cannot reproduce Please fix Maverick cursor sensitivity!

[Hyperlynx]

Mav slewing is WAY more sensitive than TGP, FCR, datalink etc. It makes them very difficult to use, especially considering what a pain it is to boresight and use the TGP instead (which isn't your fault, that's how they are).

This is trivially reproduceable, a track file should not be necessary, but I can supply one if you need.

[BIGNEWY]

Hi, 

we are not seeing any issue here, have you tried adjusting your curves to suit your preference? 

thank you 

[skywalker22]

Indeed is very sensitive, hard to direct small amounts. I use analog stick on Thrustmaster TWCS. We have been discussing this in the past, but nothing has been done yet. I also struggle slewing the Mav around, despite trying numerous of curves adjustments.

The problem is, you have to be very precise with slewing around, and most of the time you don't have much time for adjustments, and you simple circle around the target (overshooting most of the time).

[Furiz]

I agree, the slew rate of TGP is different than what we have with Maverick, Maverick slew is faster and its making it very hard to make small corrections.

If he adjusts the curves to make Mav slew rate acceptable it will make slew rate of TGP very slow...

 

[skywalker22]

59 minutes ago, Furiz said:

If he adjusts the curves to make Mav slew rate acceptable it will make slew rate of TGP very slow...

Exactly.

ps: I am glad someone brought this one up again. I hope now ED does something about it.

Edited February 1 by skywalker22

[Gilligan]

I had a similar issue with my original input setup. The MAV definitely slews at a different rate than the TGP/other sensors (Radar), and I had trouble making fine enough adjustments to use them effectively. Not disputing if this is an accurate recreation or not, but I did find it difficult.

 

My personal solution may not suit everyone, but I bound a second input for TDC slew with a  much slower curve.

 

I have a TM 16000M throttle with a "Coarse/Fast" TDC slew curve on its joystick, and a WingWing F16EX with a "Fine/Slow" curve on it's thumb joystick.

 

If you are limited to once TDC slew input then this may not work, but if you have second input option this may be worth a try.

 

 

Edited February 2 by Gilligan

[Furiz]

7 hours ago, Gilligan said:

I had a similar issue with my original input setup. The MAV definitely slews at a different rate than the TGP/other sensors (Radar), and I had trouble making fine enough adjustments to use them effectively. Not disputing if this is an accurate recreation or not, but I did find it difficult.

 

My personal solution may not suit everyone, but I bound a second input for TDC slew with a  much slower curve.

 

I have a TM 16000M throttle with a "Coarse/Fast" TDC slew curve on its joystick, and a WingWing F16EX with a "Fine/Slow" curve on it's thumb joystick.

 

If you are limited to once TDC slew input then this may not work, but if you have second input option this may be worth a try.

But that is not the solution,

The solution is that ED adjusts and slows down the slew rate of Maverick missile, which is making it very hard for us to target anything.

[Hyperlynx]

16 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Hi, 

we are not seeing any issue here, have you tried adjusting your curves to suit your preference? 

thank you 

As stated: mavericks slew faster than TGP, FCR, HTS and HSD. If I adjust the axis curves, I'd be adjusting it for all of these sensors as well. There is no problem slewing those sensors.

I've just recorded a short demonstration. See attached track file and video demo at

Note in particular when I have the TGP on wide and zoomed all the way out. At this point the zoom level of the TGP and the mav on the WPN page are about the same. I can easily slew the TGP smoothly back and forth and over the end of the runway where the target is. On the other hand, I struggle to get the maverick to point at the same location, because the cursor is so much more sensitive (though I get there in the end). Again: please note that these are the same axes.

e: actually, I noticed something a little odd. When I was slewing the TGP, without stopping the slew input, I pressed DMS to cycle to the WPN page, and the mav did seem to slew at the same rate. But, when I stopped the input and tried again, it jumped back to slewing much further than the TGP.

maverick sensitivity.trk

Edited February 2 by Hyperlynx

[SpecterDC13]

In your video I can tell you need to adjust your curves still because you are only getting a max slew rate of 7 on your TGP. It should be going to 9. 

Not at my computer at the moment but give me a few and I will show you what I am talking about.

[SpecterDC13]

Alright, hopefully this might help someone.

Default values will/should allow you to slew full rate with all sensors and the Maverick but is very touchy and sensitive.Maverick Sens Default curve.trknull

 

With a curve of 30, you maintain full rates through all sensors and the Maverick, and it is very controllable as you can see in the track. If you need it to be less sensitive still, I would not pass 50 for your curve. 

