

 

 

Both modules are still in Early Access, while the A-10C with its Litening implementation has been feature complete for many years. Not saying that's the definite reason, but it's my best guess to explain the difference between the modules.

The F-16s which Litening targeting pods are seen lasing in a wide arc over there are not early access :

 

 

 

That's a typical reason why I can't accept the way that question was (not) answered.

[hornblower793]

Good point - teach me for skim reading threads quickly in a lunch break:music_whistling:

[docWilly]

 

The F-16s which Litening targeting pods are seen lasing in a wide arc over there are not early access :

 

 

 

 

 

Interesting find as you can clearly see that lasing in this RL vid is while the target beeing far offset from F16`s direction (HDG) and still beeing lased (succesfully).

 

 

 

Again the main reason not flying straight-in while buddy lasing is to avoid AA fire - thus loitering in a circle seems more appropriate to me. You keep an eye on the AO, avoid beeing sniped by AA, give way to the attacking aircraft etc.

[diditopgun]

A-10C lasing backward:

 

 

:dunno:

[Yurgon]

Looks like the Litening is unable to illuminate a target farther than a few degrees on the right or left side, which makes it impossible to lase a target on the sides.

 

As far as I know, IRL there will be different masking profiles depending on the actual loadout, in order to prevent accidentally lasing the own aircraft, its externals stores or the pilot.

 

In the DCS A-10C I believe only one masking profile exists, regardless of actual loadout.

 

However, it's perfectly possible to lase targets at the 1, 2, 3 o'clock positions. It all depends on the slant angle, and your job as a pilot is to maneuver your aircraft to get to the proper position in order not to mask yourself.

 

In a quick comparison, the old A-10C in the latest Stable and the new A-10C II in the latest Open Beta seem to have the exact same masking profile.

 

I'm not speaking about how the aircraft or ordnance mask the field of view but the way the laser is masked in a cone far smaller than the field of view (see track).

 

In addition to the masking profile discussion, keep in mind that laser and camera don't necessarily sit in the exact same spot in the head of the TGP, so while the CCD/FLIR might have LOS with your target, the laser might already be masked. I imagine there may also be a bit of an additional safety margin built into the masking profile, though that is admittedly pure speculation.

 

Another question being : why the Litening on the F-16 & F/A-18 does not have that "correct" mask zone ? You have no problem lasing an object while circling around it with those two planes.

 

The F-16s which Litening targeting pods are seen lasing in a wide arc over there are not early access :

 

 

Hold on, what's the point here? The F-16 in DCS works exactly like in the RL video, so DCS must be wrong? I don't follow. Plus I don't understand what that has to do with the A-10, seeing as the position the TGP is mounted is wildly different between these airframes.

 

To sum things up, "MASK ZONE IS CORRECT" may not be 100% accurate, but I believe in most situations the masking profile is kinda okay-ish as is, and shouldn't keep you from lasing targets. Just load AIM-9s or an ECM pod next to the TGP and the masking problem should be fairly obvious.

[Fri13]

Few degrees to sides would be totally.... Unbelievable.

 

45° and up and it would start to sound logical, and 70-80° could be guaranteed to be a masked afterwards if payloads at front.

[*Aquila*]

C'mon Yurgon, looks like you don't want to understand.

 

 

 

Have a look over there.

 

 

 

A-10C lasing backward:

 

 

 

 

Try to lase that way with the A-10C II and come back to tell me what you found out.

[Ziptie]

With TGP on station 2, I maintained an altitude hold orbit for approximately 15 minutes while buddy lasing multiple targets for other A10CII's in my flight, as well as a Hornet. My range was approximately 5-8nm from targets, while successfully maintaining a non masking profile of the pod and laser. It was close a few times to encountering a masking situation, but a slight correction of roll kept it from happening.

 

I always have the pod mounted on station 2, with station 1 having either one or two aim9m's and no more than one maverick on station 3 - just for a setup reference.

 

 

Cheers,

 

Ziptie

[Yurgon]

C'mon Yurgon, looks like you don't want to understand.

 

You said the TGP looking forward and slightly sideways will get masked too soon. Now you want me to prove that the TGP looking back and below does work correctly in DCS. Why don't you make up your mind what you actually consider to be the problem at hand, and then we continue?

