New JDAM LAR incorrect?
-
With 4.36 the JDAM LAR scale on the HUD seems to be an incorrect implementation.
The new behaviour shows a very small dynamic launch zone (R1 Max/R1 Min) staple that resembles the normal CCRP behaviour rather than proper previous IAM implementation.
The scale (R1 max/min) is a very small range compared to previous bms versions, and even has the loft angle displayed, which again seems to take it’s behaviour from the new CCRP stuff. And a level release is inhibited until the loft angle reaches zero. But it shouldn’t…the JDAM/IAM dynamic range scale should be far larger and allow a release anywhere within that region. The new behaviour doesn’t show the inner LAR 2 scale for aziumth settings either…it’s literary too small.
This is a real downgrade over the previous modelling of JDAM. I know there was a bug with JDAM not releasing except at max-ish range, but this wasn’t a change I was expecting, and certainly doesn’t match any IRL behaviour.
-
-
Two things:
-
please post in the right section for bug reports…
-
We need images, a TE to understand a bit better (documenting a bit your report would greatly help)
Cheers
-
-
-
Ok, so in the first image from BMS 4.35 you can see a particluar Dyanamic LAR for a IAM release. Conditions were 480kts, 15000ft for all tests. In this case WCMD was used but results are very similar for JDAM.
Take note of the range to target (7nm) and the position of the range carrot. Range carrot is at the top of the ‘inner staple’. In 4.35 this ‘inner staple’ represented the LAR region - weapon had to be pickled in this staple to hit the target.
In the next image, from BMS 4.36, with same approx conditions, take note of range scale. At 7nm the range carrot is now below the ‘inner staple’; the bottom of the inner staple now represents the max level release (0 loft) range. IAM won’t release until within this region. Which is a change from before.
The third image show the loft angle displayed when range is in the ‘inner staple’ region. Similar to the new CCRP range display…I believe the LOFT Angle for a IAM release should display differently, per real docs.
Did the IAM HUD symbology/release logic get changed in 4.36? It sort of makes sense, and functions, but now doesn’t match the real documentation (mainly MLU tape 3 manual). Curious why this was changed, and if it was intentional?
I used the instant action mission, as it illustrated exactly the behaviour I was seeing in my TE anyway.
Thanks.
-
Hi @Adam106, you’re correct the 4.36 JDAM LAR is different to .35.
It uses similar mech to GP bomb CCRP mode which gives new information for loft/toss employment of those weapons.You can see from your pics that now in .36 the in LAR for a level delivery is now beneath the bracket. The bracket gives you dynamically calculated, reqd loft angle.
JDAM LAR is still WIP but it definitely works much better than .35
Cheers
-
-
Do not forget about RALT and BARO. Terrain elevation plays a role now. BARO gets it as close as it can. RALT gets the correct altitude as long as it is put in correctly.
-
@MaxWaldorf said in New JDAM LAR incorrect?:
@Adam106 Just bear in mind that CCRP and Slant range was completely reworked in 4.36 because it was inacurate before…
So is it wrong? I don’t think so…
There might be room for improvement but @Mav-jp might have more insight!My problem is that the IAM mode (not regular CCRP mode, which is much better), now bears little resemblance to the real world documentation out there. The rightside LAR bracket for the azimuth/terminal setting is now missing completely.
BMS now uses it’s own JDAM/WCMD/JSOW symbology, made to work within the sim, but it’s not matching the reference material. I recognise that actually alot of the other systems are made that way, and are functional if not entirely accurate (MITL weapons etc). But in this case there is a correct reference, that indeed you’ve used before, and now you’re combining that with your home grown ‘hybrid’ solution. Seems a backwards step, even if it functions more reliably.
-
@MaxWaldorf
Sorry but, where is that section?Disregard, maybe sby moved to here.
Thank you in advance. -