Change log F1 Open Beta 2.7.12.23362 ?

[IvanK]

Is there a change log for the F1 for Open Beta 2.7.12.23362 ?

[jaguara5]

DCS Mirage F1 by Aerges

Optical Sight:

• “ANTENNE” (“ANT” aka “blind shooting”) gunsight mode is implemented.
• Increased the gunsight accuracy in “GYRO” mode with target range and range rate available.
• Fixed “GYRO” gunsight mode accuracy with target fixed range of 300 or 600 meters.
• Updated default values used by the gunsight when CADC or AoA data is unreliable or absent.
• Attitude reticle will be removed from indication when CADS attitude information is unreliable or absent.

Other fixes and improvements:

• TACAN lights logic reworked following SME feedback.
• TRAP-136 radio unit guard receiver computation performance was improved.
• PA test light button was made operational.
• Fuel counter now works according to SME description.
• Adjusted AoA test rate.
• Countermeasure counters no longer require electricity to reset.
• Updated startup sequence.

[IvanK]

Ok thanks, made me go looking and  found the list on the DCS sight, The F1 changes didn't get a mention in Announcement forum change log.

[Snappy]

Sorry to bring this up again,

but just to confirm, the "ANT" position is the one providing more accurate gunnery solutions because it gets radar information?

I initially thought so, but  I'm confused because of the the following lines in the change log:

DCS Mirage F1 by Aerges

Optical Sight:

• “ANTENNE” (“ANT” aka “blind shooting”) gunsight mode is implemented.
• Increased the gunsight accuracy in “GYRO” mode with target range and range rate available. 

"Blind shooting" makes ANT sound more inaccurate, like its missing radar information.
On the other hand "Increased the gunsight accuracy in “GYRO” mode with target range and range rate available" sounds like GYRO position is fed range and rate info frome the radar.

Just would like to know how its implemented in the AERGES F1 right now? I made some tests with both , and neither seems to  be very accurate unless you are super close to target already already.

 

[fausete]

Hi, ANT is the radar gunsight.

[Snappy]

26 minutes ago, fausete said:

Hi, ANT is the radar gunsight.

Ok thank you, but then how does GYRO receive range and rate as mentioned by AERGES in the changelog?

[kontiuka]

...

Edited January 4, 2023 by kontiuka

[IvanK]

Worth a read of this thread:

 

The Gyro input is fed to the computing section (together with all the other stuff) this then passed on to the collimating unit that positions the gun reticle and TD square. As far as I can make out putting the switch in ANT just provides additional radar info like Antenna pointing angles and antenna angular rates to the computing unit to refine the gunnery solution and also permit Auto fire if selected, and sufficient accuracy to enable Blind (IMC) gun firing.

In GYRO you just get a basic LCOS sight that uses Radar range if locked on or fixed range (600m/300m) if not locked on.

[fausete]

You're more or less right IvanK.

GYRO takes range and range change rate from the radar when a target is being tracked. It allows to shoot the target from any distance (not just from 300 or 600 meters). However, as it is still a classic LCOS, you need to stay in the target's plane of motion and match its rate more or less.

Right now ANT is always a superior mode to GYRO. But, once radar noise is better implemented, a possible use of GYRO instead of ANT will be to increase the stability of the firing solution provided to the piper (reduce the noise of the solution caused by the radar).

[Snappy]

On 1/4/2023 at 12:21 AM, IvanK said:

Worth a read of this thread:

 

The Gyro input is fed to the computing section (together with all the other stuff) this then passed on to the collimating unit that positions the gun reticle and TD square. As far as I can make out putting the switch in ANT just provides additional radar info like Antenna pointing angles and antenna angular rates to the computing unit to refine the gunnery solution and also permit Auto fire if selected, and sufficient accuracy to enable Blind (IMC) gun firing.

In GYRO you just get a basic LCOS sight that uses Radar range if locked on or fixed range (600m/300m) if not locked on.

 

On 1/4/2023 at 9:09 AM, fausete said:

You're more or less right IvanK.

GYRO takes range and range change rate from the radar when a target is being tracked. It allows to shoot the target from any distance (not just from 300 or 600 meters). However, as it is still a classic LCOS, you need to stay in the target's plane of motion and match its rate more or less.

