FCR air-to-ground sighting options
-
Lining-up with a runway, or a column of vehicles you know the heading of. You’ll drop 6 bombs with a spacing of 500 ft and you want them to disperse over the column, as you would when you set an azimuth on JSOW. Using the radar as a reference to line-up is not really easy, visual cues are easier to refer to.
I understand the visual element, but the BMS and official documentation refers to using OA’s as a sensor reference point, and I’m not sure how that works in a practical sense, unless I’m correct that you just set one OA, and the sensors remain achnored to that while still retaining the steerpoint as the actual aim point.
-
I’m pretty sure BMS has this modeled wrong. The steerpoint should ALWAYS define the target location, the two OA’s are used to point sensors, FCR mainly, in cases where the target would not generate a radar return directly. When you select OA1, you slew the radar cursors over the pre-planned radar significant point and using the offset distance and range this defines target location. The actual CCRP solution cue/box will still lay over the intended target (the steerpoint). You can plan two offsets OA1 and OA2, but the the steerpoint is always the target.
BMS treats the OA’s as SPI’s and you can see the CCRP solution cue moving to the OA position as if you want to attack it (the OA). This is wrong.
-
I’m pretty sure BMS has this modeled wrong. The steerpoint should ALWAYS define the target location, the two OA’s are used to point sensors, FCR mainly, in cases where the target would not generate a radar return directly. When you select OA1, you slew the radar cursors over the pre-planned radar significant point and using the offset distance and range this defines target location. The actual CCRP solution cue/box will still lay over the intended target (the steerpoint). You can plan two offsets OA1 and OA2, but the the steerpoint is always the target.
BMS treats the OA’s as SPI’s and you can see the CCRP solution cue moving to the OA position as if you want to attack it (the OA). This is wrong.
That is interesting. That might also explain why this information is so hard to find.
I’d be interested to hear more input on this to confirm incorrect implementation. Perhaps it’s on a todo fix list if it is indeed not working as intended.
-
I feel like I’m flying in the 90s here… Why is this so complicated in BMS? With most targets you have coordinates. If it’s mobile like a vehicle, then throw a steerpoint down and slew your TGP to it (can be done with stationary targets too). The only situation this may become tricky is in DEAD. Real world we never use the A/G radar; it’s terrible (some people have never even used it). We have better technology like a TGP.
-
I think that’s the point. We are flying in the 90’s.
After all, MLU-M1 was current on the original F4 release, and it contains the same information in the BMS documentation.
-
I feel like I’m flying in the 90s here…
I mean the BMS Viper is like 6 tapes behind its real world counterpart so the 90s is probably an accurate assessment of the current state of the avionics (aside from having a few newer items cherry picked from later tapes like HMCS, JDAMs, etc).
-
Real world we never use the A/G radar; it’s terrible (some people have never even used it).
Do you think that will change once you guys have fancy new APG-80s or APG-83s?
-
I feel like I’m flying in the 90s here… Why is this so complicated in BMS? With most targets you have coordinates. If it’s mobile like a vehicle, then throw a steerpoint down and slew your TGP to it (can be done with stationary targets too). The only situation this may become tricky is in DEAD. Real world we never use the A/G radar; it’s terrible (some people have never even used it). We have better technology like a TGP.
I mean the BMS Viper is like 6 tapes behind its real world counterpart so the 90s is probably an accurate assessment of the current state of the avionics (aside from having a few newer items cherry picked from later tapes like HMCS, JDAMs, etc).
In fairness, there is no RF or true thermals modeled in BMS so the A/G radar is significantly more useful/effective in BMS than the real world counterpart, and the TGP significantly less so. Odds are if the real world radar were 50% as effective as the BMS version, the TGP may have been developed in an entirely different fashion; specifically tailored to the A-10s and other platforms which rely heavily on visual acquisition, and then adopted to the F-16s to provide guided munitions support, instead of the other way around.
-
OAPs are designed with an intentional offset between sensor and target as Adam106 suggests. The idea is that your OAP is the orphanage and the target is the bad guy bunker. You point your sensors at the orphanage (OAP) but the bombs drop on the bunker, the offset being programmed into the jet. The bombs should never be dropped on an OAP. BMS (wrongly) changes your weapon aiming along with your sensor aiming causing bombs to fall on the orphanage.
This somewhat changes the utility of OAPs. You can use them as “alternate DMPIs” but if you want to use them for their intended purpose you have to rotary back to target after refining system deltas with the OAP as the aiming location or risk delivering weapons on the OAP instead of the target.
I’ll see if I can do a write up using a default training mission as a basis to demo OAPs and IP/RPs. It’s not that complicated in total but initial access to understanding isn’t so easy. Some of the features like automatic switching of navigation and sighting locations aren’t working 100% and there are a few bugs which are obstacles as well.
