AGM-65E Max Range

Yep, I guess what I was trying to get at, is that the laser doesn't act like it should operationally. From my above video, and other's findings, the range on the laser is about 8-10nm, depending on height of aircraft. When the maverick reaches the end of the laser, and the end of the laser isn't on a target, but in the air, it will chase the end of the laser. (edit: here's the video again to save looking for it

I did a quick google, and it seems the A10C laser someone said has about a range of 10nm too, so I'm guessing the laser is apart of a standard DCS module item and not created by Razbam.

If we want the Maverick E to work properly, the range of the laser needs to be increased.

I did a quick google, and it seems the A10C laser someone said has about a range of 10nm too, so I'm guessing the laser is apart of a standard DCS module item and not created by Razbam.

 

If we want the Maverick E to work properly, the range of the laser needs to be increased.

Not just the stock laser, but the stock laser seekers and missile profiles too.

It doesn't seem right now that any of the stock SALH seekers are treated differently, regardless of whether they are fixed (APKWS), fairing (GBU-12), or gimbaled (AGM-65/114), which when combined with stock propulsion modules and stock Maverick guidance/flight profiles are bound to produce some... interesting results.

Meaning that it's not just Maverick Es that don't work properly. Technically nothing works properly, not even the stock IR/TV Mavericks or GBUs (LGB or JDAM variants) dropped by any module.

Not just the stock laser, but the stock laser seekers and missile profiles too.

 

It doesn't seem right now that any of the stock SALH seekers are treated differently, regardless of whether they are fixed (APKWS), fairing (GBU-12), or gimbaled (AGM-65/114), which when combined with stock propulsion modules and stock Maverick guidance/flight profiles are bound to produce some... interesting results.

 

Meaning that it's not just Maverick Es that don't work properly. Technically nothing works properly, not even the stock IR/TV Mavericks or GBUs (LGB or JDAM variants) dropped by any module.

I'm pretty new to DCS so not sure how all the other weapons systems work, but would it be safe to assume that all the other weapons systems, while not working as they should in real life, they still produce the same result as they would real life i.e. the bomb will hit the laser designated target?

...would it be safe to assume that all the other weapons systems, while not working as they should in real life, they still produce the same result as they would real life i.e. the bomb will hit the laser designated target?

Maybe?

That's the problem when the weapon FMs aren't synchronized with the aircraft symbology.

There are a ton of varying reports of people making 15+ NM shots but then others (and a developer) say that the Mavericks have a 60 second lifetime. A Maverick shouldn't be traveling 15 NM in 60 seconds, it should be more like 100 seconds.

Some people are having their LMAVs detect laser spots at ranges of 25 NM, through hills and buildings, despite a nominal 10 NM DCS laser range.

It's nice that it sounds like the INRNG symbology is based on the actual altitude:Mach charts, but if the weapons themselves don't follow the same logic because ED didn't code them that way, then it's unfortunately just a bandaid solution that is liable to fail as often as it succeeds.

And it's not just the Mavericks that feel the pain here.

Technically the Harrier gun angle issue still lets you produce the effect of rounds hitting a target, but since it's angled much higher than it should be it reduces the amount of time you should have to track a target (especially once they implement the fact that you can't go Idle and fire the gun in the Harrier - you have to have it >60% to produce the bleed air required to operate it).

The A-10C JDAM FM lets you produce the effect of bombs hitting grid coordinates, but if the bombs are decelerating to 230 KTS and taking twice as long as a Mk82 or GBU-12 would to get there, then we don't know what effect that's going to have on an aircraft flying much higher and faster with an allegedly better loft capability (both Harrier and Hornet).

Hopefully these stock pylon and weapon modules get some love from ED soon, because the cracks in the system and FMs are starting to become much more visible.

Here's a video I put together last night but didn't get uploaded till now. It's overly long and rambley but I hope it's at least useful for showing the problem lol.

Here's a video I put together last night but didn't get uploaded till now. It's overly long and rambley but I hope it's at least useful for showing the problem lol.

Nice one Deano, pretty much same as my findings, although a lot more detailed. Hopefully someone from ED can have a look at your video, if they don't already know about the issue.

Yep, I guess what I was trying to get at, is that the laser doesn't act like it should operationally. From my above video, and other's findings, the range on the laser is about 8-10nm, depending on height of aircraft. When the maverick reaches the end of the laser, and the end of the laser isn't on a target, but in the air, it will chase the end of the laser. (edit: here's the video again to save looking for it

)

 

 

I did a quick google, and it seems the A10C laser someone said has about a range of 10nm too, so I'm guessing the laser is apart of a standard DCS module item and not created by Razbam.

 

 

If we want the Maverick E to work properly, the range of the laser needs to be increased.

I've successfully lased a buddy GBU-12 into target from 13 nearly 14nm away in the A-10C. Anything past 14nm in A-10C and the laser doesn't even like to fire. This is what the behavior I experienced was a couple months ago. Havend tried it again since.

