DCS A-10C QUESTIONS

[JayPee]

Pardon me for using the wiki but I didn't feel like Googling any further right now.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infra-red_search_and_track

 

As it says, an IRST system 'can' use a laser as a rangefinder. However, even if it is the case, I doubt a rangefinding laser is strong enough/of the right type to be detected by an LWS system. A rangefinding laser is a different one from a targetting laser used to paint targets for missiles and other sensors to pick up. The more knowledgeable should chime in if this is not correct.

[sobek]

However, even if it is the case, I doubt a rangefinding laser is strong enough/of the right type to be detected by an LWS system.

 

The ranging laser must be strong enough for the reflection to be detected by the ranger's own sensor, so it is pretty much a given that the energy density on the target is high enough for it to be detectable.

 

It is more a question of the LWS system's capability than overall technical feasability. It certainly is feasible.

[shagrat]

I guess the point is he couldn't "see" a SU-27 sneaking up on him on the RWR. As I'm quite sure the EOS (OLS-27) does not have a laser range finder?

[Flagrum]

Hrm, seems I wasn't flying the Hog for too long ... so to add to the overall confusion: does the A-10C even have LWS capability? Is the functionality combined with the IR/MWLS?

[sobek]

Hrm, seems I wasn't flying the Hog for too long ... so to add to the overall confusion: does the A-10C even have LWS capability? Is the functionality combined with the IR/MWLS?

 

Yes.

[sobek]

I guess the point is he couldn't "see" a SU-27 sneaking up on him on the RWR. As I'm quite sure the EOS (OLS-27) does not have a laser range finder?

 

Such a system would be pretty much useless without a rangefinder. What principle it is based on is a different question, but laser is most likely.

Edited December 28, 2014 by sobek

[shagrat]

Well, the PIRATE in the Typhoon/Eurofighter has no Laserrangefinder, it uses the 2D IR detection and computer math to extrapolate range and course information AFAIK, I don't know about the OLS-27 specifically, but PIRATE is said to be able to identify(!) enemy fighters at over 50 Km distance so what useful addition would a laser bring, apart from guiding/target illumination? As well as it would give away your directoon and maybe even your distance.

So assuming the EOS 'can' be used with a laser range finder, I guess it is more likely used for accurate measuring of a gun solution in dogfight or for target illumination, and not for long distance range measuring as it would compromise the whole EOS/IRST idea.

By the way, the LWS on the A-10C is working in sim. It shows even Tanks that use laser to target you quite ok, if you fly in a way the laser hits the sensors... at least it did during A-10C beta and in release version.

 

EDIT just read up a bit on the OLS-27. The laser range finder is indeed used for tracking a target! So if it is in STT it should emit a a tracking laser, even over a bit larger distance... the PIRATE is different in that regard.

Yet a SU-27 would need to be in the correct angle and bearing to the A-10 LWS to show on the RWR, (usually lower or same height and not directly beneath)

Edited December 29, 2014 by shagrat

[arkroyale048]

I haven't flown the Hog in a while... just an occasional milk run or two.

 

But I do seem to recall an L appearing on the RWR (no sounds) when I'm being lased by IFV's with TOW missiles.

 

 

Weird thing is; if the Su-27's EOS has laser rangefinding. Shouldn't it appear on the A-10's RWR as well ?

 

On a side note; when I was being tracked by an Su-27 in the Ka-50; my LWS went off.

 

So...

[Zee Pet]

The mystery intensifies? Personally I think it would be good for the sake of realism that it's ammended , but its prety nit-pickey. In all the time I've had flaming cliffs, its been pointless to stealthy stalk a slow moving hog. Also I know that if it did give an indication, I'd end up on both sides eventually both decrying and vociferously advocating for its implementation(if it is in fact RL behaviour) can of worms I guess. Yeiks.

[whartsell]

Most likely the discrepancy is due to the laser wavelength

[Zee Pet]

That's what I resigned myself to.

[sobek]

Most likely the discrepancy is due to the laser wavelength

 

Unlikely, i guess it is an omission in the sim.

[BabaGanoosh]

Quick question about landing patterns:

 

In the manual it tells me I should be descending at 300 ft for every mile traveled when in the pattern. Does anyone have a handy formula to calculate your descent rate in ft/mile?

