correct as is Missing INS Alignment information in the manual

[darthu_vaderu]

The INS alignment section and alignment procedure sections of the manual seem to be incomplete. They are missing details regarding:

1. The use of IFA, and what shows up in the HSI and the advisory list when GPS is active or inactive, both during alignment and when alignment is complete.
2. The alignment procedure doesn't mention IFA.
3. More clear information about alignment quality. It would be worth mentioning at least that the number has to reach 0 before alignment is OK.

The manual I've been reading from is the one linked on this page.

I was able to learn more about IFA from a YouTube video.

[speed-of-heat]

use this 

https://chucks-guide.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/DCS FA-18C Hornet Guide.pdf

[WobblyFlops]

All of this is detailed in the official manual, starting from page 142. IFA, acceptable alignment quality, stored heading alignment and so on.

[darthu_vaderu]

On 12/4/2021 at 7:49 PM, WobblyFlops said:

All of this is detailed in the official manual, starting from page 142. IFA, acceptable alignment quality, stored heading alignment and so on.

It's not as detailed as it should be. It's why I linked a video, for comparison.

[WobblyFlops]

1 hour ago, darthu_vaderu said:

It's not as detailed as it should be. It's why I linked a video, for comparison.

It has all the details that are relevant for the game. If you want more details about the real life implementation, reference the real life manual.

[QuiGon]

On 12/7/2021 at 7:07 PM, WobblyFlops said:

It has all the details that are relevant for the game. If you want more details about the real life implementation, reference the real life manual.

Sorry, but a customer can rightfully expect that the manual of the DCS Hornet module should explain ALL the functions that the product offers. That's what product manuals are there for. Manuals for other DCS modules (e.g. DCS Warthog or DCS Black Shark 2) do exactly this: Thse product manuals explain EVERY function that the module offers, which is how it should be.

Of course, the full DCS Hornet manual is still not available, as we currently only have the Early Access guide, but I expect, that upon release of the module the full manual will explain all the function that the module offers.

Edited December 9, 2021 by QuiGon

[WobblyFlops]

2 hours ago, QuiGon said:

Sorry, but a customer can rightfully expect that the manual of the DCS Hornet module should explain ALL the functions that the product offers.

What extra information would you like to have added to the manual? I've skimmed through this part multiple times and I've found everything that is relevant to everyday operations in the DCS Hornet. The INS modelling is quite a bit simplified in DCS, the update functions don't really work and based on my testing, the system logic and failure states of the degraded modes don't really follow the logic described in the NATOPS. As a sidenote, I'd add that this level of simulation is in line with other DCS products, people can't reasonably expect advanced failure states and greatly detailed system logic for this low of a price. Other product that offer this level of depth in the simulation often cost twice or three times as much as a DCS module.

 

So TEST, GB and Gyro aren't detailed, which means that those aren't properly implemented (at the moment, or maybe they never will be, we don't know), therefore the user isn't supposed to use those features and if they do, either some WIP or simplified interaction will take place or nothing will happen at all.

 

So if someone is interested in what these settings do in the real jet, the NATOPS describes all these perfectly. But that information is only relevant if someone wants to learn about the real life Hornet, not the DCS product. The DCS manual is intended to help you use the features that are included in the simulator, it isn't intended to teach you about the functions or working of the real aircraft. If you reference the manual, every function that is simulated in the DCS Hornet will be described to you.

[QuiGon]

2 hours ago, WobblyFlops said:

What extra information would you like to have added to the manual?

For example, the "Update" functions of the HSI are still missing in the manual, even though they are already (partially) implemented in the sim. It's important to know how to use the various nav fix functions, especially when operating in an GPS degraded environment.

Edited December 8, 2021 by QuiGon

[darthu_vaderu]

12 hours ago, QuiGon said:

Of course, the full DCS Hornet manual is still not available, as we currently only have the Early Access guide, but I expect, that the full manual upon release of the module will explain all the function that the module offers.

