Maverick question
-
In the A-10C the video doesn’t change on contrast selection but instead the overlaid symbology and character of the splotch that can be tracked. If the lines are black you’re looking to track a black splotch and if the lines are white you’re looking to track a white splotch. The video itself doesn’t change. However just because the A-10 does it this way I cannot say the F-16 does it this way. It would be easy to invert the video (or not) and always track white splotches. The end result would be the same.
M1 tape doc calls it “tracking polarity” which suggests a change of what color splotch is tracked which is a vote for A-10C style video unaltered method. MLU M2 tape reinforces the concept of TGP having BHOT/WHOT/TV but also having WT/BT/NT for being able to track white, black, or any objects. Interestingly MLU M2 says that Maverick video is changed to be toggled with uncage and no longer automatically occurring after timeout. In the next paragraph it describes EO-VIS as taking two TMS forwards to switch SOI to Maverick (once to ground the TD box and again to shift to WPN SOI). MLU M3 EO-HMCS employment is also this way.
WOB/BOW (and possible automatic although it takes longer to begin track) is for AGM-65A/B. HOC/COH is fro AGM-65D/G.
I note that the EO bore cross is not central but biased to the side the missile is on. Also apparently it flashes when the pointing cross flashes.
I have never seen a Maverick video inversion in any video or picture in an F-16. In the same breath I have never seen the symbols be anything other than their standard green or white color. It could be that tracking contrast option isn’t reflected in the cross symbols or video inversion and is just a label.
It is worth note that the TGP handoff instructions don’t mention selecting a contrast option with TMS left. The MBC seems to have no trouble correlating the MAV and TGP video even if one is inverse to the other. In any case the automatic procedure doesn’t require thought as to contrast option from the pilot.
After everything I’ve read (one more supporting note from Vipers in the Storm) I’m confident enough to say that white is always hot and black is always cold on the Mav. video. The contrast option is just to tell the missile what kind of splotch should be tracked.
––
The ability to back up the “pre/post designate” chain in the various EO modes I don’t have good info or even a feeling about. However I feel the restricted nature of SOI during the EO modes can’t be right.
In EO-PRE if I am moving around FCR or TGP cursors (SPI) and decide, screw this I just want to slew the Maverick now. I press DMS down to WPN SOI and just slew. It’s not locked preventing WPN SOI slewing at any time like it is in 433.
In EO-VIS I slew the TD box around and never press TMS forward to ground the box. I decide this is close enough. DMS down, WPN SOI, slew the Maverick. No need to follow the chain and auto SOI switch upon designate. If you want to change SOI you are free to do so and slew Maverick at any time (or FCR or TGP).
In EO-BORE the WPN format initializes as SOI. You fly the bore cross near the target and just start slewing. You don’t need to press TMS at to freely slew.
-
The TGP is supposed to set the mav contrast selection to match the track type from the TGP (WT/BT), IIRC. The note about the MLU M2 differences does reinforce the point about things being different per F-16. Personally Id prefer it if we had entirely CCIP avionics, or if MLU blocks had MLU avionics and CCIP blocks CCIP avionics. The Configurator is a step in that direction, so I approve greatly of that.
-
Yeah, I’m sure that would be an obvious bit of automation. Whatever tracking option the TGP had surely should be enforced on the Maverick.
Naturally MLU 123 are not identical to USAF OFP whatever. I am trying to draw a straight line from known territory to unknown, getting insight into the design thinking.
-
The TGP is supposed to set the mav contrast selection to match the track type from the TGP (WT/BT), IIRC. .
Correct. This function is known. So are some other details mentioned.
-
I also must say that I actually find it weird that the Maverick will return to slave mode just because SOI was removed from WPN page… not so intuitive to me, at least I can’t think of another system that behaves this way.
LANTIRN essentially does. Taking SOI away is not the trigger, but making any slews does(as per 1.32.1.10.5 A-G Mode.).
-
After everything I’ve read (one more supporting note from Vipers in the Storm) I’m confident enough to say that white is always hot and black is always cold on the Mav. video. The contrast option is just to tell the missile what kind of splotch should be tracked.
Yes this is how it’s working in RL. Not yet in BMS because of code/feature limitations - Specifically there is no “temperature” management for objects so they will be displayed all white or all black depending on the display’s polarity, once we will implement temperature management for objects, it will be possible to implement such behavior of the Maverick head. Until that point, what we have now is I guess the best compromise because the Maverick does track objects of the cursor’s color…
The ability to back up the “pre/post designate” chain in the various EO modes I don’t have good info or even a feeling about. However I feel the restricted nature of SOI during the EO modes can’t be right.
What do you mean by “the restricted nature of SOI”? do you mean the fact that once a Maverick is ground stabilized you cannot put it to slave again without changing Master mode? if yes then this is according to the latest info we have from a very reliable source, and we believe that to be the most correct behavior, no matter what the docs say.
