Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
In each case, the pilot presses Consent whenever he consents, and the bombs drop when the program determines that the bombs should drop. I see no inconsistency.

This is baaaad design.

So you're telling me, that your sw would without any problems drop the bombs 15s after the pilot pressed the pickle button?

You're creating possible unwanted weapon release scenarios just because you're lazy to hold thep button for 5seconds.

Posted

If that's how you feel, then you change the consent window to be as small as needed for the bomb to be prepared much as in the current version...say 5 seconds. You state the pilot has to hold it for 5 seconds, then suggest that the flaw is he can press it 10 seconds before THAT. Why? I'm saying you can just make that 5 second press into a tap 5 seconds before the bomb drops. No one is saying the pilot consents a week prior to release and trust that the software will conduct the entire campaign for you.

 

EDIT: Apologies to SH for blowing your mind with this post.

Posted

All this chat reminds me of the bombs from 'Free Running'

i.e. "Ok bomb, now drop and go do your thing"

Bomb " Sorry I can't do that"

"what but you're a bomb"

Bomb suddenly realises it's conciousness, thinks it's God and blows up. Classic.

Posted

There are irreversible physical (and potentially software or other hardware) processes that happen during this activation. And for whatever reason, automatic activation to the end may not be desirable.

 

Just because you (or anyone else on this forum) doesn't know why, doesn't mean the system is incorrectly programmed or designed. It just means they've already thought of things you don't even have a clue about ;)

 

If that's how you feel, then you change the consent window to be as small as needed for the bomb to be prepared much as in the current version...say 5 seconds. You state the pilot has to hold it for 5 seconds, then suggest that the flaw is he can press it 10 seconds before THAT. Why? I'm saying you can just make that 5 second press into a tap 5 seconds before the bomb drops. No one is saying the pilot consents a week prior to release and trust that the software will conduct the entire campaign for you.

 

EDIT: Apologies to SH for blowing your mind with this post.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted (edited)
There are irreversible physical (and potentially software or other hardware) processes that happen during this activation.

 

Yet the pilot can cancel release by letting go prematurely. Please link me to the secret forum so I can gain a "clue" into the dark underworld of bomb release software, where variables and anti-variables have to be kept seperate lest they collide into pure variation.

 

EDIT: You could even have a "cancel" voice command if you are so sure about the dangers of quick buttons. You can make the system function EXACTLY AS IT DOES NOW except for the part where the button must be held. I honestly can not state this any simpler, and it's repeatedly met with confusion. I guess I DON'T have a clue, I will stop posting now...I concede defeat to my audience, but not to my idea.

Edited by Seanner
Posted

Join the USAF or one of their weapons contractors.

 

Yet the pilot can cancel release by letting go prematurely. Please link me to the secret forum so I can gain a "clue" into the dark underworld of bomb release software, where variables and anti-variables have to be kept seperate lest they collide into pure variation.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D

I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Posted

Love armchair general theorists.

 

Ofc his system's better than what the military has come up with. It's so obvious and logical from sitting behind your 24" screen playing a sim.

 

Seanner - I dare you to write a proposal to the USAF with your ideas - with Skynet, Star Trek, computer AI included. So Data has a brain - wth can't we do it too.

 

I'm sure they'll take it seriously and under advisement and try not to chuckle... much.

Posted

Man, you would be a bad sw designer.

 

1)You are sacrafising safety (the biggest concern when it comes to weapon delivery) for your, not even real pilots, cofmort. Delivering munition is very serious business. When live munition get off the store, it can ruin a day for someone you didn't intend. Your SW has to be therefor 100% sure that the pilot does want that munition to come off at the time it's comming of, not 5s before. There is no safer way then to have the pilot hold a simple button for the entire time.

It cannot take wild guesses from arbitraty parameters like g-load, bank angle... how does your sw know that the pilot is actualy aborting the attack and not just toss bombing?

 

2)You make the system very hard to read for the user. The pilot have no way to recognize if the sw is really following his intention to abort the attack.

 

3)You limiting user options (only be able to press pickle button 5s before release in ccrp) to workaround your sw design flaws.

