What do people thinking of having to align the Mavs?

[Deano87]

2 hours ago, taco3rd said:

My bad if the process was fixed. Last time I tried to boresight them on the ground I could only get one side to align. Still had to manually slew on the right side. Still, I'm talking to the point of when these things simply aren't working the way they're supposed to. I'm pretty sure the Air Force isn't putting 16's out with software bugs that pilots have to find work-arounds for. That's all I'm saying.

Wanting an option to skip boresighting to avoid a bug in an early acces (and by definition unfinished) product is a bit different from wanting to skip boresighting just because its inconvenient.

To me boresighting your mavericks is a cruicial part of using the weapon. If you screw up boresighting then your ability to employ the weapon effectively and quickly at the critical moment is impacted. As such I don't believe there should be an option to skip it. It not like auto-start or a pre-aligned INS because those are just time savers and non-critical to the mission. Boresighting a maverick requires practice and a small amount of skill to do it effeciently and quickly - Its part of the procedure for using that weapon with the TGP.

 

Where does it end? Gah the Mav's take a whole 3 mins to cool down, I don't have time for that! OMG setting the fusing and laser codes on the F-18 is such a PITA, Man this TGP is tricky to use... etc etc

I'm perfectly happy with Air-starts to have them pre-aligned as it can be assumed that they boresighted after takeoff and then powered them off. If you don't have much time to play then you could jump into an air-start mission, or chose a weapon that you can employ more quickly. Or boresight as you get to the AO.

 

28 minutes ago, falcon_120 said:

I hate that I don't have the option to turn it off because I have a Real life and sometimes I simply don't have the mood or time to do it, I simply don't have enough time in a day to fly more than 20/25 min.

Its part of the procedure for the weapon, just like any other procedure for employing weapons in DCS you might need to practice it. I can boresight Both pylons in like 20 secs as I get to the AO if required.

Edited January 12, 2021 by Deano87
spelling

[fudabidu]

3 hours ago, Machalot said:

What do you mean by "slave perfectly"? Are they pointing at different targets or the same? 

I intentionally did the boresight procedure wrong by locking two targets 800 meters apart.
After commanding a hand-off the Mavericks aligned perfectly with the TGP.

3 hours ago, Machalot said:

Why not keep it in but make it part of the autostart sequence? 

Because boresighting is supposed to be done in the air to maximize view range and minimize parallax errors.

[Machalot]

1 hour ago, fudabidu said:

5 hours ago, Machalot said:

What do you mean by "slave perfectly"? Are they pointing at different targets or the same? 

I intentionally did the boresight procedure wrong by locking two targets 800 meters apart.
After commanding a hand-off the Mavericks aligned perfectly with the TGP.

Hm, I had a different experience. I aligned them to slightly different points on the same building, and when I slewed and attempted handoff, there was a pointing error in the Mav.

 

You seem to be saying you don't even need to bother aligning them, just mash the BSGT button wherever they happen to be pointing.

[fudabidu]

51 minutes ago, Machalot said:

Hm, I had a different experience. I aligned them to slightly different points on the same building, and when I slewed and attempted handoff, there was a pointing error in the Mav.

 

You seem to be saying you don't even need to bother aligning them, just mash the BSGT button wherever they happen to be pointing.

That's exactly what I'm saying and I've just tested it again. See screenshots attached.

bsgt1 was taken before boresighting. On the WPN page I marked the TGP target (left) and the MAV target (right). You probably need to zoom to make out the tiny white dots.
bsgt2 was taken after commanding a handoff. MAV slewed over and locked onto the target without any issues.

I repeated the process on the other pylon and got the exact same result.

Edited January 13, 2021 by fudabidu

[Fri13]

12 minutes ago, fudabidu said:

That's exactly what I'm saying and I've just tested it again. See screenshots attached.
I repeated the process on the other pylon and got the exact same result.

 

Looks to be so.

 

So the procedure is there, so you learn it and you need to do it.

But the function in the procedure is broken as no matter what errors or mistakes you do, the procedure will end to perfectly done alignment.

 

This is the common problem in DCS that systems are modeled with the assumption that player does always the right thing and there are no errors, no problems, no challenges etc modeled.

Like the original thing in KA-50 or Su-25T, you have Shkval for targeting and it will lock on any 3D model that considered by game as "live" (not destroyed). So when you try to lock on dead unit it is denied as game knows it is dead, you should as well know it is dead, so why should you try to target a dead unit?