Maverick Sens 30 curve.trk

 

What I saw in the video from the guy who posted it, is his max rate on the TGP only got to 7. Not sure if he was full deflection on what he was using but I was only able to achieve this with a Y sat of 75. This obviously is not idea as you will lose out on a lot of freedom over the sensors in term of speeds/control.  I am running with the F16EX setup, but when I use to run the TM Warthog this was a problem with the mini stick, and I had to adjust the saturations quite a bit to achieve full rates with my sensors.  So, if you adjust only the curve and still notice some "jumpy/twitchy" movements and you are not achieving full rate on your TGP then only then adjust the saturation.

Maverick Sens Default curve 75 Y Sat.trk

 

To make sure you are getting full rates across all sensors use the TGP as it gives you the indication #L/R/U/D as you see in my tracks. 

[Hyperlynx]

I don't remember if I was pushing the TGP as hard as I could. I feel like I was using very gentle motions for both, at least when trying to line up the target at the end of the runway.

For what it's worth, I'm using a WinWing Orion 2 throttle with F-16 attachment.

 

Anyway, the thing is, they should be slewing at the same rate regardless of what my axis settings are

Edited February 3 by Hyperlynx

[SpecterDC13]

1 hour ago, Hyperlynx said:

I don't remember if I was pushing the TGP as hard as I could. I feel like I was using very gentle motions for both, at least when trying to line up the target at the end of the runway.

For what it's worth, I'm using a WinWing Orion 2 throttle with F-16 attachment.

 

Anyway, the thing is, they should be slewing at the same rate regardless of what my axis settings are

Why should they slew at the same rate? They are not designed the same. The Maverick seeker sits on a gimbal controlled by gyros which arent the best, outdated, and very easy to mess up. That is why when you are maneuvering hard and fast you should not have the wpn page up or wpn pwr on as this would mess up the boresight of the maverick. This is why the uncage feature is there. Also, the same reason you arent suppose to takeoff with the TGP out of standby or the maverick pwr on and wpn page up as well. Damage to the gyros could occur. Now that isn't all modelled in DCS but I do know pulling a lot of G's over time will mess up the boresight alignment on the Maverick so there is a small amount of detail there with how the gyros interact with the weapon itself.

The TGP gimbal/gyros are much newer and better than the maverick's which is why it is easier to control. Also, zoom plays a factor as well. The more zoomed in you are the more fine movements you can make as seen in the tracks I posted. The maverick does not zoom as much meaning small fine movements will translate into a decent amount of movement in the image you see. Which is why I suggested the curve to make it less sensitive and easier to control the finer movements that you are trying to achieve. 

I have the WinWing F16EX HOTAS with the Orion 2 throttle setup as well and do not have a problem slewing the maverick. Adjusting the curve itself will not effect how fast you can slew the TGP or maverick. It is only adjusting the sensitivity and how quickly you reach the slew rates. And if you have a deadzone on it I would take it off as that is not going to help you.

Should be noted as well that the WinWing grip's RDR cursor is very free in movement compared to the real aircraft's RDR cursor. To remedy this I added two of these (the black ones) which helped stiffen up the RDR cursor thumbstick on the grip itself making it feel closer to the real thing. Not saying you have to do this but I did and have been able to get very movements quicker and more easily. I took them out for those tracks I made though.

https://www.amazon.com/KontrolFreek-Precision-Assist-Control-PlayStation-Controller/dp/B08TRMS8PS/ref=asc_df_B08TRMS8PS/?tag=hyprod-20&linkCode=df0&hvadid=475858350123&hvpos=&hvnetw=g&hvrand=18055223619493420539&hvpone=&hvptwo=&hvqmt=&hvdev=m&hvdvcmdl=&hvlocint=&hvlocphy=1022649&hvtargid=pla-1186136705027&psc=1&mcid=eb3a1a6294fc39d0a645122eb9ac135a&gclid=CjwKCAiAjfyqBhAsEiwA-UdzJDLgpfuMjLqbcoDodaqjJBPq7B5X1jPZapPYifQiDjYvZSsGY0YB0xoCslYQAvD_BwE

 

[Hyperlynx]

I see. So they genuinely are crappy, and the solution is genuinely to reduce sensitivity of the axes

[SpecterDC13]

38 minutes ago, Hyperlynx said:

I see. So they genuinely are crappy, and the solution is genuinely to reduce sensitivity of the axes

For the Mavericks we have yes. If we got the G2 or K2 then you would see a slight improvement but the D, and standard G and K are quite old. The USAF has slowly been phasing them out due to multiple factors and ease of use is one of them. Ive talked with plenty of the pilots I work with and they all say that the maverick is/was the hardest weapon they had to use. Plus due to some countries upgrading SAMs and MANPADs it is not a viable weapon anymore to bring into combat for modern day at least. But yes, I highly suggest tweaking the curve. I would not touch the saturations. 

[Hobel]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Hyperlynx:

I see. So they genuinely are crappy, and the solution is genuinely to reduce sensitivity of the axes

Why not use the TGP to control the Maverick and then do a handoff?

