no bug FCR fix and slew - bug or feature?

[Sprool]

2 issues I'm finding with the Apache FCR; first the manual slew L & R for the scan area, only moves when you stop scanning.  When you stop scanning it re-centres anyway so is there any point in having the scan slewable? Should I be able to slew it left and right when its actively scanning?

Second, if I stop then re-start a scan it picks up a target I have previously hit and destroyed, and will send another hellfire to hit it again. Its like the scan restarting wipes any memory of previously targeted and destroyed units, and the scan is picking up destroyed ones as still live.

[AndreNL]

2nd point:

What I use to do, is when I attacked a target I mark it with a target point on the map. The FRC doesn't know when a target is destroyed or not. So I can see in an eyeblink if the target that's pops up in a new scan is already destroyed. Also handy If you wanna look with the tads to that saved target point on the map. 

Edited December 31, 2023 by AndreNL

[Sprool]

On the FCR it already marks an 'X' on targets you've launched missiles at, to have to mark it manually as well with a target point seems a bit of a pain - if it knows you already shot at it, it should not reset with a new scan should it? I'm suspecting this is not a feature but something that's not yet fully implemented, I hope. I dont like wasting Hellfires on targets already killed. The whole point of the FCR is to release a load of Hellfires on a group of enemy positions in a short as possible time with minimal effort.

 

[Floyd1212]

14 minutes ago, Sprool said:

The whole point of the FCR is to release a load of Hellfires on a group of enemy positions in a short as possible time with minimal effort.

I think you will get a little push back on this statement...

Raptor9 had a great post a few days ago:

 

[Sprool]

OK, but if it's clever enough to put an X on the screen where you already fired a missile why would it allow a second one to be fired there? 

Regarding the scan area slew, can you do it whilst scanning?

[LorenLuke]

4 hours ago, Sprool said:

OK, but if it's clever enough to put an X on the screen where you already fired a missile why would it allow a second one to be fired there?

Because 

1) It trusts you to be a competent pilot and recognize where you've previously shot. 

2) Your missile got shot down or otherwise didn't reach the target, which the FCR can't tell happened.

3) Targets might have moved either from or to that shot position, throwing off any application of that logic within the aircraft computer.

4) Imagine trying to deliberately launch a second missile at a target, possibly to be assured of its destruction, and your aircraft telling you 'no'.

[Sprool]

3) targets might have moved - it can already distinguish moving targets and changes symbology accordingly, and the FCR still marks them with an X once they've been fired on.

[LorenLuke]

1 hour ago, Sprool said:

3) targets might have moved - it can already distinguish moving targets and changes symbology accordingly, and the FCR still marks them with an X once they've been fired on.

The X (to my knowledge) doesn't move, and the X generated by shooting a laser hellfire at the target certainly doesn't move.

And if you're worried about wasting hellfires, just wait for the LINK function and save some kilos for any you might have missed. 

[Sprool]

I'm still waiting for the corsair

 

[NeedzWD40]

On 12/31/2023 at 8:45 AM, Sprool said:

2 issues I'm finding with the Apache FCR; first the manual slew L & R for the scan area, only moves when you stop scanning.  When you stop scanning it re-centres anyway so is there any point in having the scan slewable? Should I be able to slew it left and right when its actively scanning?

Second, if I stop then re-start a scan it picks up a target I have previously hit and destroyed, and will send another hellfire to hit it again. Its like the scan restarting wipes any memory of previously targeted and destroyed units, and the scan is picking up destroyed ones as still live.

Manual slew can be handy if you want to bias in that direction, ie you're expecting to catch something over that direction first. When you initiate a scan, you can't change the angle until the scan is completed as it's treated like a snapshot in space and time. Further, the radar doesn't have to scan an area straight ahead all the time; you can scan over your right or left to potentially find targets off boresight. This works very well with narrower scan areas to search potential points of interest.

A scanburst maintains a database of the targets it found on that scan and when you initiate another scan, it will discard the previous database and start from scratch. You can get around this with a continuous scan, but eventually you'll have to stop and scan again. You can use the TSD with pan and zoom to correlate where the Xs are and skip over targets with NTS (or use PFZs/NFZs) to avoid re-attacking shot targets. The X is just a positional coordinate registered as having been fired upon at some point by you (or others if you've used the BDA functionality), there's no exact correlation with actual destroyed targets. ie the FCR records you having shot at an ADA unit, but the missile instead prioritized a tank.

[Sprool]

thanks that was useful, you confirmed my suspicions about wiping memory when starting a new scan, at least i know its not me missing a trick.

