Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Circles and crosses respectively with the location of flight members/donors and friendly ground forces.

 

With altitude readout for airborne units.

 

They can be hooked/slaved to etc

 

A lot more than that. 65 pages (16 of those pages are symbology) cover the HMCS in the 1A-10C-1.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A lot more than that. 65 pages (16 of those pages are symbology) cover the HMCS in the 1A-10C-1.

 

Ok yeah, but how much of all the datalink feature will find their way to our sim?

 

Viewing wingman/donors positions and alt, EPLRS symbology, all hookable, SPIable etc. And that’s about it I imagine.

 

What about datalink markpoints? and other TAD features, it’s a shame these haven’t been mentioned.

Link to post
Share on other sites
It would be nice to finally be able to see all human-flown friendlies on the TAD.

I'm still a bit confused about SADL/Link-16 in the A-10C. My current understanding is, that the A-10C is only equipped with SADL and hence can only see other SADL-equipped units as it has no way to communicate with Link-16. Is that correct?

And on that note, isn't the F-16 equipped with both, SADL and Link-16?

Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still a bit confused about SADL/Link-16 in the A-10C. My current understanding is, that the A-10C is only equipped with SADL and hence can only see other SADL-equipped units as it has no way to communicate with Link-16. Is that correct?

And on that note, isn't the F-16 equipped with both, SADL and Link-16?

 

The A10C is SADL, but can communicate with the Link-16 Network through a 'gateway'. It can receive Link 16 tracks through this gateway, just like a Hornet would. I'm pretty sure it can push data onto the L16 network as well. For example, the A10C can construct and transmit CAS assignments using L16. It can also use VMF for this, although it's line of sight only.

 

I'm not sure exactly how it's all integrated. I.e Is SADL/L16 all one big thing as far as the A10 pilot sees it?, or is it SADL for flight members and L16 for those outside the flight etc....

 

 

I think only the National Guard F-16's are SADL (with presumably a similar gateway), and the active AF uses Link16.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm still a bit confused about SADL/Link-16 in the A-10C. My current understanding is, that the A-10C is only equipped with SADL and hence can only see other SADL-equipped units as it has no way to communicate with Link-16. Is that correct?

And on that note, isn't the F-16 equipped with both, SADL and Link-16?

 

My understanding is that it will be able to see link 16 translated data through a gateway, the most common one being a lovely E3 AWACS in a mission.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...
The A10C is SADL, but can communicate with the Link-16 Network through a 'gateway'. It can receive Link 16 tracks through this gateway, just like a Hornet would. I'm pretty sure it can push data onto the L16 network as well. For example, the A10C can construct and transmit CAS assignments using L16. It can also use VMF for this, although it's line of sight only.

 

I'm not sure exactly how it's all integrated. I.e Is SADL/L16 all one big thing as far as the A10 pilot sees it?, or is it SADL for flight members and L16 for those outside the flight etc....

 

 

I think only the National Guard F-16's are SADL (with presumably a similar gateway), and the active AF uses Link16.

 

The A-10C cannot transmit or receive Link 16 messages only SADL, the f-16 can do both though.

 

As to the main point though, I don't think ED simulated gateways, they simulated the function, but not specific assets. The SADL-Link 16 gateway still works if there is no awacs. Perhaps they built an automatic reversion to ship-based or other terminals/gateways, but the more likely answer, in light of the choices they made regarding simplification of datalinks as a whole in their implementation, is that ED chose to implement a gateway function without requiring a specific asset. It makes sense for a number of reasons (other than strict realism). Like all systems they model they make choices, for a variety of reasons, about what behavior of the real system they choose to simulate. So, an individual fighter gets a line of sight check. That's good low hanging fruit realism, so to speak. A fair amount of what they did include can be inferred from how the system works, what functions we have in jet, etc. We don't, for example, have different modes, or peacetime constraints like mode 1 frequency hopping. That makes sense because, well, not peacetime. But we also don't have frequency separation concerns, IPF failures, and while DCS is not "big" enough where time slot duty factor would be an issue, its also not simulated. The F-16 fine/coarse sync is a good example. Its in there, you can change it, but their's no system time, network time reference or event time slots... so its pointless. That detail would probably be difficult to simulate for several reasons and would add very little to the sim, so i'm fine with it.

 

AWACS is just one gateway and generally is used for a limited purpose. Voice bridging and tactical gateway functions are usually provided by redundant layers with specific assets serving participial forces. A drone bridging SADL L16 for force protection of a large ground maneuver, navy s tadil satellites for fleet, modified Gulfstream V bridging frequencies w/ NATO allies, etc.

