Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
-
In my opinion, it is not useful.
It makes everything unreadable and does not bring anything…arguably, its not about usefulness - it should be about accuracy. i.e., if the aircraft has moving map, then it should be simulated.
Id not personally be spending time on it myself, were I in such a position - but then, it seems undeniable that it would be a useful feature, for those aircraft so equipped. Excellent SA tool, depending on the resolution of the display, as you could add rather a lot of useful information to a raster background.
-
Excellent SA tool, depending on the resolution of the display, as you could add rather a lot of useful information…
This leads to another idea/request of having more than 4 STPT LINES available in the UI/Map options.
-
In my opinion, it is not useful.
It makes everything unreadable and does not bring anything…From what I’ve seen it is pretty readable. But anyway with just a click pilot can make the map appear/disappear under HSD anytime, just to enhance his SA on where exactly he is on the globe.
Although this would be a couple of coding days to implement, this actual feature comes as a pair with Link-16 tapes software, so I would first expect to see bms devs implement a L16 first, then this map could possibly follow;
-
just to enhance his SA on where exactly he is on the globe.
I’m pretty sure with all the information they have, they already know where exactly on the globe they are. No need for crayons!!!
C9
-
@Cloud:
I’m pretty sure with all the information they have, they already know where exactly on the globe they are. No need for crayons!!!
C9
There is ALWAYS a need for crayons
-
So if you fly a night low-low deeeep strike 300nm within the enemy territory 200ft above terrain and with no satcommunications (only; Israel has such gizmos on the viper) you always know where you are on the old-classic HSD layout and what physically is around you, like mountains and obstacles for nap, towns/villages, populated places that will uncover you etc…
Don’t know what the original system developers where thinking to throw their time and efforts to for the old viper… Funny thing is that adding info over a map to a cockpit display, not only on latest glass pits but also older/upgraded assets is a must-have trend all around, military, civil, choppers, ships, tanks…
I am sure Elon Musk will also have one on the ship to mars…
-
So if you fly a night low-low deeeep strike 300nm within the enemy territory 200ft above terrain and with no satcommunications (only; Israel has such gizmos on the viper) you always know where you are on the old-classic HSD layout and what physically is around you, like mountains and obstacles for nap, towns/villages, populated places that will uncover you etc…
Fortunately yes he can.
Pilots knows how to fly with classic map. This is the first thing we (at least in FAF) learn when young flight student. The trainings a/c we had didn’t had any GPS or INS/IRS.Only the drew map, compass and watch. This is the basics. Back in 1990, MF1, and Jaguars over Iraq were flying the same way. IRS/GPS are very good and practical stuff … but an IRS is drifting and can fail, a GPS can fail, be jammed or spoofed. Moving map is a useful tool, but a pilot who is dependent of this device might be in a serious trouble in many cases …
However, yes, by night or in bad weather you can’t fly visual and “can’t” go out of track (in low level) … but it is still possible to navigate and fly a profile within a pre-computed corridor with compass and watch only (much more limitative), and sure not a 200ft/AGL.What I mean is that the moving map is certainly not something necessary to do what you are describing (“low-low deeeep strike 300nm within the enemy territory 200ft above terrain and with no satcommunications”), what is needed to fly safely at 200ft by night is is a terrain following system (radar or digital terrain or both) … or, pe-computed profile and NVGs, … associated to localization precision (provided by GPS, and/or IRS). Moving map remains a + … but is only a +.
-
This leads to another idea/request of having more than 4 STPT LINES available in the UI/Map options.
Sure. This is a good request; one that has been made earlier in the thread I believe.
The CCIP aircraft can also update their lines in flight with L16 messages
-
This post is deleted! -
It’d be nice to be able to type hostnames in the comms phonebook, instead of IP Addresses only. You can already type in the dedicated IVC addres box (though I haven’t checked if that actually resolves the hostname). That wouldn’t change much in terms of 24/7 servers running on static IP, but hosting would be much easier for people who have dynamic IP and use some dynamic DNS service.
-
This post is deleted! -
Only the drew map, compass and watch. This is the basics. … IRS/GPS are very good and practical stuff … but an IRS is drifting and can fail, a GPS can fail, be jammed or spoofed. Moving map is a useful tool, but a pilot who is dependent of this device might be in a serious trouble in many cases …
Wheres the whiskey compass?
