reported A-G radar EXP3 and aircraft movement issues

[LastRifleRound]

EXP2/3 designation inaccuracy is due to the same bug that is confirmed and causes FRZ to be inaccurate. It is not due to some ED modeling of real-world inaccuracy of radar designations.

 

This discussion here, marked "correct as is", likely due to the title, contains evidence of the above, including tracks and references to prior bug reports with tracks showing the same behavior.

 

The confirmed FRZ bug, reported by @Frederf, is here, as of August of 2020

 

 

[Fri13]

Likely that same bug, system should adjust itself using INS to compensate aircraft movement related to the mapped area.

 

This was one reason I didn't use the freeze feature as it was totally useless for thr purpose, fly to get detailed enough picture and freeze frame, turn away to safe and designate target from that frozen picture and then turn around back target.

 

The EXP3 is less accurate than EXP2 at close ranges, that is the technical limitation.

But not it that your radar builds a inaccuracy between start of the sweep and end of a sweep by amount that is relative to aircraft position between those.

 

I talked about this at the time of release how your aircraft turning between sweep increased the error that you might got a designation totally wrong place.

As it was like the system didn't have any correlation from where it did capture the picture and where it is itself related to that picture.

 

There is a risk that radar would become too capable and accurate as it is limited in simulation (ie, doesn't render trees and hence no tree shadows) as terrain is just ground and buildings. And this gives you possibility do what you shouldn't be able do, detect individual vehicles etc.

[IvanK]

Its been many moons since I used the expand modes (circa 1986.... pre GPS etc) however a diff I notice between old real world and DCS is this:

 

You have a Designated tgt (be it WPTDGS or Radar map Designation whatever)

You select one of the EXP modes say EXP2

You see the EXP 2 build over the designated point with the "stabilsed cue" over the designation.

You refine the designation using the designation cursors

The instant you release the TDC the display should immediately erase and the new EXP map should build with the stabilsed cue on the revised designation point.

What you see in DCS is an awkward pause with the exp map still shown with the stabilsed cue still over the original position ... This just shouldn't happen and is confusing.

The map eventually erases and slowly builds over the new position with the stabilsed cue on the new designation point.

 

Never ever used the FRZ option (never had a reason to). Practically you could say in EXP2 or 3 (at say 10nm 30 deg off the nose) see the hookcable support structures and designate the centre of the rwy abeam the hookcable. Then fly an approach with the HUD diamond exactly where you placed it  (+- say 3mins of INS drift). You could easily designate in EXP3 to an accuracy of +-70feet from 10nm.

 

From the last Century

 

 

Edited July 18, 2021 by IvanK

[oldcrusty]

1 hour ago, IvanK said:

From the last Century

 

 

 

I'm beginning to miss that century. 

 

So... how do you convince ED without TAC manuals? 

Edited July 19, 2021 by Gripes323

[Harker]

 
I'm beginning to miss that century. 
 
So... how do you convince ED without TAC manuals? 

You're not supposed to post them here, but if you have information you can share, you can send it to them directly.

[LastRifleRound]

8 hours ago, IvanK said:

Its been many moons since I used the expand modes (circa 1986.... pre GPS etc) however a diff I notice between old real world and DCS is this:

 

You have a Designated tgt (be it WPTDGS or Radar map Designation whatever)

You select one of the EXP modes say EXP2

You see the EXP 2 build over the designated point with the "stabilsed cue" over the designation.

You refine the designation using the designation cursors

The instant you release the TDC the display should immediately erase and the new EXP map should build with the stabilsed cue on the revised designation point.

What you see in DCS is an awkward pause with the exp map still shown with the stabilsed cue still over the original position ... This just shouldn't happen and is confusing.

The map eventually erases and slowly builds over the new position with the stabilsed cue on the new designation point.

 

Never ever used the FRZ option (never had a reason to). Practically you could say in EXP2 or 3 (at say 10nm 30 deg off the nose) see the hookcable support structures and designate the centre of the rwy abeam the hookcable. Then fly an approach with the HUD diamond exactly where you placed it  (+- say 3mins of INS drift). You could easily designate in EXP3 to an accuracy of +-70feet from 10nm.