 

When these simulations doesn't include these kind things, it gets broken. Like Shkval, so Mavericks.

And now someone might argue "But if you try to do something you shouldn't, you are doing it wrong".

But that is the point of the simulator that you are challenged to do things right, and even when you do things right, you might get errors and problems.

 

Like why to see effort to be careful and accurate with the Maverick alignment when it is always perfection itself? Just run the procedure and it is fine. And that leads to situation, just skip the whole thing as you can't do it wrong, you can't suffer from the errors and mistakes you did as the system does it anyways properly. So until the system actually works properly, don't require to do it as result is same!

[fudabidu]

7 minutes ago, Fri13 said:

So until the system actually works properly, don't require to do it as result is same!

Not boresighting at all is different from doing it wrong and still having it work.

Until the system is finished it's still good practice to do correctly.

[Machalot]

Is it possible that the Mav in your case is boresighted with misalignment, but is successfully image correlating in spite of a misaligned handoff?  When I boresighted with a residual misalignment, I was zoomed way in, so the misaligned seeker had a very different image from the TGP and did not successfully find the target.

[Fri13]

1 hour ago, fudabidu said:

Not boresighting at all is different from doing it wrong and still having it work.

Until the system is finished it's still good practice to do correctly.

 

Learning systems that works improperly is bad, not learning it at all before it works is better. And being able to learn it when ready for it or when wanted, is best.

[Northstar98]

15 hours ago, taco3rd said:

IMO, it takes a certain level of experience to even recognize and work around these issues. Expecting a newb to come in and understand what he/she is looking at and then take the actions necessary to rectify it is asking a lot.

 

Nobody is asking that a complete newcomer be familiar with it, and follow the procedure without assistance; there are however measures and content in place to allow them to learn; there's plenty of video tutorials on YouTube, there's the aircraft manual (and the F-16CM has the best manual IMO, super clear, super easy to follow, formatted beautifully), and if neither of those things work, they can simply ask on this forum; nobody honest is going to chastise them from wanting to figure out how to do something - I'm no different.

 

They don't have to learn at the same pace as everybody else, it's not a competition, nor do they have to learn it at all.

 

[falcon_120]

12 hours ago, Deano87 said:

 

Its part of the procedure for the weapon, just like any other procedure for employing weapons in DCS you might need to practice it. I can boresight Both pylons in like 20 secs as I get to the AO if required.

 

I know what it is and i already said i like it is there and simulated.

 

But you missed my point, sometimes i dont have the time, It is not 20 seconds for sure, at least not if you dont train which most of us cant, and its does not mind cause its not only about this procedure, but about all realistic procedures, for example coupled with a cold start and full ins alingment. If i had to do that everytime my 20 min daily session would consist on 3 minutes of flying, 17 of setting everything correctly. Luckily for that we have options like a hot start jet. This is the same, it would be nice to have as an option in the option menu (at least for SP).

 

Again, its not that i want a game, i like dcs modules for its complexity and simulation, its just that RL gets in the way and some compromises for people with less time should always be considerd AS AN OPTION THAT DOES NOT TAKE ANYTHING AWAY FROM PLAYERS WHO WANT THE FULL EXPERIENCE ALL THE TIME.

[falconbr]

8 hours ago, fudabidu said:

That's exactly what I'm saying and I've just tested it again.

 

Hi,

 

You are right, I tested as well.

 

This should be bug.

 

According to relevant -34 manual boresighting is done with the same target selected with TGP or HUD.

 

Best regards,

 

falconbr

[fudabidu]

8 hours ago, Fri13 said:

 

Learning systems that works improperly is bad, not learning it at all before it works is better. And being able to learn it when ready for it or when wanted, is best.

Early access isn't supposed to cater to everybody. It's a chance to get your hands on a module early, test it and provide feedback to the devs. You have to expect that many systems will be missing functionality, missing entirely or have bugs.
If learning bugged systems is such a bad idea then people shouldn't buy early access modules, unless they already know how things are supposed to work or they are willing to dig through manuals. People would just learn the wrong things all the time, because the module isn't finished, right?
 

1 hour ago, falconbr said:

 

According to relevant -34 manual boresighting is done with the same target selected with TGP or HUD.

Thank you.

