WHOGX5 Posted July 16, 2023 Posted July 16, 2023 I don't have any evidence backing what I'm about to ask, hence I'm not marking this as a bug, but I still think it is and hopefully someone can provide a factual response to this question. Shouldn't you be able to store detected emitters on the HAD as markpoints? It's very strange that you can create markpoints using every single sensor in the DCS F-16C, except the HAD. If I send a detected emitter over LINK 16 to my wingman, the emitter will be displayed on his HSD with the correct emitter type and even a threat circle indicating the engagement range of the emitter. In my own aircraft however, the best I can hope for is to not lose track of it on the HAD and have it turn green, only to completely fade away moments later. I can not get it to display on my own HSD with a threat circle, and I cannot slew the ground radar to the emitter in order to refine the coordinates. The workflow currently has to be: 1. Bug emitter on HAD. 2. Make TGP SOI. 3. TMS Up to get a point track. 4. Create a markpoint and set as active steerpoint. 5. Switch to GM radar and cursor zero. It's an unnecessarily convoluted process and I can't imagine that's what pilots have to do in real life. If this workflow was correct, it'd also mean that you can't mark the emitter if there are clouds in the way, as you won't be able to get a point track with the TGP. It feels like you absolutely must be able to create markpoints using the HAD in real life, because I don't see how you could be effective in the SEAD/DEAD role otherwise. 3 -Col. Russ Everts opinion on surface-to-air missiles: "It makes you feel a little better if it's coming for one of your buddies. However, if it's coming for you, it doesn't make you feel too good, but it does rearrange your priorities." DCS Wishlist: MC-130E Combat Talon | F/A-18F Lot 26 | HH-60G Pave Hawk | E-2 Hawkeye/C-2 Greyhound | EA-6A/B Prowler | J-35F2/J Draken | RA-5C Vigilante
Furiz Posted July 16, 2023 Posted July 16, 2023 @WHOGX5 I heard on a podcast that HTS is really remarkable little contraption, starts at 52:43 in this podcast: But this is not evidence and SMEs seem to only know what we can provide documentation for. 2 1
Braunn Posted July 20, 2023 Posted July 20, 2023 (edited) Weasel pilot Dan Hampton praise the HTS pod in his book. They did do some changes to it to make it better but cant remember what it was. I can only assume they made it less work needed (as per OPs question) to operate effectively. Edited July 20, 2023 by Braunn
WHOGX5 Posted July 22, 2023 Author Posted July 22, 2023 On 7/20/2023 at 2:08 PM, Braunn said: Weasel pilot Dan Hampton praise the HTS pod in his book. They did do some changes to it to make it better but cant remember what it was. I can only assume they made it less work needed (as per OPs question) to operate effectively. Yeah, I've read that book. He mentioned helping out with the development of the HTS R7 variant, but exactly what that upgrade entailed is left out, apart from being generally better than it's predecessor. I don't even know if the R7 variant is accurate for the DCS F-16C. ED should however have access to the necessary documentation as they've modelled the HTS pod and HAS page in-game. All I can say is that I find it extremely improbable that you can't mark SAMs in the F-16CM-50, and I wish ED could bring some clarity upon this topic. 4 -Col. Russ Everts opinion on surface-to-air missiles: "It makes you feel a little better if it's coming for one of your buddies. However, if it's coming for you, it doesn't make you feel too good, but it does rearrange your priorities." DCS Wishlist: MC-130E Combat Talon | F/A-18F Lot 26 | HH-60G Pave Hawk | E-2 Hawkeye/C-2 Greyhound | EA-6A/B Prowler | J-35F2/J Draken | RA-5C Vigilante
skywalker22 Posted July 22, 2023 Posted July 22, 2023 3 hours ago, WHOGX5 said: Yeah, I've read that book. He mentioned helping out with the development of the HTS R7 variant, but exactly what that upgrade entailed is left out, apart from being generally better than it's predecessor. I don't even know if the R7 variant is accurate for the DCS F-16C. ED should however have access to the necessary documentation as they've modelled the HTS pod and HAS page in-game. All I can say is that I find it extremely improbable that you can't mark SAMs in the F-16CM-50, and I wish ED could bring some clarity upon this topic. I have been thinking same question for quite some time. Great that I brough it up @WHOGX5. 1
SeeYouAtTheMerge Posted May 30, 2024 Posted May 30, 2024 I dont think the green emitters should fade, they should stay so if a emitter goes offline you can still hook it and shoot it with a harm from the HAD or find it with the TGP 1
RyanR Posted May 31, 2024 Posted May 31, 2024 Leave the HAD as SOI for as long as possible. With the TGP in the opposite MFD, it will get closer to the emitter as the HAD gets a better quality location. Not foolproof, though. Still a bit of a needle in a haystack, and you have to slew the TGP quite a bit to find it. I bet this works a LOT better with a donor over the datalink, so you can get down to PGM1 with plenty of distance. Once you find the emitter, marking it is standard stuff. -Ryan
Recommended Posts