Indicate max range for a flight

[upyr1]

7 hours ago, Mars Exulte said:

  Gonna have to go with this guy on this one. Max range, even for the helos, is rarely a factor, as you can generally crisscross the map with a full payload. The ''max range'' is typically well beyond the map edges if one way, and usually around the edges for ''combat radius'' (150 miles for a helo give or take usually, and from the very center of the map that's going to generally be out near the edges of the map).

 

  Loiter time is the more relevant statistic in DCS, but that's very variable based on weight, drag, throttle, altitude, temperature, and how closely you actually fly the ideal profile. This is a rare example of wikipedia info being ''good enough'', or even just napkin math for the purposes of mission planning. 

 

I don't want something based on the max range listed in Wikipedia, rather something that is based on the selected flight's payload, mission profile and any assumptions an officer planning a mission would make. So a dynamic range indicator would be a good label. 

21 hours ago, SharpeXB said:

So use them. There’s nothing in DCS stopping you. It’s not clear in your OP what “something that indicates you max range” is. If the Mission Planner showed you a colored circle or something that was your “max” range, it would be the size of the map and thus not very helpful. 

 

Why not add those guidelines to the mission editor? You could start with a ring that shows the max range for the flight's current configuation. Then as you lay down a way point it might shrink based on estimated fuel use or grow if you put a in flight refueling way point or alter the payload. 

[cfrag]

20 minutes ago, upyr1 said:

Mind explaining why do you think pilots plan missions inside the cockpit and aren't following plans made by someone at HQ?

Probably because in DCS we don't (unlike IRL) attend pre-briefs nor flight briefings, and do not attend the planning sessions. Few people know anything about a combat pilot's daily routine/duties outside what they do in a game cockpit. This may lead them to (erroneously) assume a lot about how a mission's profile comes about, without knowing what actually goes into it. 

[Tippis]

21 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Check out some RW pilot live streams. You can see the whole process. 

That's not an explanation. That's just evasion. So presumably, you can't actually explain or you would have.

5 minutes ago, cfrag said:

Probably because in DCS we don't (unlike IRL) attend pre-briefs nor flight briefings, and do not attend the planning sessions. Few people know anything about a combat pilot's daily routine/duties outside what they do in a game cockpit. This may lead them to (erroneously) assume a lot about how a mission's profile comes about, without knowing what actually goes into it. 

That would also explain Sharpe's obsession with some mythical hypothetical in-cockpit planning tool as being the clincher as to whether the mission editor should be expanded with one of the most obvious mission planning features ever.

[upyr1]

4 hours ago, Exorcet said:

The absolute max range may not be a factor for DCS maps (though this isn't really true in all cases), but on the larger maps you will hit fuel limits if you fly with a heavy payload, fly low to avoid detection, or fly with significant AB use.

For a realistic naval mission on the Gulf map for example you'll be flying from the Gulf of Oman. There is no way a carrier is going to risk getting into Silkworm range. Fly a hi-lo-hi profile and it's impossible to return from Bandar Abbas without refueling. I know because I tried:

Even on more ideal conditions you can't go anywhere you want without planning. Striking Kerman from Liwa or Al Dhafra in a F-16 is possible, but how many fuel tanks do you need? How many bombs can you carry? How many planes do you need to launch? It's not necessarily obvious.

I made the flight, but landing with 500 lbs of fuel isn't safe. And this was the ideal case with no enemy or weather to worry about.

Wiki is kind of useless here. The data is not presented in consistent format. "Range" can be ferry range in one case and combat radius in another, it's a bit of a mess, and it's not always labeled. I've try skimming it for helpful info and it falls short on this subject.

I will say that testing for range isn't all that difficult in DCS, but having a reasonable estimate precomputed would make things even faster. For really complex missions it could be considered a necessity.

It would also help make things easier for new players. I figure you don't need something that is precise to the last pound of fuel but rather something with configurable estimates based on the current payload, mission profiles and assumptions about combat. 

