reported Will we get scan centering in RWS?

[BIGNEWY]

A reminder, please do not share information that break our 1.16 rule

thanks

[raus]

Hey @BIGNEWY Could you please confirm what is the status here? Still in need of evidence, or awaiting implementation? If evidence is needed, being so scarce... would it be just possible to check with one of your SMEs with a simple "Is scan centering in RWS a thing?"... I mean, I have checked with some Hornet pilots (not USN, not Lot20) and they did confirm it is possible to slew also in RWS... And it was possible in DCS at first, so I wonder where the evidence came from to make the change into no slewing in RWS...

 

Thanks!!

[Fromthedeep]

7 hours ago, raus said:

would it be just possible to check with one of your SMEs with a simple "Is scan centering in RWS a thing?"...

Maybe their SME is unwilling or unable to talk about the radar. It would explain a lot of stuff.

[MARLAN_]

If ED is able to ask any F-18 SME they will find out RWS Scan Centering is most certainly a thing, and it's not some super secret, it's a very basic functionality of the radar.

The FRM vaguely explains this, but sadly is not very clear. There are other documents that I would not be surprised that ED has (but who knows) that is extremely clear regarding this, maybe they can't source it, but with SME input and the FRM I would think that is enough to implement something so simple as centering the scan volume, which already exists in DCS if you use the AZ/EL page.

[NineLine]

13 hours ago, MARLAN_ said:

If ED is able to ask any F-18 SME they will find out RWS Scan Centering is most certainly a thing, and it's not some super secret, it's a very basic functionality of the radar.

The FRM vaguely explains this, but sadly is not very clear. There are other documents that I would not be surprised that ED has (but who knows) that is extremely clear regarding this, maybe they can't source it, but with SME input and the FRM I would think that is enough to implement something so simple as centering the scan volume, which already exists in DCS if you use the AZ/EL page.

Anything we put into the game must be sourced to a document that we can cite, not solely based on word of mouth.

[AngelAtTheTomb]

On 7/8/2022 at 2:44 PM, NineLine said:

Anything we put into the game must be sourced to a document that we can cite, not solely based on word of mouth.

I'm not trying to be a punk, but that's only partially true, isn't it? There are systems - like the datalink - that are a weird magic box pretty divorced from reality. Where did the design of that magic box come from? It's not a real system, and the real systems are classified or export-controlled. So either you just make them up, or they're carefully calibrated to reflect non-classified word of mouth on how the real system sort of works.

 

The real EM-performance of the F-18 is classified or export-controlled. The performance of the DCS jet is an estimate, based on incomplete documents that aren't classified or export-controlled. If you could not make some sort of estimates not 100% based on sourceable documents, we would not have an aircraft and you would not have our $80.

 

We get it. You have a fine line to walk. But it seems disingenuous to say "We 100% can't do this without a sourceable document" when there's plenty of stuff on the jet for which you obviously can't point to a sourceable document.

Edited July 9, 2022 by AngelAtTheTomb

[92nd-MajorBug]

Please, cite the document that shows how every molecule of air glides over the real aircraft's surface. Oh you can't, because that document doesn't exist? Then the aircraft in the sim shouldn't be able to fly. Please, cite the document that shows how every wave of EM energy the real radar emits will bounce off every object ever made. Oh you can't, because that document doesn't exist? Then the radar in the sim shouldn't work at all. The above point regarding the datalink implementation is a very good one. Those documents aren't public knowledge, so by your own rules, you shouldn't have implemented a datalink at all.

It's painfully obvious that in certain cases, word of mouth and approximations will be good enough for you (and good enough for us, thank you!), and in others you will become painfully scrupulous about the perfect realism of your implementation regarding publicly available information. And we can't understand why! Why exactly is scan centering in RWS such a sensitive topic that you will make us jump through every possible hoop before you accept to implement it correctly? This is insane. Please understand that, at the very least.

[BIGNEWY]

Unlike some systems and features that we have very little documentation on, we have quite a bit on the APG 65 and 73. In none of those documents is this ever mentioned, so, we need evidence. 

Feel free to PM me 

[NineLine]

This is now reported, thanks!