Jump to content

Link 16 Datalink Primary Track


Go to solution Solved by BIGNEWY,

Recommended Posts

Posted

If you hook a Link 16 track with the HSD cursor, the track should be right on top of the actual position. Why is it lagging/offsetting in DCS? Please fix this issue since it is not functioning as in real life. Also is the display of the range to the track going to be added in future?

The current implemention of the L16 Datalink Track is very much appreciated, however, much more difficult to use than irl.

Posted

Screen_220718_165858-min-min.png

In the picture above, the track should be right above the airplane and it should show the distance from your aircraft to the track as well.

Posted
6 hours ago, RuskyV said:

Did you do a cold start, or hot start?

if a cold start did you do the HMD alignment?

It doesn’t change if hot start or cold start with correct HMD alignment. Same effect no matter what. Everyone I talked to experienced it in DCS. I created this forum post because 2 real F16 pilots got upset about the inaccuracy of the feature.

In addition to that, the track is also often lagging and stuck for a few seconds, which would have nothing to do with the alignment. Distance to the track is also missing.

Posted

Most notably is the lagging when the PDLT contact changes altitude. If you PDLT for example the flight lead, he climbs from 10k ft to 20k ft, the track doesnt smoothly move with him, but rather in „increments“, every 3-5 seconds or so.

Accuracy of the symbology gets worse, the closer you are to that contact.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Posted

This. I always thought it’s just the way it is and realistic. However, as soon as I heard that irl it’s much better (almost perfectly aligned at all time), I thought it’s a problem.

Posted

The issue is that, in DCS, the update rate of all Link 16 functions is fixed at 1 update per 12 seconds. IRL, different elements update at different frequencies, with PPLI updating very frequently for example (~1-3 seconds IIRC, perhaps faster) and other things, such as AWACS contribution to non-PPLI aircraft, updating at a slower rate.

So, if you had the PDLT set on your wingman, it should update constantly and thus stay on top of the aircraft. If you have it on a bogey, it will likely update more slowly, like in DCS.

So the problem is not with PDLT, but with the L16 update rate in DCS.

The vertical thing is something else, because it seems like extrapolation is implemented in XY, but not in Z. No idea how the real thing works there.

  • Like 3

The vCVW-17 is looking for Hornet and Tomcat pilots and RIOs. Join the vCVW-17 Discord.

CVW-17_Profile_Background_VFA-34.png

F/A-18C, F-15E, AV-8B, F-16C, JF-17, A-10C/CII, M-2000C, F-14, AH-64D, BS2, UH-1H, P-51D, Sptifire, FC3
-
i9-13900K, 64GB @6400MHz RAM, 4090 Strix OC, Samsung 990 Pro

Posted
2 hours ago, oibafx said:

This. I always thought it’s just the way it is and realistic. However, as soon as I heard that irl it’s much better (almost perfectly aligned at all time), I thought it’s a problem.

I guess you would have to provide some reliable source of information. 

Posted
2 hours ago, skywalker22 said:

I guess you would have to provide some reliable source of information. 

I don't think so since the current implementation is illogical.

  • Like 2
Posted
6 hours ago, Harker said:

The issue is that, in DCS, the update rate of all Link 16 functions is fixed at 1 update per 12 seconds. IRL, different elements update at different frequencies, with PPLI updating very frequently for example (~1-3 seconds IIRC, perhaps faster) and other things, such as AWACS contribution to non-PPLI aircraft, updating at a slower rate.

So, if you had the PDLT set on your wingman, it should update constantly and thus stay on top of the aircraft. If you have it on a bogey, it will likely update more slowly, like in DCS.

So the problem is not with PDLT, but with the L16 update rate in DCS.

The vertical thing is something else, because it seems like extrapolation is implemented in XY, but not in Z. No idea how the real thing works there.

You have open source docs on this? 

Posted
You have open source docs on this? 
In the IRL Link 16 stuff I mentioned? I have no docs I can share, this is me merely passing on info I've read or heard (from people working IRL in the field), so take it with a grain of salt. The same topic has been brought up and discussed in the Hornet forums, where the same issue is encountered with the HMD MIDS symbols.

The vCVW-17 is looking for Hornet and Tomcat pilots and RIOs. Join the vCVW-17 Discord.

CVW-17_Profile_Background_VFA-34.png

F/A-18C, F-15E, AV-8B, F-16C, JF-17, A-10C/CII, M-2000C, F-14, AH-64D, BS2, UH-1H, P-51D, Sptifire, FC3
-
i9-13900K, 64GB @6400MHz RAM, 4090 Strix OC, Samsung 990 Pro

Posted
12 hours ago, oibafx said:

I don't think so since the current implementation is illogical.

To prove a claim you need to have some evidence or reliable source, it also needs to be public info. Being illogical doesn't mean it is not true to real world.

But I do agree with you, I think it might need tweaks, but I can't prove it since I don't have any documentation on it. Maybe the update rate should be more frequent so it doesn't lag behind so much.

  • Like 2
Posted
3 hours ago, Furiz said:

To prove a claim you need to have some evidence or reliable source, it also needs to be public info. Being illogical doesn't mean it is not true to real world.

But I do agree with you, I think it might need tweaks, but I can't prove it since I don't have any documentation on it. Maybe the update rate should be more frequent so it doesn't lag behind so much.

What I don’t understand is why ED made it this way in the first place. 

  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
vor einer Stunde schrieb BIGNEWY:

If you have unclassified evidence to support your claims please feel free to PM me. 

thanks

is not necessary, because it is a bug.

What people are wishing for here is already present in DCS

The error only occurs with aircraft in the group.

Edit: the same applies to the F18

 

DCS F16 datalink bug.trk

 

 

 

vor einer Stunde schrieb skywalker22:

I know its a bif off this thread`s title, but for example, same goes for the Target Designation Box (STT Radar Lock). It stutters and in many cases it off the positon where it should be. Maybe there is a connection, and that there is some JHMCS issue, I mean that the problem is more "global", and not only connected to what OP is refering to.

image.png

 this is also a global DCS deficiency, look at how the TGPs are shaking in A/A mode.

Edited by Hobel
  • Like 5
  • ED Team
  • Solution
Posted
4 hours ago, Hobel said:

is not necessary, because it is a bug.

What people are wishing for here is already present in DCS

The error only occurs with aircraft in the group.

Edit: the same applies to the F18

Thanks for the track and video I have reported

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, PIMAX Crystal

  • BIGNEWY locked this topic
  • 2 years later...
Posted (edited)

When designating a PDLT flight member through the HSD , the octagon that appears through the JHMCS starts to drift and lag behind the contact. That is only for flight members though. When you designate a member of a different flight , the octagon seems to stay right on that member and doesn't drift like when it's a flight member. Also it seems to be affected by distance, speed an movement. Which behavior is correct?  Track attached

pdlt lags.trk

Edited by St4RgAz3R
  • Like 1
Posted
16 minutes ago, Tholozor said:

Is it similar as to what's been described here?

 

Yes , i didn't see that post existed.. I see it was reported back in july 2022! Still no fix.  @Hobel got it right. That's exactly what i recorded on my track too. Only flight members seem to get affected. On other flights the octagon stays on them all the time. 

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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