Tanks tougher in 1.5.2 ? A10C weaker ?

I noticed lately the A10C is feeling a little vulnerable ? been flying this some years now, since Beta in fact, even the 12.6mm hits causing massive crippling damage it seems atm ??

I am only comparing to past experience, and also compared to say the SU25T which feels like a proper armoured ground pounder ?

Also I noted when flying some practice missions, the tanks seem tough as nails, I fired at least 5 MK5's into the rear and above of T80 and T90 and hardly scratched them (barely half health on F10 map view), also many many rounds of cannon and still they live ?

The more I am getting into this plane and systems the more problems I seem to be having, completely unable to make the CBU103/105/97 to work properly, watched all the guides

Problems with Mavericks finding a lock at more than 3.5km (D and H models I usually use)....starting to wonder if my install is just broken or something tbh !

No I'm finding the same, not just you.

All of the above points Westr ?

Aim small miss small, wonder if the armor is starting to reflect reactive armor values?

I have been engaging these at between 0.3km and 1km, made them so they don't shoot back on my weapons testing mission......hence I have been in really close and dirty.

Artillery, APC's etc all act as expected, just the tanks I am experiencing this problem with, so doesn't appear to be a problem with the "Gun" ?

Max lock range with the mavericks seems to be between 3km and 5km if you are lucky, talking about the H model specifically here, and nearly always needing to go into black hot mode to acquire that lock ? this could be a completely different issue however I concede.

I've started flying the A10c about two weeks ago. Learned it inside and out. I've had times where I can take a lot of hard hits and still be functional. Other times not so much. I don't feel the plane is too weak.

Tanks - Have an insanely hard time getting guns kill on them. Seems like it takes a TON of ammo even with direct hits. I use tac view to verify. CBUs work just fine though. I make kills all the time. Just make sure they hit the target and are the variant for vehicles. LASTE wind stuff and all that jazz.

Mavericks are easy. Slave all to SPI, TMS up short until it locks. May have to hit it several times. I can make max distance shots so easy. Then of course you have force correlate for the long shots. Mavericks are still deadly.

Maybe it is just the feel of being away from the cockpit for a while. Take it up a few more times and go through some stuff. I'm willing to go up in the air with you on a mission and see. Everything is fine to me.

All of the above points Westr ?

I'm having a problem with the Mavericks and the tgp. Namely the SPI keeps moving and I find that when i slave the mavs to the spi on my tgp the spi has moved and therefore I can't lock a target. I believe this issue has been reported a lot on the A10 section of the forum. I also have found recently that it takes a lot of hitting to destroy a tank in the A-10. In my opinion I don't think this is fully accurate. I'm simply going on a book I once read about the A-10 and quoting an A-10 pilot he said you just put the pipper on the tank pull the trigger and "the thing would just explode". I believe ED were looking at weapons causing more collateral damage, weapons such as rockets for example. This may have been adjusted already.

Guess the guys need some time to get things ironed out for 2.0 they have had a lot to do recently, and well DCS A-10C is probably the best combat simulation out there even with some probs so I'm willing to forgive them :).

But yeah I'm experiencing similar things. :).

However can't say I have noticed any difference in the amount of damage that you can take.

I know I had a hell of a time in 2.0 last night taking out a T-72,I always fire at .7nm or less, took 3 passes and ~500 rounds to finally kill it. I'll double check the tacview tonight but something sure felt off.

Mavs and CBUs are working fine for me though.

I have been flying the A10C fairly regular for years, and recently around 4 hours per day semi regular, only recently started getting deep into the systems and learning the more in depth stuff.

The CBU issues, no idea if it is me or wtf is going on there, but I copied exactly what a guy was doing in a CBU lesson to no avail so far, I posted up a track in the CBU 97/105 problems thread.

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2646510&postcount=188

Re: Damage, just feels like smaller calibre weapons are disabling and heavily damaging engines and other systems much more frequently than before, could be my imagination tho I guess.

Never had an issue with Mavericks before, it was one thing I could loose easily for the last few years with no problems, now suddenly I have locking issues....using TGP and slaving to maverick, then TMS UP, but hardly ever locks, hence TMS up TMS up repeat until I can get it to bloody lock, by which time I am far closer than I intended to target !!! :joystick:

There is def an issue with Guns/Rockets vs tank strength, of that I am certain.

Just FYI: using force correlate on Mavericks to hit targets at standoff ranges is completely unrealistic because of how Force Correlate works in real life. Regarding locking range, it may have to do with the now broken FLIR implementation: you may want to try either reverting the terrain to 1.2.16 blurriness (search for gain in the broken TGP thread) or download a texture pack.

