BMS 4.36 DEV SERIES - AGM 65L
-
Ahh, finally the manual lasing trigger became significant. Thank you Max.
-
@Stevie said in BMS 4.36 DEV SERIES - AGM 65L:
@Mav-jp - are the SCAN, SLAVE, and CAGE functions also modeled? Couldn’t really tell from the video…unless there is some symbology missing.
Not modelled
-
@Tumbler31 - thought so…great to have LMAV, still room for improvement.
-
I noticed that the pull gets very limited once the laser is fired
-
@Alfred - the MAVL does have a reduced field of regard over the MAVE, but it shouldn’t really be that noticeable.
Your ability to hold a track should be as good as the TGP ability to track and lase during a pull, it’s just that now you are going to get some positive feedback on how you’re doing.
And the laser modes should be in accord with the baseline TGP track mode(s). Trigger lase should be an option, not a requirement.
-
@Alfred you mean your control of the aircraft changes when the laser is firing?
-
@SOBO-87 said in BMS 4.36 DEV SERIES - AGM 65L:
@Alfred you mean your control of the aircraft changes when the laser is firing?
yes, and significantly. The pull up becomes hard to do & rate of ascend therefore very low.
-
@Alfred
Do you by any chance use the FSSB from Real Simulator and forgot to remove the key binding for the precision mode? This was by default mapped to the trigger button (at least for me). -
@Razor161 said in BMS 4.36 DEV SERIES - AGM 65L:
@Alfred
Do you by any chance use the FSSB from Real Simulator and forgot to remove the key binding for the precision mode? This was by default mapped to the trigger button (at least for me).yes I have the FSSB from real simulator. What exactly is the key binding for precision mode?
-
@Alfred said in BMS 4.36 DEV SERIES - AGM 65L:
@Razor161 said in BMS 4.36 DEV SERIES - AGM 65L:
@Alfred
Do you by any chance use the FSSB from Real Simulator and forgot to remove the key binding for the precision mode? This was by default mapped to the trigger button (at least for me).yes I have the FSSB from real simulator. What exactly is the key binding for precision mode?
By default it is the 1st trigger detend. The same thing that is used to fire the laser.
You can disable it in the Software the comes with the FSSB. -
@Razor161 said in BMS 4.36 DEV SERIES - AGM 65L:
@Alfred said in BMS 4.36 DEV SERIES - AGM 65L:
@Razor161 said in BMS 4.36 DEV SERIES - AGM 65L:
@Alfred
Do you by any chance use the FSSB from Real Simulator and forgot to remove the key binding for the precision mode? This was by default mapped to the trigger button (at least for me).yes I have the FSSB from real simulator. What exactly is the key binding for precision mode?
By default it is the 1st trigger detend. The same thing that is used to fire the laser.
You can disable it in the Software the comes with the FSSB.thanks pal, you were right, I disabled it and the stick’s response during lasing is normal.
-
@Alfred - that certainly ain’t right…
-
@Stevie let’s continue here
Yes, AGM-65L is not complete and has some issues (kinda wondered why no one started about the DLZ ). But so far I found limited public info on this version.
If you can share some info or give public references, that would be of great help.
-
@Tumbler31 - if you start with the MAVE, you will be VERY close. The only thing I know that differs is that the MAVL FOR is slightly smaller, but I don’t know by how much.
In fact, I’d like to see both E and L variants included in BMS - I think the two also differ in warheads, but not certain about that.
-
@Stevie thanks for your reply. Warhead (damage) can be set via data files, so if you have some input do let me know.
And I also looked at the E, but then ended up in Harrier mechanization, which seems to differ from the Viper.
-
@Tumbler31 - check out the VRS Superbug (man, I hate that stupid name…) AGM-65E model. They have the best one I’ve seen so far. In fact, they are my fav Hornet overall really -
https://forums.vrsimulations.com/support/index.php/AGM-65E_Laser_Maverick
When it comes to MAVs it’s pretty much going to work the same way for all, other than for how the actual HOTAS setup is built. Look over all the sims out there, and pay more attention to function over style. Never overlook other sims as good references!
-
@Stevie ah that one, had it bookmarked but forgot about it, thanks.
-
Someone help me out with this, I don’t understand the useage case for this weapon. To me it’s kinda like swapping an AIM-120 for a AIM-7. You are swapping a fire and forget weapon for a guide it all the way in weapon. To be explicit your also trading off the ability to hit 2 or more targets in one pass for what exactly?
I hate to be dense but the only two potential upsides is:
- potentially a higher hit rate, I’m around a 5/6 hit rate with the D/G variants. I’m never really surprised when one of the six goes off into the wild blue, but that is still like a 80% hit rate which is way higher than our AMRAAM hit rates.
- max standoff range, I think we have to be fair, in BMS popping one off at max range is a bit of a fluke, maybe some super-sayen can do it but for myself as a normal BMS guy it’s more like 8-10 mile release.
-
@Buttons - MAV is primarily a CAS weapon. The MAV E/E2/L in particular.
Firstly, you can’t hit more than one target in one pass with any MAV. That is one of the things that is totally unrealistic that has been fixed. One pass/one shot…that’s how it works in the RW.
Second - a laser MAV is your single best choice for taking out tanks from any approach aspect. You can steer it manually or let it guide using auto lock/lase…and you can also use it pretty much like you would a gun for hitting a pinpoint on a building, etc.
You also get more options for employment in more scenarios - if you are working with a ground FAC, the FAC will shine the laser, and then it is “fire and forget”. This is also the only method that might accommodate a multiple launch, but I don’t know of anyone that operates that way.
But you can also self designate, or buddy lase. -
-
@Stevie
multiple launches - you could if using different laser code for every missile/bomb to different target-example , Hellfire, old one, is also this SALH , but there are 4x AH64A , close to each other , wing… and every carries 8xAGM114 SALH version … every chopper has its own laser-code … or imagine mixup when they all fire from the same direction
Same goes to FAC, TargetPOD , one target only per laser (laser-code)…
The only question how far laser(s) with the SAME code can be apart to not “cross-effect” each other… and that is affected by range and direction obviously. … and vicinity of both targets …
-eg … firing platforms are using same code but they fire from opposite directions , 90-270 , … how far TARGETS must be from each other so the weapons don’t mix themself up …
- there are few outcome of this (AND/OR) , obviously , both weapons miss , both weapons hit first target , other target , … but IMHO, 99% would be both miss as sensors would go haywire
(mil) Lasers are pretty good ranged, airborne type, moisture, atmosphere etc, … ground (FAC) are not so , ~5nm tops., not because of laser, but platform , you need excellent STABILITY, PRECISION, OPTICS, to target anything at that range, sniper stuff, move a milrad - at 10000yards move 10yards or 100? … anyway , you got the point.
Cheers
Yes, I also don’t believe that you get DLZ from anything that you didnt SELF-PAINTED , only from reflection , so range information shouldn’t be there… else then a calculated from cordinates you were given … as it is