[Moxica]

On 1/1/2024 at 8:36 AM, LorenLuke said:

Because 

1) It trusts you to be a competent pilot and recognize where you've previously shot. 

2) Your missile got shot down or otherwise didn't reach the target, which the FCR can't tell happened.

3) Targets might have moved either from or to that shot position, throwing off any application of that logic within the aircraft computer.

4) Imagine trying to deliberately launch a second missile at a target, possibly to be assured of its destruction, and your aircraft telling you 'no'.

Does not make sense. Is this the reason it prioritize a dead radar over a live AAA? Sending several missiles on the same dead target in same salvo?
Because the missile may have been shot down?
-Not a smart design decision, considering the price of a hellfire alone.

[Raptor9]

5 hours ago, Moxica said:

Does not make sense. Is this the reason it prioritize a dead radar over a live AAA? Sending several missiles on the same dead target in same salvo?
Because the missile may have been shot down?
-Not a smart design decision, considering the price of a hellfire alone.

As stated in this thread and several others, the AH-64D FCR (or any radar system for that matter) has no way of knowing what targets are dead or alive. The implication of such is outside reality.

In addition, the radar system will not blank out sections of the battlefield simply because a munition has been fired into that location. This too is beyond reality and good sense. If I was a tank commander and started seeing my vehicles getting hit by missiles, I would just radio everyone to park next to tanks that have already been hit if I knew those areas would be inhibited from being fired on.

Pilot's are not just button-pushers. They must have situational awareness of the battlefield and use all available sensors at their disposal, along with good judgement and training, to determine the appropriate course of action. There are many other tools onboard the AH-64D that are used in combat; the FCR is never used by itself to just "scan and spam" Hellfires. Nor do fighter pilots simply fire BVR missiles at every radar target that appears in front of them.

[Moxica]

1 hour ago, Raptor9 said:

As stated in this thread and several others, the AH-64D FCR (or any radar system for that matter) has no way of knowing what targets are dead or alive. The implication of such is outside reality.

In addition, the radar system will not blank out sections of the battlefield simply because a munition has been fired into that location. This too is beyond reality and good sense. If I was a tank commander and started seeing my vehicles getting hit by missiles, I would just radio everyone to park next to tanks that have already been hit if I knew those areas would be inhibited from being fired on.

Pilot's are not just button-pushers. They must have situational awareness of the battlefield and use all available sensors at their disposal, along with good judgement and training, to determine the appropriate course of action. There are many other tools onboard the AH-64D that are used in combat; the FCR is never used by itself to just "scan and spam" Hellfires. Nor do fighter pilots simply fire BVR missiles at every radar target that appears in front of them.

Than what is the point of marking target with an "X"? Just to fire next one on the same spot, when there still are some unmarked, live AAA just nearby?
I don't get it. I've seen three out of four hellfires hitting the same spot seconds apart.

[Raptor9]

The X symbols let the crew know where they have fired a missile, so they can perform Battle Damage Assessmemt after the fact (which is why these locations are sent in a BDA report). It doen't mean targets at those locations are dead, it means that is a location at which BDA should be performed following a missile engagement.

Again, these are all tools to provide the crew with information, so the crew can decide what to do because the FCR cannot determine such things. You can change the scan zone size, move the scan zone, change the priority scheme, use PFZ/NFZs, etc, if you want to isolate specific areas that you haven't engaged yet to avoid double-tapping the same area. But even so, if you see an X symbol underneath an FCR target after performing a subsequent scan, nothing is stopping you from pressing the NTS button to skip that target.

The FCR is not a super-sensor. It cannot record a history of what has happened on the battlefield, it can only show the pilots what targets it has found on the most recent scan with an appropriate priority ranking. The crew must still use discretion and judgement before launching munitions.

[Moxica]

I understand what you are saying, Raptor, and thank you for patience and time.
What I find "illogical" (according to the descriprion about prioritzing), I can explain with an example:
Six targets in a PF. I fire six missiles in quick succession after a single scan.
FCR skip to next target after I fire, and I wait for solid square before firing again.  (I cant separate single targets in that cluster on the FCR screen, overlapping each other)
Three missiles hit same target, leaving two AAA units unharmed.
In other words; FCR prioritize same target thrice. Unless, of course, it is the limas themselves going for that metal chunk.
But then again; Why do they miss completely when the INU is out of whack?
I guess it will be easier when the link function become available. ..and the target could be lased?
 