 

From the last Century

 

 

 

Thank you for your input. I have reported the re-scan issue already as well. Bug report is in status "investigating".

 

I hope they address this bug as well.

 

 

[escaner]

Anyone that has tried to use the AG mapping radar to designate targets knows it is a mess. You need to designate while the current update. If the next swipe starts you are now designating in an old radar image and it will be off. Same thing happens when you use the freeze option: the image you see will always be old and the designation totally useless.

Every time you make a designation, you need to wait a refresh or disable and re-enable the EXP option to force it, and then look where you actually designated your target.

All this makes no sense at all.

[JG54_NF2]

Is it normal for the ground echo of Ag radar to deviate from the actual target by about 5m under EXP3?

As described in the picture, I carry a pod to verify whether the aiming point of the Ag radar is accurate. After I align the echo center on the Ag radar and set the TGT, I can see that there is a deviation of several meters from the actual object from the pod image. The strike effect is similar after the actual delivery of weapons.

Is this a bug or a normal deviation?

[speed-of-heat]

i had a similar problem with the tpod and the hud reticle and maverick seeker at the weekend... 

[Harker]

Have you checked the position of the stabilized cue on the radar page after it refreshed, as well? There's currently a bug, where the MC won't compensate for your own motion and so if you designate, you will always be a little off. Normally, you should be able to designate based on what you see on the display.

The bug becomes even more apparent when you use Freeze to designate, the designation is not even close, if you wait for a bit before you make it.

I can't link the relevant bug thread right now, but IIRC it's reported.

[Rissala]

2 hours ago, JG54_NF2 said:

Is it normal for the ground echo of Ag radar to deviate from the actual target by about 5m under EXP3?

As described in the picture, I carry a pod to verify whether the aiming point of the Ag radar is accurate. After I align the echo center on the Ag radar and set the TGT, I can see that there is a deviation of several meters from the actual object from the pod image. The strike effect is similar after the actual delivery of weapons.

Is this a bug or a normal deviation?

See the following thread's later posts. The EXP3 has been bugged ever since it was relased.

It does not compensate for the movement between map refreshes.

Sometimes you get lucky with a ~20 feet deviation but sometimes you get 100 feet + deviation, depending on the timing between the refresh and movement.
I know that the radar is not supposed to be pinpoint, but this is not about that. There is a consistant error that ranges from mild to major relating to the movement and refresh.

1 minute ago, Harker said:

Have you checked the position of the stabilized cue on the radar page after it refreshed, as well? There's currently a bug, where the MC won't compensate for your own motion and so if you designate, you will always be a little off. Normally, you should be able to designate based on what you see on the display.

The bug becomes even more apparent when you use Freeze to designate, the designation is not even close, if you wait for a bit before you make it.

I can't link the relevant bug thread right now, but IIRC it's reported.
 

Linked above

[Rissala]

7 minutes ago, Harker said:

Have you checked the position of the stabilized cue on the radar page after it refreshed, as well? There's currently a bug, where the MC won't compensate for your own motion and so if you designate, you will always be a little off. Normally, you should be able to designate based on what you see on the display.

The bug becomes even more apparent when you use Freeze to designate, the designation is not even close, if you wait for a bit before you make it.

I can't link the relevant bug thread right now, but IIRC it's reported.
 

This seems like a bug that ED just will not recognise :(.
It is honestly frustrating that the F-16 is going to get a workable solution.

[Harker]

This seems like a bug that ED just will not recognise :(.
It is honestly frustrating that the F-16 is going to get a workable solution.

Thanks for linking. Hopefully ED will notice it and now that the Viper seemingly gets a working solution, they'll fix it for the Hornet as well. At the current state, with the designation drift and the bugged EXP frame update rates, the A/G radar is unusable for anything beyond GMT and SEA.

[Rissala]

1 minute ago, Harker said:

6 minutes ago, Rissala said:

This seems like a bug that ED just will not recognise :(.
It is honestly frustrating that the F-16 is going to get a workable solution.

Thanks for linking. Hopefully ED will notice it and now that the Viper seemingly gets a working solution, they'll fix it for the Hornet as well. At the current state, with the designation drift and the bugged EXP frame update rates, the A/G radar is utterly useless for anything beyond GMT and SEA.