[Furiz]

If its like that IRL I have no complaints.

[skywalker22]

Just now, Furiz said:

If its like that IRL I have no complaints.

Me neither, although I find it strange that the Mav slewing would be that imprecise.

[Hyperlynx]

1 hour ago, Hobel said:

Why not use the TGP to control the Maverick and then do a handoff?

Because to do that you have to boresight them first, and to do that you have to get a lock, and that's hard to do with the crappy sensor and the crappy slewing.

Not to mention, boresighting only works for the exact range you were at when you applied it. If you're further out or closer in, it'll be off.

[SpecterDC13]

1 hour ago, skywalker22 said:

So IRL they also reduce the axes sensitivity on the hotas of F-16 so the pilots can used the Mavs?

Kidding a bit, but this is surely not a solution.

If you felt and used the real RDR cursor on the F16 you would understand where Im coming from. Adjusting the curve actually makes your hardware closer to the thing as from my experience our sim hardware we get is not up to par as the real thing. The real thing is much stiffer and far easier to control things with finer movements.  You should see in-sim the difference not just with the TGP but using the HUD to slew the Maverick around you will notice it does not move like the Maverick image on the WPN page. When you control the Maverick directly is when you notice it the most as the input is going directly to the wpn and not just being transfered or translated to the maverick. In my tracks even with the curves set to 30 it is still a bit jumpy and i have to really focus and give the smallest amount of movements in order to make fine adjustments. But i dont have to focus as much with the TGP. If we had a company make an actual 1:1 replica of the real life throttle grip oh man it would be amazing. Its hard to decribe but slewing things around even something like the markpoint in the HUD just moves so smooth and even moving it a hair is so precise. But then you slew the Maverick screen and you can tell a difference that you arent really controlling something that is part of the jet. 

 

You can see in this video when he starts to move it the seeker almost looks like it floats as he is trying to get onto another target. That is the gyros slowing the seeker and the pilot has to fight that essentially any time he moves it. So small movements is always key. At least our seeker dont float that bad...yet lmao. And this is on an A10 as well. 

 

This video definitely shows what Im talking about with the floatiness of the seeker. Now imagine being told to use this as your targeting pod, which A10 pilots were told to do during ODS 

https://youtu.be/zCTG8wcUUy8?si=W-KzAMFUyGmb3IBl

[Hyperlynx]

As it happens, my curve was 30 something, though I had the ends chopped off. I've set it to 35.

I'll also try those precision rings you mentioned, specially since they make it closer to the real thing. Cheers.

[SpecterDC13]

1 hour ago, Hyperlynx said:

As it happens, my curve was 30 something, though I had the ends chopped off. I've set it to 35.

I'll also try those precision rings you mentioned, specially since they make it closer to the real thing. Cheers.

For sure. Those precision rings help a tone. Im trying to find a better solution to stiffen it up but nothing yet. Im sure I will find a better solution.

[Chibawang]

All due respect, I think you're overcomplicating the subject and causing needless confusion. The point is there is an obvious problem with slew rate on the mavericks being much higher than the other sensors. Seeker instability is a separate issue, I don't even believe that is modelled. Hardware parity is also a separate issue, but concessions sometimes have to be made for home hardware use. ED does this all the time. But again, I don't think that's relevant to this whatsoever. 

[skywalker22]

22 hours ago, SpecterDC13 said:

You can see in this video when he starts to move it the seeker almost looks like it floats as he is trying to get onto another target. That is the gyros slowing the seeker and the pilot has to fight that essentially any time he moves it. So small movements is always key. At least our seeker dont float that bad...yet lmao. And this is on an A10 as well. 

This video definitely shows what Im talking about with the floatiness of the seeker. Now imagine being told to use this as your targeting pod, which A10 pilots were told to do during ODS 

I do not see any "floatiness" of the seeker head of the Mav from this video, or maybe I am not looking for the things you do. But the thing is, actually what I can see from this tape, that the pilot could slewed the seeker head around with way more precision then we can with ours in DCS. The movement seems to be way more precise and controled. This is not the case with ours.

1 hour ago, Chibawang said:

 Seeker instability is a separate issue, I don't even believe that is modelled. Hardware parity is also a separate issue, but concessions sometimes have to be made for home hardware use. ED does this all the time. But again, I don't think that's relevant to this whatsoever. 

I also belive that instability is not modelled in DCS, which is more the case then slewing around IRL.

[Chibawang]

52 minutes ago, skywalker22 said:

I do not see any "floatiness" of the seeker head of the Mav from this video, or maybe I am not looking for the things you do.

I THINK he refers to the cross dropping down low as he pans right, and he has to go a bit further than the target and then up/left to correct. But again, this is totally irrelevant to the issue being reported.