Does the manual also explain what boresighting does exactly?
I'm under the impression it just aligns the MAV LOS with the TGP. When done at max range both lines of sight will be mostly parallel to each other, which is good enough to lock onto a target the size of a tank. Parallax would only be an issue at VERY close ranges when the angle between the LOSs increases significantly (way too close to launch anyways)

Edited January 13, 2021 by fudabidu

[falconbr]

1 hour ago, fudabidu said:

Does the manual also explain what boresighting does exactly?

 

Hi,

 

The summary is as follows:

 

- The AGM-65 mounting procedure induces an unknown amount of misalignment.

- Those misalignments is corrected by boresighting the missile LOS to the HUD/TGP LOS.

- Missile boresight is most accurate if performed in the air on a realistic target.

- The AGM-65 boresight procedure may only be performed on the ground if the missiles do not have dome covers installed.

- The TGP can also be used for boresight.

- The object used to boresight the missiles to the TGP should be as far away as possible to limit parallax errors.

- To accomplish missile boresight LAU-117/A launcher is required.

- VIS or PRE submode can be used to that procedure.

 

Best regards,

 

falconbr

Edited January 13, 2021 by falconbr

[Deano87]

I’ll put a track together and report that boresighting incorrectly somehow still works In the bug section.

[fudabidu]

@falconbr Highly appreciated. Confirms exactly what I've been taught elsewhere.

[falconbr]

11 minutes ago, fudabidu said:

@falconbr Highly appreciated. Confirms exactly what I've been taught elsewhere.

 

[twistking]

1 hour ago, falconbr said:

 

Hi,

 

The summary is as follows:

 

- The AGM-65 mounting procedure induces an unknown amount of misalignment.

- Those misalignments is corrected by boresighting the missile LOS to the HUD/TGP LOS.

- Missile boresight is most accurate if performed in the air on a realistic target.

- The AGM-65 boresight procedure may only be performed on the ground if the missiles do not have dome covers installed.

- The TGP can also be used for boresight.

- The object used to boresight the missiles to the TGP should be as far away as possible to limit parallax errors.

- To accomplish missile boresight LAU-117/A launcher is required.

- VIS or PRE submode can be used to that procedure.

 

Best regards,

 

falconbr

 

 

but why do you have to boresight only once per pylon? i would think that there could be some misalignment for each missile on a rack.

[fudabidu]

Or more importantly:
"To accomplish missile boresight LAU-117/A launcher is required"
That's the single launcher. What about the LAU-88?

No boresight, no handoff I assume. You wouldn't even need to bother with boresighting anymore! Sorry, I find that thought hilarious.
Now imagine ED also changed how the LAU-88 works on the A-10C.

[ebabil]

I hate boresight process and I find it unnecessary. IRL most likely it is not boring because they are not using meverick everyday and even more than one flight a day.

I think that in this game, it could be ignored. Especially we still have too many missing features..

[falconbr]

6 hours ago, twistking said:

 

but why do you have to boresight only once per pylon? i would think that there could be some misalignment for each missile on a rack.

 

4 hours ago, fudabidu said:

What about the LAU-88?

 

Hi,

 

Adding the LAU-88 is compromise ED has been made with the community:

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3920366&postcount=21

 

Probably, ED is simulating the LAU-88A/A launcher that has improved launcher electronic unit (LEU) and provides "Separate Boresight Memory Setting".

That means that LAU-88A/A LEU retains the missile boresight setting. Once the first missile is boresighted, the launcher provides the same boresight correction to all missiles on the LAU-88A/A.

 

I just tested that in DCS F-16 and TPG boresight procedure is possible with LAU-88. Only one missile should be boresight.

 

Best regards,

 

falconbr

[Machalot]

18 minutes ago, falconbr said:

That means that LAU-88A/A LEU retains the missile boresight setting. Once the first missile is boresighted, the launcher provides the same boresight correction to all missiles on the LAU-88A/A.

Partially explains why boresighting, firing, then rearming Mavericks doesn't require reboresighting.  Maybe.

 

Can you explain the triple rack issue? They were never allowed IRL because of damage from the Mav plumes, but a single Mav is allowed on the same station?  Why doesn't that plume cause damage?

[Deano87]

2 hours ago, Machalot said:

Partially explains why boresighting, firing, then rearming Mavericks doesn't require reboresighting.  Maybe.