Right now ANT is always a superior mode to GYRO. But, once radar noise is better implemented, a possible use of GYRO instead of ANT will be to increase the stability of the firing solution provided to the piper (reduce the noise of the solution caused by the radar).

Hi @IvanK , thanks for the info. 

 

Posted 1 minute ago

  On 12/16/2022 at 11:43 PM, IvanK said:

We have the Answer ... Blind Gun firing ... i.e. shooting in IMC:

 

Expand  

Hi @IvanK, thank you for your input.
However in its current implementation, the ANT setting doesn't seem to work very well/ accurately, let alone for use in IMC/blind shooting.

Or I'm seriously misunderstanding something in regards to symbology.

Could you kindly take at the attached track? I also attached the mission file in case you need it for the track to work.
Its a canned setup, the target is flying steady 3G left turn-orbits and I tried to zero out closure rate . I flew as accurate as I could,trying to put the pipper center on the target when firing.

Still of all the bursts , all rounds fired except a single one, seemed to fall significantly short.They did not even hit further aft of the pipper position, but missed target completely.

In my understanding, it should've been optimal radar solution conditions, with constant target G, no target plane of motion change and zero or little closure rate. 

Am I doing sth wrong or is this a bug?

Thank you , kind regards,

Snappy

F1MirageGunsFighter.miz F1Radarguns.trk

Edited January 5, 2023 by Snappy

[fausete]

Hi. Are you placing the piper on the orange square in front of the aircraft?

[Snappy]

7 hours ago, fausete said:

Hi. Are you placing the piper on the orange square in front of the aircraft?

New short track, with the pipper aimed on the orange radar target square (which btw is not necessarily always in front of the target, sometimes it was on  the target body or around wings).Still the rounds fell short. 
 

 

F1RadarTGTguns.trk F1MirageGunsFighter.miz

Edited January 5, 2023 by Snappy

[IvanK]

Snappy. I am not one of the devs but just a true Mirage nutter , with real world Mirage III experience in the last century Comparing the Mirage sight to a modern Director sight like in the FA18/F16 leaves us with the impression that pipper on means real time solution and therefore hits.

I looked at the track. You did get some hits... albeit not many. Though looking at the tracking and comparing it to real world experience against a 30foot banner (Radar locked LCOS in the Mirage III) the hits you got are probably about right. Even with perfect tracking in the Squadron a score of more than 30% hits was rare.  If I was assessing your "film" in the squadron (which I used to do as a weapons instructor) I would simply say your tracking needs to improve ... harsh perhaps but that would have been the reality in the squadron.

In your case the pipper is moving , everytime it moves the LCOS solution is behind the game. Recall the sight solution time is probably around 1.2 X  the time of flight. in other words you need the pipper on and stable for perhaps at a minimum for 1.2 seconds for the solution to be correct. Everytime the pipper moves (through minor flight control input the timer starts again. So sight handling in an LCOS sight is an art form that requires really really smooth flight control input and anticipation of pipper movement and the interplay between Range, range rate and sight solution time. The LCOS pipper can be likened to being held by two opposing rubber bands. The pilot controls the rear band with the stick, more backstick the rear band pulls the pipper backwards , reducing range the front band pulls the pipper forward, it is the pilot that has to control these forces such that the pipper moves along the "line" (primarily using roll for left right corrections and G for forward and aft corrections) and stabilizes on the target for 1.2 X the time of flight ... this is the art of sight handling.

Now that deals with standard LCOS, what about the ANT function ? I only have a limited understanding of exactly what it does in the F1 through logic and reading the explanation in the F1KED manuals (where the sight is effectively always in the ANT mode when locked on). Reading this info leads me to believe that ANT just adds radar antenna position and angle rates to the firing solution. because of this the computation knows the current position of the gun reticle and the target (orange square) the system can than monitor the coincidence of both the theory being if the GYRO reticle is on the orange TD square then it is a valid solution so hits (again assuming sight solution time has been observed) should ocurr. this then allows Auto fire if selected to occur. The F1KED manual states that if coincidence is inside 15mills (and in range) then Autofire will be initiated. though to me 15mills is a huge tolerance. in the F1KED manual there is also reference to "Future prediction angles for radar distance firing at a fleeting target" Not exactly sure what that means but might result in reduced sight solution time ?