Edited February 4 by Chibawang

[SpecterDC13]

3 hours ago, skywalker22 said:

I do not see any "floatiness" of the seeker head of the Mav from this video, or maybe I am not looking for the things you do. But the thing is, actually what I can see from this tape, that the pilot could slewed the seeker head around with way more precision then we can with ours in DCS. The movement seems to be way more precise and controled. This is not the case with ours.

I also belive that instability is not modelled in DCS, which is more the case then slewing around IRL.

https://youtu.be/zCTG8wcUUy8?si=W-KzAMFUyGmb3IBl

This video shows it better than the first which I did put in that one reply you quoted, but it was at the bottom. But let me explain what I am looking at. But I promise you, that movement you see is not very precise or controlled. 

Between 0:19 to 0:23 seconds you can see how he is going from left to right/up and down but as he makes direction changes it sort of floats then moves in the opposite direction. 

From 0:24 to 0:28 seconds you can see as he is trying to make small adjustments to get over the target, it pretty much floats or sways right past it. And at exactly 0:27 seconds he gets the seeker close enough and does TMS up to lock. As it locks you can see the pointing cross, the smaller + symbol, lag behind. Remember, the pointing cross shows the relative bearing between the LOS of the missile seeker and the longitudinal axis of the missile. Essentially, telling the pilot exactly where the seeker of the missile is pointing in relation to the actual missile. This is why it is important to make sure the pointing cross is inside what is called the keyhole.  But, in that exact instance, you can see the pointing cross lag behind indicating that the seeker had stopped and the torquer motors (which control the up/down/left/right) had to be stopped again by the braking mechanisms. These braking mechanisms act like brakes on your car, they help slow the seeker down, and once the seeker is stopped, they hold it in that position. If more movement is needed in the tracking state, then the guidance unit takes over control of the torquer motors to maintain track on the target. If you are constantly slewing around the seeker these brakes are not going to be activating very often resulting in a floating seeker/image.

That is what I am referring to. And from the pilots I spoke to back in 2022 when I loaded these onto F-16s, that is exactly how they describe it. Mavericks are complicated to use for that very reason. That is why most of the time they employed them they did so using BORE mode. 

5 hours ago, Chibawang said:

All due respect, I think you're overcomplicating the subject and causing needless confusion. The point is there is an obvious problem with slew rate on the mavericks being much higher than the other sensors. Seeker instability is a separate issue, I don't even believe that is modelled. Hardware parity is also a separate issue, but concessions sometimes have to be made for home hardware use. ED does this all the time. But again, I don't think that's relevant to this whatsoever. 

I am not overcomplicating anything or causing any confusion on the matter. I am simply stating my real-world experience with the aircraft controls as well as knowledge on the missile and how it works. In my opinion, the AGM-65 for the F-16 is probably the closest thing to the real-world counterpart. For the cursor itself, the rate of cursor movement is a function of the force applied to the controller. A steady controller tilt causes a constant rate of cursor movement. Increasing or decreasing controller tilt causes a corresponding increase or decrease in cursor movement up to the maximum or minimum allowed. Generally, the cursor moves across the SOI display at a constant rate for a given force as follows: 
Slewing is optimized for the closest ground stabilized symbol (A-G TD-box, steerpoint diamond, offset aimpoint triangle, pop-up point, and steering circle) within the HUD FOV (if any) and the closest in range outside the HUD FOV (if none are within the FOV).
The closest slewable HUD symbol moves over the HUD at a constant angular rate despite the range to the point on the ground.
Cursors for target acquisition, GM, and slewable ACM move over the MFD at a constant linear rate despite the selected radar range scale.
TGP LOS is slewed at a constant angular rate for a given FOV (slower rate applies to smaller fields-of-view).
AGM-65D or G, LOS is slewed at a constant angular rate for a given FOV.
HSD, HAD, and HAS cursor movement mimics the CRM/TWS cursor movement.

So yes, certain things inside the jet have a slightly different slew rate depending on if it is angular or linear. I can tell you from personal experience that slewing the TGP vs slewing the Markpoint cursor in the HUD, feel very different from each other regardless of being controlled by the same cursor inside the jet. In cases with the TGP and Maverick, the FOV definitely affects how the slew rate appears to the user. The same goes for the slew rate when you are using the FCR with the EXP function selected, the slew rate is decreased by a factor of 4 when using the expand function. Not sure if they will do this, but when we get the Sniper pod, it has an option to change the slew rates.

I also believe hardware parity is definitely a big factor in this and how it feels or appears to the user. The cursor movement inside the real jet is very much a function of the force you apply to the controller on the grip. Our at-home hardware does not mimic this not even to the slightest degree. It is the same with using a full range of motion stick versus using a force-sensing stick in the F-16. Or using a stick that can do force trim for helos versus not using one. The feel of how something operates is going to be different to the user as well as appear different in most cases.