THere are really only three things missing in DCS: AV-8B - Page 2 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-12-2019, 04:29 PM   #11
shagrat
ED Translator
 
shagrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 10,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DmitriKozlowsky View Post
No soldier, airman, sailor, and marine , ever got a perfect fault free, complete weapon system. Dealing with shortcomings and limitations is part of the fun.
Oh, shortcomings and limitations are nice if simulated correctly. The TPOD integration and target coordinates, compared to the A-10C is overly complex and not easy to work with. That is part of the realistic simulation. The bugs and missing features are simply that, bugs to be fixed and features missing to represent the AV-8B to DCS standard. I am sure Razbam is currently working on the remaining stuff (@Zeus67 and team: thanks by the way for the flood of recent updates).
I just oppose any "this is finished" announcement, inevitably causing the next shitstorm in the long run.
Razbam has the AV-8B labeled as early access (Work In Progress) for good reason and though we seem to near completion, they are the ones to announce it is finished and release it officially. Until then we have the chance to dig into it, find bugs and help make it a better product on release.
__________________
Shagrat

- Flying Sims since 1984 -
Win 10 | i5 7600K@4.0GHz | 32GB | GeForce GTX 1080 8GB - Acer XB280HK 28" 4k | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | TM HOTAS Warthog custom extension | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | TM Cougar MFDs |a hand made UFC | AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)
shagrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 04:38 PM   #12
Harlikwin
Senior Member
 
Harlikwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 2,467
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by DmitriKozlowsky View Post
No soldier, airman, sailor, and marine , ever got a perfect fault free, complete weapon system. Dealing with shortcomings and limitations is part of the fun.
LOL... Trolling I see... If I put my sarcasm glasses its a very funny thread now...
__________________
New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1
Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Harlikwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 04:39 PM   #13
Harlikwin
Senior Member
 
Harlikwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 2,467
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shagrat View Post
Oh, shortcomings and limitations are nice if simulated correctly. The TPOD integration and target coordinates, compared to the A-10C is overly complex and not easy to work with. That is part of the realistic simulation. The bugs and missing features are simply that, bugs to be fixed and features missing to represent the AV-8B to DCS standard. I am sure Razbam is currently working on the remaining stuff (@Zeus67 and team: thanks by the way for the flood of recent updates).
I just oppose any "this is finished" announcement, inevitably causing the next shitstorm in the long run.
Razbam has the AV-8B labeled as early access (Work In Progress) for good reason and though we seem to near completion, they are the ones to announce it is finished and release it officially. Until then we have the chance to dig into it, find bugs and help make it a better product on release.
The fact that the harrier TPOD will have ~100m error in coordinates at 10nm isn't modeled either.
__________________
New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1
Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Harlikwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 04:54 PM   #14
zhukov032186
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Fort Worth, Tx
Posts: 2,031
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bkthunder View Post
Lol, I'm sure we are all glad you have fun dealing with the limitations and problems of an unfinished/bugged product for which you paid full price, I can even suggest you roll back to one of the previous versions of DCS to enjoy even more limitations and fun
Rofl hard to come back at that one, touche
__________________
Zhukov attacks *FORUM USER* with Legendary Trollsword!
*FORUM USER* Constitution save roll.... Fail!
*FORUM USER* afflicted with ''Hurt Feelz'', -1 Concentration for two rounds
zhukov032186 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-12-2019, 07:51 PM   #15
shagrat
ED Translator
 
shagrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 10,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlikwin View Post
The fact that the harrier TPOD will have ~100m error in coordinates at 10nm isn't modeled either.
To be fair with the current bomb damage modeling I am more positive about the TPOD being a tad bit more accurate.
__________________
Shagrat

- Flying Sims since 1984 -
Win 10 | i5 7600K@4.0GHz | 32GB | GeForce GTX 1080 8GB - Acer XB280HK 28" 4k | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | TM HOTAS Warthog custom extension | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | TM Cougar MFDs |a hand made UFC | AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)
shagrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 12:05 AM   #16
Dr.SquirrelBoy12
Member
 
Dr.SquirrelBoy12's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Wisconsin USA
Posts: 138
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlikwin View Post
The fact that the harrier TPOD will have ~100m error in coordinates at 10nm isn't modeled either.
I mean, that shouldnt make much of a difference for our current weapons. Once we get JDAMs though, then it might.
__________________
Modules: FC3, A-10C, M2000C, MiG-21bis, F-86F, AV-8B NA, F/A-18C, F-14A/B, F-15E, F-4E, A-29, A-6E, F-16C, MiG-23MLA, Nevada, Persian Gulf, South Atlantic, Syria, Afghanistan