30mm rounds are exactly that: 30mm. Even at 6000rpm and high velocity the effect they have on highly armored modern tanks such as the newer variants of the T-72 and T-80 isn't that high. It's a debated point, but most of the videos of tanks literally blowing up after a few rounds are of old T-62s or even previous models.

Take a look at this official US report: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a522397[dot]pdf

Here is a quote:

The six tanks which were impacted received damage physically assessed as ranging from catastrophic in the case of two combat vehicles to negligible in the case of one tank attacked directly from the front.

That said, it's also a problem of how the DCS engine deals with damage to ground units, which is in my opinion pretty bad by the way, where units have just HP and no localized damage, and splash damage is nonexistent. The GAU-8 should have a very high disable ratio on modern MBTs, but a very low catastrophic ratio, and this can't be translated ingame because the tank is either kicking at 100% of its ability, or completely destroyed.

IMHO don't engage tanks with the GAU-8: either plink them, use CBUs, or Mavericks. The cannon is amazing against soft targets, APCs, and IFVs.

I'm having a problem with the Mavericks and the tgp. Namely the SPI keeps moving and I find that when i slave the mavs to the spi on my tgp the spi has moved and therefore I can't lock a target. I believe this issue has been reported a lot on the A10 section of the forum....

I'm not saying this is impossible as we are talking about a simulation with bugs. I've never experienced such an issue and would have to be able replicate the same error to believe that is was not user error. I've never had SPI move to something else unless I pushed a button to cycle it to something else. There are HOTAS controls to change it from TGP to steerpoint or whatnot on the fly.

I've never had it happen before.(Maverick slave issue) Ive had the A-10c for a long time now. I have only had my TM warthog this past six months. Sometimes I have some trouble selecting and making a particular mfd SOI with the TM warthog, using the correct switch long will make it SOI, however it sometimes just changes the display on the MFD as if I'm just using short. If I restart the mission the problem goes away, and I'm back to normal again. It maybe a problem with my TM warthog. I wonder if anybody else has had issues using the TM warthog?

I've never had it happen before.(Maverick slave issue) Ive had the A-10c for a long time now. I have only had my TM warthog this past six months. Sometimes I have some trouble selecting and making a particular mfd SOI with the TM warthog, using the correct switch long will make it SOI, however it sometimes just changes the display on the MFD as if I'm just using short. If I restart the mission the problem goes away, and I'm back to normal again. It maybe a problem with my TM warthog. I wonder if anybody else has had issues using the TM warthog?

It actually is an 8-way switch, and whenever you hit one of the diagonals (which is pretty easy to do by mistake because of how the throttles are always angled differently) the game always interprets it as a short command.

I know there is actually a solution that involves using the TARGET software, but I personally found that by selecting what feels slightly towards the upper right (or left) position instead of only the right (or left) position actually lets it register correctly nine times out of ten.

It's pretty awkward to explain it in words.

I know I had a hell of a time in 2.0 last night taking out a T-72,I always fire at .7nm or less, took 3 passes and ~500 rounds to finally kill it. I'll double check the tacview tonight but something sure felt off.

 

Mavs and CBUs are working fine for me though.

Looked at the tacview. First run I hit the tank 134 times. Second run I hit 122 times. Third run was 201 rounds.

These were all rear aspect runs under .7nm.

Ridiculous.

I have to confirm: Targeting is harder (slave issue) + distance have to be shorter 40% and tanks are harder. Also A10C seems to be hit once by tank gun to get plane disable. Whatever the weather there is something not right, specially distance of targeting using mavericks. Most annoying thing is that I cannot lock targets using mavericks as it was in 1.2 Targets are almost not visible to SPI/TDP.

Take a look at this official US report: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a522397[dot]pdf

 

Here is a quote: That's one third catastrophic and one negligible on the front armor, and we're talking T-62s here: I can just guesstimate how the numbers would drop even more with the more advanced T-72s and T-80s.

Probably no different since the roof/side and rear armor have little difference between T-55/62/64/72/80/90. All ~30mm/80mm/45mm respectively. And its just steel, no reactive armor is mounted on the roof or rear and usually only the front half of the side has reactive armor.

I take some solace in not feeling alone with my teething problems tbh.....

I just watched a guide on forced correlation and more success locking them, felt more like it used to be, but now need to apply memory muscle to get the routine smooth again.

I have been totally out of luck with those CBU's, and they look so awesome :(

Some interesting posts here, thanks for the input everyone.

