Maverick Visual or BORE Mode?

[peanuthead]

Hello,

Which Maverick visual mode do F-16 pilots use most and what advantage does that mode have over the other? These modes look very similar from a pilots perspective; find it on the HUD, lock it up, and fire. I noticed one difference underlined below but I don’t know what that means or whether it would serve any benefit.

Visual E-O Delivery
The visual (VIS) E-O submode is designed for delivery of AGM-65 electro-optical weapons using dive toss (DTOS) type sighting. In VIS submode, the HUD is initialised as the SOI and the weapon seeker head is slaved to the HUD TD box.
Prior to designating a target, the TD box is caged about the FPM. The TD box can be positioned on the target either by maneuvering the aircraft or with the cursor switch. The target is designated by positioning the TMS up. Designating the target ground stabilises the TD box on or near the target and automatically moves the SOI to the MFD WPN format. Target rejection should be commanded by manually selecting the HUD as the SOI with DMS up and positioning the TMS down. Currently you need to switch master mode (for example to MSL OVRD or DGFT) and then back to A-G to return SOI to the HUD. TO BMS1-F16CM-34-1-1

BORE – E-O Delivery
The BORE submode displays are similar to the PRE displays except that the AGM-65 seeker head is pointed to the nominal boresight, which is roughly aligned with the E-O reticle (cross) on the HUD. This allows for firing on targets of opportunity without disturbing the FCR track position. The aircraft is flown to place the HUD E-O reticle on or close to the target. With the WPN format as SOI, the cursor is slewed to refine the AGM-65 target.
The Electro-Optical (E-O) Reticle. The E-O reticle consists of a cross that indicates the E-O weapon is pointed to the armament datum line. For the AGM-65, the E-O reticle is positioned at the armament datum line if the boresight line of sight is selected. TO BMS1-F16CM-34-1-1

Thank you

[drtbkj]

Well, P , in Viper Pilot VIS seemed to be most used, though I recall one BORE delivery. Other books describe PRE attacks using GMT.
My assumption has always been that in a quick reaction situation like SEAD/DEAD VIS or BORE is used. I’d be interested in hearing what people with RL experience think about that

[Axe]

peanuthead, your question about the underlined info got my interest. Thinking it over I couldn’t come up with any clarity. So I created a TE with a PRE target and a TOO enroute to the primary PRE with the hopes of finding out. And I believe I did.
The text of the manual is dry, so put yourself into the situation they set up. You are enroute A/G with mav’s to a preplanned target which means a target STP. Your FCR is reaching out a fair distance and you fence in and ready for your maverick attack. All of a sudden, golly gee look down there! I’m getting some of those hits! You must act fast because the nature of a TOO is that is wasn’t expected to begin with. Rather than take the extra time of manipulating FCR range and magnification, even if that might be sorta possible it’s not nothing like a quick switch into bore or vis for a fast close attack. When they say(imo)that you don’t have to disturb the FCR track location it’s either because it’s hard to return to the original STP or it’s hard/slow to use in a unexpected hurry. Since the FCR has a CZ OSB button, it ain’t nothing to get the FCR back to the original STP . It’s just one click away. Therefore they must mean that disturbing the FCR is really going to cost you time and possibly lose you the Opportunity part of the TOO. My test TE revealed just that. Since this Visual and Bore mode info you provided also included in the manual, info on the PRE mode, I believe the intent was to describe Bore - in contrast to PRE, and not so much VIS. What do you think?

[peanuthead]

Good point. So use BORE for targets of opportunity while in PRE mode. Under what tactical situations would we use VIS then?

Thank you

[Raptor]

BORE is used ONLY in case the aircraft INS has failed, then this mode is the only one left to the pilot to know where the missile’s head seeker is actually looking.

[Axe]

thanks Raptor, I cannot comment regarding real life implementation. That’s good to know, I’ll probably get this damage as well in the sim as I tend to get hit more than I should.

peanuthead, your welcome the thing that comes to mind in the sim, and I’m just trying to learn the mavs just now, is that without any altitude the bore mode is going to suck big time as you need to point your nose down to get a target in the cross. If you do have some alt be careful you don’t lawndart. Vis is fast and will allow a downward scan. But when I’m in a hurry, nothing beats simplicity, and using the cross in Bore is as simple as it gets with mavs. [so far imo.]
In the TE I made, I had several thousand feet alt headed to Pre, and saw that I was going to cross the TOO battalion at a right angle. I dropped the nose, changed out of Pre and with Bore wasted them right fast like. Carrying 4 AGM G, as that’s what’s on my mind now too. They were already aligned, and don’t need uncaging. regards.

[Frederf]

LAU-88 can’t do slave (bore only), LAU-88A can.

[Stevie]

You would never dive-toss a Maverick…ever.