 

Can you explain the triple rack issue? They were never allowed IRL because of damage from the Mav plumes, but a single Mav is allowed on the same station?  Why doesn't that plume cause damage?

Regarding the tripple rack, from my understanding they allow(ed) the use of the TER with the two outboard rails being used. The plume issue was when you loaded 3 mavs onto the TER, the inboard mav's exhaust plume/exhaust plug can impinge on the horizontal tail. With a chance of damaging it. Would the 6x AGM-65 loadout have been used in a Fulda Gap style situation where the main idea is "oh my god, kill all the tanks!!"? I dunno... Possibly? 

Edited January 14, 2021 by Deano87

[fudabidu]

"This configuration [3 MAV on LAU-88] placed very high stress on the airframe and the inboard missile's exhaust impinged on the horizontal tail, causing the Air Force to restrict that load except in wartime."- Found in another forum, but with no replies to confirm or deny. Does sound reasonable to me though.
 

[FlankerKiller]

On 1/10/2021 at 8:02 AM, fudabidu said:

And where are we supposed to draw the line? Automatic AAR, automatic trim, pre-aligned INS, pre-aligned MAVs ... what's next? An 'easy radar' option for people who can't figure out antenna elevation?

Someone apparently spent 20 minutes trying to boresight. Only thing that can go wrong is the target being out of Maverick range, so you can't lock and press BSGT. It's all over the internet, because so many people have problems with it.
So, now we need an option for it, because expecting people to use google for 5 minutes in 2021 is asking too much.

The skill floor is low enough already, especially online.

So I think something that's being missed is some of those functions are done be the ground crew. Alert aircraft are often fully aligned and ready to get airborne on a moment's notice. We can keep alot up and runing on ground power. Also I do think prealiged INS, TGP, and weapons should be a special option. It doesn't make the jet any more or lethal, and frankly time is finite. But it should be an option, not forced to work one way or the other. 

[DoctorVixen]

On 1/9/2021 at 11:21 PM, falconbr said:

Hi,

 

If our goal is to stuck to simulate real F-16, this procedure is the must.

 

The borresight in PRE/VIS mode without TGP is also needed.

 

Best regards,

 

falconbr

That missiles need to be aligned is realistic, but that the pilot needs to do it when he enters the plane is not realistic, ground crew can pre-align the missille if u ask them. but u cant in dcs. The plane needs to be cleaned and washed from time to time as well, The airframe needs to be checked regularly also. It's not done by the pilot.

 

things as waiting minutes, or doing repetetive chores is not what i like. Fine that i can learn them but once i did, i don't think i'll enjoy aligning mavs for the 1000th time. Also this full fidelity f16 is not full fidelity at all yet. Its an early access module. NOBODY asked for 8 minutes alignment or the boresight procedure. We don't have ground radar sea radar of any of the toys on the jf17.  And what do they implement? chores.

 

For me, i was really excited when i found out about the f16, i did not realize that it was missing so much.

 

the mavs are actually a hassle to use in my opinion and the cbu97's are hassle free, more fun and more effective.

i can't set spi, no ground radar. yes full clickable cockpit, all kind of buttons that say click an animate and do nothing.

 

I tried the jf17 during the free trials and bought that one. update dtc data - copy.  f10 click click click BAM  waypoints set. you can shoot cruise missiles drag bombs, have al kinds of radars and modes, buttons work.

 

in the f16...waiting for 8 minutes ins align. lets put in 1 waypoint, go to f10, change so its metric, get a pen and paper north 12.23.34423 east 32.12.31231

ok press wpt, N put in all the numbers from youre note. next put in easting, remember to add a 0... ok now elevation, first waypoint done. f10 map, not next waypoint back to plane, put in the waypoint. do the same for the other 15 waypoints.

when done with that chore, get ready to find a target to align the missiles, aah to bad this airport has no object to align on, ah well. lets startover at another field.

 

meanwhile in the jeff i am actually having fun. its the full fidelity kind i like, and it doesn't  feel unrealistic at all. Also i have not found any bug. auto-ins alignment takes about 30 seconds. i can get ground crew to enter coordinates, i know how to do it the hard way too, but i need to do it every time i start up so. I am very glad i can delegate the chores i dont like to do everytime and with the jeff i get those options, i only miss one thing and that's the vipers thrust and speed. 

Edited January 14, 2021 by DoctorVixen