[When firing hellfire, losing the missile counter to hit why ?]

3 hours ago, Swift. said:

There are more ranging sources than laser though. I'd imagine it would give the TOF until the current ranging whether or not that's where the missile is actually going.

Yep, if you’re buddy lasing you’d ideally have a target store at the targets location. When this point is set as ACQ Source, it provides a NAV range that is used for TOF calculations. Works pretty well in the sim. 

This can of course mean that the TOF counter can be misleading if you’re shooting a MSL at a illuminated target somewhat displaced from the selected NAV Acq source (or any last entered range). 

[How to "LST" on AH-64D but from pilots seat?]

Well, it's not the proper LST function as this hasn't been implemented yet. Once it does get implemented, the true LST will only be available from the CPG seat.

However....the poor man's LST method will work from the back seat, same as front. Just WAS your MSLs and select SKR from the ACQ Source list. Once the missile picks up the laser code, you'll get the ACQ source cross jumping to it's location. It's pretty pointless from the back seat though as you have no way to act on the information, you can't lase, you can't store etc. You can fire MSL but with no range information etc, it's suboptimal. Best leave it to CPG.

This is far from a perfect solution to buddy lasing though and can be a mess with lots flipping backwards and forwards between SLAVE state, PRI, ALT codes etc. The sooner ED implement LST the better.

[Acquisition by CP/G - How does it work?]

With NVS MODE in NORM, the TADS is unavailable for use as a sight, so that's your problem. (In NVS, the TADS is being used as a 'Sensor', not a 'Sight').

Put the NVS switch to OFF, sight select TADS, and then ACQ Source to GHS. Now press the slave button and the TADS will follow the HMD.

[Master Arm switch - ARM/SIM vs off]

3 hours ago, Rubberduck85 said:

Guys/girls can we stay on topic?

This was started to understand the difference, avionics-wise, between master arm/off/sim and understand if DCS: F-16 simulates correctly.

It is not a post for sharing individual/squadron/real/realistic/anecdotal SOPs on master arm, even if they are truly interesting!

Thanks 

 

I think we’ve established that DCS hasn’t got it correct.

The correct functionality is outlined in a couple of easily found docs online, but it’s a bit of an effort to detail the specifics in a forum post. 

I imagine someone will need to PM ED to highlight again the details though….for whoever feels up to it. 

[TSD SAT Map Type renders flat grey image]

Same on Caucasus.....

Anyone tried any other map?

[Master Arm switch - ARM/SIM vs off]

15 minutes ago, Rubberduck85 said:

So the current functionality of SAFE is not correct due to that fact that shows the simbology?

Correct. SAFE should not show any CCRP/DLZ/Missile information, either AA or AG. WPN video should not show in SAFE either. 
That symbology is only shown in ARM/SIM. 

[Master Arm switch - ARM/SIM vs off]

SIM mode is not modelled in DCS. It adds ‘SIM’ to the HUD. That is all. Cosmetic.

Of course in real life it’s connected to the weapons symbology displays and video WPN page display etc. But none of that logic has been added. 

[MGRS and zulu time visible in TADS. (personally not sure if correct for our Apache version)]

On 11/2/2022 at 6:27 PM, Raptor9 said:

That's simply from the recording. It's never visible in the video source in the aircraft.

What would be nice is an implementation of the ‘Recording’ HAD message and associated TEDAC record button…It wouldn’t need to actually do anything, a fake message if you like, but for SOP / role play could be a nice low effort addition.
Not sure if you can suggest it Raptor? Thanks. 

[LOAL self designating.]

4 hours ago, Floyd1212 said:

After you launch the missile LOAL, and then lase while the missile is in the air, the constraints box goes to a large solid square to indicate there is good laser return to the seeker.  Is this indicating the seeker of the missile in the air, or the next missile on the rack?

The next missile in sequence on the rack. Once the missile has gone, it’s gone….there’s no way of telling if it’s tracking the laser spot. 

