Why does slewing SOI result in all points slewing across all (non-tracking) systems?
-
The immediate answer is presumably, “because that is how it works in RL”.
But the question is as much about RL as in the sim. What’s the reasoning/logic/advantage in shifting a steerpoint when I just want to use the TGP to look at something to the left?
The A-10C (at least, as modeled by DCS) seems to me, perhaps naively, more ergonomic.
-
The immediate answer is presumably, “because that is how it works in RL”.
But the question is as much about RL as in the sim. What’s the reasoning/logic/advantage in shifting a steerpoint when I just want to use the TGP to look at something to the left?
The A-10C (at least, as modeled by DCS) seems to me, perhaps naively, more ergonomic.
An interesting question. My understanding is that it was designed this way to act as a “quick position fix” in AG missions, when you didnt have GPS to correct INS drift.
What you would do, is put the IP on a geographic feature quickly acquirable by TGP or FCR. Then, when you arrived, with the IP as active steerpoint, you put your SPI on the geographic feature to correct for INS drift, then you switched to your target steerpoint. This way, you were sure that your target steerpoint was actually on target.
-
FCR or visual, when it was designed. TGP was a later addition.
-
The immediate answer is presumably, “because that is how it works in RL”.
But the question is as much about RL as in the sim. What’s the reasoning/logic/advantage in shifting a steerpoint when I just want to use the TGP to look at something to the left?
The A-10C (at least, as modeled by DCS) seems to me, perhaps naively, more ergonomic.
Because the way many modern systems are integrated, all “free” sensors in general will revert to slave to SOI once “freed”; in the case of an attack Master Mode - such as A/G - your INS counts as a “sensor” to drop a mark for re-attack. How “useful” that may be depends on your attack considerations…the trick - I think - is to make sure you are undesignated before you change SOI; try that and see what you get. If I had to guess the system thinks that if you are designated you mean it - no matter where you put the SOI. At least, that’s how I’d do it…or one way I’d do it.
-
This post is deleted! -
Estimates are:
1. From the era where INS drift was the primary concern.
2. Uses less computational resources.
3. Harder for the design engineers to screw up.
4. Harder for the stick jockey to screw up.A-10 is more ergonomic for CAS. F-16 is more tuned toward one-pass strike, lots of planning toward a fixed objective. Your target is more likely to be a bunker or an ammo depot behind the FLOT whose position is well known and won’t be moving. The steerpoint is probably going to be at the target by plan and you’ll be fixing both the navigation and targeting info in one effort. The pace of engagement also warrants adjusting all the navigation cues to this shift as well to help you quickly and confidently turn the right way where seconds matter.
It would be interesting how an F-16 with pilot-selectable SPI generator (instead of context-selected) and pilot-selectable slaving.
-
Thanks all, again, for clearing that up!