[whartsell]

For a standard 3Deg approach your vertical speed should be 5x your indicated air speed. So if your approach is at 120 Kts your vsi would indicate 600 FPM. Another trick in your head is to put a 0 after your indicated speed and divide by 2. This is easier for some people. E.g. 120 becomes 1200 then divide by 2 = 600

[PFunk1606688187]

Another trick in your head is to put a 0 after your indicated speed and divide by 2. This is easier for some people. E.g. 120 becomes 1200 then divide by 2 = 600

Or divide 120 by 2 and add a zero. Same diff.

 

I generally don't calculate descent rate though, usually instead focusing on the AoA indexer and the TVV. Put the TVV on your touchdown zone, make changes to power, configuration and trim to get yourself to approach speed using the Indexer while keeping that TVV at -3 degrees and on the touchdown zone. Good technique sees you have the indexer with the donut and the 'too fast' hash mark up until flare with your flare bringing you to a solitary donut on the indexer meaning on speed.

 

However for low visibility approaches without an ILS calculating the number is nice.

[JayPee]

I'd recommend to not constantly calculate. Instead, pre-calculate what your height should be at 5nm, 4nm, 3nm, etc. If you start to continuously cross check your instruments you'll end up loosing your situational awareness and that might be even more dangerous than flying visually without checking a single instrument.

[Loz]

For a standard 3Deg approach your vertical speed should be 5x your indicated air speed.

 

I think the vertical rate of descent should be approximately 5 times you GROUND SPEED for a 3 degree approach. :)

 

But even more accurate would be GS x5 plus 10%.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Loz

[shagrat]

Well, green Donut and speed 130-140 on end of final approach and 120-130 on touchdown... get her on the glidepath, keep speed and AoA and your doing fine... I know there is a lot of theory and math about the "correct" approach, but most of the time I simply use AoA, speed indicator, and Eyeball Mk I with a little bit of gut feeling.

Works quite well, actually. ;)

[GeneralDynamics]

Hi guys, I've been away from DCS A-10C for a while, but I've recently gotten back into it much deeper now. I've been studying and applying what I've learned, can start the aircraft from memory now, and I'm really enjoying testing the waters in missions. That's where I have a question. Was working on the Hideout mission last night, got the radios down, navigation etc... When I was over the target area, I had the targeting pod set as SOI, set a BTR-80 (I believe it was) as SPI with point track. I radioed my wingman and requested he attack ground targets at my SPI with missiles. He acknowledged, and then every time he would fly off across the border into Russia and get hammered with SAMs and I'd have to tell him to rejoin to get him out of there. Same behavior if I told him to attack from the east or default direction. I ended up having to take out all the targets myself. If I simply told him to go after targets of opportunity or air defenses he'd get some of them but would generally get himself into trouble as a result. Is there something fundamental I'm missing when instructing my wingman to attack my SPI? The good news is, I got through the mission without a scratch, RTBed and landed... Mission Complete! I was stoked, and I know that this will certainly generate some eye rolls, but it was a big deal to me. Finally getting the hang of how everything works and I'm loving it. Just need to sort out why my wingman decides to head out to parts unknown, however. Can anybody offer any suggestions regarding what I may be doing wrong? Thank you!

[KaspeR32]

I believe you can have your wingman attack from a specified direction. (From the north, from the south, etc) Also, having them in a holding pattern pretty far from the target area would help also.

[shagrat]

Hi guys, I've been away from DCS A-10C for a while, but I've recently gotten back into it much deeper now. I've been studying and applying what I've learned, can start the aircraft from memory now, and I'm really enjoying testing the waters in missions. That's where I have a question. Was working on the Hideout mission last night, got the radios down, navigation etc... When I was over the target area, I had the targeting pod set as SOI, set a BTR-80 (I believe it was) as SPI with point track. I radioed my wingman and requested he attack ground targets at my SPI with missiles. He acknowledged, and then every time he would fly off across the border into Russia and get hammered with SAMs and I'd have to tell him to rejoin to get him out of there. Same behavior if I told him to attack from the east or default direction. I ended up having to take out all the targets myself. If I simply told him to go after targets of opportunity or air defenses he'd get some of them but would generally get himself into trouble as a result. Is there something fundamental I'm missing when instructing my wingman to attack my SPI? The good news is, I got through the mission without a scratch, RTBed and landed... Mission Complete! I was stoked, and I know that this will certainly generate some eye rolls, but it was a big deal to me. Finally getting the hang of how everything works and I'm loving it. Just need to sort out why my wingman decides to head out to parts unknown, however. Can anybody offer any suggestions regarding what I may be doing wrong? Thank you!