[TMS up on a SAM threat on the HSD should choose it as a steerpoint]

On 10/23/2022 at 12:24 PM, nickos86 said:

The SAM threat stored as a steerpoints. Putting the HSD cursor over it and pressing TMS UP like you do with regular steerpoint should make it your waypoint. Moreover, TMS DOWN should remove the ring and then TMS UP bring it back.

edit: @BIGNEWY,sent you a PM 

 

Yeah, this should work as you described. Although ED hasn't modeled the pre-planned threats as being actual Steerpoints yet (should they be 56-79?....I think), which until they do, TMS on the HSD symbol wouldn't mean much anyway. 

In short....it's NOT correct as is.

[Patch notes discussion thread 2022]

Just now, BIGNEWY said:

It is disappointing yes, we are all excited for the patch, but the team were not happy with final checks, so best to delay and take the extra time needed. 

Patch now planned for the 28th. 

thank you all. 

Preliminary Changelog would ease the pain. With everyone's grown up understanding that it's 'subject to change'....... How about it? Thanks.

[Any way to see targeting cursor in CP/G HUD that corresponds to CP/G's TADS?]

2 hours ago, tsgucci said:

I totally agree. Sometimes when the target is close and in an urban area where it is difficult to make a difference between the buildings I look out of the window to orientate myself and on my CPG IHAADS symbology a Cued LOS Reticle (crosshair) would be extremely helpful, to see where my TADS is looking.

I watch my tads on the TDU and I switch off (tune down) the TADS feed on the IHADSS.

Is it not modeled or even the real one did not have this feature?

Real thing doesn't have this feature.

You have to use the other tools at your disposal to build awareness of where the TADS is looking.

[Head Track symbol.]

You could also deselect ‘cueing’ from the pilots WPN-UTIL page to declutter.
But this would take away all ACQ source info…

[IDM datalink]

I wouldn’t expect it at all. 

Wag’s did mention it in passing once, but never since, and to implement it fully would be a fairly big task, and I don’t see any signs of it happening. 

[Select ACQ TADS to operate? Help!]

3 hours ago, Raptor9 said:

It's already fixed internally.

I'll stress that this is the nature of Early Access. Development of additional features and improvements will continue, and sometimes things like this are necessary to move the project forward.

Thankyou Raptor for your reply. Nice to hear that. 

Maybe I was being testy, but the 'two steps forwards, one step back' approach is sometimes hard to understand from a mere users perspective. But not just an Apache specific issue..... Anyway thanks.

[Select ACQ TADS to operate? Help!]

On 10/2/2022 at 11:45 PM, Raptor9 said:

This is a temporary implementation as George AI is improved. For him to be able to search based off where you are looking, you will need to be set to TADS for the time being.

In reality, the Pilot's ACQ selection has no bearing on the CPG being able to slave the TADS to the Pilot's Helmet (PHS). So this will be corrected in the future; but again, just temporary.

Any idea how long this will take to change back? This is a major retrograde step in usability.

The ability to have a target CM active as your own ACQ source and to get George to search around that area was fundamental to using George CPG. The current implementation is poor and unrealistic, even if only temporary. And with DCS timescales, could be here for a while……. 

[Control Measure graphic text glitch (Invisible text)]

There's a new problem with the display of certain CONTROL MEASURE graphic icons on the TSD. With the CM graphics that have interior text, such as BP, AA, FU, EU etc, that interior text is not displayed correctly after the point becomes 'deselected'. (The text should be the CM number, C51 etc, or in the case of FU/EU, the free text entered by user).

You can see that text as reverse highlighted (black text) as you create the point, but when deselected that black text now becomes invisible. In previous open betas it worked fine. The reverse highlight bit always made the text labels visible at all times. With CM's that don't have interior text, like AE or EI for example, this is not an issue.

See track and shot.

Thanks.

CM Text bug.trk

[Option for automatically importing Mission Editor Target/Threat & Control Measure points]

Yeah come ED, what's the latest on internal discussion on this 'feature'? It needs to be an option at the very least. It's not even very useful in SP since every enemy ground unit is depicted as an AE 'Enemy Armor' CM - making the TSD cluttered with identical and 'wrong' CM's. I kinda see what you were trying to do, but please.....this is not the way at the moment.

A universal, but obviously module tailored, DTC solution is the answer as we all know...what's the latest on that? Any progress since 2019? I'd happily pay for it at this point.  

