Bafffled by my sudden failure with CCIP bombing

[Bahger]

I used to be very capable with bomb delivery via CCIP but after a long break I'm having inexplicable problems.

 

Basically, I run in at 8 - 10,000ft by the HUD (i.e. MSL) and do what I always did before: power off at 3.8nm from the target, steep nose down to where the pipper shows up at about 50 degrees below the horizon, power smoothly back in as I pull the nose up and pull the pipper through the target.

 

The problem is, the pipper seems latched to the bottom of the HUD no matter how aggressively I push the nose down.

 

I'm wondering if the default IFCC settings might have changed in a patch?

 

Also, the in-flight altitude settings in the ME are very odd at the moment. I do not understand how, or if, the AGL to MSL "conversion" works in the ME.

 

Am I missing anything obvious here?

[Korn]

Maybe you're using the Mk-82Air? They are specifically designed for high drag; either deploy them in slick mode or use the non Air variant.

[Wayc00lio]

Nah, that won't be it. Bahger has been around a while and will know what bombs he's dropping. I'm pretty sure of that!

 

@ Bahger, have you changed or looked at the 5 mil/3-9 settings? Maybe they need looked at??? Clutching at straws here........

[Bahger]

No, I'm using non-balluted Mk-82s and CBU-87s and 97s. I think I've just lost the knack for the moment. A lot depends on when you add power in the dive and how hard you pull back. It's the combination of those things that keep the pipper in view and "walking" onto the target as you add power. My muscle-memory of the whole thing has gone so completely that I began to think the settings were wrong (i.e. no "CLM" escsape maneuver in the bomb profile). as I say, though, I think it's operator error. Got to get it back, as humble CCIP is about flying the aircraft, not pushing buttons.

 

EDIT: Thanks Wayc00lio, I appreciate the vote of confidence. I feel like an idiiot, I had this down. I looked at the delivery consent options; it still defaults to manual release, which is what's needed...

Edited January 25, 2013 by Bahger

[Wayc00lio]

NP mate :-)

 

Nothing worse than skill fade. If it is just lack of practice then I'm sure you'll get it back in no time!

[Eddie]

The parameters you describe don't quite add up, a 3.8Nm base is way too far out for any dive delivery you'd want to perform in the Hog and more than double the desired base distance for a 45HADB, which would have a base altitude of just over 11,000ft AGL. So I don't see how you can be using a 3.8nm base distance and 10,000ft base alt for a 50 degree dive, you'd aiming well short of the target that way.

 

Can you post a track so it's clear what you're actually doing and how, it would be easier to offer advice then.

[Bahger]

Hey Eddie, thanks for chiming in, I've used your training materials extensively in the past.

 

I will post a track, or better still, a FRAPS capture of a track. So that I can use your recommended numbers alongside mine, what base altitude, base distance at nose-down, dive angle and entry speed do you recommend?

[Eddie]

It all depends on what delivery you want to perform..........

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=99688

[Bahger]

OK, I'm going to try your 82 30HA6 profile (8.8kft/275kts/1.9nm). What is Initial Aim Off Angle and Track Altitude and where on these useful charts is the target dive angles in degrees below level flight noted, please, or is this a dynamic/variable value?

Edited January 26, 2013 by Bahger

[Eddie]

IAA is the angle between the target and the aim off point (AOP) at track altitude.

 

Track altitude is the altitude at which you should be wings level and established at the desired dive angle and heading, and the pipper begins tracking up to the target.

 

The dive angle is at the top of each sled, in the profile name. In the case of the example you chose above, it is 30 degrees, hence 30HA(DB)

 

A selection of demonstration videos can be seen at the youtube link in my sig if you want to see "live" examples.

[WildBillKelsoe]

Not to surmise on Eddie's posts, but as you dive, trim NOSE DOWN, and balance by pulling back on stick for 1.0 G on final. This is from Andy Bush himself.

 

 

I give the nose down trim button a couple of clicks to offset the nose up trim change that occurs as the airspeed increases in the dive. If the aircraft is to be slightly out of trim, I want it to be nose down, not up. I can hold the stick steadier if the stick is heavy rather than light.

[patton]

CCIP still valid?