This then needs discussion of gun harmonisation . The 30MM Defa rattled around a fair bit during firing. For a single DEFA the quoted dispersion was 4mills. In the Mirage III the guns are NOT point harmonised but rather harmonised in a Figure of 8 area type pattern leaning over about 30degrees to the right. Each gun axis separated by 3mills in the vertical The resultant field of fire about 7mills dispersion. This "shotgun" like harmonization to somewhat compensate for gun movement, pilot tracking quality and computational accuracy. I have no idea in the F1 as to what the harmonization pattern was, but i doubt they were point harmonized.

Then there is the issue of scintillation. This is the radar tracking point moving around especially as you get close, this will result in the TD square moving around the target as the radar grabs a better return. Scintillation is a real thing and could even be seen in the FA18 circa 1985. The TD box would wander all over the target aircraft.

The final point. I am unaware of to what extent in the AERGES F1 all of this has been implemented.

Happy tracking

Edited January 6, 2023 by IvanK

[fausete]

Hi Snappy. We'll take a look at the TRKs but take what IvanK has said into account too. Another thing I can tell you is that there is an update of the control system incoming that will make steady attitude control (especially at high AoA) easier.

 

 

[fausete]

To add more. In first place thanks to IvanK because you're almost 100% correct. Furthermore, the maximum distance the gunsight can use internally is 1600 m and the effective range is 1200-1300 m. Aircraft sideslip and roll rate are also not accounted for by the sight so, ideally, you'll want to keep those as close to 0 as possible when firing. Another source of error is the employed AoA: the aircraft calculates a high and low airspeed AoA approximation, and the sight only takes the high speed one so at low speeds you can expect errors of up to 1°. Also, target accelerations are not computed by the sight, unlike in a modern aircraft.

Considering all these, a recommendation, especially for maneuvering targets, is to shoot the target along its length rather than take a pinpoint shot at it.

 

Edited January 7, 2023 by fausete

[Snappy]

On 1/5/2023 at 11:26 PM, IvanK said:

Snappy. I am not one of the devs but just a true Mirage nutter , with real world Mirage III experience in the last century Comparing the Mirage sight to a modern Director sight like in the FA18/F16 leaves us with the impression that pipper on means real time solution and therefore hits.

I looked at the track. You did get some hits... albeit not many. Though looking at the tracking and comparing it to real world experience against a 30foot banner (Radar locked LCOS in the Mirage III) the hits you got are probably about right. Even with perfect tracking in the Squadron a score of more than 30% hits was rare.  If I was assessing your "film" in the squadron (which I used to do as a weapons instructor) I would simply say your tracking needs to improve ... harsh perhaps but that would have been the reality in the squadron.

In your case the pipper is moving , everytime it moves the LCOS solution is behind the game. Recall the sight solution time is probably around 1.2 X  the time of flight. in other words you need the pipper on and stable for perhaps at a minimum for 1.2 seconds for the solution to be correct. Everytime the pipper moves (through minor flight control input the timer starts again. So sight handling in an LCOS sight is an art form that requires really really smooth flight control input and anticipation of pipper movement and the interplay between Range, range rate and sight solution time. The LCOS pipper can be likened to being held by two opposing rubber bands. The pilot controls the rear band with the stick, more backstick the rear band pulls the pipper backwards , reducing range the front band pulls the pipper forward, it is the pilot that has to control these forces such that the pipper moves along the "line" (primarily using roll for left right corrections and G for forward and aft corrections) and stabilizes on the target for 1.2 X the time of flight ... this is the art of sight handling.

Now that deals with standard LCOS, what about the ANT function ? I only have a limited understanding of exactly what it does in the F1 through logic and reading the explanation in the F1KED manuals (where the sight is effectively always in the ANT mode when locked on). Reading this info leads me to believe that ANT just adds radar antenna position and angle rates to the firing solution. because of this the computation knows the current position of the gun reticle and the target (orange square) the system can than monitor the coincidence of both the theory being if the GYRO reticle is on the orange TD square then it is a valid solution so hits (again assuming sight solution time has been observed) should ocurr. this then allows Auto fire if selected to occur. The F1KED manual states that if coincidence is inside 15mills (and in range) then Autofire will be initiated. though to me 15mills is a huge tolerance. in the F1KED manual there is also reference to "Future prediction angles for radar distance firing at a fleeting target" Not exactly sure what that means but might result in reduced sight solution time ?