 

4)You are making SW that is uncessary complex for such a critical task as weapon delivery. Added complexity is something that can result in unpredicted scenarios, coming either from design flaws or system failures, and that is something no sane army would accept.

 

5)You're taking control from the one responsible for the weapon delivery. Your sw doesn't see, doesn't reason, it isn't even responsible for the consequences. The pilot sitting there is, he's the only one that can say wheter or not that bomb should leave the store. And he's telling that by pressing the button, not by flying in straight line.

 

6)You clearly missunderstood what is the job of a fire computer. It's job is to deliver bombs, when the pilot says they should be delivered. Not to second guess the pilot, if the pilot is not pressing the button, he doesn't want those bombs to go off... simple.

 

If a pilot is dumb enough to forget to hold the release button for 5seconds and gets the store hung, then the pilot is to blame, and not the SW doing it job, making sure the bomb doesn't come off when the pilot doesn't tell it to.

Posted

EDIT: You could even have a "cancel" voice command if you are so sure about the dangers of quick buttons. You can make the system function EXACTLY AS IT DOES NOW except for the part where the button must be held. I honestly can not state this any simpler, and it's repeatedly met with confusion. I guess I DON'T have a clue, I will stop posting now...I concede defeat to my audience, but not to my idea.

 

If the system you're suggesting is exactly the same now but with a voice command cancellation then it'd still result in a hung store - it's already been stated that once the process begins it can't be aborted. So what's the difference between what we have now and starting the process as opposed to starting the process then yelling out "abort, abort... arghh".

 

Or do you mean voice activated cancel on a quick release - wouldn't that then defeat the purpose of having a quick release? You'd have to be pretty damn quick to yell out if that quick release is pressed and has now dropped your ordnance. Maybe a "Cooommme baaaack" voice command?

Posted
If the system you're suggesting is exactly the same now but with a voice command cancellation then it'd still result in a hung store

 

Alright I broke my promise to not respond. What you said is exactly it. It WOULD still result in a hung store. THE IMPROVED SOFTWARE DOES NOTHING OTHER THAN REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT TO HOLD THE PICKLE. (It can do more as I've suggested, but as a bare minimum it is strictly an improvement.) The launch can still be canceled, and will still result in the same issues as before.

 

Join the USAF or one of their weapons contractors.

 

I was active enlisted for 3 years (palace chased to reserves) as an analyst, or "Maintenance Data Systems Analyst" which in theory means I run all kinds of fancy studies and use statistics to prove that certain parts break too much or whatever, but in practice means I create pie charts for the MXG commander to look at. There were ~7 other people in the office, and the job could be done by just me. The cause of this discrepancy in potential vs actual work is once upon a time computers weren't powerful and widespread, and it took a whole team of analysts (pie chart makers) to make enough pie charts on giant sheets of paper to send out across the squadrons for everyone to look at each day. Nowadays you press ctrl+c ctrl+v and update your excel sheet in 3 seconds, and bam new pie chart, then click send to all and you're done. There is about 1 hour of work a week, but the air force never changed its manning requirements. Actually there used to be 6 hours as it took a lot of manual labor to do the delayed discrepancy report, but I wrote a program to automate it ;)

 

I would appreciate you stop throwing around impressive sounding acronyms like "USAF" as if it somehow wins the argument single-handedly. Yes, the USAF is powerful ... primarily because of the engineers that design technologically superior aircraft ... but that doesn't mean there aren't obvious flaws in what they do.

 

The other good one is the usage of B-1s at Al Udeid to suppress individual terrorists (and therefore the associated vast KC-135 support, the costly repeated engine failures on the poorly designed aircraft, etc.). The threat level is sufficiently low that you could use a P-51 and strafe the guy. They actually used to use mere F-16s for the job, but the wing commander when I was there happened to be a B-1 pilot. Needless to say my questions as to why we were using B-1s for a task better suited to an A-10 of all things (I didn't ask them to the wing commander of course) were met with an effective "I'm a Major and you are enlisted." In this case I DON'T have enough facts, and maybe the threat of terrorism is deemed so high that having a supersonic strategic bomber tasked to killing a random guy with an AK with a bomb is warranted...but that's why I asked the question at least. Didn't get a real answer...