 

If someone were really curious it would be easy to test. We don't have milstar satellites or modified gulfstreams, just AWACS and surface ships. Gateway altitude is critical to line of sight, so if DCS is simulating gateways, we should see link degrade significantly for a fighter with terrain blocking LOS to the fleet or other friendly assets vs. a high altitude awacs.

just a dude who probably doesn't know what he's talking about

Link to post
Share on other sites
The A10C is SADL, but can communicate with the Link-16 Network through a 'gateway'. It can receive Link 16 tracks through this gateway, just like a Hornet would. I'm pretty sure it can push data onto the L16 network as well. For example, the A10C can construct and transmit CAS assignments using L16. It can also use VMF for this, although it's line of sight only.

 

I'm not sure exactly how it's all integrated. I.e Is SADL/L16 all one big thing as far as the A10 pilot sees it?, or is it SADL for flight members and L16 for those outside the flight etc....

 

 

I think only the National Guard F-16's are SADL (with presumably a similar gateway), and the active AF uses Link16.

 

The A-10C cannot transmit or receive Link 16 messages only SADL, the f-16 can do both though.

 

As to the main point though, I don't think ED simulated gateways, they simulated the function, but not specific assets. The SADL-Link 16 gateway still works if there is no awacs. Perhaps they built an automatic reversion to ship-based or other terminals/gateways, but the more likely answer, in light of the choices they made regarding simplification of datalinks as a whole in their implementation, is that ED chose to implement a gateway function without requiring a specific asset. It makes sense for a number of reasons (other than strict realism). Like all systems they model they make choices, for a variety of reasons, about what behavior of the real system they choose to simulate. So, an individual fighter gets a line of sight check. That's good low hanging fruit realism, so to speak. A fair amount of what they did include can be inferred from how the system works, what functions we have in jet, etc. We don't, for example, have different modes, or peacetime constraints like mode 1 frequency hopping. That makes sense because, well, not peacetime. But we also don't have frequency separation concerns, IPF failures, and while DCS is not "big" enough where time slot duty factor would be an issue, its also not simulated. The F-16 fine/coarse sync is a good example. Its in there, you can change it, but their's no system time, network time reference or event time slots... so its pointless. That detail would probably be difficult to simulate for several reasons and would add very little to the sim, so i'm fine with it.

 

AWACS is just one gateway and generally is used for a limited purpose. Voice bridging and tactical gateway functions are usually provided by redundant layers with specific assets serving participial forces. A drone bridging SADL L16 for force protection of a large ground maneuver, navy s tadil satellites for fleet, modified Gulfstream V bridging frequencies w/ NATO allies, etc.

 

If someone were really curious it would be easy to test. We don't have milstar satellites or modified gulfstreams, just AWACS and surface ships. Gateway altitude is critical to line of sight, so if DCS is simulating gateways, we should see SADL-link 16 gateway degrade if you build a mission with no relays and terrain blocking LOS to the fleet, then test on other side of terrain.-

just a dude who probably doesn't know what he's talking about

Link to post
Share on other sites
A-10s can currently see AI-flown Hogs, Vipers, Hornets and Eagles.

 

But Hogs can only see human-flown Hogs. Can’t see human-flown Vipers, Hornets or Eagles.

 

So which is correct?

 

Neither, or it depends I guess. Instead of "see" lets use "communicate," because seeing where other units are is just one small aspect of what links do. Real time ISR, targeting, avoiding blue on blue, better informed and faster command, its an endless list. But tio answer your question:

 

Viper can communicate with both Hogs (SADL) or Hornets/Eagles (Link-16)

 

Hog can communicate with Hogs, Viper, AC-130, many helos, some Army small drones like puma/shadow, larger drones like predator/gray eagle, global hawk, tankers, any ground unit with a EPLRS radio.

 

Hornets/Eagles can communicate with other eagles/hornets, vipers, f-35s, f-22 (receive only), B-1, B2s, awacs, jstars, rivet joints, tankers, ships, most other ISR assets from U-2s to sentinels to global hawks, NATO fighters (typhoon/rafael)

 

There are many others. F-22 uses IFDL (but can receive link 16), F35 uses MADL, but also link 16. Global hawks have everything from ku-band satcom to UHF tactical links, and can operate as dedicated gateway (EQ-4B variant).

 

In reality it's not this segmented. Gateway is a misleading name, it's not a firewall/router type device but rather a translator/forwarder that transfers data fromo one datalnk to another, or more accurately between several. Some are air based, in DCS i guess awacs is performing the job though E-11 and EQ-4B are real world airborn communication nodes. Air based has the advantage of not having line of sight issues, but there are ground gateways as well. BUG-E's are one example of link 16 - SADL ground gateway, or link 16/SADL - SIPRNet (WAN based).

 

This is really just scratching the surface, and just public info. OEF was the ultimate proof of concept and its only accelerated since.


Edited by sk000tch

just a dude who probably doesn't know what he's talking about

Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand all of the above, but my question still stands because we currently have a glaring division based solely on whether it’s AI- or Human-flown.

