investigating Auto boresight mavs

[Chad Vader]

Chad Vader

Posted 8 hours ago

Hi,

First, I realise this is a sim and realism is paramount and must take precedence.

However i would like to ask if there is an option or ED has considered perhaps adding a special option to have this procedure carried out by the ground crew and not the pilot.  This adds about 5 to 10 minutes of time onto every pre flight, as you have to wait for the mavs to warm up and in a multiplayer environment, if you lose a few airframes could add up to half an hour on to the play session, depending on efficiency.

It would be great if there were a special option like this so we could start in a hot aircraft with the mavs pre boresighted and warmed up.

Thank you for taking the time to read my suggestion, please be civil if you disagree with the sentiment here.

[backspace340]

Please god yes, especially because it seems to be all manner of broken from time to time and the only way to get a perfect boresight is to airstart! The Hornet, the A-10 and the Viggen don't have to boresight Mavs in-game, so please give us the option to experience the same level of bliss. That goes for the Apache bore-sighting too (in VR it just plain doesn't work) - all forms of manual boresighting are a complete pain and getting a good boresight seems impossible.

Edited January 20, 2023 by backspace340

[Chad Vader]

Exactly! I mean, it is a good feature that they have this in there for realism, but in mp it is a hindrance that could be avoided by providing an option in the special options menu.

[79Au]

I'm not a fan of any of this boresight stuff, that's not the kind of realism I'm looking for primarily when playing a sim.

[jonsky7]

Yes please for the option

[WHOGX5]

If you warmup your mavericks during startup, you can boresight them before taxi/takeoff in 1-2 minutes depending on how many you're carrying. I'd suggest you simply practice boresighting so you can do it quickly and efficiently instead. I don't think we should make the aircraft less realistic just because people can't be bothered to learn how to start their aircraft in a timely manner. What else should we remove? JHMCS alignment? INS alignment? Why not just hot start/air start at that point?

[jonsky7]

3 minutes ago, WHOGX5 said:

If you warmup your mavericks during startup, you can boresight them before taxi/takeoff in 1-2 minutes depending on how many you're carrying. I'd suggest you simply practice boresighting so you can do it quickly and efficiently instead. I don't think we should make the aircraft less realistic just because people can't be bothered to learn how to start their aircraft in a timely manner. What else should we remove? JHMCS alignment? INS alignment? Why not just hot start/air start at that point?

I'd be happy with an option to remove JHMCS alignment as well, thanks for suggesting it.

Chad is only asking for an OPTION to remove it. Not that it is removed. 

[Chad Vader]

56 minutes ago, WHOGX5 said:

If you warmup your mavericks during startup, you can boresight them before taxi/takeoff in 1-2 minutes depending on how many you're carrying. I'd suggest you simply practice boresighting so you can do it quickly and efficiently instead. I don't think we should make the aircraft less realistic just because people can't be bothered to learn how to start their aircraft in a timely manner. What else should we remove? JHMCS alignment? INS alignment? Why not just hot start/air start at that point?

I think you are being slightly pedantic here and you are missing the point of my original post, which is that the procedure becomes tiresome if you are running through multiple frames in multiplayer..

I'm not asking for the removal of said feature... I 'can' boresight the mavericks fine but it takes 2 minutes for the mavs to warm up and its just extra overhead I dont want in a mp environment.  I would appreciate the option to have them pre aligned by the ground crew in a hot start, which would fit with your level of realism, as its not technically a skip.

[WHOGX5]

2 hours ago, Chad Vader said:

I think you are being slightly pedantic here and you are missing the point of my original post, which is that the procedure becomes tiresome if you are running through multiple frames in multiplayer..

I'm not asking for the removal of said feature... I 'can' boresight the mavericks fine but it takes 2 minutes for the mavs to warm up and its just extra overhead I dont want in a mp environment.  I would appreciate the option to have them pre aligned by the ground crew in a hot start, which would fit with your level of realism, as its not technically a skip.

I completely agree that they should be pre-aligned in a hot start aircraft. I just think that when starting from a cold and dark state, the aircraft should truly be cold and dark.

3 hours ago, jonsky7 said:

I'd be happy with an option to remove JHMCS alignment as well, thanks for suggesting it.

lol

[jonsky7]

9 minutes ago, WHOGX5 said:

I completely agree that they should be pre-aligned in a hot start aircraft. I just think that when starting from a cold and dark state, the aircraft should truly be cold and dark.

lol

Haha, I'm glad you found the humour in that...

I didn't mind doing it as long as it worked. Before this current patch you just had to go through the motions and it would be locked in. Then someone complained that wasn't realistic enough, because the couldn't get it to not align properly even when locked the TGP and MAV to two different targets. Who cares? Why anyone would want it to not be aligned is beyond me.