Edited April 6, 2022 by upyr1

[upyr1]

2 hours ago, cfrag said:

If you play Rambo-game style (the way I prefer), perhaps; just litter the place with immortal tankers so you can top off willy-nilly. IRL, not so much - combat logistics is applied science. So mission builders who want to create realistic mission profiles could benefit from built-in editor support for endurance calculation. 

 

2 hours ago, cfrag said:

Game experience, yes. I believe the other people are talking about realistic mission profiles in DCS, which could benefit from editor support. 

Now, I'm not with the ultra-realistic bunch, so I'm ambivalent wrt this feature; I myself have little use for it. But I understand how it can be a highly appreciated tool for designers that look to create hyper-realistic missions. 

I'm talking about setting up a realistic mission, where CAP 2 comes on station as cap 1 is running low on fuel and goes back to the tanker or RTBs.  SO the max range tool isn't the max range as listed in Wikipedia but rather the expected range based on the mission profile. 

Edited April 6, 2022 by upyr1

[Rick50]

 

The USAF had fancy networked software for full scale mission planning in 1991, but apparently it took years to program. Probably had a few replacements since then, maybe one or two before it. But... while I do think Western nations and wealthier nations have a smaller equivalent, like Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and so on... I think poor nations have very little for their Mig-21's. Maybe a laptop with some excel spreadsheets to figure out fuel burn for a mission. 

But the advanced software might well be ITAR controlled... 

[cfrag]

7 minutes ago, Rick50 said:

The USAF had fancy networked software for full scale mission planning in 1991, but apparently it took years to program.

Well, I guess the salient point is that no real-world combat pilot since WWII (and probably also neither during that time) plans their mission in the cockpit. There usually are days (effort) of planning that goes into each flight, even for simple transfer flights. 

Heck, most civil/private pilots plan their flights outside of the cockpit, and when they are lucky enough to have a flight computer on their flight deck, punch in the numbers from prepared notes. Since it's wholly uninteresting to most, and can be downright boring, it's good that games like DCS focus on the good stuff (flying) and skip the tedium.

But that can create the impression that pilots decide in their cockpit on where or how (what route) they fly to a destination, what timing they take, or what ordnance they carry. The reality is starkly different: all parts of a mission are usually assembled/integrated hours, if not days before departure, and with the help of multiple experts. The pilot just happens to be the "delivery expert" who executes that plan with great precision and skill, almost always as part of a greater, coordinated team.

 

[Rick50]

 

No doubt.

I hear it's similar with most large airlines for longhhaul flights: the pilots don't usually make the flightplan for a several thousand mile trip, that's done by... a scheduling office, that has to figure out all sorts of things, including how to pay for the fuel for the return flight, book landing/takeoff times, book gate times, weather at various stages, fuel cost index to choose (apparently this is variable, where burn might be increased slightly to make up for weather, or gate timings to avoid penalties). This is probably not true for small charters operating KingAirs and such, pilot probably does much of the planning... but I'm not sure at what point it's mostly out of the pilot's hands: Dash-8's doing regionals? National flights? International flights that aren't that far, like maybe 1500miles?

Anyway, back to the the intel gathered about the need for the strike. Then the determination of ordnance needed for the strike. Get legal to go over each target and give a determination about each target.

Then the intel on the SAM threats, to develop a proper SEAD plan. Figure out the strike package size with enough redundancy. Consider how much CAP needed. Determine the timing needed at target, then working back to figure out launch times. Route planning.  

Then figure out how much AAR support will be needed, how much AWACS, EW and ELINT support needed and how to have them available for the duration. Plan for CSAR rescue. 

Then comes all the logistics, will they have enough fuel munitions, food and support staff prior during and after the strike. Airbase space and capabilities for ramp space, fuel reserves, maintenance facilities, personel and tools parts.

 

and on..

and on...

and on...

It's probably a bit like the planning needed to start a medium size tech company from zero, just get it up and running ASAP. Lots of parts, all of them "moving parts", very difficult to sort through and make a plan that will work.  

