Ground moving target AGM-65F + POD

[irq11]

Dear all,
I noticed that if you move towards a ground moving target face to face (Target  -->     <-- AGM-65F) and use POD to track target and "transfer" to AGM-65F, it fails to track target or if tracks, hits beyond target.
however, if you move towards target with angle between 60 and 90, AGM-65F more often succeeds to track target and you can see AGM-65F pointer follows target after POD transferred target infos.
 

Is this normal operation in your opinion/knowledge ? It is true that I did not do the face-to-face test with only the AGM-65F without the pod, if I have the same behavior...
thanks by advance
nice day

[maxTRX]

I just tested this, well at least I tried. The attack direction didn't quite workout the way I planned. When approaching the movers head on, I ended up a bit to one side and the sunlight was slightly hitting the sensors. Hot summer afternoon in both cases.

When approaching the targets from behind, I was able to persuade the MavF's to lock. It seemed like the FLIR was updating the Mav's seeker on occasion, making the seeker 'jump' toward the target. The FLIR was tracking the first vehicle in the convoy but the Mav locked on the second. I wasn't going to waste time to correct just as long as I remembered which vehicle I fired on already...   

On the second test, approaching from a head on direction the FLIR was tracking for a while but the Mav never acquired.  When the FLIR finally lost track I undesignsted and used the Mav seeker on its own. It was shaky but it worked.  I'm not sure if this test helped  to answer your question.  Personally I think there were other factors, including of course the current modelling.

https://youtu.be/TWeF_N9MIw4?si=QWkK9vJNEbIJRmTs

[CBStu]

I have pretty much given up on using pod + Mav F. Getting the pod to change from the standard reticle to the moving target reticle and having it actually lock onto the moving target that I want it to is very hit or miss for me. 

[bonesvf103]

I had been testing this extensively a while back and the only time I got the IR Mavericks to work with the TPOD 95% of the time was to realize that when you lock the moving target with the TPOD and uncage the Maverick, the Maverick will look at the target initially, but not actually lock onto it.  To have it keep the track, you have to every so often redesignate the target to "update" the target.  The only time the Maverick will track the target on its own is if you undesignate the TPOD and quickly TDC over to the Maverick while it is uncaged and slew the seeker over to the target.  It makes sense in a way since the TPOD is merely telling the Maverick where to look  and that's it.  And the Maverick will look but since it's not "actively" being used, it just keeps looking where the TPOD told it to look at that particular moment.  It's kind of dumb until you let it be the "SOI" then it smartens up.

But you still have to be 1) quick at handing off to the Maverick and "fine tuning" it and 2) cognizant that it still needs a good enough heat signature/contract and its seeker can be affected by things like ambient temperature, LOS angle and so on--it was meant really for ships that are against an ocean background anyhow.  I've come to getting more comfortable doing that quick action and getting kills almost all the time, but it takes alot of practice to get the rhythm right.  The only thing I don't like about them now is how BHOT and WHOT have always been useless.  I only notice it changes the color of you crosshairs but does nothing with the target imagery or targeting ability.

Here is a video showing the TPOD used with the Maverick without TDC depressing:

 

And here is one where TDC is depressed periodically to "update" the Maverick:

 

v6,

boNes

Edited December 18, 2023 by bonesvf103

[bfr]

On 12/14/2023 at 3:59 PM, CBStu said:

I have pretty much given up on using pod + Mav F. Getting the pod to change from the standard reticle to the moving target reticle and having it actually lock onto the moving target that I want it to is very hit or miss for me. 

Same here. I found in most scenarios it was just quicker, easier and more reliable to cut out the middle-man and slew and lock the Mav directly.  The pod to missile handoff just seemed too prone to error (a mix of me being ham-fisted and cocking up the sequence of inputs, and the stars not all aligning for a successful handoff).

[bonesvf103]

5 hours ago, bfr said:

Same here. I found in most scenarios it was just quicker, easier and more reliable to cut out the middle-man and slew and lock the Mav directly.  The pod to missile handoff just seemed too prone to error (a mix of me being ham-fisted and cocking up the sequence of inputs, and the stars not all aligning for a successful handoff).

Despite my testing in the above, I too prefer to use the Mav-F without a TPOD.  Less to have to fool around with in the heat of battle.

I just wish the WHOT and BHOT actually worked.  All this time all I've seen that do is change the color of your crosshairs which is useless.

v6,

boNes

Edited December 19, 2023 by bonesvf103

[rob10]

On 12/19/2023 at 9:50 AM, bonesvf103 said:

I just wish the WHOT and BHOT actually worked.  All this time all I've seen that do is change the color of your crosshairs which is useless.

Just to clarify: what are you expecting this function to do?  The only visible result of switching those should be the change of crosshair colour.  The IR MAV video polarity in the F-18 CAN'T BE CHANGED.  The colour change of crosshairs ONLY indicates the change of the polarity the MAV will attempt to lock on (WHOT will attempt to lock hot target, BHOT will attempt to lock cold targets).  I haven't checked how that works in DCS, but if you're expecting it to change polarity of your video, that's not going to happen.  If you're aware of all this then ignore this post, but it wasn't clear what your expectation is.

[CBStu]

The problem that I was hoping the tpod could help with is the limited magnification available in the Mav screen itself. Unfortunately, for me anyway, it isn't worth the trouble to use the tpod because by the time I get it all to work (in the few instances where I succeed) I am pretty dang close anyway. It is a pain in the butt getting hit by whatever armament a tank can shoot at me.

[bonesvf103]

On 12/20/2023 at 12:45 PM, rob10 said:

Just to clarify: what are you expecting this function to do?  The only visible result of switching those should be the change of crosshair colour.  The IR MAV video polarity in the F-18 CAN'T BE CHANGED.  The colour change of crosshairs ONLY indicates the change of the polarity the MAV will attempt to lock on (WHOT will attempt to lock hot target, BHOT will attempt to lock cold targets).  I haven't checked how that works in DCS, but if you're expecting it to change polarity of your video, that's not going to happen.  If you're aware of all this then ignore this post, but it wasn't clear what your expectation is.

I admit that WAS the expectation I had for WHOT and BHOT.  Too bad that the video doesn't change accordingly but now that I know what it does, that's helpful, thanks.

v6,

boNes

[evilnate]

A-10C and F-16C: Point track moving target with TGP, slave AGM-65 to point. Easy!

F-18C: Point track moving target, slave AGM-65 to point and then learn the point is no longer valid because the moving target is no longer where it was when you initiated track with TGP. I have a hard time believing this is correct modeling!

[bonesvf103]

17 hours ago, evilnate said:

A-10C and F-16C: Point track moving target with TGP, slave AGM-65 to point. Easy!

F-18C: Point track moving target, slave AGM-65 to point and then learn the point is no longer valid because the moving target is no longer where it was when you initiated track with TGP. I have a hard time believing this is correct modeling!

I do too, but yes what you describe is true behavior in the sim and I have had to adapt to it begrudgingly.  It's not too bad once you get used to it but for newcomers it is frustrating especially if you don't know about it.

 

v6,

boNes