-
I feel like I’m flying in the 90s here… Why is this so complicated in BMS? With most targets you have coordinates. If it’s mobile like a vehicle, then throw a steerpoint down and slew your TGP to it (can be done with stationary targets too). The only situation this may become tricky is in DEAD. Real world we never use the A/G radar; it’s terrible (some people have never even used it). We have better technology like a TGP.
The 90s? That’s way too modern for my brain.
But to be serious if you use the Recon map and Target Steerpoints it is pretty darn easy to deliver 7 JDAMs in one pass and I use TGP just to confirm that the target is still there (sometimes ADBs move and sometimes buildings are already destroyed – bc I don’t check the entire ATO to see if someone is going to beat me to the target by 1 to 90 minutes). Even with dumb bombs it’s the same story. GMT mode is great though for locating movers, but then I lay down a reference markpoint (in case I accidentally touch something that slews my TGP off into space) and switch to TGP prosecution. If the cloud base is below 11 to 14k depending on the enemy, I don’t chase movers. But I can usually find an area that looks relatively safe to drop down below the clouds and get the TGP verification that I like, but if the area is too hot I just race in and drop from high altitude. I would think that’s pretty close to 2010 and forward tactics?
I got to believe that all the modern fighter jets have at least Garmin 100 colored GPS scrolling map capability, I mean for Pete’s sake you can get them through Walmart?
And as much as I enjoy doing low altitude lofts I am guessing that is not implemented very often in real life. At some point its just smarter to toss a Tomahawk or a drone/hellfire at targets. Tomahawks have been around for a long time and the drones I think have been around since the second gulf war. And in a case where it’s just too dangerous due to whatever (including weather) these high risk missions that are so fun would probably be considered stupid risks in the real world.
Oops sorry for the ramble.
-
CCRP Sighting Option Familiarization
I. Sortie Preparation
Commit TE433_10_GPbombs
Select steerpoint 6
ICP-AG
Freeze simulation for data entryII. Data entry
A. OAP data entry
ICP-LIST, ICP-1 for DEST
NEXT/PREV to STPT 6
SEQ to OA1
RNG 2000, ENTR, BRG 900, ENTRB. VRP data entry
ICP-LIST, ICP-9 for VRP
ICP-0 to enable TGT-TO-VRP
VRP NEXT/PREV set target steerpoint to 6
RNG 4000 ENTRIII. Ingress
Verify VRPCRP or CCRP HUD text depending on VRP use.
Use TMS right or FCR OSB 10 to cycle rotary options
Note OAP position 2000’ left (east) of target
Note RP position 4000’ near (north) of targetVI. Notes
OAP2 use is identical to OAP1.
VIP function similar to VRP.
OAP and IP/RP use is independent; use either or both.
VIP and VRP functions are mutually exclusive.
OAP/IP/RP are incompatible with snow plow (points are relative to select steerpoint and not snowplow’s pseudo-steerpoint).
VIP-to-PUP bug displaces the PUP as entered relative to TGT instead of IP.
OAP and IP/RP data can be stored in the data cartridge from mission planning. -
Gents:
Okay I checked the -1 and I am not finding an explanation as to the theory behind VIP and VRP and PUP. I don’t even know what those acronyms stand for, nor why they would be useful?
Maybe this is why @Fox3TwoShip feels like we’re stuck in the 90s? I mean that technology isn’t really utilized anymore? Even so, I like flying old school so I am still curious what this is all about. I understand using OAPs to get a visual cue in your HUD (i.e. a runway layout if clouds obscure TGP). But the VIP, VRP, and PUP stuff is greek to me, if someone has a moment or two to flesh that out or point to an article on it that would be much appreciated.
@Frederf typo as to bearing?
-
BMS1-F16CM-34-1-1
Sighting Options
p.27And real world:
MLU_M1
SECTION 5 AIR-TO-GROUND RADAR
p.153Both provide about the same scope.
-
With regard to Offset Aimpoints:
weapons may be delivered against a target that presents a poor radar return by aiming at a radar-significant object
The problem appears to be that the implementation in BMS isn’t accurate and the offsets are treated as the target itself.
With that in mind, I’m not clear how OAs are used in BMS without compromising the attack.
-
BMS1-F16CM-34-1-1
Sighting Options
p.27And real world:
MLU_M1
SECTION 5 AIR-TO-GROUND RADAR
p.153Both provide about the same scope.
Thanks @supanova I thought for sure that would be in the -1, oh well. Now I understand @Fox3TwoShip’s comments a lot more. This is all well and good but why not just put in the GPS coordinates as STPT if you know the target is 865 meters and bearing 260 from the specified target – certainly HQ and AWACs has that ability ready to go? I think you’d only need it if you were taking direction directly from say some GI that doesn’t have GPS equipment available. But if that GI was giving this information and it made it’s way through to you by AWACS you’d think you would get the GPS coordinates as well from them. So probably very rarely would real pilots need to do this. But that being said, it’s pretty cool stuff and I am glad it’s included!
