Jump to content

tgp loses position


doclucio

Recommended Posts

7 hours ago, jdfocus1985 said:

I see. You actually have a point here, it does happen at the said position, and think about the position where the TPG is mounted.... I guess it is not a bug, and player should aim the VV slightly to the upper-left...  

Well, I don't KNOW it's not a bug.  I've certainly experienced finding things in simulators that made me believe they had actually simulated some kind of real failure mode, and explained in my head to myself why that would happen IRL, only to find out in a later update that it was just a bug and they fixed it 🤣

I've wondered why they didn't make the longitudinal axis of the Litening II camera oriented in some other direction, since straight ahead is kind of a cardinal direction.  My suspicion is that the designers just didn't think about it since they were expecting the important area was going to be straight down with LGB attacks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, jdfocus1985 said:

I see. You actually have a point here, it does happen at the said position, and think about the position where the TPG is mounted.... I guess it is not a bug, and player should aim the VV slightly to the upper-left...  

What about the shift in SPI I mentioned.  That's not a function of the TGP geometry.

Looking at the target with the HMCS, the SPI was on the vehicle.  Then after the shift, the SPI had moved.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, No1sonuk said:

What about the shift in SPI I mentioned.  That's not a function of the TGP geometry.

Looking at the target with the HMCS, the SPI was on the vehicle.  Then after the shift, the SPI had moved.

If the TGP is SPI, the location will of course move with the the TGP. 

Was something other than the TGP set as SPI at the time?  That would definitely be odd.

It is kind of frustrating that sometimes the TGP finds the original target and sometimes it doesn't.  If it fails, it'd be nice if it failed consistently 🙂

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, jaylw314 said:

If the TGP is SPI, the location will of course move with the the TGP. 

Was something other than the TGP set as SPI at the time?  That would definitely be odd.

It is kind of frustrating that sometimes the TGP finds the original target and sometimes it doesn't.  If it fails, it'd be nice if it failed consistently 🙂

 

I think the Maverick imager page was SOI at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/6/2022 at 12:07 AM, No1sonuk said:

It happened around 8 minutes in on this one, then again a little bit later.

Thanks for the track! Didn't find the time to watch it sooner, but now I just did.

I think I saw what you mean, and that gave me the idea to science the heck out of this issue.

Using the Depressible Pipper, it seems the sensitive area for the TGP is dead ahead, below 5 NM slant range, at fairly exactly -70 mils.

Above 5 NM slant range, we can see the outline shift in the TGP, but the image stays dead centered on the selected spot. Below circa 5 NM, when the nose drops below or climbs above a TGP depression of -70 mils, the TGP visibly rotates and tries to reacquire the target/spot on the ground.

In this scenario, it seems the TGP was able to get back to the same spot, but if it's already close to gimbal limits, it seems quite plausible that it will do so with a significant offset, which will of course veer all weapons off target if it happens during terminal guidance phase.

Long story short, when the target is closer than 5 NM and a player is about to lase something, it behooves said player to avoid the -70 mils area. Setting the Depressible Pipper to -70 mils can help visualize this zone.

Does that make sense? Can you guys confirm this conclusion?

Of course none of that answers the question whether it's a bug. But it actually seems quite plausible to me that the TGP optics might have a deadzone right in that particular spot; before the introduction of APKWS, there would have been little reason to lase something at -70 mils, and the area above (+70 mils) would probably be kept clear for the A-A mode, where a blind spot would be pretty bad (remember the Litening II is not exclusive to the A-10).

A-10C_II_NTTR_TGP_Shift.trk


Edited by Yurgon
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Yurgon said:

Thanks for the track! Didn't find the time to watch it sooner, but now I just did.

I think I saw what you mean, and that gave me the idea to science the heck out of this issue.

Using the Depressible Pipper, it seems the sensitive area for the TGP is dead ahead, below 5 NM slant range, at fairly exactly -70 mils.

Above 5 NM slant range, we can see the outline shift in the TGP, but the image stays dead centered on the selected spot. Below circa 5 NM, when the nose drops below or climbs above a TGP depression of -70 mils, the TGP visibly rotates and tries to reacquire the target/spot on the ground.

In this scenario, it seems the TGP was able to get back to the same spot, but if it's already close to gimbal limits, it seems quite plausible that it will do so with a significant offset, which will of course veer all weapons off target if it happens during terminal guidance phase.

Long story short, when the target is closer than 5 NM and a player is about to lase something, it behooves said player to avoid the -70 mils area. Setting the Depressible Pipper to -70 mils can help visualize this zone.

Does that make sense? Can you guys confirm this conclusion?

Of course none of that answers the question whether it's a bug. But it actually seems quite plausible to me that the TGP optics might have a deadzone right in that particular spot; before the introduction of APKWS, there would have been little reason to lase something at -70 mils, and the area above (+70 mils) would probably be kept clear for the A-A mode, where a blind spot would be pretty bad (remember the Litening II is not exclusive to the A-10).

A-10C_II_NTTR_TGP_Shift.trk 2.41 MB · 0 downloads

 

Nice, I hadn't thought to use the depressible pipper to accurately define the location!  I can't imagine why the range would make a difference if it is truly not just a bug

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Yurgon said:

Of course none of that answers the question whether it's a bug. But it actually seems quite plausible to me that the TGP optics might have a deadzone right in that particular spot; before the introduction of APKWS, there would have been little reason to lase something at -70 mils, and the area above (+70 mils) would probably be kept clear for the A-A mode, where a blind spot would be pretty bad (remember the Litening II is not exclusive to the A-10).

Thanks for looking.
As I've said elsewhere, I can understand the turret geometry issues - I worked on the hanging-down style for 20 years.
What I don't understand is why that would shift the SPI, as I noticed in a recent Maverick attack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/8/2022 at 9:41 AM, No1sonuk said:

What about the shift in SPI I mentioned.  That's not a function of the TGP geometry.

Looking at the target with the HMCS, the SPI was on the vehicle.  Then after the shift, the SPI had moved.

 

On 1/9/2022 at 7:38 AM, No1sonuk said:

Thanks for looking.
As I've said elsewhere, I can understand the turret geometry issues - I worked on the hanging-down style for 20 years.
What I don't understand is why that would shift the SPI, as I noticed in a recent Maverick attack.

Sorry my friend, I borrowed your unfinished topic to report something that slightly offset your main problem. It is because I don't always get attention and people rarely have run in and experienced similar issue. I saw your issue in this topic may be caused by the same mechanism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...