Anywho, they tried to fix that error, and now introduced another whereby it doesn't seem to want ever to be aligned. Or it's aligned but at one distance only, do the boresight at 5nm, well then you're going to have to target everything at 5nm if you want to use the TPOD.

That's a reported bug btw.
 

 

[Chad Vader]

3 hours ago, jonsky7 said:

Haha, I'm glad you found the humour in that...

I didn't mind doing it as long as it worked. Before this current patch you just had to go through the motions and it would be locked in. Then someone complained that wasn't realistic enough, because the couldn't get it to not align properly even when locked the TGP and MAV to two different targets. Who cares? Why anyone would want it to not be aligned is beyond me.

Anywho, they tried to fix that error, and now introduced another whereby it doesn't seem to want ever to be aligned. Or it's aligned but at one distance only, do the boresight at 5nm, well then you're going to have to target everything at 5nm if you want to use the TPOD.

That's a reported bug btw.
 

 

LOL! Thats the DCS community in a nutshell... cant please everyone!

[Chad Vader]

4 hours ago, WHOGX5 said:

I completely agree that they should be pre-aligned in a hot start aircraft. I just think that when starting from a cold and dark state, the aircraft should truly be cold and dark.

lol

Yes I agree you should have to boresight in a cold start aircraft.

[backspace340]

11 hours ago, WHOGX5 said:

If you warmup your mavericks during startup, you can boresight them before taxi/takeoff in 1-2 minutes depending on how many you're carrying. I'd suggest you simply practice boresighting so you can do it quickly and efficiently instead. I don't think we should make the aircraft less realistic just because people can't be bothered to learn how to start their aircraft in a timely manner. What else should we remove? JHMCS alignment? INS alignment? Why not just hot start/air start at that point?

You're missing the point - it's not that we don't know how or can't be bothered. It's that it doesn't work or it's almost impossible to properly align it even when using the correct procedure and it's something that no other module even has the pain of bothering with. The INS always aligns perfectly, but right now you cannot boresight the Mavs from a cold start. It's broken. Similarly for the HMS alignment in anything that tries to simulate it realistically - it doesn't work in VR, you can't keep your head perfectly still and so it's always a bit off (not to mention the parallax and the way they've made it in some modules, e.g. Apache, means it doesn't even make sense how it boresights). I'm all for going through the procedure, but if it's impossible to boresight from a cold start to an acceptable or realistic level because of issues in how the game is made, what are we even simulating? 

[Geraki]

21 hours ago, jonsky7 said:

I'd be happy with an option to remove JHMCS alignment as well, thanks for suggesting it.

Chad is only asking for an OPTION to remove it. Not that it is removed. 

Hi jonsky7

JHMCS alighnment !!!!like FCR build in test warm up and FLCS BIT test  MFD page are in SOP F-16 procedures in real too , do we want a compete realistic DCS F-16 or a sort of realistic? So my opinion is not to remove or add unrealistic functions in DCS F-16 

Kind Regards

Edited January 21, 2023 by Geraki

[WHOGX5]

10 hours ago, backspace340 said:

You're missing the point - it's not that we don't know how or can't be bothered. It's that it doesn't work or it's almost impossible to properly align it even when using the correct procedure and it's something that no other module even has the pain of bothering with. The INS always aligns perfectly, but right now you cannot boresight the Mavs from a cold start. It's broken. Similarly for the HMS alignment in anything that tries to simulate it realistically - it doesn't work in VR, you can't keep your head perfectly still and so it's always a bit off (not to mention the parallax and the way they've made it in some modules, e.g. Apache, means it doesn't even make sense how it boresights). I'm all for going through the procedure, but if it's impossible to boresight from a cold start to an acceptable or realistic level because of issues in how the game is made, what are we even simulating? 

I agree. I'd rather see ED actually fix the issue than create workarounds for it though. I really don't see how it can be so hard for ED to implement proper boresighting as it seems like one of the absolute easiest features to implement. Just check the angle between the sensors and slave the Mavericks to that angle? But I've suffered through 3 years of early access hell flying the F-16C, so waiting a little bit longer can't possibly decrease my mental well-being any further. I just hope they actually fix these issues before they push the F-16C out of early access.

[jonsky7]

5 hours ago, Geraki said:

Hi jonsky7

JHMCS alighnment !!!!like FCR build in test warm up and FLCS BIT test  MFD page are in SOP F-16 procedures in real too , do we want a compete realistic DCS F-16 or a sort of realistic? So my opinion is not to remove or add unrealistic functions in DCS F-16 

Kind Regards

 

Well different people want different things, that's what options are for.