In EO-PRE if I am moving around FCR or TGP cursors (SPI) and decide, screw this I just want to slew the Maverick now. I press DMS down to WPN SOI and just slew. It’s not locked preventing WPN SOI slewing at any time like it is in 433.
Something here doesn’t makes sense to me, what exactly in 4.33 is “locked preventing” you?? is there some lack of knowledge here maybe?? are you aware to the fact that at any time in PRE mode you can just do that exactly, i.e move SOI to WPN and just slew the Maverick? the only limitation you do have is that once the Maverick was ground stabilized you must cycle MM in order to reset the Missiles back to slave mode (currently you can do that only with DGFT/MM-ORD, but later with any MM switch).
In EO-VIS I slew the TD box around and never press TMS forward to ground the box. I decide this is close enough. DMS down, WPN SOI, slew the Maverick. No need to follow the chain and auto SOI switch upon designate. If you want to change SOI you are free to do so and slew Maverick at any time (or FCR or TGP).
Yes, I need to check VIS mode deeply, apparently there are some details which are not so accurate (e.g in RL TGP Handoff is also possible in VIS mode).
In EO-BORE the WPN format initializes as SOI. You fly the bore cross near the target and just start slewing. You don’t need to press TMS at to freely slew.
Yes I confirm that we already checked and this should be fixed indeed.
-
I must be remembering 4.32 too much. I check again and there is more freedom than I remember. EO-PRE I think is perfect. You can even HUD SOI and move SPI with HUD slews which I never tried before. Back in 4.32 it was impossible to WPN-SOI and slew but 4.33 you can.
EO-VIS enforces the TD box approach. One should freely move SOI around HUD-WPN-FCR. It directly says you can reject target by manually putting HUD SOI and TMS aft. I assume this re-establishes slave to TD box but at the very least it would break track, unground TD box possibly back to FPM. I note post-designate EO-VIS you can SOI between MFDs, just not back to HUD to refine or reject the TD box.
TGP MBC is a kind of override mode that does it in EO-PRE or EO-VIS the same way. What I don’t know is if EO-VIS’s TDC box will direct the TGP LOS or SPI to the same spot or if it’s completely separate leaving TGP LOS or SPI alone.
EO-PRE/BORE behave differently with VIP/VRP enabled and overfly than without. Interestingly it says that DMS up doesn’t HUD SOI in “SSNS” but does in “SSS.” I don’t fully understand the VIP/VRP SSNS/SSS distinction. Is SSS allowing the HUD because one slews the visual points when using VIP/VRP to correct INS drift? EO-VIS doesn’t have SSS/SSNS distinction.
One thing I’m 50/50 on as a guess. Is a Maverick is tracking and one slews can you “rip away” a track by slew only or is TMS aft required? Other AGM-65 implementations I’ve come across attempt track automatically whenever slews are ceased or if TMS forward is pressed. If the Maverick didn’t track after slew release it would try for a few seconds and go into “break lock” mode which tracked the ground but was devoid of the crosshairs.
Oh and the pointing cross should never occlude the tracking window (the rectangle formed by the gates). Any part of the pointing cross in the window is transparent.
About the HOC/COH. What about just forcing the display white=hot at all times and let everything lock in either mode. That wouldn’t be full featured but would be more accurate or no less accurate in all respects. Preventing the wrong targets from being trackable in the wrong polarity (and having cold tanks) would be a job for another day.
I haven’t seen every aspect of the 30-30-30 rule in effect, namely the 30°/sec roll rate limitation. The delta roll is present but at max roll rate I can get an instantaneous good launch if I launch at a similar angle as I started the track even if I do so spinning like a mad man.
-
TMS down returns the missile to slew in BMS, not to slave. If the BMS manual says it should return to slave, that would be a mistake.
TMS down undesignates, in which case I would expect the missile to return to last selected state, or slave to cursor if a different SOI has been selected…at least, that is what I would expect.
-
Thats what I would expect too, but it doesnt work like that in BMS.
-
I hope they fix that then…
-
The TGP is supposed to set the mav contrast selection to match the track type from the TGP (WT/BT), IIRC. The note about the MLU M2 differences does reinforce the point about things being different per F-16. Personally Id prefer it if we had entirely CCIP avionics, or if MLU blocks had MLU avionics and CCIP blocks CCIP avionics. The Configurator is a step in that direction, so I approve greatly of that.
I’m pretty sure the missile doesn’t work that way (at least I know the F doesn’t) but the jet could certainly force it to behave that way…I don’t see why anyone would particularly want that though, as the pictures on the two sensors aren’t comparable to an extent and what looks good on one might not look good on the other. I’m pretty sure the crew could/should be able to override selection, even if they are both initially synched.
-
Well, at least we can now return to slave mode by changing any MM rather than MRM/DGFT. Would be nice to be able to return to slave from SOI input also.