Producer's Note #4 - Navigation

[amalahama]

Another question

 

How much deviation could accumulate the Inertial Navigation System of the Ka-50 in a flight? ( per hour or per 100 kilometers )

 

Because the Ka-50 range could not be very large and in a typical combat sortie ( thinking in a main base 100-80 Km from the FEBA, and several FARPS only 50-30 km from this line ) this deviation could be very low to need the introduction of navigation correction points via Shkval or other means.

 

This question is interesting.

 

Could it be that the more intense rotor vibrations add more errors in the INS accelerometers and gyroscopes?

 

In fact, I've read usually INS in helicopters is a no-go, it's preferable the use of Doppler systems, because the accelerometers are very sensitive to the vibration.

 

Regards!!

[Avimimus]

It might also be harder to protect them from the maneuvers of a combat helicopter (up down, side to side, spinning in yaw, snaking banking turns etc.)?

[Avimimus]

The next note will be the Shkval sensor and helmet mounted sight. After that I will start the weapon notes.

 

Will it be possible to demonstrate the weapons at both maximum and minimum range (eg. salvos of rockets at long range or firing off a pair at point blank)? It would also be neat to get a sense of effectiveness against different types of target (eg. for the UPK).

 

Thanks for the video,

[BeachAV8R]

Funny thing is..I'm learning a lot from Wag's videos! :book:

[burnzoire]

First of all let me say a huge thanks to Wags for volunteering these lovely videos to us, it sure has got me excited about DCS! It's also very enlightening - I'm learning a lot about the black shark without reading a thing :)

 

Everything is looking very polished, but I did notice a big terrain anomaly there - is that something that is being worked on now? I remember from an FSX blog that these things are very time consuming to find and fix.

 

One more thing - I noticed there were no tower comms during the approach & landing. Will this be implemented, and to what level? Audio, or just text chatter? Will there be traffic patterns etc or will it be the same as Lock On? Sorry if this has been answered before!

 

Good flying again Wags :)

[swepain]

lol "Franken-sim" well,, i would'nt mind one franken round right now! its like when u added the 25t it was miles ahead of the rest!

 

But when this baby is done... whoohaa (gr8 work all of u guys from Ed ppl to beta testers and forum junkies) thx

[Grimes]

As I watch more of these videos I have to wonder about how much I will be using the HOTAS. It appears as its more of a HOSAM (on Stick and Mouse) I know the game is scaleable in terms of how you choose to play it, but I'm getting the idea unless I get really good at the minimouse on my X52, I'll be channeling most of my commands through my all purpose mouse.

[Feuerfalke]

As I watch more of these videos I have to wonder about how much I will be using the HOTAS. It appears as its more of a HOSAM (on Stick and Mouse) I know the game is scaleable in terms of how you choose to play it, but I'm getting the idea unless I get really good at the minimouse on my X52, I'll be channeling most of my commands through my all purpose mouse.

 

I doubt that. I am an old Falcon-veteran, which comes with a full-clickable-cockpit, too. You don't need all the functions you are given all the time. A lot of the buttons and switches are primarily used to get the aircraft ready and systems online and preconfigured. In flight you only use a limited number of buttons. After all the aircraft themselves are layed out to limit the workload for the pilot inflight.

It's not that overwhelming after you get used to it and you got to remember that you really have to use a mouse in Falcon. In a full 6DOF-cockpit, you can probably just position the mouse on the center, map a button to enable/disable the mouse and another button for clicking. You can use the head to position the pointer over the switches.

[EagleEye]

I`m again impressed how pretty the ground environment looks like. Imagine how much fun hide and seek will be while playing online...:)

[bogusheadbox]

I`m again impressed how pretty the ground environment looks like. Imagine how much fun hide and seek will be while playing online...:)

 

Until an enemy ka-52 flys Through the middle of that group of trees and loads you full of cannon.

 

At present, the only safe place to hide will be behind solid ground or buildings.

 

Can't wait for collidable trees. Its what Lomac and this sim really needs.

 

Aside from that, it is looking good

[Feuerfalke]

Until an enemy ka-52 flys Through the middle of that group of trees and loads you full of cannon.

 

At present, the only safe place to hide will be behind solid ground or buildings.

 

Can't wait for collidable trees. Its what Lomac and this sim really needs.

 

Aside from that, it is looking good

 

Yeah, the difference between cover and concealment. :D

[BBQ]

I’d like to better understand the “reference” points that are input into the INU panel. I think I understand the concept—that when you fly over this known point (landmark??) you tell the computer you are there, and it is able to tweak/correct/update the system from any errors acquired. However, if there are errors acquired already—how do you know you’re over the reference point??!! That is to say, you’re using the system to fly to the reference point, but you’ve already got errors, so who’s to say you’re really over the point when you think you are? :doh: The only thing I can think of—is that these reference points are landmarks of some kind, or radio beacons.

 

I’m sure there’s an obvious answer to this—please enlighten me!

 

Also--does the GPS/Sat system update the INU at all? Some sort of cross-check?

[EagleEye]

Until an enemy ka-52 flys Through the middle of that group of trees and loads you full of cannon.

He he, first the enemy Ka-52 would have to find me.:D That was my intention.

But you are right, trees aren`t a solid cover...

[BBQ]

Thanks for the reply, Acedy--makes sense.

[RedTiger]

In a full 6DOF-cockpit, you can probably just position the mouse on the center, map a button to enable/disable the mouse and another button for clicking. You can use the head to position the pointer over the switches.