 

It should be one or the other regardless of who is controlling the aircraft.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

http://www.476vfightergroup.com/content.php

High Quality Aviation Photography For Personal Enjoyment And Editorial Use.

www.crosswindimages.com

Link to post
Share on other sites
Neither, or it depends I guess. Instead of "see" lets use "communicate," because seeing where other units are is just one small aspect of what links do. Real time ISR, targeting, avoiding blue on blue, better informed and faster command, its an endless list. But tio answer your question:

 

Viper can communicate with both Hogs (SADL) or Hornets/Eagles (Link-16)

 

Hog can communicate with Hogs, Viper, AC-130, many helos, some Army small drones like puma/shadow, larger drones like predator/gray eagle, global hawk, tankers, any ground unit with a EPLRS radio.

 

Hornets/Eagles can communicate with other eagles/hornets, vipers, f-35s, f-22 (receive only), B-1, B2s, awacs, jstars, rivet joints, tankers, ships, most other ISR assets from U-2s to sentinels to global hawks, NATO fighters (typhoon/rafael)

 

There are many others. F-22 uses IFDL (but can receive link 16), F35 uses MADL, but also link 16. Global hawks have everything from ku-band satcom to UHF tactical links, and can operate as dedicated gateway (EQ-4B variant).

 

In reality it's not this segmented. Gateway is a misleading name, it's not a firewall/router type device but rather a translator/forwarder that transfers data fromo one datalnk to another, or more accurately between several. Some are air based, in DCS i guess awacs is performing the job though E-11 and EQ-4B are real world airborn communication nodes. Air based has the advantage of not having line of sight issues, but there are ground gateways as well. BUG-E's are one example of link 16 - SADL ground gateway, or link 16/SADL - SIPRNet (WAN based).

 

This is really just scratching the surface, and just public info. OEF was the ultimate proof of concept and its only accelerated since.

 

I guess the word you're looking for is "Converter".

 

But saying that it doesn't support Link-16 is odd if the converter is able to convert the whole thing and speak back to Link-16 the same way, others in the Link-16 network would have no idea any conversion took place, that's how I think conversion should work, otherwise it's purposelly different for some other reason.

So you're trying to say it's only able to convert some basic subset (limited set) of Link-16 features? Or it's able to receive the full Link-16 feature set but only transmit a limited feature set?

 

For reference this is how a pure relay from the A-10C's voice radio system is like:

 

Bp1m3xt.png

 

So if the new DCS Warthog 2 will be able to get some Link-16 features into it's cockpit systems, it probably has some capability to digest Link-16, over just being a pure relay of Link-16 to others.


Edited by Worrazen

Getting back in action!

1st.: PC Specs WIP: Win10P 2004 (20H1), 1440p@75"32 - MB: Asus ROG Strix X-570E - CPU: AMD Ryzen ... - GPU: AMD Radeon ... - RAM: 64 GB - SSD: Samsung 970 EVO Plus 1TB NVMe

2nd.: PC Specs: Win10P 2004 (20H1), 1440p@75"32 - MB: Asus P9X79 - CPU: Intel i7 3820 - RAM: 32GB - GPU: AMD Radeon RX480 8GB - SSD Samsung 860 EVO 250GB (DCS), Input: Saitek Cyborg X/FLY5

Modules: A-10C I/II, F/A-18C, Mig-21Bis, M-2000C, AJS-37, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, P-47, FC3, SC, CA, WW2AP.

Terrains: NTTR, Normandy, Persian Gulf, Syria.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Guess we are going to have to wait for Wags video on the subject to find out.

 

Can't wait for this upgrade. the bumps on the nose from the refueling probe is worth 10 bucks alone!

 

Have you seen the video he's just released? Bumps and all!!

System :-

i7-7820X, ASUS ROG Strix X229, 32GB Corsair Vengeance DDR4 3600MHz, 11GB Nvidia Geforce 1080Ti, 1x 500GB Samsung 850 EVO, 1x 1TB Samsung 850 EVO, 1x 500GB Samsung 960 EVO M.2, Windows 10. VPC WarBRD Base with HOTAS Warthog Stick and Throttle, Saitek combat rudder pedals, Oculus Rift S.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
I understand all of the above, but my question still stands because we currently have a glaring division based solely on whether it’s AI- or Human-flown.

It should be one or the other regardless of who is controlling the aircraft.

 

Exactly

Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the A-10C-1 you can create Markpoints from the HMD.

______________________________________________

Specs

 

CPU i9 9900k

GPU RTX 2080TI

MOBO Asus Z390-E

RAM 32GB Trident z RGB 3200MHz

PSU Evga 750w g5

SSD Samsung 860 Evo 500gb/Samsung 970 Evo Plus 1tb

________________________________________________

Setup

Thrustmaster Warthog, Trackir 5 with pro clip, MFG Crosswinds,Thrustmaster MFDs, and 3 Monitor

 

________________________________________________

Modules

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...