<blockquote>will the so called link 16 be implemented in 4,36?<br /><br />no<br />you need to face reality<br /><br />it is extremly complex to use and would need major upgrade of AI<br /><br />TBH when I read docs about Link16 I wonder how this would be possible to sue it without proper real training<br /><br /><br /></blockquote><p><br />Could you detail this?<br />I work on Link16 training (on a different platform). One day I tried to analize the possibility of having L16 on BMS, but I thought that it was not done before due to the limitations of the Falcon Bubble. On Link16 the C2 sends a J3.2 for surveillance tracks sending you the position of air hostiles, however on bms if the hostiles are out of the bubble, C2 can only send you what is seen on the 2D screen, right? This would mean that a hostile formation cannot be seen outside the bubble as several aircraft, but as a formtation of Xship aircraft, right?<br />Regarding the implementation of the TN management and network, that could be done automatically by the DTC, as the COMPLAN does now. Briefing page could extract even an OPTASKLINK. Then on the aircraft just power it up and syncro, and ready. <br /></p>
Posts made by Jordan
-
RE: Quick update from the frontlines, 4.36
-
RE: Tacview – Understand what happened during your last flight! (alternative ACMI viewer)
Hi,
As in Falcon, for online squadrons a very nice feature would be to have a “adress list” to remember the ip of different players that tipically host the tacview debrief. -
RE: Continuous crash without log file
I would post the log but it crashed me and sent me directly to the desktop with no log.
This happened to us in multiplayer KTO, on the veterans gaming multiplayer campaign, IRON FORTRESS. -
RE: Continuous crash without log file
Same here.
2 pilots out of 6 crashed today on a flight due to this issue. -
RE: F16 Brakes at 4 35
Once I saw a crew doing training at max effort landing dispatched without antiskid in a paved runway. First landing they made, two tires blew out. lol…
You are right, antiskid decreases landing distance always.
Airbus aircraft ANTISKID ON:
https://i.imgur.com/5SzqQdT.png
Same conditions ANTISKID OFF
https://i.imgur.com/XWvPmdx.pngOn most Airbus the procedure with antiskid off is braking manually with max 1000 PSI to avoid wheel lock,… so landing distance is increased.
You have to manually adjust brake pedals to brake less than 1000 psi, so that example is not valid here.
Flysmart just reflect that.Anyway, on cars normally ABS decrease braking distance as stated above, as a wheel locked has less friction coeficient.
-
RE: [F4RADAR] Lightweight standalone radar application
In principle F4A and F4R do more or less the same, but I wanted 2 things differently: 1. deagged entities 2. no hassle (no additional programs, no TE loading, no BE definition, etcetc). But yes, F4A contains quite some fancy features. I’ve had contact with Monster and he gave me some tips. But he admitted that currently he has limited time to maintain his programs.
Furthermore it’s fun the create a tool like this for the community and I have still plenty of ideas also not present in F4A. And a little bit of ‘competition’ never hurts.
For me, those two PROs makes this software very useful. F4A is great, but when you have 4 fighters on a CAP and in many other cases, you must see all the assets available.
F4A still have other very cool functions, like IVC integration.@tumbler31, we are trying to use it on our spanish SQN, and it seems there is a bug with the “Iberia Theater”.
Contacts are shown out of the map. -
RE: [F4RADAR] Lightweight standalone radar application
Awesome tool! Have you considered adding the type of aircraft on the contact info? Or to classify it manually by association?
-
RE: On call CAS procedures
We’ve made a webinar with a RL german airforce JTAC. Maybe thats also informative for you guys:
Thanks! Could you share the checklist? Looks very clear
-
RE: Spanish translation of 4.34 training manual
Contact “BlackDuke” on the escuadron111 forum via PM (http://www.escuadron111.com/foro/).
He have translated most of the manuals of the 4.33. Maybe he can help, or you can be coordinated. -
RE: DED CRUS HOME - OPT ALT Function
CRUS HOME is being extremely sensitive to drag index (DI). With maximum DI I could load on the airplane (436) HOME suggested a cruise alt of 7,844’.
Thanks for giving it a try!
Similar result here, and WDP and charts give around 25000ft OPT ALT. -
RE: DED CRUS HOME - OPT ALT Function
That alone is enough to identify the most probable cause: one or the other doesn’t properly account for DF. If I were to guess, I’d say that the CRUS HOME value is right, since dash 1 doesn’t know the actual DF and your ship does, but I’m not sure what to make of WDP, which should know your DF, too (at least I think so).
What I tried to say was that with DF=0, or low Drag, I have a CRUS HOME OPT ALT more similar to the one on WDP or on the charts on T.O. GR1F-16CJ-1-1.
However, with other DF values, the difference is very noticeable.
For example, F16CM52, GW:35.5
DF=100 gives: WDP OPT ALT:33400ft; Charts (HAF):33400ft; CRUS OPT ALT:29200ft
DF=280 gives: WDP OPT ALT:30700ft; Charts (HAF):30700ft; CRUS OPT ALT:19300ftWDP seems to account for DF, as the tables on T.O. GR1F-16CJ-1-1:
However, CRUS OPT ALT seems to be very sensitive with DF.
I thought maybe this ALT would be just the recommended altitude to go back to “home plate”, to avoid being a lot of time on MIL while climbing to OPT ALT,…but then that computation should consider the distance to the “home plate”. -
DED CRUS HOME - OPT ALT Function
Hi guys,
I was trying to work out how to optimise flight parameters to save more fuel on cruise or during an emergency, and I have encountered some doubts on this DED CRUS HOME function.
I thought this function was supposed to calculate the profile of a flight plan to divert to a “home point”, using the minimum amount of fuel. This flight plan would consist on a minimum fuel climb at MIL power to the optimum altitude, a cruise climb (opt altitude increases as fuel is burned), and then a iddle descend to a given altittude (dont remember if 5000ft or 10000ft) over the “home point”.
