Target diamond

[BOPrey]

Is the target diamond realistic? It doesn't seem to be an in game feature as I cannot turn it off from Options.

[S77th-konkussion]

It's intended to simulate ground units "laising" a target that is critical to the successful completion of a mission. I suppose it's not terribly realistic...you're not usually employing laser guided weapons. The mission creator sets up the targets to be marked ahead of time, it's an option only to him.

[Laivynas]

Fly Su-25 :)

No diamonds at all! ;)

[VapoR]

Fly Su-25 :)

No diamonds at all! ;)

 

True, but you DO get a bearing and distance to the next designated target on your HSI (when in 7--ground attack mode).

[bSr.LCsta]

this started bothering me too, so now when I make missions I put intel in the briefing and omitt the target diamond. Makes it more challenging.

[DayGlow]

It's intended to simulate ground units "laising" a target that is critical to the successful completion of a mission. I suppose it's not terribly realistic...you're not usually employing laser guided weapons. The mission creator sets up the targets to be marked ahead of time, it's an option only to him.

 

Even if you aren't using LG weapons, most ground attack aircraft do carry a marked target seeker. I agree that the SU25 HSI is bit of a stretch though.

[BOPrey]

this started bothering me too, so now when I make missions I put intel in the briefing and omitt the target diamond. Makes it more challenging.

 

Is this done through not setting the target in the mission builder? If so, how do you get the AIs to attack the targets? I guess it wouldn't be a problem if you are the only one doing the attack runs.

[Roman G]

I was wondering about how realistic the target diamond is too. If somebody know please let us know too ...

 

From technical point of view - it is doable. For that the aircraft needs either good inertial navigation system, or GPS receiver, or local radio based positioning system. Then it has to have database of targets coordinates and short program which projects the diamond for the selected target on the HUD. Coordinates might be already known for static things like buildings - for vehicles they can be retrieved from spotters or ground radar or AWACS. If the target is moving - then I don't know how the target diamond can be kept on target without datalink from AWACS or external radar ....

[BOPrey]

I too have no problem with the diamond for stationary targets; but for moving targets, I just have a very hard time figuring how it works in real life.

[WhiskeyRomeo]

I too have no problem with the diamond for stationary targets; but for moving targets, I just have a very hard time figuring how it works in real life.

As long as you have someone painting a target with a laser the PavePenny seeker doesnt care if its moving or not and will throw the diamond steering cue up on the HUD. Even if the A-10 has no LGBs on board its still possible to get target diamond cues to help the pilot spot & attack the target.

The "realism" issue requires a "leap of faith" that you have someone (TACP, FIST, etc) out there with a laser "spotting" for the A-10s. The A-10 pilots may need initial guidance to get into position where the PavePenny seeker can pick up the laser reflected energy.

[GGTharos]

Right, the problem is that it's not something or someone that can be destroyed, lose LOS to the target, and the diamond can be spotted form ANY angle and range as opposed only havving a 20 deg angle visibility and only a say 10-20nm detection range, if that. Aircraft can't do it to confirm target, yadda yadda.

 

Big leap of faith. BIG.

[SUBS17]

A stationary target could be pre-programmed into the navigation system of the aircraft. The target can also be designated by observers on the ground or in the air such as a Kiowa, longbow, or UAV or even another aircraft. Realistically in an F-16 you might get cues in the HUD as to such targets if they are predetermined before takeoff. Also would probably appear on a/g radar. Moving targets could still be on the hud if the target is being tracked by a/g radar in GMT mode.(such as Falcon 4) I notice the one FAC tool we have is yet to feature in any online missions, can anyone think of what that could be? Of all flight sims I've played FC/lockon has the best an most accurate map and navigation features on the map. So long as I have a grid coordinates of a target, I can find it and take it out.

[MBT]

I think the diamond is a substitute for what we'd all like: a more communicative environment. In real life I reckon you'd have more information coming from the guys on the ground, particularly if you were on CAS duty, you'd have some sort of FAC or Air Liason guy helping you surely?

 

The trouble with the diamond is it removes the possibility of the pilot mis-identifying targets.

[BOPrey]

The trouble with the diamond is it removes the possibility of the pilot mis-identifying targets.

 

I suppose the ground troops are not going mis-identifying targets. Going back to the original topic. If the target info (moving or stationary) is received with some kind of "help", I rest my case. This is obviousely better than a ground AWACS.

[SUBS17]

The smoke effects from the WP rockets are good, but I notice it doesn't kill igla operator eventhough white phos burns people pretty bad. Maybe it could have the same effect as the chemical weapons used on the SU25 B8 rockets. The ones with orange smoke. They kill igla operators in FC, both can be used to mark targets but you need something like an F-15E or F-16 to do the buisness.

[EvilBivol-1]

Yeah, I've always disliked the diamond, especially when it comes to moving targets... its ridiculous! When I design missions I simply set coordinates as targets. If a convoy is in question, I set two coordinates along the road to estimate the convoy's range of locations at the time of ingress. Of course this doesn't work too well for the AI, but its great for multiplayer.