 

lol...funny to see I wasn't the only person thinking of this. I hope it works this way. You are nearly right about Falcon, however there are some very useful things that you can do during ingress that DO require you to use your mouse -- adding MARK points for example. From the looks of the ABRIS, there will be things of this nature in there as well. So here's hoping I can just assign the mouse click as a button on the HOTAS and just move the cursor with TrackIR.

[BBQ]

Also--:

 

Is the "Rubicon" another name for the INU? I was looking on the homepage about systems--and it show the input panel, and calls it the "Rubicon".

 

EDIT: oops, I see now, the "Radian" is a sub-system, which is what Wags was using, calling it the something -800 panel. Ack--I don't have access to the vid right now.

[EvilBivol-1]

I’d like to better understand the “reference” points that are input into the INU panel. I think I understand the concept—that when you fly over this known point (landmark??) you tell the computer you are there, and it is able to tweak/correct/update the system from any errors acquired. However, if there are errors acquired already—how do you know you’re over the reference point??!! That is to say, you’re using the system to fly to the reference point, but you’ve already got errors, so who’s to say you’re really over the point when you think you are? :doh: The only thing I can think of—is that these reference points are landmarks of some kind, or radio beacons.

 

I’m sure there’s an obvious answer to this—please enlighten me!

 

Also--does the GPS/Sat system update the INU at all? Some sort of cross-check?

The ABRIS is not fully integrated into the Ka-50's native avionics. It does not cross-link navigation information with the INS. It is a "stand-alone" sat. navigation system, although modified for the military to display tactical information (such as known threat zones and datalink information).

 

As Wags already covered in his ABRIS video (Poducer's Note #2), the ABRIS and the INS operate independently, each tracking the aircraft's position on it's own. This means the pilot has to pay attention to both to make sure the correct steerpoint is selected. Remember, in this video you can see Wags manually adjust the steerpoint on the ABRIS when the INS switches to the next one (19:33). Ideally, if you fly the route carefully and hit all your steerpoints, both systems will automatically switch to the following point, but this is not always the case. In the ABRIS, you can also adjust the distance to the point at which the system will select the following one.

 

Because the systems are not fully cross-linked, you cannot use the ABRIS directly to update the INS. However, you can place reference points on the map in the ME when designing the mission, which are automatically displayed on the ABRIS map (as if manually added to the ABRIS database by the pilot before the mission). Because the sat. system is generally highly accurate, it is a reliable method of displaying your position over the desired reference point when you fly over it. However, if you add new reference points (or steerpoints) to the INS while in the mission, they will not be displayed on the ABRIS, unless you manually add them yourself.

 

The other option is, as you said, to simply place the reference point over a visible area, such as a bridge, a tower, etc., in which case you don't have to rely on the sat. system to know that you are over the point.

[EvilBivol-1]

Another question

 

How much deviation could accumulate the Inertial Navigation System of the Ka-50 in a flight? ( per hour or per 100 kilometers )

 

Because the Ka-50 range could not be very large and in a typical combat sortie ( thinking in a main base 100-80 Km from the FEBA, and several FARPS only 50-30 km from this line ) this deviation could be very low to need the introduction of navigation correction points via Shkval or other means.

I believe the cumulative error can be up to 4 km. per hour of flight.

[BBQ]

Thanks for the info Evil

[Esac_mirmidon]

4 Km per hour of flight ¡¡¡¡ OMG.

 

This is much more than i ever think.

 

INS correction methods are really a must then....

[BBQ]

Another question:

 

What if you have one system, say the GPS, with the active waypoint #2, and with the INS system, you have #3 active--which information is sent to the HSI and HUD? How is the priority set between systems? I remember in some sim, maybe F/A 18?, there was a little box that would show up on the MFD that would indicate those sensors were "active". Is something similiar used with Blackshark?

[GGTharos]

The ABRIS, as mentioned, is not really integrated with the INU. The INU was there first, and thus is the instrument which is integrated with all the avionics.

[BBQ]

The ABRIS, as mentioned, is not really integrated with the INU. The INU was there first, and thus is the instrument which is integrated with all the avionics.

 

 

So the waypoints in the ABRIS--they won't update the HSI RMI needles, etc., or HUD cues?

 

Also, isn't there a digital HSI on the ABRIS? Wouldn't it have to be integrated with the instrument in order to show a digital form of it? Or is that aspect of the ABRIS sort of a "dummy" monitor for the instrument. Just thinking out loud, trying to wrap my head around it all. :book:

 

Actually, why have the INS at all? I guess redundancy? It seems the ABRIS can do everything the INS can do--but if sattelite signal was lost...

[GGTharos]

So the waypoints in the ABRIS--they won't update the HSI RMI needles, etc., or HUD cues?

 

Correct ... you can pretty much infer the same from the video and what EB has mentioned before.

 

Also, isn't there a digital HSI on the ABRIS?

 

Also correct.

 

Wouldn't it have to be integrated with the instrument in order to show a digital form of it? Or is that aspect of the ABRIS sort of a "dummy" monitor for the instrument. Just thinking out loud, trying to wrap my head around it all. :book:

 

You're still looking at two different instruments - for the ABRIS, whether it displays an HSI or a moving map for you, it's nothing other than a different representation of the same data. :)

 

Actually, why have the INS at all? I guess redundancy? It seems the ABRIS can do everything the INS can do--but if sattelite signal was lost...

 

 

Not to mention it's already integrated into the helicopter's systems ... and yes, if your sats are blown out of the sky, zorched, or otherwise ECM'ed, you better have some sort of working navigation instrumentation :)

 

I believe fighters today use the EINS - GPS corrected INS (think of the ABRIS completely integrated with the INU) ... in case one fails, the other's there, and of course GPS is much more accurate.

[BBQ]

Thanks for your patience in explaining this GGTharos.