Edited April 6, 2022 by Rick50

[upyr1]

4 hours ago, Rick50 said:

 

The USAF had fancy networked software for full scale mission planning in 1991, but apparently it took years to program. Probably had a few replacements since then, maybe one or two before it. But... while I do think Western nations and wealthier nations have a smaller equivalent, like Japan, South Korea, Saudi Arabia and so on... I think poor nations have very little for their Mig-21's. Maybe a laptop with some excel spreadsheets to figure out fuel burn for a mission. 

But the advanced software might well be ITAR controlled... 

I expected that would be the case. I figure the mission editor is supposed to simulate the software used to plan missions.

[Rick50]

 

Hmm... I think that would be hugely beyond the scope of a retail entertainment product, IMO.  The complexity, the time needed by lots of dev members, the  coordination, the deep knowledge of how ACTUAL operations really happen.   Such software used with professionalism and determination, would be SOOO much more valuable than any single platform, I'd consider it a "force multiplier". Even a "weapon" unto itself.  Probably even more important than stealth tech, IMO.

 

I think the closest you could make for DCS is to do it yourself (or part of a collaboration):  pick a plane, and do flights to fuel exhaustion with various loadouts. Put on autopilot, watch and record your fuel flows at the different weights and loadouts and alts,  and sit back occasionally looking for flameout and other behaviors. Check the range, and pick a distance short of that, say maybe 15%, for the "must land now" distance, and then you  have your answer. From there, half it for a combat radius, maybe allow for a pre-Bingo fight time. Record it all... now you at least have some kind of benchmark for range. 

Keep in mind the more you depend on that fuel to get there and back, you  may have very little time to fight in AB before you hit Bingo and need to dive and extend back home!!

You'll also want to check ground speed for future timing of packages, and airspeeds so that you  can know you  are doing the proper speed for Time  On Target timings.

Thing is, it would be a lot of work, building slowly either in lots of tests, or recording actual data from missions you fly. But over time you'll get a much better idea of how far you can push a mission!  My guess is that this is done for real even with the fancy advanced USAF software, to get it tuned very well for actual conditions,  albeit with massively more functions. Meaning the post-mission inspections and checking fuel states, checking how much was taken while in AAR, what ord if any was brought back or dropped, for a drag coefficient. 

[upyr1]

51 minutes ago, Rick50 said:

 

Hmm... I think that would be hugely beyond the scope of a retail entertainment product, IMO.  The complexity, the time needed by lots of dev members, the  coordination, the deep knowledge of how ACTUAL operations really happen.   Such software used with professionalism and determination, would be SOOO much more valuable than any single platform, I'd consider it a "force multiplier". Even a "weapon" unto itself.  Probably even more important than stealth tech, IMO.

 

I think the closest you could make for DCS is to do it yourself (or part of a collaboration):  pick a plane, and do flights to fuel exhaustion with various loadouts. Put on autopilot, watch and record your fuel flows at the different weights and loadouts and alts,  and sit back occasionally looking for flameout and other behaviors. Check the range, and pick a distance short of that, say maybe 15%, for the "must land now" distance, and then you  have your answer. From there, half it for a combat radius, maybe allow for a pre-Bingo fight time. Record it all... now you at least have some kind of benchmark for range. 

Keep in mind the more you depend on that fuel to get there and back, you  may have very little time to fight in AB before you hit Bingo and need to dive and extend back home!!

You'll also want to check ground speed for future timing of packages, and airspeeds so that you  can know you  are doing the proper speed for Time  On Target timings.

Thing is, it would be a lot of work, building slowly either in lots of tests, or recording actual data from missions you fly. But over time you'll get a much better idea of how far you can push a mission!  My guess is that this is done for real even with the fancy advanced USAF software, to get it tuned very well for actual conditions,  albeit with massively more functions. Meaning the post-mission inspections and checking fuel states, checking how much was taken while in AAR, what ord if any was brought back or dropped, for a drag coefficient. 

Dcs already does the calculation when we are airborne. So they might be able to reuse some of the methods.