[Axe]

drtbkj Using PRE on GMT seems to be situationally dependent, by that I mean the moving target can’t have enough time to travel outside of the FCR track position. If so you would have to ‘disturb the FCR track position’ to obtain a firing solution, or of course just change to another mode, like Bore. I experienced this issue recently with something somewhat fast moving, cargo ships, and it caused problems for me. I do think there are ground battalions that could move fast enough,if I was far enough away, to create the same issue for me.

[Axe]

Raptor, I believe now that I misunderstood your comment. IRL or not is not relevant…sorry.

Are you saying that Bore is the least desirable mode to use regardless because depending on that mode likely requires some radical flight maneuvering unnecessary with other modes… I would understand that.

[Blu3wolf]

@Stevie:

You would never dive-toss a Maverick…ever.

dive-toss type sighting. Perhaps a read of the -34 double sticks section on DTOS is in order?

[MorteSil]

This post is deleted!

[Axe]

Very nice explanation, thanks. I appreciate the practical example, that kind of talk really helps me.

It does work in BMS the way you describe. You can jump into Bore or Slave for TOO and return to PRE with original FCR location still showing.
It is the fastest way to engage TOO, and doesn’t modify SPI as you’ve explained the advantage of. But if you do adjust the PRE cursor location
for a TOO, the CZ will get you back. It’s a win win.

[Stevie]

@Blu3wolf:

dive-toss type sighting. Perhaps a read of the -34 double sticks section on DTOS is in order?

Not even that, really…it’s a powered weapon, not a bomb. Not to be confused with a safe-escape or other post-launch maneuver. Delivery is either level or in a dive at release - and there’s the keyhole to deal with. Which is the only reason a level release can work in some circumstances.

[Blu3wolf]

Okay, but the point is that the DTOS sighting mode works the same as the VIS sighting mode. So if you already understand how to use the DTOS sighting (which does not in fact require or even encourage a dive toss delivery), then its a good way to explain the VIS sighting, which works in the same way. HUD is SOI, put the thing roughly on the thing, TMS up to ground stabilise, put the thing actually on the thing… same way as DTOS works.

So in short, the discussion about DTOS has nothing to do with dive toss deliveries, and Im not sure why you brought it up…

[drtbkj]

@Axe:

drtbkj Using PRE on GMT seems to be situationally dependent, by that I mean the moving target can’t have enough time to travel outside of the FCR track position. If so you would have to ‘disturb the FCR track position’ to obtain a firing solution, or of course just change to another mode, like Bore. I experienced this issue recently with something somewhat fast moving, cargo ships, and it caused problems for me. I do think there are ground battalions that could move fast enough,if I was far enough away, to create the same issue for me.

Axe, I quite agree. Since I wrote the earlier post I went back into the book in question, and the author did slew the Mav over to the moving target. So, the situation we’re discussing would be where GMT get us “close enough”, and do the final lock on the Mav WPN page.
Also in that earlier post I asked about RL procedure in DEAD, against non-preplanned targets. I find myself cruising around looking for SAM’s, launch plumes, etc. When I spot something I point the jet in the general direction on the target, use VIS, check keyhole and range, and shoot.

[Axe]

@drtbkj:

Also in that earlier post I asked about RL procedure in DEAD, against non-preplanned targets. I find myself cruising around looking for SAM’s, launch plumes, etc. When I spot something I point the jet in the general direction on the target, use VIS, check keyhole and range, and shoot.

drtbkj, That’s cool that the book checked us out like it did. Glad you took a look.

I’m going to make a TE and give that a go. It certainly would be good to be good at that. [point jet, vis, keyhole, range, red button on cougars…copy and paste…got it.]
Copy on your first comment just now, about the “close enough” part.
Howse about a new saying for the day…… “Close enough for horseshoes and GMT” … lol

[Stevie]

@Blu3wolf:

Okay, but the point is that the DTOS sighting mode works the same as the VIS sighting mode. So if you already understand how to use the DTOS sighting (which does not in fact require or even encourage a dive toss delivery), then its a good way to explain the VIS sighting, which works in the same way. HUD is SOI, put the thing roughly on the thing, TMS up to ground stabilise, put the thing actually on the thing… same way as DTOS works.

So in short, the discussion about DTOS has nothing to do with dive toss deliveries, and Im not sure why you brought it up…

I only mentioned it because the OP mentioned it. It’s more about mind/cockpit/operational-discipline, really. Not really a matter of if the modes are the same/similar - it’s about maintaining procedural discipline and not mixing up mindset when it counts in the short-game.

[Blu3wolf]

@Stevie:

I only mentioned it because the OP mentioned it. It’s more about mind/cockpit/operational-discipline, really. Not really a matter of if the modes are the same/similar - it’s about maintaining procedural discipline and not mixing up mindset when it counts in the short-game.

Mindsets are not being mixed up, and the OP quoted the manual…

… the actual air force manual, its worth noting. So perhaps direct your critique to Lockheed Martin?

[Stevie]

@Blu3wolf:

Mindsets are not being mixed up, and the OP quoted the manual…

… the actual air force manual, its worth noting. So perhaps direct your critique to Lockheed Martin?

I think I was directing it at the Air Force…