Regarding this OPT ALT, why is the CRUS value not close to the optimum altitude calculated via WDP or the T.O. GR1F-16CJ-1-1?
I know that the optimum altitude is not used for “Short Range missions”, but this “OPT ALT” on the CRUS HOME is not affected by the distance to the “home point”. I have changed the “home point” and this OPT ALT value was not affected.
I was expecting this CRUS value to be close to the optimum value from WDP in case of a long flight back home.If someone knows how this CRUS OPT ALT figure is calculated, I would be very grateful to read it
Some pictures:
F-16CM-52
GROSS WEIGHT on the picture: 35000 lbs
DRAG Factor: 126
Optimum altitude via WDP: 33-34000 ft
Optimum altitude via T.O. GR1F-16CJ-1-1 (HAF 52+): 33-34000 ft
Optimum altitude via CRUS HOME: 28000 ftI tested other configs, and I have the same result (except with DF=0, where I had a similar value). I considered the actual Fuel Weight, not the takeoff weight.
From the BMS Manual:
“When HOME is mode selected 2 carets are displayed in the HUD on the speed tape and on the altitude tape. Following these 2 carets will establish the best profile to reach Home Plate (or any steerpoint designated as HMPT).
The procedure to fly this profile is to select full military power, reach the speed caret first then pitch to reach the altitude mark while maintaining the speed on the caret. Altitude may vary according to fuel burned. Please note, optimal altitude is given in radar altitude on the DED, but may be different on your HUD scale depending on the altimeter setting. Check the picture on the right, both carets are followed and the optimum altitude in the DED matches the HUD radar altimeter. If you follow both carets you will reach the home point at the selected optimum altitude. The altitude caret will disappear once you can start your descent. Further information displayed on this page indicates home point (can be changed to any INS steerpoint (e.g. alternate)), onboard fuel quantity remaining when reaching active steerpoint, optimum altitude for the HOME profile, wind direction and speed.”Thanks!
-
RE: Link 16 things you want in the next update
So my Link 16 things wishlist is following:
General system features:
-Possibility to set transmission power aswel as set receive only mode.
-Possibility to zero the keys (just like it is with IFF already) making system useless
-DTC initialization procedure
-Multiple channel selection for fighter to fighter aswel as mission control
-HMCS integration (for showing PDLT and so)Fighter to fighter related:
-SEAD datalink
-AMRAAM shoot lines (you will know at wich targets your buddies guide AMRAAMs at)
-Lock lines for wingmen AA tracks
-Secondary target transmission
-HTS triangulation
-Expanded data format for friendly aircraft
-All the basics like transmitting SPI, markpoints, friendly positions and soMission Control related (AWACS and so on):
-Expanded data format (to see things like type of threat), that would get rid of the radio clutter as it would be no longer needed to use declare!
-Mission Assignment for things like CAS and so on (AI AFAC would transmit those messages when you are CAS flight and you check in). WARNING! Knowing what is MA may make you banned on ED forum, so use that knowledge with care
-Mission Assignment for AA targets (AI AWACS would send them for CAP, SWEEP and interception flights).
-Friendly tracks (air defense, non air defense, naval and so)
-Enemy tracks (air, naval, air defense, non air defense ground targets)You got a lot of info on L16 there:
http://falcon.blu3wolf.com/Docs/MLU_M3.pdfGenerally speaking L16 would be my biggest wish for BMS at this time. Hope it will come at some point (i know it won’t be soon but i am rather petient men).
That would be a dream.
A huge step ahead for AA combat.
A ton of new code, but it would be amazing.
And that manual seems very detailed… Maybe too dangerous to code due to export control?Enviado desde mi POCOPHONE F1 mediante Tapatalk
-
RE: 4.34 - IDM principles of operation
Flying online with the new IDM model seems a big change from 4.33. Great addition!
For packages with 8 or less aircraft, no problem at all with this fantastic document.
However for packages with more aircraft, as posted above, we would appreciate a recommended setting to know what is the normal procedure to configure this IRL (maybe having one IDM in CONT hosted by the Mission Commander with the package leaders and element leaders?, maybe just using it on DMD?)In the case that in one UHF freq there were two or more leaders in IDM CONT, what would happen? We tested this on BMS online and somehow it worked but in a degraded quality (positions updated far more slower).
Thanks!
Enviado desde mi POCOPHONE F1 mediante Tapatalk
-
RE: Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
It would be interesting to create in the map view a new icon near OOB or ATO for the ACO.
This Airspace Control Order (ACO) could be customised and saved in a TE or modified online.
In the ACO the pilots could create SAMs positions, reference points, corridors, AAR Areas, buffer zones, etc
As this info would be shared online, pilots can: 1) Create its own Lines and Preplanned Threats with the ACO as reference; 2) coordinate with other pilots on briefing; 3) create posible SAM locations during a campaign.Enviado desde mi SM-A510F mediante Tapatalk
-
RE: FaceTrackNoIR w pointtrack and 3 point cap. How to buffer small movements?
Jordan can you update the link? Im interested to test it without jitter in my laptop.
Thanks.This is the link with the file I downloaded time ago and you ask for.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2laz8m2o90bt7m8/facetracknoirgorrajordan.ini?dl=0
And this is the profile I am using right now (I don´t know If it is different or not):
https://www.dropbox.com/s/1rcxxc9mdrrhtew/Facetracknoir_Jordan2016.ini?dl=0
-
RE: X64 crashes when trying to connect to a server
Could it be some kind of problem with the WPApi64.dll?
-
RE: [Release] Grb2fmap - GRIB to BMS Converter
Thank you Ahmed. Fantastic tool !