This then needs discussion of gun harmonisation . The 30MM Defa rattled around a fair bit during firing. For a single DEFA the quoted dispersion was 4mills. In the Mirage III the guns are NOT point harmonised but rather harmonised in a Figure of 8 area type pattern leaning over about 30degrees to the right. Each gun axis separated by 3mills in the vertical The resultant field of fire about 7mills dispersion. This "shotgun" like harmonization to somewhat compensate for gun movement, pilot tracking quality and computational accuracy. I have no idea in the F1 as to what the harmonization pattern was, but i doubt they were point harmonized.

Then there is the issue of scintillation. This is the radar tracking point moving around especially as you get close, this will result in the TD square moving around the target as the radar grabs a better return. Scintillation is a real thing and could even be seen in the FA18 circa 1985. The TD box would wander all over the target aircraft.

The final point. I am unaware of to what extent in the AERGES F1 all of this has been implemented.

Happy tracking

 

 

3 hours ago, fausete said:

To add more. In first place thanks to IvanK because you're almost 100% correct. Furthermore, the maximum distance the gunsight can use internally is 1600 m and the effective range is 1200-1300 m. Aircraft sideslip and roll rate are also not accounted for by the sight so, ideally, you'll want to keep those as close to 0 as possible when firing. Another source of error is the employed AoA: the aircraft calculates a high and low airspeed AoA approximation, and the sight only takes the high speed one so at low speeds you can expect errors of up to 1°. Also, target accelerations are not computed by the sight, unlike in a modern aircraft.

Considering all these, a recommendation, especially for maneuvering targets, is to shoot the target along its length rather than take a pinpoint shot at it.

 

 

@IvanK,

thank you very much for your detailed reply&the interesting pictures ! Fair enough with criticism of steadier tracking !  When I have the opportunity I will try again and try to fly with a steadier pipper position.

I don’t doubt what you wrote , but was really suprised about the 30% hit rate under steady perfect tracking.

I have to look it up again , but I think  I somewhere read about the criteria for valid gunshots during Red Flag in the 70s and it required only very few frames of tape with pipper on target. That seemed to imply, if the pipper was on the targets the rounds were going to hit.

 

@fausete Thank you. I’m not at home at the moment, but I can check in the next few days , but I’m reasonably sure , I was a lot closer than 1600 m in my tracks.

I will try to do another run with steadier pipper control , but I still feel the gunsight in ANT is calculating an insufficient lead value under steady conditions.Would be really nice if you could check it. Especially since it is supposedly able to provide accurate solutions under IMC( the mentioned blind shooting) I don’t see this happening with the current implementation.

In a few days I hope to have a better example track.

Kind regards,

Snappy

Edited January 7, 2023 by Snappy

[fausete]

Hi @Snappy,

I was just providing possible explanations for sources of error in the sight. Nevertheless we are checking more in-depth as you might have actually stumbled upon a bug.

 

[IvanK]

An interesting snippet from fausete:

"Another source of error is the employed AoA: the aircraft calculates a high and low airspeed AoA approximation, and the sight only takes the high speed one so at low speeds you can expect errors of up to 1°."

This I think refers to how the sight deals with Trajectory shift. If so then its similar to the CSF97K in the Mirage III in that a fixed value for Trajectory shift was applied by the sight... part of the reason for the Harmonization being offset in the vertical. So if thats the case at any time the AOA is other than the value used for the trajectory shift calculation an error in the plane of symmetry will occur .... so if in doubt add a bit more lead   (Modern Director style sights F18/16 etc calculate Trajectory shift in real time.)

Snappy "

"I don’t doubt what you wrote , but was really surprised about the 30% hit rate under steady perfect tracking.

I have to look it up again , but I think  I somewhere read about the criteria for valid gunshots during Red Flag in the 70s and it required only very few frames of tape with pipper on target. That seemed to imply, if the pipper was on the targets the rounds were going to hit."