 

Is CCIP really a valid method of attacking a target anymore? Given the mission of the A10c is CAS, do you really want to use a Mk82 in CCIP mode? Is this a weapons release method that you guys still use a lot or is it just a legacy system? Thoughts?

 

P.S. This question includes the even more inaccurate CTR modes. :book:

[Eddie]

CCIP is, and always will be, the primary aiming method used when delivering unguided munitions.

[Bahger]

To me, CCIP bomb delivery is an essential technique to learn in this a/c; it's the A-10's most basic function and the method of weapon delivery that requires the most airmanship, as opposed to button-pushing.

[Leeham]

To me, CCIP bomb delivery is an essential technique to learn in this a/c; it's the A-10's most basic function and the method of weapon delivery that requires the most airmanship, as opposed to button-pushing.

 

To that end, is CCIP-CR considered 'non-standard'?

[Headspace]

I'm doing a tutorial video for this. CCIP works best when you start from a manual bombing profile--using the venerable "bomb triangle" that is more than 60 years old. I've scripted an automated method to gather ballistics data for the mk82 for profile generation. There are a bunch of real-world tables floating around, but they're almost certainly not matched to what you see in the game. In DCS, every munition is identical--in the real world that isn't the case.

 

As I understand it, some online squads have done similar things already and have bombing profiles set up to use. There are some standard ones out there that you can do a forum search for.

 

In a nutshell, if you follow a profile correctly, the pipper will walk where you need it to and you can pickle without struggling with the pipper, loading the a/c and then throwing your shot. It will feel way more intuitive.

 

A big problem with doing this in a game is that you're getting no haptic feedback as to how the A/C is loaded. 4G in real life is not trivial, yet most players don't know that they're at other than 1G in the game unless they actually look at the accelerometer. In reality, a pilot will know when the A/C is loaded by feel, and can concentrate on other factors. You don't have any backup senses in a game other than your eyes.

Edited January 27, 2013 by Headspace

[Bahger]

I'd be very interested in seeing your tutorial, Headspace, thank you; might you post a notification in this thread when it's available? I'm looking forward to learning CCIP "the right way"; I had it down before my hiatus but it was too improvised, my approach was too high and the exposure over the target too great. I want to roll in semi-inverted like in Eddie's videos and learn to fly different profiles by the numbers.

[Headspace]

I'd be very interested in seeing your tutorial, Headspace, thank you; might you post a notification in this thread when it's available?

Sure, in the meantime I would look at the videos Eddie linked.

 

If I didn't think it was something a layperson could learn to do in the game, I wouldn't make a tutorial for it. It's just one of those things that takes practice.

[Eddie]

There are a bunch of real-world tables floating around, but they're almost certainly not matched to what you see in the game. In DCS, every munition is identical--in the real world that isn't the case.

 

The attacking planning system we have in the 476th uses the same ballistic data and calculations as the USAF's CWDS. And it matches weapon performance in DCS almost perfectly, certainly more than closely enough for any virtual pilot out there. Quite a testament to the quality and accuracy of the weapon and flight models in DCS really. Although, that said, the old 1980s data floating around from early A-10A documents isn't quite as accurate.

 

Good luck with the tutorial, if I can help out in anyway just let me know.

[Headspace]

The attacking planning system we have in the 476th uses the same ballistic data and calculations as the USAF's CWDS. And it matches weapon performance in DCS almost perfectly, certainly more than closely enough for any virtual pilot out there.

Is that published somewhere? (edit: Unless it has to do with FalconView, in which case I probably already know what you're talking about) I would like to compare it to what DCS is showing me.

 

It is probably the case that any offsets are not big enough to be a factor.

Edited January 28, 2013 by Headspace

[soupyc]

I would also be very interested in your tutorial Headspace.

[Headspace]

I was going to do an instrument approach tutorial and then I thought it might bore a lot of people. So I figured I would come back after two years to do a tutorial that more people would find useful and do the instrument one later.

[Wayc00lio]

Me too!!

[patton]

Yeah, where have you been Headspace...I miss your excellent videos. Make more:pilotfly:

[Bahger]

OK, I'm getting my CCIP mojo back. Eddie -- or anyone else -- how do you judge the offset angle when running in to allow for the semi-inverted pull down?