No, that is a typical problem with AI. Your AI Wingman doesn't know about the "Russian Border" in the briefing etc.

So he just complies with your orders and tries to fly a standard attack pattern.

 

One reason flying with human wingmen in multiplayer is far more fun... :music_whistling:

[Yurgon]

As was already said, the AI in DCS is far from perfect. There may be some tricks that work, but those can easily change with an update, so basically you just have to develop a feeling for how to use them. But I'd be lying if I said that I could proficiently manage my AI wingmen.

 

The good news is, I got through the mission without a scratch, RTBed and landed... Mission Complete! I was stoked, and I know that this will certainly generate some eye rolls, but it was a big deal to me.

 

I know exactly how you feel. :)

 

I think Hideout is a particularly well designed mission, and the first two or even three times I made it all the way through I felt a huge amount of accomplishment. :thumbup:

 

One reason flying with human wingmen in multiplayer is far more fun... :music_whistling:

 

Unless they get bored and start shooting at you (yes, I'm talking about you, audax! :music_whistling: :D)

[GeneralDynamics]

Thanks so much for the input, guys! Very much appreciated - I'll try specifying different attack approach directions and pay more attention to the layout of the target area. Maybe there's one that will work besides default or east.

[QuiGon]

Like others aid: The AI has some huge flaws, so I can only recommend to give multiplayer a try. It's far more fun than to struggle with the retarded AI. :thumbup:

[PFunk1606688187]

I'd recommend to not constantly calculate. Instead, pre-calculate what your height should be at 5nm, 4nm, 3nm, etc. If you start to continuously cross check your instruments you'll end up loosing your situational awareness and that might be even more dangerous than flying visually without checking a single instrument.

 

Not to be too harsh, but thats basically the antithesis of good pilot habits. Scanflow of all instruments is essential and in the A-10 at least the HUD is not a primary instrument. As such the core 5 instruments embedded in the centre of the front console are positioned specifically to aid the scanflow during high stress piloting situations such as low vis approach. The HUD is certainly a factor but when it comes to basic visual or instrument approaches situational awareness is gained more from the instruments than just looking outside. Visual you want to blend what you see with what your instruments tell you, but in zero vis there's nothing for you but the instruments.

 

Good habits during good vis mean that when you find yourself 5 miles out on final in grey slop with no runway in sight you aren't struggling to find the info you need to stay 'on the wire'.

 

As for height that should be a universal. 3 degree glideslope for any given distance is always the same. Its 300 feet per nautical mile. 5 mile final is 1500 feet, 10 mile final is 3000 feet, etc. Thats simple enough to cross check with your DME. For calculations the sink rate is the only actively important variable (assuming you won't be or already have calculated approach speed based on GW) that should be different for any given approach or part of an approach since it varies based on speed which the final approach speed itself varies based on stall speed which is based on aircraft gross weight and configuration.

 

Now all those instruments we have such as the HUD with TVV and the AoA indexer allow us to 'cheat' and bypass the need to do math to find and fly to our correct position on an approach. Thats a good cheat because it lowers pilot workload and allows him to focus. However that doesn't dismiss the need to have the ability to do it without them. Thats whats called a "sanity check" most commonly. Real commercial aircraft use sophisticated GPS/INS autopilots that can fly very accurate flight paths but pilots routinely dial in the VOR and NDB radials and display them on the moving map or instruments to cross check them as a good habit and to ensure that the autopilot is functioning as instructed.

 

There are aspects of combat flying that deny the ability to cross check instruments such as NOE flying or certain tactical formation situations but in general during approach to landing instrument scanflow is a primary concern. My best advice for getting good at it is to switch the HUD to Stanby and fly without any of that green stuff. Its a whole new way to look at things and it'll make you a better pilot for it.