I've successfully lased a buddy GBU-12 into target from 13 nearly 14nm away in the A-10C. Anything past 14nm in A-10C and the laser doesn't even like to fire. This is what the behavior I experienced was a couple months ago. Havend tried it again since.

I think the key thing is how far from the target were you when the bomb landed

Interesting findings

Pman

Maybe?

 

That's the problem when the weapon FMs aren't synchronized with the aircraft symbology.

 

There are a ton of varying reports of people making 15+ NM shots but then others (and a developer) say that the Mavericks have a 60 second lifetime. A Maverick shouldn't be traveling 15 NM in 60 seconds, it should be more like 100 seconds.

 

Some people are having their LMAVs detect laser spots at ranges of 25 NM, through hills and buildings, despite a nominal 10 NM DCS laser range.

 

It's nice that it sounds like the INRNG symbology is based on the actual altitude:Mach charts, but if the weapons themselves don't follow the same logic because ED didn't code them that way, then it's unfortunately just a bandaid solution that is liable to fail as often as it succeeds.

 

And it's not just the Mavericks that feel the pain here.

 

Technically the Harrier gun angle issue still lets you produce the effect of rounds hitting a target, but since it's angled much higher than it should be it reduces the amount of time you should have to track a target (especially once they implement the fact that you can't go Idle and fire the gun in the Harrier - you have to have it >60% to produce the bleed air required to operate it).

 

The A-10C JDAM FM lets you produce the effect of bombs hitting grid coordinates, but if the bombs are decelerating to 230 KTS and taking twice as long as a Mk82 or GBU-12 would to get there, then we don't know what effect that's going to have on an aircraft flying much higher and faster with an allegedly better loft capability (both Harrier and Hornet).

 

Hopefully these stock pylon and weapon modules get some love from ED soon, because the cracks in the system and FMs are starting to become much more visible.

Thanks for info.

I guess then not much we can do except keep mentioning it, and also hopefully some of the 3rd party teams can put some pressure on ED also to improve this area.

Just remember that until last AV-8B NA update the AGM-65E was negleted. So I am sure it has not entered ED's round of weapons upgrade. I will check and see if it is going to be upgraded anytime soon, specially since the F-18C should use it as well.

Just remember that until last AV-8B NA update the AGM-65E was negleted. So I am sure it has not entered ED's round of weapons upgrade. I will check and see if it is going to be upgraded anytime soon, specially since the F-18C should use it as well.

I don't believe it's a Maverick problem. I think it's an issue with the laser. Watch my video, you can see the "end" of the laser walking its way across the HUD. And I've certainly experienced inexplicable issues buddy lasing for people outside 9 miles in the past with LGBs etc but never really been able to figure out why until now.

I don't believe it's a Maverick problem. I think it's an issue with the laser. Watch my video, you can see the "end" of the laser walking its way across the HUD. And I've certainly experienced inexplicable issues buddy lasing for people outside 9 miles in the past with LGBs etc but never really been able to figure out why until now.

 

I believe it's a Maverick problem too, especially the FM.

Just remember that until last AV-8B NA update the AGM-65E was negleted. So I am sure it has not entered ED's round of weapons upgrade. I will check and see if it is going to be upgraded anytime soon, specially since the F-18C should use it as well.

thanks for listening to our complaints at least! for now we can work around it. just glad to have a (basically) working l-mav for the time being

I believe it's a Maverick problem too, especially the FM.

It depends what problem we are talking about here.. The inability for the 65E to hit anything from beyond 10 miles if you stay beyond that range at all phases during the attack is not FM related, its laser related. I agree that there are FM issues, but thats true for a lot of weapons in DCS and thats not directly related to the laser issue.

I don't believe it's a Maverick problem. I think it's an issue with the laser. Watch my video, you can see the "end" of the laser walking its way across the HUD. And I've certainly experienced inexplicable issues buddy lasing for people outside 9 miles in the past with LGBs etc but never really been able to figure out why until now.

 

Nice job Deano. Very well done demonstration.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

In the past I've buddy lased with both the A_10C and AV8B Harrier from 15-25nm. WHen nearing the latter end of the spectrum, there were definite issues getting a lock, but that was mainly due to my connection to the server causing a bit of a jittery effect when looking at the end of the laser itself, this is most easily seen at nighttime with the marker/lase+marker. I never had any issues with the laser stopping short at 8nm, so something must have changed in 2.5.2 for this to happen. This being said, I have noticed a definite increase in issues with the KA-50 locking a point in space just ahead of me with the release of 2.5.2.

The Mavericks range varies with systems used, your velocity, weapons velocity, elevation, visibility and I’m sure I could add many more factors!

7.5 miles from TGT is certain and 98% sure of a kill!

I have had the chance to see a real one go bang when I was on the ground! I don’t fancy a fighter jock firing on a tgp or any other sensor unless they can see the Union Flag on my arm!!