Edited January 11 by Moxica

[Grennymaster]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Moxica:

I understand what you are saying, Raptor, and thank you for patience and time.
What I find "illogical" (according to the descriprion about prioritzing), I can explain with an example:
Six targets in a PF. I fire six missiles in quick succession after a single scan.
FCR skip to next target after I fire, and I wait for solid square before firing again.  (I cant separate single targets in that cluster on the FCR screen, overlapping each other)
Three missiles hit same target, leaving two AAA units unharmed.
In other words; FCR prioritize same target thrice. Unless, of course, it is the limas themselves going for that metal chunk.
But then again; Why do they miss completely when the INU is out of whack?
I guess it will be easier when the link function become available. ..and the target could be lased?
 

 

dont forget that the FCR is not a guidance system. its "only" an aquisission source. The Lima still uses its own Rader for hitting the Target. The FCR is prioritizing mostly correkt. But we dont have the Link system now, so you cannnot correct the FCR Data.

In an RL Scenario the crew is trying to stay hidden as long as possible. But there is a militäry doktrin: Effekt comes before coverage. So if you really need to take out speziffic targest first, you have to use the K.

[Raptor9]

3 hours ago, Moxica said:

FCR skip to next target after I fire, and I wait for solid square before firing again.  (I cant separate single targets in that cluster on the FCR screen, overlapping each other)
Three missiles hit same target, leaving two AAA units unharmed.
In other words; FCR prioritize same target thrice. Unless, of course, it is the limas themselves going for that metal chunk.

The FCR does not prioritize the same target multiple times. The FCR just sends the target location to the missile (same as if you lased the target using the TADS to send the target location to the AGM-114L). The missile itself finds the target on its own, which is how it achieves its "fire and forget" ability. If there are many targets clustered in close proximity, multiple AGM-114L missiles may lock onto the same target as each other, regardless of the prioritization order of the FCR. If you have a bunch of vehicles parked closely together, a laser-guided AGM-114K would probably be better if you want to destroy a specific target out of the group.

It would be like if your wingman stored a specific truck among several parked next to each other, and then sent you the target point. When you slaved your TADS to the location and saw a bunch of trucks around your TADS crosshairs, for all you know it could have been any of them and you may shoot a different one than what he originally stored as a target point. The same concept applies; the AGM-114L itself may acquire a different target than you originally selected on the FCR page due to the close proximity to other targets.

3 hours ago, Moxica said:

I guess it will be easier when the link function become available. ..and the target could be lased?

1 hour ago, Grennymaster said:

But we dont have the Link system now, so you cannnot correct the FCR Data.

There are apparently some misconceptions on the LINK function as well; the LINK function simply provides a quick and easy way to slave the TADS to the location of the FCR's current target. However, the FCR and TADS do not correlate target data or operate together, LINK just gives the crew a method of handing off a target detected with one sight to the other sight, so the target can be acquired using the other. But if the intent is to designate the target with the laser, only the CPG can do this and only when the CPG is using TADS as his sight. The addition of LINK will not change this, nor will it change how the FCR functions.

[Moxica]

Thanks again, Raptor!
-Much appreciated.

[Grennymaster]

vor 5 Stunden schrieb Raptor9:

The FCR does not prioritize the same target multiple times. The FCR just sends the target location to the missile (same as if you lased the target using the TADS to send the target location to the AGM-114L). The missile itself finds the target on its own, which is how it achieves its "fire and forget" ability. If there are many targets clustered in close proximity, multiple AGM-114L missiles may lock onto the same target as each other, regardless of the prioritization order of the FCR. If you have a bunch of vehicles parked closely together, a laser-guided AGM-114K would probably be better if you want to destroy a specific target out of the group.

It would be like if your wingman stored a specific truck among several parked next to each other, and then sent you the target point. When you slaved your TADS to the location and saw a bunch of trucks around your TADS crosshairs, for all you know it could have been any of them and you may shoot a different one than what he originally stored as a target point. The same concept applies; the AGM-114L itself may acquire a different target than you originally selected on the FCR page due to the close proximity to other targets.

There are apparently some misconceptions on the LINK function as well; the LINK function simply provides a quick and easy way to slave the TADS to the location of the FCR's current target. However, the FCR and TADS do not correlate target data or operate together, LINK just gives the crew a method of handing off a target detected with one sight to the other sight, so the target can be acquired using the other. But if the intent is to designate the target with the laser, only the CPG can do this and only when the CPG is using TADS as his sight. The addition of LINK will not change this, nor will it change how the FCR functions.

yeah thats what i meant with correct was a bit unclear written sry