Posted

How about the military then? Or Department of Defense, or Pentagon or actual weapons systems engineers and contractors?

 

Forgive me if I throw more weight behind the acronym USAF rather than "Seanner".

 

But your arguments tend to go off in different directions. There are flaws everywhere in every organisation in every work sector.

As has been stated numerous times if you seriously think that your proposals are better and haven't been canvassed before then draft up a report and submit it to the US... er military contractor/Pentagon/DoD for appraisal.

Posted (edited)
"I'm a Major and you are enlisted." In this case I DON'T have enough facts

 

There is an epidemic of opinion lacking factual basis these days. One good example is the PC user that 'fancies himself a hacker' because he downloaded some warez. He is fully confident that if he could sit down with Bill Gates for 30minutes he could clear up this whole Windows blue screen problem.

 

You were an enlisted analyst who 'could run the office alone' and didn't need those officers? Well sir, I would respectfully suggest that the good Major was trying to teach you something that you would do well to contemplate: We all have our place, and no amount of spontaneously acquired perceived knowledge, or experience, will change that... and that's ok. We should be who we are the best that we can, rather than doing a halfassed job of being someone else.

 

RFPs are not only filled by contractors, they're analyzed by unbiased military and civilian engineers. The philosophies behind their engineering practices are not those of non-DOD engineers. They're not centered on 'user friendly functionality'. They're built around combat effectiveness and safety. (anyone who's ever done a transatlantic hop in a jump seat will agree emphatically)

 

It reminds me of someone that stopped by my MP server last night. He said that he hated manuals and was perfectly capable of figuring out 100% of the A-10C platform without reading a word. (right after he asked me to talk him through coord input).. BOY.. he sure said THAT in the wrong server :) .

 

Have you put any thought into the MidgetPod?

midgetPod.jpg

Edited by StrongHarm

It's a good thing that this is Early Access and we've all volunteered to help test and enhance this work in progress... despite the frustrations inherent in the task with even the simplest of software... otherwise people might not understand that this incredibly complex unfinished module is unfinished. /light-hearted sarcasm

Posted

For all those who are arguing about these "irreversible process" during a hung store, do you realize you can reload a hung store in the air?

 

If the store is "hung" because you lifted up the pickle button too early, you can reload this store through the DMS inventory page and then reuse it. I haven't needed to use this since beta 4, but it's been built in to the simulator. I can't tell you the exact software details that happen with this...perhaps it essentially reboots the weapon. However, it can be done.

 

Now if the store "hung" because of a mechanical failure of separation, that's another story.

Posted
But I mean for weapons that do require a laser, why then would you manually fire it over using auto?

 

There may be an marginal increase in accuracy by lasing manually. In CCRP mode, the release point is essentially that of a dumb bomb and at the maximal fall range for the bomb. The guidance system maneuvering during the bomb's fall uses energy and as a result the bombs have a tenancy to fall a bit short.

 

If I recall correctly, auto lasing starts at impact -12 seconds. If you're initial drop is accurate enough so that the bomb guide and correct to the target in less than 12 seconds, then you can turn to laser on later in the bombs flight. This adds up to less time with the guidance finds maneuvering the bomb and wasting energy.

 

In my my experience, the LGB's in the sim are quite accurate with auto lase and typically I only activate the laser to range a target on the TGP to improve my target point.

Posted (edited)

Wags put up a video during beta3. Not sure if this still works. I think I had a CBU105 hang once since beta. After reloading it, it didn't realign and wouldn't drop.

 

Edited by StrongHarm

It's a good thing that this is Early Access and we've all volunteered to help test and enhance this work in progress... despite the frustrations inherent in the task with even the simplest of software... otherwise people might not understand that this incredibly complex unfinished module is unfinished. /light-hearted sarcasm

Posted
If the store is "hung" because you lifted up the pickle button too early, you can reload this store through the DMS inventory page and then reuse it. I haven't needed to use this since beta 4, but it's been built in to the simulator.

The sim does make some concessions to gameplay though. For example, setting the height of function and RPM of CBUs can be done through the inventory page in the sim, but that's not how it's done in real life.