 

Your track was also nowhere near any of the parameters you showed in videos of A-10s, so why don't you go ahead and show that the DCS A-10 cannot do what those A-10 vids showed, before demanding someone else prove to you that it can?

[*Aquila*]

I don’t speak about the TGP being masked but about the laser being masked while the camera is NOT. I’ll make another track. Anyway, I won’t argue anymore on this topic with anybody not being a dev nor a CM, especially you. I feel like I’m speaking to my hat. Kind regards.

[*Aquila*]

Here's another track.

 

Just so everybody understands why I'm insisting so heavily...

 

 

Here's how the laser designator, spot detector, FLIR and CCD sensors are arranged in the optronics ball:

 

 

So you'll understand that for the laser being masked while the target is in the FLIR's and CCD's FoV, we need some explanation, won't you?

 

 

Here's what's happening when, in my track, my laser is masked (L stops blinking in the HUD & MFD, as well as M):

 

 

The point I'm lasing is clearly visible, in my 2 o'clock, 6.5 nm away.

 

 

 

 

Nothing is physically masking the laser designator.

 

 

Here's what I see while looking outside. The target is the SPI.

 

 

 

So my friend Icemaker and I are able to explain it in the review we're writing right now and which will be read by a few thousand people, can someone tell me if it's a bug, and if it's a feature, why the laser is masked in this configuration? And why it is not in other simulations of the same TGP by the same designers?

 

 

Thank you so much in advance.

a-10CII-laser-mask.trk

[*Aquila*]

New test, new track.

 

 

Now, we're at night. Same configuration as in my previous post. The target is clearly inside the FLIR's FoV. On the TGP page, LSR OSB is set to BTH. And guess what: the laser is masked (and the Mav is lost) but not the IR pointer, which is designating the target as you can see in the MFD as well as outside with the NVGs.

 

 

"Mask zone is correct"? :huh:

a-10CII-laser-mask-night.trk

[BIGNEWY]

Hi

 

It looks correct to me, it looks like stores mask when you dip the wing.

 

I am seeing the laser firing through the aircraft and I will report that however.

[*Aquila*]

I am seeing the laser firing through the aircraft

Thanks. Does this have something to do with the collision model?

[Stuka]

Also, keep in mind:

 

Yes. If you see the ‘M’ symbology on the TGP format then the pod thinks it’s masked.

 

It’s worth noting that as I mentioned above, the masking profile is accounting for the all the apertures on the pod, not just the one you’re “looking through” at that moment (the CCD might not be masked, but the LASER could be).

[Frederf]

Does the masking zone account for the secondary laser beam (coming out 40-50 degrees different than the primary beam)?

[diditopgun]

In addition to Stuka's quote:

 

You have to manually initiate an area or point track following loss of track for any reason. Masking refers to the pod being in the loaded masking profile, it doesn’t matter if the LOS of the camera is physically masked.

 

The masking profile(s) account for stores and all parts of the airframe and allow clearance from the airframe for both the CCD and IR camera apertures and the LASER/IR Pointer.

 

In DCS we always have the most restrictive masking profile, regardless of what stores are physically loaded to the jet, and we can’t select alternative profiles.

 

Aquila, after looking at your 2 tracks, I don't see lasing issue in most part of TGP's FOV. You even lase backward. The only spot where I see an issue is indeed near sidewinders, and so an idea comes to me.

 

I did myself 3 tests. TGP on the left wing hardpoint, without ECM pod, with ALQ-184, and with ALQ-131.

 

What I observed is that TGP's mask limit at 9 o'clock is always the same regardless if an ECM pod is present or not.

 

Even if you have no ECM pod and your TGP could lase without issue at 9 o'clock, masking profile used is the one with ALQ-131 (the most restrictive). And a small safety margin is present too. Mask zone occurs a bit before physicaly crossing the ECM pod limits (or other stuffs).

 

It confirm the above quotes, and mask zone seems correct in regards to the most restrictive profil imposed by DCS.

 

So in the TGP + sidewinder configuration, the mask zone works (in DCS) as if you have an ECM pod on each wing...

[*Aquila*]

Thanks guys.

 

 

In DCS we always have the most restrictive masking profile, regardless of what stores are physically loaded to the jet, and we can’t select alternative profiles.

Which means that the "MASK ZONE IS CORRECT" sentence lacks a few words: "regarding DCS limits." LMAO...