-
Let me see if I understand VIPs and VRPs.
The VIP sighting mode also allows for an unknown target position to be referenced from a known position (steer point) during a mission.
The VIP is the target. VIP bearing and range is relative to the steerpoint, PUP bearing and range is relative to the VIP.
Visual reference point (VRP) sighting mode is used in preplanned submodes to plot a reference point on the HUD as a true bearing and range from the target. This allows the utilization of a known, visually identifiable position, or RP point, to initiate an attack.
The steerpoint is the target. VRP bearing and range is relative to the steerpoint, PUP bearing and range is also relative to the steerpoint.
I think the idea is that you use VIPs when the target is hard to identify, and the steerpoint is a visual reference, and vice versa with VRPs.
That being said, wouldn’t it be better to use a VRP as visual reference, rather than OAs?
-
With regard to Offset Aimpoints:
The problem appears to be that the implementation in BMS isn’t accurate and the offsets are treated as the target itself.
With that in mind, I’m not clear how OAs are used in BMS without compromising the attack.
Well I was unable to tell from the documentation for sure so I made a TE to test it.
It seems you can rotary TMS right or OSB10 through STPT, OA1, OA2 and VIP or VRP (if you have set them) and that’s what the bomb drop cue, TGP, and-or guided weapon will be tied to. I think Adam and Frederf are saying that’s not the way it is in real life? Frederf’s example of the orphanage, if I understand him correctly, is that you would use the OA to designate areas where you definitely don’t want your bombs to go. I can see it being used for that, but I can also see it being used the other way and actually think it’s useful.
So I get a call from a ground FAC and his GPS is down for whatever reason, even lost his handy dandy printed map, and maybe he’s even got other triangulation tools at his disposal and so he says, “There is a T80 900 feet bearing 082 from the center of X Bridge burrowed into the sand.” I tally the bridge and make it a mark point, now I plug in the info I got from the FAC into a VIP or OAP and I now have a really good spot to ground stabilize my TGP and hunt for this tank. Or if there’s urgency or danger there I might just attack that spot with a standoff weapon. Anyway, I think it makes a lot of sense in terms of a backup plan if you think about how the military should have a backup plan for the backup plan and every possible contingency covered (so long as they have the funds to cover it). And yet, in real life in since 2000 or even earlier that probably just hasn’t happened and why @Fox3TwoShip contemplates why we are stuck in the 90s (probably early 90s). This stuff is just not used anymore.
Anyway, I agree that I am not going to be using this stuff very often because if you get an AWACS or FAC(A) call it’s going to give me the coords. I think you might want to use offsets for HUD visual clues in bad weather and maybe switch to CCIP at the last moment, or even good for getting the line up for a column or bridge or runway when the TGP isn’t going to get it done (i.e. terrain masked, bad weather). So I do see it being useful, just not very often and especially not in real life where I think the flying is much more conservative bc putting a pilot at undue risk in real life is just plain stupid, but this is a game so we can have fun with this stuff as much as we like.
-
I think the idea is that you use VIPs when the target is hard to identify, and the steerpoint is a visual reference, and vice versa with VRPs.
That being said, wouldn’t it be better to use a VRP as visual reference, rather than OAs?
I love yakking and learning about this stuff! LOL. I don’t think necessarily that for VIP the steerpoint has to be an easily spotted visual reference but that would definitely be preferred I would think. And yeah, if I follow you, I think the idea is to use the VRP to set up an IP after wheels up. Having all three types OAs and VRPs and VIPs all make sense to me because you get additional symbology. So, I can use VRP to set up an impromptu IP and use OAs to designate the near and far end of a runway and I am going to have all those cues on my HUD for SA purposes.
-
@Frederf typo as to bearing?
900 = 090.0° Bearings are in true (not magnetic). I think the DED says “TBRG” instead of “BRG” to emphasize true vs. magnetic.
You can use OAP for original purpose the difference is you have to return to TGT reference before weapon release.
You must not call them “GPS coordinates” but “geographic coordinates.” GPS is a tool, not a coordinate system. And like any tool it can be taken away. Your GPS is jammed and INS drifts. You might know a relative position but not an absolute one.
-
if I understand him correctly, is that you would use the OA to designate areas where you definitely don’t want your bombs to go.
You would use an Offset Aimpoint if the target had a poor radar return. The OA would then be placed on a stronger return. The FCR would reference the stronger radar return and use the offset to have a solid picture of where the target was.
But it appears in BMS the OA becomes the target, hence it is less useful than it should be.