I definitely understand this, and knew that the module is still in EA. And I only created this thread to bring to attention the fact that some documentation is missing, in case this was unknown.

[Saruman]

On 12/8/2021 at 1:45 PM, WobblyFlops said:

As a sidenote, I'd add that this level of simulation is in line with other DCS products, people can't reasonably expect advanced failure states and greatly detailed system logic for this low of a price. Other product that offer this level of depth in the simulation often cost twice or three times as much as a DCS module.

So TEST, GB and Gyro aren't detailed, which means that those aren't properly implemented (at the moment, or maybe they never will be, we don't know), therefore the user isn't supposed to use those features and if they do, either some WIP or simplified interaction will take place or nothing will happen at all.

That's not true at all. There is at least another unmentionable military sim that offers maniacal attention to details and implementation of all functions of true aircraft (not F-18) and it's totally free.  So I expect from DCS: F18, which is instead not free, the same maniacal attention to details. I'm sure ED development team is on the same wavelength, though, since A10 is wonderfully implemented and I have no reason to believe they will underperform with final release of F-18.

For the same above reason, I expect TEST, GB and GYRO will be properly implemented. The only systems that it's reasonable to expect not being implemented in final release are the classified ones.

Edited December 15, 2021 by Saruman

[WobblyFlops]

On 12/15/2021 at 1:02 PM, Saruman said:

That's not true at all. There is at least another unmentionable military sim that offers maniacal attention to details and implementation of all functions of true aircraft (not F-18) and it's totally free.  So I expect from DCS: F18, which is instead not free, the same maniacal attention to details. I'm sure ED development team is on the same wavelength, though, since A10 is wonderfully implemented and I have no reason to believe they will underperform with final release of F-18.

For the same above reason, I expect TEST, GB and GYRO will be properly implemented. The only systems that it's reasonable to expect not being implemented in final release are the classified ones.

Sorry, I missed your comment somehow. One thing to note, the forums have extremely heavy moderation so comparing DCS to other products is a pretty big no-no. But let's just say that making a commercial product and a completely free mod cannot be directly compared due to the difference in required cost and regulatory constrains. A 100% accurately simulated Hornet or any other military aircraft can be interpreted as a training aid and not an entertainment software and it would run foul of ITAR. Which has happened before (not for DCS but there was a perfect simulation of a trainer and the Air Force made the dev team pull it back because it was so accurate that it became and ITAR violation), so certain things are better left as they are. DCS products are entertainment products, artistic rendtions of existing aircraft. 

With that being said, in an ideal world, you'd be right. Ideally we'd have all relevant navigation features of the Hornet (after all, HB did simulate drift and all the update options), with a fully simulated INS, degraded modes, update options and many other features that are currently missing. But ED have to prioritize what to implement due to their lack of resources. They have at least 10 complex projects all together and they aren't a huge dev team with infinite money, so it makes sense.

 

The vast majority of DCS players spawn in the air, fire their missiles randomly (mainly on friendlies), land, refuel and rearm and do it again. Very, very few people would be even interested in highly nuanced failure modes or a simulated AHRS or detailed BITs. The only exception to this is the INS only operation and the INS update functions, because it's relevant for people who play on time specific server (no GPS) and approximate an earlier Hornet. But I'd argue that as it stands now, the better approach is to turn off INS drift all together, because realistic update options are obviously incredibly complicated and would require an immense amount of work that really can't be justified if the vast majority of playerbase wouldn't even care. Plus as I've said, ED historically doesn't accurately simulate INS drift and update options. It's missing from the Ka-50 (originally it was in during the BS1 era but it got cut after the spherical Earth model was implemented), it's missing from the Viper and it's missing from the A-10.

 

The Viper is slated to get ACAL and FIX and it's generally a much higher quality, much more polished and higher fidelity product than the Hornet, so hopefully that gets these features.