LuftWolf and Amizaur's Weapons and Sensors Database Mod v3.072 --- Now Available!!!

[LuftWolf]

Ok, there's at least one other person in the world who thinks this doctrine works fine, so I need you guys to test the 27LAM and the TLAM using this doctrine listed above.

If there are any problems, I need to hear about it. Thanks!

Cheers,
David

PS The newest file was posted to the above link at 1:30pm EST.

[Fearless]

Originally Posted by LuftWolf

Ok, there's at least one other person in the world who thinks this doctrine works fine, so I need you guys to test the 27LAM and the TLAM using this doctrine listed above.

If there are any problems, I need to hear about it. Thanks!

Cheers,
David

PS The newest file was posted to the above link at 1:30pm EST.

LW, I've tested the TLAM so far and 1 out of 3 reached it's target.

The first TLAM did not have much terrain deviation to content with and reached and blew up the land target. The other two did have greater terrain variation and as soon as they reached the terrain gradient they lost altitude and dove into the ground. Now having said that, could it be that because the first one did have a target to go for and the sensors had something to direct the TLAM to? Because the other two didn't have a target to shoot at and were just following their waypoints. It's as if the sensors lost sight.

There was very minimal response to variable terrain contours.

[ASWnut101]

Um, the TLAM's don't have sensors. It just flies to a given point and blows up. I've had a similar problem with helo-dropped torpedoes.

[fatty]

Originally Posted by ASWnut101

Um, the TLAM's don't have sensors. It just flies to a given point and blows up. I've had a similar problem with helo-dropped torpedoes.

In real life they do, not sure about the game

[Fearless]

That's what I thought as well otherwise terrain following would not be possible.

[ASWnut101]

Hpmf. Look here:


The Tomahawk land-attack cruise missile has been used to attack a variety of fixed targets, including air defense and communications sites, often in high-threat environments. The land attack version of Tomahawk has inertial and terrain contour matching (TERCOM) radar guidance. The TERCOM radar uses a stored map reference to compare with the actual terrain to determine the missile's position. If necessary, a course correction is then made to place the missile on course to the target. Terminal guidance in the target area is provided by the optical Digital Scene Matching Area Correlation (DSMAC) system, which compares a stored image of target with the actual target image.

And the terminal guidance, I guess could technically be called a guidance sensor. It compares target images. That's it.

So, I don't consider that a sensor per-se. And the dispenser variant does NOT have a sensor. Just fly here and despense.

courtesy FAS.org

[fatty]

Originally Posted by ASWnut101

So, I don't consider that a sensor per-se.

Radar and/or some sort of camera... What, then, would you consider a sensor?

And these websites suggest that the TLAM-D does use TERCOM at least.

[Fearless]

Yep, I didn't think the word "sensor" would become a "proof me wrong" issue.

Whether it is a guidance system, radar or whatever it's deemed to be called, it still is a sensor in layman terms, The TLAM still has to adjust it's flight altitude according to height variations and that's done through sensing height variations.

That's it debate over. back to the original topic.

Nice piccies though

[Molon Labe]

Originally Posted by Fearless

LW, I've tested the TLAM so far and 1 out of 3 reached it's target.

The first TLAM did not have much terrain deviation to content with and reached and blew up the land target. The other two did have greater terrain variation and as soon as they reached the terrain gradient they lost altitude and dove into the ground. Now having said that, could it be that because the first one did have a target to go for and the sensors had something to direct the TLAM to? Because the other two didn't have a target to shoot at and were just following their waypoints. It's as if the sensors lost sight.

There was very minimal response to variable terrain contours.

I think a good goal would be to make sure this terrain following doctrine works at least as well as the stock flag did, and TLAMs would crash into mountain ranges with the stock game. So, if you can tell me where this occurred (lat-long would be very helpful), I can try to reproduce it and figure out the thresholds.

EDIT: Never mind. Using Time on Target as a test mission, its clear that the stock flag is doing a better job of terrain following. I even lost 4 of 6 missiles on the coastline!

The "nose-dive" phenomenon seems to be happening with the stock flag though. That, and sometimes just not pulling up enough to clear the feature. With the mod doctrine, what I'm seeing is the missile not reacting to some terrain features and going straight in.