I see a DG, but those drift, can fail, etc…
If you are dependent on gyros, could be serious trouble in many cases…
You see what I mean? You can pick any technology and say its too new, too advanced, not reliable enough… schoolmasters complained about PAPER when it started to replace slates. What about when the paper runs out, and the young ones cant clean a slate properly??
-
That’s why usually several systems are implemented/used simultaneously to provide several layers of redundancy in case one fails! It’s doesn’t have to be one or the other.
-
Well new changes even if they r for the better are not welcome by 90%.
I believe this goes for pilots and systems changes.
The moving map is a detailed system of what current systems display in a more easy to read and understand manner.
Example the tfr page… Hard to comprehend in the beginning seeing a computer data representation in the most unrecognizable way.
With training u get the hang of it, and why the visual markings and the audio alerts along the system? Why the nvg along? Why the flir? Well both , human and aircraft, are expensive.
Yes new tech when it fails u return to the stone age and u must be prepared, but this comes from training and the excuse with new tech when it fails u r in trouble I believe is unrealistic. Aircraft from the very very first are dependant to tech. They had a gun firing bulets between the rotor blades in ww1.
Now they plan on digital maps and must memorize the whole thing.
Another thing , real pilots don’t change on daily or weekly basis their area of mission or type of mission. Simmers change this on hourly basis, I flew a campaign strike mission, and I’ll be escort in 4 hours in a pvp mission. From Israel to Spain. Talk about a mind job regarding terrain sa.Sure those are choices but I believe they are every day practice for most of the ppl that are actively flying.
Also lines on the mfds in real photos and vids there are zillion of lines on different colors I believe those are another level of detail for a non displayed map but for the terrain or airspace map.
Regardless all that from what I’ve seen regarding the moving map I find it very hard to read during flight. Font Colors and map colors get so messed up that u must zoom in and take some time to say oh that’s that village on the left I saw a minute ago? One minute that you could go kaboom.
For me having more than 4 lines is more demanding than a moving map. You will need those lines even if u have a moving map. Unless such areas of interest can be drawn on the map in real.
But if u fly a model that has no moving map I believe u need those extra lines.Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
I am a fact junkie and a bit of a historian…at least 5 deaths in DS1 from blue on blue wind drift and bad fire control radar references, THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN AVOIDED if the map had been refrenced without a computer involved. The most telling instance, the apache front seater says " the FCR says 290, BUT I KNOW WE ARE FACING EAST" and they tell him to fire and then he tells the ground control guy " you should start writing your report and blaming the wind."
-
Please repair FAC missions ,
WP_FAC seems broken, in 2D target waypoints says ‘Airdrop’ instead ‘Fac’ and Fac dont exist in drop down menu, and really, in 3D (watched fac over hsd/idm) it really does just that, flying Airdrop (TAC) profile, it even confirms by radio.…maybe it is somehow broken or typo with T instead F in “?AC” , error is too similar for coincidence
-edit… If you DON’t touch anything also, nogo …, eg. create FAC misson package , add some On-call cas flighs in the same package , same TOT, don’t touch nothing waypoints etc… just weapons, open briefing it will say WP5-6 FAC , …
the moment you open flight-plan all is lost , it will change tgt WP to airdrop … so don’t touch… and go fly as CAS flight , track FAC plane via IDM , this time tried contacting FAC for Check-in , but now menu is grayed out (no awacs and Jstar planes in air, but FAC should activate at least its own calls)
So , really, IMHO , FAC is broken and/or mixed up with TAC.Pretty PPPlease:doh:
-
how about accurate cockpit for the F-16A, and some very nice ground interaction when gears are down, better heat effect at the nozzle, no rotating clouds when panning
-
I’d like to have a cross-platform & compatible to way to get at BMS flightdata and textures, maybe using comms via socket or similar.
Sending commands to bms via Socket would also be quite helpful.
All the best, Uwe
-
no rotating clouds when panning
+1 for the clouds. Not sure it’s doable without rewriting the code though.
-
+1 for the clouds. Not sure it’s doable without rewriting the code though.
it’s not a problem of code, it’s just a problem of FPS saving.
To have non rotating clouds, you need to generate 3D clouds, which is no problem at all but at what cost ?