Yup. I hope there will be a fix.

Such a shame that a feature as beutifully modelled as this is completely useless now as the pilot cannot rely on it due update and movement issues...

Edited October 19, 2021 by Rissala

[BIGNEWY]

Hi,

If you want to report an issue please include a track replay example so we can check it. 

thanks

[Solo_Turk]

Is there any track file needed really? just fly with tgp, lock something via ag radar and look to tgp. using FRZ option will show you the problem more clear. in wag's f16 ag radar video, he can use frz and designate targets(idk designation accuracy because he didnt show). but f/a18c ag radar has many problems making radar impossible to use.

[Rissala]

1 hour ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hi,

If you want to report an issue please include a track replay example so we can check it. 

thanks

Merge the topics?
 

Multiple tracks here.

[BIGNEWY]

merged

[Rissala]

I made a track in the new patch relased today using FRZ and EXP3

I still got a 42 meter (139.75072ft) error from the middle of the 3 SU-25s (where I aimed) and to the impact craters.

I hope this helps :)

A-G radar shift.trk

[LastRifleRound]

This is still having the same issue. I'll cut another track but have another observation.

Another easy way to demonstrate this issue is to designate point on the ground with the radar. Get within 12nm or so and 30-45 degree offset. Open up the FLIR image. Now, without slewing, keep designating the same spot in rapid succession. Watch as the designation in the FLIR slides along the opposite direction of the axis of travel, and watch as the "skip" gets larger the more angular velocity to that point increases.

Not sure if that helps or not.

I can also confirm that the JF17 and Viper do not share this issue.

[Rissala]

On 10/30/2021 at 9:45 AM, LastRifleRound said:

This is still having the same issue. I'll cut another track but have another observation.

Another easy way to demonstrate this issue is to designate point on the ground with the radar. Get within 12nm or so and 30-45 degree offset. Open up the FLIR image. Now, without slewing, keep designating the same spot in rapid succession. Watch as the designation in the FLIR slides along the opposite direction of the axis of travel, and watch as the "skip" gets larger the more angular velocity to that point increases.

Not sure if that helps or not.

I can also confirm that the JF17 and Viper do not share this issue.

>I can also confirm that the JF17 and Viper do not share this issue.

Which is extremely annoying...

Edited October 31, 2021 by Rissala

[escaner]

Also please note that this problem is not exclusive of the exp modes. It happens in all a/g that I have tried: standard ground mapping, freeze, even in sea mode...

Enviado desde mi Redmi Note 4 mediante Tapatalk

[Harker]

FLIR designation, A/G radar slaved to the FLIR A/G radar designation, FLIR slaved to the radar

 

Notice the difference in coordinates.

Edited November 1, 2021 by Harker

[Cepheus76]

When I want to target JDAMs and the like with the radar, I make sure that I activate the "precise" option for coordinates and also change the coordinates format to seconds and decimal seconds before using the radar. I then just drive the cursor in EXP3 over my target, designate with the SCS and get on the proper heading to drop. Actually, I configure the coordinates the same way when using the pod for targeting. 

Once I figured the above steps out I didn't experience that many misses with free fall ordnance (and JSOWs)

Regards,

Cepheus76

[Rissala]

14 minutes ago, Cepheus76 said:

When I want to target JDAMs and the like with the radar, I make sure that I activate the "precise" option for coordinates and also change the coordinates format to seconds and decimal seconds before using the radar. I then just drive the cursor in EXP3 over my target, designate with the SCS and get on the proper heading to drop. Actually, I configure the coordinates the same way when using the pod for targeting. 

Once I figured the above steps out I didn't experience that many misses with free fall ordnance (and JSOWs)

Regards,

Cepheus76

It makes no difference what coord format you use. And all sensor designated TGT/MKPTS are stored as precise anyways.
This is evident when designating a point with anything, and then selecting precise. -> The precise coordinates are already there even though you designated with non-precise mode on.

I had this thought initially as well, but with the FLIR and Active Pause evidence, the coordinate format factor seems unlikely.