The 30 % figure is of all rounds fired in multiple passes on a towed banner. This was a repetitive series of passes aiming for consistent sight handling every time.... gives you an impression of just how difficult it was to achieve hits. Each round of each firer was colour dipped in different colours so scoring was by physical hole counting and matching colours. so for 250 rounds fired you are talking  75 hits. In my time the highest score achieved (not by me) was 50% and that was exceptional. With the FA18 scores were much higher and 50% hits were in fact close to the norm, this using Director mode gunsight in the FA18 and before the batr came to the Hornet.

WRT Pipper on and cine/video tracking as you refer to in a Red Flag type scenario.. Our BFM/ACM gun kill criteria was steady pipper on the target for 1 second with a firing witness marker evident on the film. and range inside 6Hm ... the rationale to allow for the sight solution time.

Not forgetting just 1 or 2 30mm HE hits will kill any fighter aircraft.

So whats perhaps the best way to use the sight ? When setting up the shot dont concentrate on the pipper....think about the gun bore line (somewhere up near the top of the combining glass) and get that ahead of the target on the "line" then allow the pipper to come into your scan and smoooooooothly make minor corrections to control pipper drift on to the target.... not so easy in a dynamic BFM engagement ! ...  IMO aim for steady tracking for at least one second, try to overlead slightly ... if possible have the pipper on the forward portion of the target rather than towards the tail. Secondly dont discount a slow drifting pipper snapshot as long as open fire occurs before pipper touches the target. And finally as it has always been Get in close .

In plane snap shots are your friend and in many cases in the heat of an engagement are probably the best you are going to get especially if the bad guy knows you are there. Make the decision early to employ a snapshot rather than attempt a tracking shot ...... set up the snapshot right from the get go ... get the Gun bore line ahead of the target get in the targets plane of motion, get rounds out there early .

This is a single frame (the best one of course )of  relatively slow early set up snap shot against a 9G F16. Silly bugger broke in plane ... but even so as you can see I didn't get the line exactly right. Dont think to many rounds would have hit  him "spray and pray" ....  but rattled his bones

We did a lot of Snaphot training especially on the way home from  BFM sorties. In this way you develop a real feel where to put the target in the sight to get the gun bore lime ahead of the target and establish the line. This then equipped you with a good method bordering on instinct to take every snap shot opportunity that presented itself in a fight.

Also imo actually doing a guns tracking shot in every PC based combat flight Sim I have flown is harder for the same scenario than it is real life. Joy stick feed back/feel limited peripheral vision, calculation and graphic cycles all I guess complicate the problem even further ... then comes multiplayer ... dont have to worry about Ping IRL.

Edited January 7, 2023 by IvanK

[Oesau]

 @IvanK are those gunsight photos of the SHAR from the world tour post the Falklands? I remember seeing Hermes in port in NZ so assume they came past Australia and the RN and RAAF “battled it out”?

[Bremspropeller]

23 minutes ago, IvanK said:

Not forgetting just 1 or 2 30mm HE hits will kill any fighter aircraft.

That's one of the things that also need fixin.

In DCS the DEFA is currently a peashooter - when you watch IAF guncams, you'll see the -21s light up like firecrackers after a short burst.

Might be a DM issue, though.

[IvanK]

Oesau Yep

 

Edited January 7, 2023 by IvanK

[Snappy]

On 1/5/2023 at 11:26 PM, IvanK said:

Snappy. I am not one of the devs but just a true Mirage nutter , with real world Mirage III experience in the last century Comparing the Mirage sight to a modern Director sight like in the FA18/F16 leaves us with the impression that pipper on means real time solution and therefore hits.

I looked at the track. You did get some hits... albeit not many. Though looking at the tracking and comparing it to real world experience against a 30foot banner (Radar locked LCOS in the Mirage III) the hits you got are probably about right. Even with perfect tracking in the Squadron a score of more than 30% hits was rare.  If I was assessing your "film" in the squadron (which I used to do as a weapons instructor) I would simply say your tracking needs to improve ... harsh perhaps but that would have been the reality in the squadron.