Specs: Intel i7 2600K, Nvidea GTX 980, 16GB RAM, NVMe SSD, Saitek X-55, TrackIR 5, Samsung Odyssey VR
Dr.SquirrelBoy12 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 01:15 AM   #17
ChickenSim
Member
 
ChickenSim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 147
Default

It's also not a hard and fast number. It just means at those ranges (and usual associated slant angles) you could see up to a 100m difference between what you are shown and where the stare point actually is.

The grid will be most accurate pulled as close horizontally to the target as you can get (as steep a depression angle as possible), at altitude, in level unaccelerated flight, fully INS aligned, with laser rangefinder on.

Anything else is only liable to get you varying shades of "close enough."
ChickenSim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 03:06 AM   #18
Harlikwin
Senior Member
 
Harlikwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 2,467
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChickenSim View Post
It's also not a hard and fast number. It just means at those ranges (and usual associated slant angles) you could see up to a 100m difference between what you are shown and where the stare point actually is.

The grid will be most accurate pulled as close horizontally to the target as you can get (as steep a depression angle as possible), at altitude, in level unaccelerated flight, fully INS aligned, with laser rangefinder on.

Anything else is only liable to get you varying shades of "close enough."
Well there is a table for this, and I **hope** that various sensor errrors get modeled.

And I hope the ARBS, TPOD, and LRF slant range errors might get modeled too.

To be fair I'm not sure to what degree these errors are modeled in other modules.
__________________
New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1
Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Harlikwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-13-2019, 10:29 AM   #19
shagrat
ED Translator
 
shagrat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 10,132
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlikwin View Post
Well there is a table for this, and I **hope** that various sensor errrors get modeled.



And I hope the ARBS, TPOD, and LRF slant range errors might get modeled too.



To be fair I'm not sure to what degree these errors are modeled in other modules.
I hope they model these "imperfections" only AFTER we get a better weapons effect modeling in DCS, especially fragmentation damage!
Currently an error of 5 to 10m with a Mk-82 means you have mostly cosmetic effects on a truck(!) requiring up to 3 or 4 "close hits", that each would have shredded the truck to pieces...
__________________
Shagrat

- Flying Sims since 1984 -
Win 10 | i5 7600K@4.0GHz | 32GB | GeForce GTX 1080 8GB - Acer XB280HK 28" 4k | TrackIR5 | Simshaker & Jetseat | TM HOTAS Warthog custom extension | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals | TM Cougar MFDs |a hand made UFC | AHCP | 2x Elgato StreamDeck (Buttons galore)
shagrat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-14-2019, 03:43 PM   #20
Harlikwin
Senior Member
 
Harlikwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 2,467
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shagrat View Post
I hope they model these "imperfections" only AFTER we get a better weapons effect modeling in DCS, especially fragmentation damage!
Currently an error of 5 to 10m with a Mk-82 means you have mostly cosmetic effects on a truck(!) requiring up to 3 or 4 "close hits", that each would have shredded the truck to pieces...
So, the TPOD errors are when providing ABSOLUTE coordinates, its still accurate for relative type attacks. Many of the errors with coordinates have to do with INS inaccuracy, then aligning the POD IMU with the INS, then you get the various slant range measuring errors. The conclusion to the work was that for JDAM's you couldn't get "good enough" coordinates from the TPOD if you were more than 6nm out, and due to some software SNAFU relative mode for JDAM's didn't work at all. Of course if you had coordinates for JDAM's from a briefing or a FAC they would still work fine.

Also, no issues using the TPOD to deliver LGBs. Nor is using the TPOD or ARBS for RELATIVE mode attacks, because the FCS doesn't care where it is in ABSOLUTE terms, it just needs to know target is dead ahead, 30 degrees under me and with 2500m slant range and my speed/angle is known.

Part of brought this up is seeing people online provide ultra precise jdam coordinates to hornets, and in reality this wouldn't be happening. At a guess, the Hornet and A10 TGPs among others have similar issues with this, maybe less since the integration might be better.

As for weapons modeling in DCS. Yup, borked, but Razbam can't fix that. (well aside from the damn sidearm reticle thing)
__________________
New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1
Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).
Harlikwin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 01:06 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.