Nobody is asking for it to be removed, just a check box option in the specials tab to have it automatically aligned for a cold start, just as it is already aligned for a hot start.

That way if you want the hyper realistic cold start up, then go for it.

Those of us who aren't bothered about such things could check the box and not worry about it. I can't see how that would bother you?

[WHOGX5]

6 hours ago, jonsky7 said:

Well different people want different things, that's what options are for.

Nobody is asking for it to be removed, just a check box option in the specials tab to have it automatically aligned for a cold start, just as it is already aligned for a hot start.

That way if you want the hyper realistic cold start up, then go for it.

Those of us who aren't bothered about such things could check the box and not worry about it. I can't see how that would bother you?

I don't get why you don't just use hot start? Adding a bunch of options where you can choose which parts of the start up procedure you want to perform and which parts you don't want to perform don't make any sense. The whole point of this simulation is to try to model these aircraft as true to life as possible. To stray away from that would go against the entire raison d'être of DCS. I also don't see how it'd work in an online environment. Like, would every server require different startup procedures due to different parts of the start up process being disabled on a per server basis?

[jonsky7]

59 minutes ago, WHOGX5 said:

I don't get why you don't just use hot start? Adding a bunch of options where you can choose which parts of the start up procedure you want to perform and which parts you don't want to perform don't make any sense. The whole point of this simulation is to try to model these aircraft as true to life as possible. To stray away from that would go against the entire raison d'être of DCS. I also don't see how it'd work in an online environment. Like, would every server require different startup procedures due to different parts of the start up process being disabled on a per server basis?

I do use hot-start where possible, but in an online server you can't choose your weapons before you join the slot. So you have to do it anyway.

Why doesn't it make any sense? What difference does it make to you or anyone else if I have my mavs auto boresighted?

Like I said, if you want rivet counting realism then that's fine by me. 

Servers won't need anything new, they either force all the procedures or they don't. 

BTW I *never* align the INS my Harrier, and the INS doesn't drift because I use those options, even online. 
You'd best head over to RAZBAM now and complain about that!

[Wags]

Dear all,

We will explore the option of auto-boresight for the Maverick and HMCS from a cold start. This would also need to be server enforced. When possible, we want to shallow the learning curve for new players.

This is a low priority though as we have much bigger fish to fry.

On the subject of Maverick boresight: this has been fixed internally and we hope to release in the next update or the one after (limited time for final testing and integration).

Kind regards,

Wags

[Deano87]

On 1/20/2023 at 4:28 PM, jonsky7 said:

Then someone complained that wasn't realistic enough, because the couldn't get it to not align properly even when locked the TGP and MAV to two different targets. Who cares? Why anyone would want it to not be aligned is beyond me.

That would be me.

The reason I want the capability of boresighting incorrectly is because its realistic, It's what happens when you do it wrong IRL. And boresighting mavs is a skill and something that needs to be planned for during missions. You set a steerpoint over a good boresighting target after takeoff for that very reason. It should be possible to do its wrong, and pay for it by either having miss-aligned mavs or have to re-do it. This is the realism I expect out of a sim such as DCS.

However for more casual players, I understand why an option for pre-boresighted Mavs would be good.

[silverdevil]

On 1/19/2023 at 4:54 PM, Chad Vader said:

It would be great if there were a special option like this so we could start in a hot aircraft with the mavs pre boresighted and warmed up.

hi. this is already a thing. matter of fact, at the moment, it is the only way to have mavs boresighted. there are several missions i use that i have to air start or i don't uses mavs.

[jonsky7]

38 minutes ago, Deano87 said:

That would be me.

The reason I want the capability of boresighting incorrectly is because its realistic, It's what happens when you do it wrong IRL. And boresighting mavs is a skill and something that needs to be planned for during missions. You set a steerpoint over a good boresighting target after takeoff for that very reason. It should be possible to do its wrong, and pay for it by either having miss-aligned mavs or have to re-do it. This is the realism I expect out of a sim such as DCS.

However for more casual players, I understand why an option for pre-boresighted Mavs would be good.

Well that's a perfectly reasonable, well made explanation.

 

53 minutes ago, Deano87 said:

However for more casual players, I understand why an option for pre-boresighted Mavs would be good.

I appreciate that you are open to the option.
 

[IR.Clutch]

6 часов назад, Wags сказал:

On the subject of Maverick boresight: this has been fixed internally and we hope to release in the next update

Mavericks are too long-suffering. Many lances have already been broken about them. Get them сorrect once and that's it)

[Hairdo1-1]

I know the purists will be up in arms but it’s tedious and would love to be able just to check a box to ensure mavericks are boresighted automatically 

[VarZat]

As a milsim purist i actually think this is a good idea.