[PERF page not working]

27 minutes ago, Vakarian said:

 

Ah, sorry all. Didn't spot it.

[PERF page not working]

So it seems the PERF page is no longer selectable in the latest OB.

Before, the PERF page was semi useful if you artificially changed the Basic Weight to actual weight (not how it's supposed to work, but workaround), and it gave semi-plausible Torque figures.

Is the PERF page still coming in an updated form, still WIP? Hope it's not gone forever.

 

[DCS Newsletter discussion 16th September 2022 - DCS: Tornado | multicrew progress | Growling Sidewinder]

Just now, QuiGon said:

I'm aware of the LRMTS, but when did Paveways got integrated?
 

MW-1 was introduced in 1985.

 

Mid/late 80’s. 
Paveway didn’t really need to be ‘integrated’, just hooked on the jet and a role change and training to work with third party lasing.

System integration would have happened during the lead to the the Gulf War, when the TIALD TGP was rushed into service. 

[DCS Newsletter discussion 16th September 2022 - DCS: Tornado | multicrew progress | Growling Sidewinder]

4 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

In 1989 there wasn't much difference between UK and German Tornados. UK Tornados had slightly more fuel, but that's pretty much it. Weapons were different, but similar.

The UK Gr.1s had the LRMTS under the nose while the Italian and Germans did not. 

The Laser Ranger and Marked Target Seeker was a system to provide laser ranging in a low level type attack where Radar ranging might be unreliable. The Marked Target Seeker was a Laser Spot Tracker type system for working with ground FACs. Both would be welcome additions to any DCS module. 

Plus the extra fuel. UK Tornados also had different RWR gear and different radios. 

3 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

Interesting, any source?
I guess they relied on ground designation then?

 

Of course, and Buccaneer support. RAF Buccaneers would have provided buddy lasing support with their Pave Spike pods. As they did during the Gulf War. 

[DCS Newsletter discussion 16th September 2022 - DCS: Tornado | multicrew progress | Growling Sidewinder]

10 minutes ago, QuiGon said:

You forgot Kormoran (and maybe even HARM).
Also it can provide AAR too, although that's not a weapon.

 

OK, I knew that would come up, I forgot the Marineflieger and Kormoran. Actually those Marine paint jobs / liveries are some of my favorites.

But that fact remains, it's a limited capability Torando at FIRST glance. Maybe it will turn out otherwise. Given the complexity of Tornados NAV ATTACK avionics, a limited weapon set might reduce complexity for the developer.

I do feel however, that we might not get a module that does full justice to the Tornado story. A 1991 RAF Gr.1 might have been doable and would better represent Tornado's full capability and have provided a better complement to current DCS modules. As well as having a better combat history. 

[DCS Newsletter discussion 16th September 2022 - DCS: Tornado | multicrew progress | Growling Sidewinder]

7 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

So what weapon systems were used by the IDS circa 1989?

Not much.

MK82, MK83, MK84 and MW-1. Oh.....and sidewinder of some kind. That's it boys.

A 1989 German IDS is probably the most limited IDS variant there is. Maybe it's a starting point and we'll get some feature creep into the Gr.1 version/weapons. Maybe. 

Kinda disappointed that Heatblur didn't get it.

[FCR not displaying datalink target nor search targets]

3 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

you have public evidence of this? Please PM me

Ok, so I’ve been through my reference ( prob same one as you guys are using), and can’t specifically find a sentence that says ‘raw FCR targets are displayed whatever the declutter level’. I think that is just presumed, since it is just common sense. 

The ALL, FTR+, TGTS, NONE options are datalink display options…i.e datalink…. They should not remove ownship radar contacts…even if that track is correlated with a datalink track. The NONE option should just remove the datalink colour overlay for that track, leaving behind the raw search/system track. Currently a correlated search target will disappear completely with the wrong declutter which is…dangerous. It wouldn’t be designed this way.

There is actually a diagram that illustrates this, but admittedly doesn’t explicitly describe the behaviour. This is one of those examples where ED’s 20+ years of experience simulating this stuff should aid in interpreting the correct function.