 

Not being a military pilot of any description, I don't know how hung stores are really handled. What I've read has lead me to believe the functionality exists to give you an option to try to re-use a store in an emergency, rather than something to be done by routine. Normally you'd just ditch the weapon somewhere safe, or bring it home and let the experts deal with it.

 

In a game there's no problem with resetting it, but in real life, if there's even a 1% chance the weapon is now confused and will do Really Unexpected Things when/if it gets released, you simply wouldn't use it.

 

THE IMPROVED SOFTWARE DOES NOTHING OTHER THAN REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT TO HOLD THE PICKLE.

And you still haven't explained why you think this would be an improvement. What is the problem with simply holding down the button until the weapon activation cycle is completed? Why do you think this would be an improvement? My earlier comments about the complexity of such an undertaking weren't to suggest that it couldn't be done, but that it would be far harder than you seem to suggest.

 

Again, why make a simple, understandable, virtually fail-safe system into something far more complex, in order to solve a "problem" which doesn't, as far as I can tell, actually exist? How often do pilots actually "slip with their finger"? I can't believe such a trivial non-issue made it into a 7-page thread. I guess I'm not helping. :D

It can do more as I've suggested
Your suggestions for future improvements had nothing to do with the mechanism used by the pilot to target and release weapons.
Posted

The one way I know to use CBUs after they've hung (since I don't think reseting is possible since beta) is to do selective jettison with options; armed and n/t. Not accurate though as you don't have the CCRP pipper when in selective jettison. I dropped 4 CBU-105s using this method on a battlefield from 5k doing 180kts.. I got lucky and did some serious damage.

 

I would have been more accurate if I'd fit the MidgetPod™

midgetPod.jpg

It's a good thing that this is Early Access and we've all volunteered to help test and enhance this work in progress... despite the frustrations inherent in the task with even the simplest of software... otherwise people might not understand that this incredibly complex unfinished module is unfinished. /light-hearted sarcasm

Posted
Wags put up a video during beta3. Not sure if this still works. I think I had a CBU105 hang once since beta. After reloading it, it didn't realign and wouldn't drop.

 

 

Page 291 in the manual is what you are looking for. There have been some additions to the procedure since that vid I guess.

 

"In addition to using DSMS Inventory to create virtual Training payloads, the other two most common

uses for these pages are to clear hung station errors and setting the burst height for cluster bombs.

Clear Hung Station. This is a common error when the pilot does not hold down the weapon release

button long enough when dropping a bomb. This warning and ability to use the weapon is resolved

by reloading the hung station. This is done by:

1. Press DSMS INV (OSB 5)

2. Press the OSB (1 - 11) that corresponds to the hung station.

3. Press the OSB that corresponds to the store class of the hung weapon.

4. Press the OSB that corresponds to the type of hung weapon.

5. On the store page, press LOAD (OSB 9) to reload the station.

6. Press STAT (OSB 1) to return to the main DSMS page.

Note: After clearing a hung IAM loaded store, you will then need to reset the power to the station in

the STAT page and then reload ALL from the DTS page to make the weapon functional again"

  • Like 2
Posted

Resetting the power to the station was the step I was missing. Once again, thanks WarriorX.

 

If we could get funding for the midgetPod™, I could have leaned out and asked him. Midget knows...

It's a good thing that this is Early Access and we've all volunteered to help test and enhance this work in progress... despite the frustrations inherent in the task with even the simplest of software... otherwise people might not understand that this incredibly complex unfinished module is unfinished. /light-hearted sarcasm

Posted

I only knew the answer because after being caught in a trance by the sight of your impressive MidgetPod, the number 291 came into my head as if he was talking to me....I don't think we yet know or understand the full capability of the MidgetPod.

Posted

could you use the midget as a muntion?

 

DTOS midgets on the bad guys? you both seem to know more about this secretive technology, hence my asking.......

Action After Contemplation

Posted

Tutorial is up for the Hung Stores Procedure: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1142155#post1142155

 

Feedback as always is welcome, if anything needs changing or correcting, sound off!!

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...