Well I just tried my training mission scenario again, done nothing different that I can see, and blow me down I got the CBU103 &105's working no problem :mad: , happy but concerned as I don't know if I was doing anything wrong, which leaves room to screw up again I guess.

One thing I do note is that the guide I am watching has full CCRP with the countdown, mine appears to be in manual mode, and not sure how to actually change that ? I have to press and hold one the range ticker comes between the makes on the reticle ?

Watching this guide here......

[ame]

Well I just tried my training mission scenario again, done nothing different that I can see, and blow me down I got the CBU103 &105's working no problem :mad: , happy but concerned as I don't know if I was doing anything wrong, which leaves room to screw up again I guess.

 

One thing I do note is that the guide I am watching has full CCRP with the countdown, mine appears to be in manual mode, and not sure how to actually change that ? I have to press and hold one the range ticker comes between the makes on the reticle ?

 

Watching this guide here......

 

You can change between CCRP and CCIP on the weapon profile page. You can also do it manually with the master mode button. The 103s/105s can only be used in CCRP.

I didn't watch the full video but he goes super in depth with it. CBUs, use CCRP mode for easy deployment. Worst thing to worry about is wind. If you do a proper CCRP mode and the wind is not an issue..it will hit. You can use LASTE wind profiles if you want to drop it with high winds.

While i know how to use LASTE, i usually don't have to. If the wind isn't too bad I can drop accurately. If it is decent I can adjust by manually selecting up wind of the target on TGP first.

Just keep practicing. You may not know why you messed up at first. You might find out later. You'll learn to do it the right way. Can be as easy as forgetting one step.

Looked at the tacview. First run I hit the tank 134 times. Second run I hit 122 times. Third run was 201 rounds.

 

These were all rear aspect runs under .7nm.

 

Ridiculous.

DAMN!!! That is ridiculous... your Tacview data really tells the story.

Is there a way to submit your findings to ED? Sure seems to be a serious problem!

I'm a rookie but from what I've seen, a post like yours with solid findings in a thread like this isn't enough for ED to take notice. Or they do take notice and just don't post a reply to acknowledge it. I just don't know much about the process.

Mike

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. System specs: Windows 7 Pro, EVGA X58 3x classified 3 MOBO, i7 960 @3.2Ghz, 24Gb Ram, Nvidia EVGA GTX 780ti with 3 Gb VRAM.

DAMN!!! That is ridiculous... your Tacview data really tells the story.

 

Is there a way to submit your findings to ED? Sure seems to be a serious problem!

 

I'm a rookie but from what I've seen, a post like yours with solid findings in a thread like this isn't enough for ED to take notice. Or they do take notice and just don't post a reply to acknowledge it. I just don't know much about the process.

 

Mike

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk. System specs: Windows 7 Pro, EVGA X58 3x classified 3 MOBO, i7 960 @3.2Ghz, 24Gb Ram, Nvidia EVGA GTX 780ti with 3 Gb VRAM.

Well what's odd is I just checked another tacview from an earlier flight where I killed a T-90 in a single pass, it was hit 166 times. It was also a rear aspect pass under .7nm. Seems odd it worked that time on a tougher tank.

Deezle: That's the weird thing, I have always been in CCRP mode ? is there a documented manual CCRP mode and then the automated mode to press and hold and release with the countdown timer ala GBU ? not had this ever come up with GBU's and have nearly a flawless hit ratio with those suckers in normal weather conditions ?

@OJ: Yes, I will try and build on this experience at least and figure out wth is going wrong if I can :thumbup:

Deezle: That's the weird thing, I have always been in CCRP mode ? is there a documented manual CCRP mode and then the automated mode to press and hold and release with the countdown timer ala GBU ? not had this ever come up with GBU's and have nearly a flawless hit ratio with those suckers in normal weather conditions ?

 

@OJ: Yes, I will try and build on this experience at least and figure out wth is going wrong if I can :thumbup:

CCRP with the GPS guided bombs is a little different than how it works with the dumb bombs and LGBs.

[ame]

I've noticed the tanks seem harder to kill with the GAU-8 as well. It was really noticeable yesterday during the Georgian Hammer campaign when I fired all of my CM rounds on a single T-72 and didn't get a kill. Then I commanded my wingman to engage him with cannon and with rounds on target from my wingman, he still was standing. I have a screenshot of the T-72 on the TGP MFD with 30mm craters all around it.

I don't even bother engaging tanks with the GAU-8 anymore because the machine gunners are dead accurate. I'd rather do a gun run on a ZSU-23 than on a tank.