Jump to content

STT taking a very long time to lock in some situations, tends to be during re-attack, possibly related to ATA/AOB or AOA.


MARLAN_

Recommended Posts

During a reattack, myself and all of my peers are having issues where STT is failing to acquire a solid lock. It tends to primarily occur during a reattack, which makes me wonder if it has something to do with AOA/AOB/ATA causing the issue.

 

According to a real FA-18 pilot, STT should be nearly instantaneous (similar to how DCS nearly immediately acquires an STT lock in most cases)

 

(In fact, off topic a bit, TWS should take much longer to build a track file, whereas in DCS it tends to be instantaneous. - This is causing a weird case where we are changing our vSqn SOP from using STT to TWS, when in the real world it would be the opposite)

 

8vrNMNj.gif

stt.trk

 

After viewing the .gif, looks like that track has an enormous mach number (mach 15000??) that could possibly also be related, I've seen that happen a lot in DCS, but I've mostly ignored it thus far.


Edited by MARLAN_

 1A100.png?format=1500w  

Virtual CVW-8 - The mission of Virtual Carrier Air Wing EIGHT is to provide its members with an organization committed to presenting an authentic representation of U.S. Navy Carrier Air Wing operations in training and combat environments based on the real world experience of its real fighter pilots, air intercept controllers, airbosses, and many others.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Was that target jamming? 

I also had contacts with crazy mach numbers, and I guess that might be why the radar cant get a proper lock indeed.... 

Would be curious of the answer on this one... 

Rig: MB Gigabite z390UD, CPU Intel I7 8700k, RAM 32G DDR4 3200 Gskill ripjaws, GPU MSI RTX2080SuperOC, HDD Crucial mx500 1tb M2 sata, PSU Corsair 850W, watercooling Corsair h100,

 

Controlers TM f/a 18 stick on Virpil warbrd base, TM cougar f16 stick on cougar base, Cougar F16 throttle on TUSBA, ch pedals, TM cougar MFD

 

27" monitor with trk IR 5 and HP Reverb HMD.

 

 

Modules F18, F16, F86, Mig15, FW 190D9, Nellis range map, Aggr campaign, Middle East map

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seeing the gif the OP uploaded, it looks like the radar attempts to go STT at a much higher elevation than the correct one. You can see the elevation caret starting very high initially and then going lower with every attempt at STT, probably until the target is inside the elevation limits of the radar again. By the time it actually succeeds to go STT, the elevation caret is just a little higher than the horizon.

I've seen the crazy high Mach number and I think it shows when the radar is supposed to have resolved the target's range, but not the velocity, which might require more than one return. The radar currently builds a trackfile after only one return, whereas it should probably display just a brick until it resolves the velocity and builds a proper trackfile. I don't think it's related to jamming, as it can occur on targets without jammers and velocity jamming is not modeled in DCS anyway.

*Random thought*: I'm thinking that these two issues *might* be connected. The radar is trying to go STT at the predicted target location. A target that's a little above the horizon at 40 NM, will be significantly higher than the horizon, extremely quickly, if it's going with a speed of Mach 14,000+ (like in OP's gif). So, the radar is "predicting" that the target will be closer and way above the horizon in the next frame and trying to go STT there, hence the higher elevation. So, it could be the case where fixing the issue of building tracks before the velocity is resolved might solve this problem as well. Just an idle thought on my part.

  • Like 2

The vCVW-17 is looking for Hornet and Tomcat pilots and RIOs. Join the vCVW-17 Discord.

CVW-17_Profile_Background_VFA-34.png

F/A-18C, F-15E, AV-8B, F-16C, JF-17, A-10C/CII, M-2000C, F-14, AH-64D, BS2, UH-1H, P-51D, Sptifire, FC3
-
i9-13900K, 64GB @6400MHz RAM, 4090 Strix OC, Samsung 990 Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Svend_Dellepude said:

This happens if you are maneuvering while trying to get a lock. Looks like you were banking left.

I was banking left, as this seems to only occur during reattack.

 

As far as I've been told though, this should not be an issue in the real world.

 1A100.png?format=1500w  

Virtual CVW-8 - The mission of Virtual Carrier Air Wing EIGHT is to provide its members with an organization committed to presenting an authentic representation of U.S. Navy Carrier Air Wing operations in training and combat environments based on the real world experience of its real fighter pilots, air intercept controllers, airbosses, and many others.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MARLAN_ said:

I was banking left, as this seems to only occur during reattack.

 

As far as I've been told though, this should not be an issue in the real world.

 

No, I wouldn't imagine this would be a real world problem, but the DCS radar seems to have some problems for the time being.

  • Like 2

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Win10 64, Asus Maximus VIII Formula, i5 6600K, Geforce 980 GTX Ti, 32 GB Ram, Samsung EVO SSD.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Have noticed the same for a while now. Specifically, being inverted/high bank angle for extended periods seems to stop the radar from working at all in some cases and it will drop trackfiles entirely

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/14/2021 at 7:10 AM, dundun92 said:

Have noticed the same for a while now. Specifically, being inverted/high bank angle for extended periods seems to stop the radar from working at all in some cases and it will drop trackfiles entirely

How does radar antenna elevation work in such attitudes? Does it change elevation to compensate for inverted flight, or does it stay put which will change the scanned area - which could probably lead to a dropped contact?

That is not suggestive questioning - I honestly would like to know!


Edited by Hiob

"Muß ich denn jedes Mal, wenn ich sauge oder saugblase den Schlauchstecker in die Schlauchnut schieben?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...