In your case the pipper is moving , everytime it moves the LCOS solution is behind the game. Recall the sight solution time is probably around 1.2 X  the time of flight. in other words you need the pipper on and stable for perhaps at a minimum for 1.2 seconds for the solution to be correct. Everytime the pipper moves (through minor flight control input the timer starts again. So sight handling in an LCOS sight is an art form that requires really really smooth flight control input and anticipation of pipper movement and the interplay between Range, range rate and sight solution time. The LCOS pipper can be likened to being held by two opposing rubber bands. The pilot controls the rear band with the stick, more backstick the rear band pulls the pipper backwards , reducing range the front band pulls the pipper forward, it is the pilot that has to control these forces such that the pipper moves along the "line" (primarily using roll for left right corrections and G for forward and aft corrections) and stabilizes on the target for 1.2 X the time of flight ... this is the art of sight handling.

Now that deals with standard LCOS, what about the ANT function ? I only have a limited understanding of exactly what it does in the F1 through logic and reading the explanation in the F1KED manuals (where the sight is effectively always in the ANT mode when locked on). Reading this info leads me to believe that ANT just adds radar antenna position and angle rates to the firing solution. because of this the computation knows the current position of the gun reticle and the target (orange square) the system can than monitor the coincidence of both the theory being if the GYRO reticle is on the orange TD square then it is a valid solution so hits (again assuming sight solution time has been observed) should ocurr. this then allows Auto fire if selected to occur. The F1KED manual states that if coincidence is inside 15mills (and in range) then Autofire will be initiated. though to me 15mills is a huge tolerance. in the F1KED manual there is also reference to "Future prediction angles for radar distance firing at a fleeting target" Not exactly sure what that means but might result in reduced sight solution time ?

This then needs discussion of gun harmonisation . The 30MM Defa rattled around a fair bit during firing. For a single DEFA the quoted dispersion was 4mills. In the Mirage III the guns are NOT point harmonised but rather harmonised in a Figure of 8 area type pattern leaning over about 30degrees to the right. Each gun axis separated by 3mills in the vertical The resultant field of fire about 7mills dispersion. This "shotgun" like harmonization to somewhat compensate for gun movement, pilot tracking quality and computational accuracy. I have no idea in the F1 as to what the harmonization pattern was, but i doubt they were point harmonized.

Then there is the issue of scintillation. This is the radar tracking point moving around especially as you get close, this will result in the TD square moving around the target as the radar grabs a better return. Scintillation is a real thing and could even be seen in the FA18 circa 1985. The TD box would wander all over the target aircraft.

The final point. I am unaware of to what extent in the AERGES F1 all of this has been implemented.

Happy tracking

 

Hi Ivan!,

thank you very much for explaining things in such detail and also for sharing these guncam pictures. I really enjoy your posts!

One question for my understanding, regarding your first pic, the one with pipper on the F-14:

If this was a steady sight picture and the pipper had stayed steady for one second already and let’s say instead of the targets left displacement, you would be in the same plane of motion, so the target would be along your gun centreline.

If you now pressed the trigger , would you expect to score hits? Or is the pipper too far aft on the Center of the target aircraft  body?Would it be considered a valid shot?

thank you very much again for sharing from your experience!

kind regards, Snappy 

 

[jaguara5]

All this info's (text and pictures) of how the gunsight is working in  different  aiming modes  and how to properly use the piper must be implemented in detail  in the manual IMO. 

[gulredrel]

2 hours ago, jaguara5 said:

All this info's (text and pictures) of how the gunsight is working in  different  aiming modes  and how to properly use the piper must be implemented in detail  in the manual IMO. 

That would really be useful, yes. So no more guessing on user's end. Was lately gunning an IL-76 and needed to aim far in front of the radar dot.

Edited January 9, 2023 by gulredrel

[Snappy]

15 minutes ago, gulredrel said:

That would really be useful, yes. So no more guessing on user's end. Was lately gunning an IL-76 and needed to aim far in front of the radar dot.

 

That was my initial impression too, that the gunsight in ANT does not provide calculate sufiicient lead , even if you aim to put the pipper on the radar dot/square (which itself may be in front of target or on its body) . I will do more testing when I have some quiet time for that.

Edited January 9, 2023 by Snappy