Ability to call FFE mission from field artillery or MLRS via link to FDC

[kgillers3]

47 minutes ago, barundus said:

It generally took a day and a half of the FIST truck parked in our hangar, with an aircraft plugged into wall power next to it, and the FISTers and a couple nerd pilots fiddle-fucking the TACFIRE to try and figure out how to get them to talk to each other.  

Six months later those guys would be gone, and we'd have to learn it all over again for the next gunnery.  Neither the canon-cockers, nor the aviators were very proficient.

I always took an interest in the digital side of things, and tried to make it work.  There aren't many of us left that have actually conducted TACFIRE digital missions, much less fired real Copperheads.  

Things have progressed radically in the last twenty years, but to my knowledge no-one has ever conducted a digital fire mission *in combat*.  We'll get there.

I would very much like to see it in DCS though.  

Agreed it’d be a nice integration into dcs. Before I jumped over I remember spending hours in the back of the brad trying to get it to work. And those were systems that were “made” to talk to each other 

[bies]

On 2/18/2021 at 7:51 PM, barundus said:

High-precision grid really doesn't matter for a Copperhead, as it's laser-guided.  And, like you stated; retired/out of inventory

It doesn't matter it's out of inventory TODAY, because DCS doesn't simulate today's battlefield, but historical one. 

DCS Apache is going to simulate 2000s period, some 15 years ago, when Copperhead was still in use. It was i.e. used in combat during 2003 Iraq Freedom. Just saying.

[Remco]

On 11/5/2021 at 6:53 PM, kgillers3 said:

there is a guy on here that may or may not want to share his story but it’s his story to tell so I’m not gonna shout him out

 

It works great when you have the guys on the ground properly integrated and it was very convenient in Chora, but I'm going to refrain from going into detail to much on that one till we know whether or not ED intents to implement it in any way.

On 11/7/2021 at 3:31 AM, bies said:

It doesn't matter it's out of inventory TODAY, because DCS doesn't simulate today's battlefield, but historical one. 

DCS Apache is going to simulate 2000s period, some 15 years ago, when Copperhead was still in use. It was i.e. used in combat during 2003 Iraq Freedom. Just saying.

I'm going to agree with this one, people say copperheads aren't around anymore but DCS doesn't simulate exact modern day. It'd be great to play around with in the 2000's and guiding them in with the 64 sounds like hella fun. But as I said before, that would require a change on Combined Arms side more so than on the 64 module.

[Rogue Trooper]

On 4/1/2021 at 1:57 PM, MRTX said:

I know this is a very late reply to this discussion.

 

To recap my thoughts about calling in firemissions via datalink, I'm certain that the datalink method is the way more immersive and realistic approach to do it within the limitations that DCS offers. 

Without being able to call in firemissions via datalink we would be stuck to combined arms and the F10 map, which when it comes to immersion and realism is a pure dealbreaker.

Datalink would also give mission makers the ability to assign specific artillery batteries to specific apaches and maybe later on Kiowa's and therefore prohibiting the player to use every artillery asset available to them, this would later on also greatly bennefit the multiplayer user experience .

 

ED pls. don't be stupid and cheap out on the Apache and its features!

 

Agreed..... mostly for the Kiowa, but the Apache will also not be so bad at offering such a service.

Grunts in the mud can, for sure the Kiowa and Apache can with all their GPS and laser range finding thingy ma jiggs! 

Edited November 8, 2021 by Rogue Trooper

[kgillers3]

23 hours ago, Remco said:

 

Why the frowny face I didn’t want you to share something you didn’t want to! I’ll name tag you next time if you want! 
 

I’d put a sassy gif here but my cell service is terrible rn. <insert gif at later date>

 

Edited November 9, 2021 by kgillers3

[Remco]

21 minutes ago, kgillers3 said:

Why the frowny face I didn’t want you to share something you didn’t want to! I’ll name tag you next time if you want! 
 

I’d put a sassy gif here but my cell service is terrible rn. <insert gif at later date>

Hahaha d/w I'm just messing with ya brother. I always appreciate a good sassy gif though

[kgillers3]

16 minutes ago, Remco said:

Hahaha d/w I'm just messing with ya brother. I always appreciate a good sassy gif though

Here for you 

[kgillers3]

@Remco Gif updated