Hellfire SKR as ACQ and FAC Issues

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

Some questions here:

a) Single player CP/G. FAC was lasing some MLRS targets. For each target, hellfires successfully track FAC's laser (status "AT"). ACQ was set to helllfire SKR. But screenshot shows dashed cross (SKR/ACQ) always points at road in front of targets and never at the target currently lased. Missiles still impact all lased targets each time. Is it right to conclude that the SKR/ACQ just points in the general direction it's looking and not necessarily at the currently lased target?

b) Occasionally, AFAC calls "Cleared hot", I fire and get an "Abort! Abort! You have no permission" What went wrong?

c) Apart from using a mod, is there anyway for the A/FAC to give more precise coords than a six number MGRS?

Thanks!

[jayst0r]

SKR is not implementent yet

currently since you cant spot the laser or if you want to shoot from cover you may want to create a Target point from the MGRS coords an set it as ACQ so you can be in constraints for hellfire, so that it has a chance to catch the laser when fire in LO or HI mode. As far as I remember the contraint for LOAL Hi Lo is even smaller, but missle will launch anyway, because it expects laser after launch.

Of ocurse if it Detects the laser on set Laser code bfore launch,it reverts back to LOBL .

You may want to check: for explanation

 

Edited April 7, 2022 by jayst0r

[frostycab]

2 hours ago, GrEaSeLiTeNiN said:

a) Single player CP/G. FAC was lasing some MLRS targets. For each target, hellfires successfully track FAC's laser (status "AT"). ACQ was set to helllfire SKR. But screenshot shows dashed cross (SKR/ACQ) always points at road in front of targets and never at the target currently lased. Missiles still impact all lased targets each time. Is it right to conclude that the SKR/ACQ just points in the general direction it's looking and not necessarily at the currently lased target?

While I can't offer any solution to the issue, it's interesting that in your picture the slaved TADS video image bears a tremendous similarity to the reported offset when slaving to a lased-and-stored target point. I wonder if the 2 share a common cause.

2 hours ago, GrEaSeLiTeNiN said:

c) Apart from using a mod, is there anyway for the A/FAC to give more precise coords than a six number MGRS?

I have no idea, but I would surmise that the 100m square that a 6-digit UTM reference provides would be good enough for most LOAL missile shots, and that if you were planning to attack with gun or rockets then you would be searching the vicinity of the point visually anyway.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

I have no idea, but I would surmise that the 100m square that a 6-digit UTM reference provides would be good enough for most LOAL missile shots, and that if you were planning to attack with gun or rockets then you would be searching the vicinity of the point visually anyway.

Well, I keyed in the six number FAC.coords and used it as ACQ, slaved. They were no where near the lased targets, at least not in any meaningful or useful way.

There should be 8 numbers in MGRS, perhaps I forgot to add the zeros.

[frostycab]

11 minutes ago, GrEaSeLiTeNiN said:

Well, I keyed in the six number FAC.coords and used it as ACQ, slaved. They were no where near the lased targets, at least not in any meaningful or useful way.

There should be 8 numbers in MGRS, perhaps I forgot to add the zeros.

Ah, yes! You would almost certainly have needed to append a zero after the third and sixth digits. Did the KEU not flash at you when you hit ENTER, or did it just accept the 6 digit coordinates? If not then perhaps the system added a couple of zeroes to the end of the entry, which would REALLY throw things off.

Edited April 7, 2022 by frostycab

[Raptor9]

SKR is indeed implemented, and has been tested to work with other AH64s and other aircraft. I've never personally tested it with a JTAC or AI aircraft serving as a FAC-A, but SKR is in the game already.

[Fresh]

1 hour ago, GrEaSeLiTeNiN said:

Well, I keyed in the six number FAC.coords and used it as ACQ, slaved. They were no where near the lased targets, at least not in any meaningful or useful way.

There should be 8 numbers in MGRS, perhaps I forgot to add the zeros.

Just thinking out loud: wouldn't it be better to append a 5 instead of a 0? The 6 numbers give you a "box" and adding the 5 puts you in the middle of the box instead of in the corner of the box. Anyone with the same thought or a contradicting opinion? (I guess it depends also on who/how the original grid was chosen..)

Edited April 7, 2022 by Fresh

[Swift.]

2 hours ago, Fresh said:

Just thinking out loud: wouldn't it be better to append a 5 instead of a 0? The 6 numbers give you a "box" and adding the 5 puts you in the middle of the box instead of in the corner of the box. Anyone with the same thought or a contradicting opinion? (I guess it depends also on who/how the original grid was chosen..)

 

That might work 99% of the time, but there are some squares that are incomplete (think on the border between two GZD ie on caucasus). And if you start making up numbers you might find yourself trying to place a point in a location that doesn't exist. This is why MGRS should always be truncated, not rounded. Because if you round up from something like AB 5559 5559 you will get AB 5560 5560 which might not exist.

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

10 hours ago, frostycab said:

Ah, yes! You would almost certainly have needed to append a zero after the third and sixth digits. Did the KEU not flash at you when you hit ENTER, or did it just accept the 6 digit coordinates? If not then perhaps the system added a couple of zeroes to the end of the entry, which would REALLY throw things off.

 

Yes! So I added the missing zeros (underlined) to the six numbers given by the FAC = CN14005480 and now it's accurate (see left pic). I think earlier on I keyed in the FAC's six numbers straight in but did not check the last two digits at the end which were probably the default last two digits of my own ship coords. So that threw off the location of the crosshairs.

9 hours ago, Fresh said:

Just thinking out loud: wouldn't it be better to append a 5 instead of a 0? The 6 numbers give you a "box" and adding the 5 puts you in the middle of the box instead of in the corner of the box. Anyone with the same thought or a contradicting opinion? (I guess it depends also on who/how the original grid was chosen..)

 

I tried "5" instead or zero just to compare. The crosshairs ended up a several meters closer to the road (see right pic). I guess it's not going to make much difference when locating the targets since the resolution is 10m and so it would still be within the vicinity of the target.     

But does anyone know why the AFAC sometimes calls out "Abort! No permission" after giving me a "Cleared hot"?

Edited April 8, 2022 by GrEaSeLiTeNiN

[frostycab]

38 minutes ago, GrEaSeLiTeNiN said:

But does anyone know why the AFAC sometimes calls out "Abort! No permission" after giving me a "Cleared hot"?

Hmm, not sure. Have you updated again since last Friday's April Fools patch? 

(I'm joking, ok?)

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

4 hours ago, frostycab said:

Hmm, not sure. Have you updated again since last Friday's April Fools patch? 

(I'm joking, ok?)

Got it to work (no Aborts) by putting the AFAC behind me.  

[GrEaSeLiTeNiN]

On 4/7/2022 at 9:09 PM, Raptor9 said:

SKR is indeed implemented, and has been tested to work with other AH64s and other aircraft. I've never personally tested it with a JTAC or AI aircraft serving as a FAC-A, but SKR is in the game already.

Yep working. With "AT" status, SKR followed a moving tank lased by AFAC in my test mission though the crosshairs will not necessarily be on the target

Edited March 18, 2023 by GrEaSeLiTeNiN

[YoYo]

Thx!