[Roman G]

As long as you have someone painting a target with a laser the PavePenny seeker doesnt care if its moving or not and will throw the diamond steering cue up on the HUD. Even if the A-10 has no LGBs on board its still possible to get target diamond cues to help the pilot spot & attack the target.

The "realism" issue requires a "leap of faith" that you have someone (TACP, FIST, etc) out there with a laser "spotting" for the A-10s. The A-10 pilots may need initial guidance to get into position where the PavePenny seeker can pick up the laser reflected energy.

 

I presume that it is quite safe for spotters to "paint" things like bridges and school buses with laser painter, but I think the spotter would be asking for a LOT of trouble if he is painting something like a tank for more than about 30 seconds. I think that any tank not older than 20 years has warning system which alert's the crew about being painted and it should not require much more complicated sensor on the tank to find out exactly where the laser source is. I wouldn't be that much surprised if most modern tanks have this function (to kill laser source) fully automated.

 

So yes, it is not hard for an aircraft to put a diamond over laser-painted target - but I don't think this is the case in real life. Especially in LOMAC you can have about 10 targets where you can place your diamond on all the time - in real life that would mean that ALL targets would need to be constantly painted ALL the time.

[BOPrey]

I think that any tank not older than 20 years has warning system which alert's the crew about being painted and it should not require much more complicated sensor on the tank to find out exactly where the laser source is. I wouldn't be that much surprised if most modern tanks have this function (to kill laser source) fully automated.

 

A lot of tanks now have anti-laser source capability.

[WhiskeyRomeo]

I presume that it is quite safe for spotters to "paint" things like bridges and school buses with laser painter, but I think the spotter would be asking for a LOT of trouble if he is painting something like a tank for more than about 30 seconds. I think that any tank not older than 20 years has warning system which alert's the crew about being painted and it should not require much more complicated sensor on the tank to find out exactly where the laser source is.

I don't think the LockOn era armor have the Active Protection Features available now to the best modern main battle tanks. The best they had were Laser warning recievers and passive countermeasures (like smoke). They still had to search and locate the laser teams visually and even then might not be able to reach out to get them.

Some of the best current MBTs have some active Laser countermeasures and better passive abilities too. I've read about systems that use a tank mounted laser to engage the LDT equipment optics (including collateral damage to operator eyeballs).

 

Even the best current active countermeasures have "counter-countermeasures" that keep the effectivness of LGWs high.

A "10 second call" to shift the laser onto the target is still effective even today.

Tank crews have even been known to bail out as soon as they get a laser targeting warning so the offset and shift procedures are used a lot. Rumors are that some SOF types used a laser to get a tank crew to bail out even without having any aircraft or LGWs on hand.

As mentioned above its not neccessary to "paint" the target to help an aircrew locate a camouflaged target and attack with CBUs or Mk82s, etc.

These are "real world" tactics and procedures and are used all the time.

Special Operations forces & Rangers are especially adept at getting behind the line to designate important targets for air interdiction missions. TACP (USAF air support) and FIST (USA direct and indirect fires) are the sharp point of the laser spear.

 

For A-10s the target diamond is realistic (within the limits of the game).

I'm not sure about the target diamond for other flyables in the game but I think most forces probably have some similiar capabilites.

OK, there are laser range and angle issues in the game that aren't modeled 100% correctly. But thats also the case with so many aspects of real operations vs this game. Its just too hard to model all the actual tactics & procedures and so compromises have to be made.

In my option ED came up with a reasonable compromise (as far as the A-10 goes) to give us an option to enhance game play. And it is an option - use it if you want. It's not large a stretch of reality as are so many other aspects of the game.

 

If your "sense of doctrinal purity" requires it throw in a Bradley APC to act as a FIST for CAS, a Hummer to act as a TACP, or orbit a chopper to use as laser source. Write a mission scenario that has SOF or Rangers behind the line for your interdiction missions. Do what ever you need to make your missions fun or interesting to the players.

[WhiskeyRomeo]

I thought I'd be able to dig out an A-10 HUD camera video I saw a while back that showed the pilot cycling between several laser designated targets (by changing the laser codes). It clearly showed the tgt diamond moving between the different targets (as in LockOn). The live fire exercise mission was for an F-16 to drop several LGBs on the same pass and hit multiple targets (each with a seperate laser designator and laser code) and for the A-10s to follow on and mop up the area. There was also a HUD video for the F-16 which was very interesting.

 

So far I havent been able to dig them out. Seems a lot of the websites I used to cruise have dropped into the never-never land of .Mil only domains. I'll ask around and see if I can't locate them.

[SUBS17]

Theres a technique that is used to hit two targets in one pass with LGBs using just the aircrafts laser designator. With buddy lasing from another aircraft more targets are achieveable in that first pass than two.