Fire control, lack of and what you think of it.

[GwynO 16]

Some of you may have seen a few screen shots I posted with a post about Comrpnt's amazing

Operation Rubicon, if not they are here click This one in particular has aggravated a

perennial itch in my little sim brain, so if you will forgive a tiny bit of a rant from my direction.

 

Breath...

It have always felt a little more than dissapointed that no sim I have ever played correctly estimates

the descriptions I have read of how strike fighters work. At the moment captured in that

picture, the non suicidal pilot would presumably tell the fire control that is where she/he

would like the bombs and thank you very much but were pulling up out of here now.

 

So as a work around I used the cockpit from the RF-111G in the F for the ccip and by

toggling the cockpit off when my pull out obscures the target, this allows at least some

kind of stand off and precision with dumb bombs ala precision platform strike fighter (F-

111F).

 

By adjusting the view angles, level bombing becomes a lot easer in a B-52, or if adjusted even further "back", it would be possible to use the toggle off cockpit and ccip to aim a lobbed nuke while in the vertical plane. Hardly the same as a real LABS etc., but IMHO better than nothing, and certainly better than dive bombing.

 

I was hoping that those cleverer than me could see some way to lessen the gap between the extremes of my uber hud approach and the IMHO insanely irritating approach of dive bombing in an F-4E let alone an F-111, perhaps some way of making a light come on in the cockpit at the moment that the ccip would pass over the target but without necessarily seeing the ccip at all?

 

Every time I have seen this issue raised on other forums as well as here at CA, it seems to generate some negative sounding replies. I can only assume that the reason for this is out of regard to TK, perhaps not to notice a fault is better than to throw mud at the creator but certainly it is preferable to express our true thoughts, or not?

 

I don't value the visual over the playability in these sims, I play with graphics turned down and while I can see a reason for the development of the sim graphically, I cannot see the reason why not to add one (dive toss) or two (LABS) or even three (DIANE) fire control systems to the avionics.dll? I doubt it would be hard to do, I would even volunteer to program it myself, I doubt it would alienate people as I am talking about simple approximations as everything else in the avionics not a hard core study of the real thing, just a light to switch on in the cockpit is all that's needed and everything else is under the hood.

 

Ok now I'm sure people are thinking, and that is good, I hope.

 

Gwyn.

[Viper6 3]

Don't the Varks usually bomb with pavetac and LGB's? There was a post last year on how to install ccip into the F-4E as requested by me when I cried about the Rhino not having a ccip

Edited January 12, 2009 by Viper6

[Icarus999 70]

Every time I have seen this issue raised on other forums as well as here at CA, it seems to generate some negative sounding replies. I can only assume that the reason for this is out of regard to TK, perhaps not to notice a fault is better than to throw mud at the creator but certainly it is preferable to express our true thoughts, or not?

 

Most people here are ferociously loyal to TK and that is a good thing. I love his games, and in them I can see a huge potential. TK has a vision and like many creative people he is focused on his vision.

It took me personally a long time to realize as a creative mind (Music, songwriting ) that the things that I liked were not necessarily what others liked, and that if I wanted to reach a wider audience I

would need to be open to input and make some small adjustments to my vision. If I were to offer a suggestion for improvement it would be a customer/modder input thread at thirdwire... give people who buy these games and spend countless hours playing and modding them an area to make recommendations, then review those ideas for development feasibility.

[Rambler 1-1 9]

If you're flying in 60's or 70's era aircraft (aka no ccip/ccrp), you should just get used to the level or shallow dive bombing tactics (350-450 knots, 30-45 degree dive angle, depending on the plane) . I enjoy doing strikes on areas such as the one in your picture, especially in thuds and phantoms, because it takes some degree of skill (and luck...), it's not just lining up and firing. However, flying newer planes into areas with SAMs and all the like, it would be nice to have some sort of more modern fire control system, although there is still noting quite like putting bombs on target with a gunsight and some luck.

[GwynO 16]

If you're flying in 60's or 70's era aircraft (aka no ccip/ccrp), you should just get used to the level or shallow dive bombing tactics (350-450 knots, 30-45 degree dive angle, depending on the plane) . I enjoy doing strikes on areas such as the one in your picture, especially in thuds and phantoms, because it takes some degree of skill (and luck...), it's not just lining up and firing. However, flying newer planes into areas with SAMs and all the like, it would be nice to have some sort of more modern fire control system, although there is still noting quite like putting bombs on target with a gunsight and some luck.

 

With all due respect Rambler, this is the reason I asked people do they even know what fire control is/was (still is). I find the graphical depictions of fire control in books and magazines, the detailed descriptions of such systems both technical and anecdotal a fascinating subject and by all accounts I have read, fire control involving some sort of ccrp (rp = release point for those not familiar) has been around a lot longer than you suggest. Have you read much into the systems used for bombing (conventional and nuclear) from the 1950's through to Vietnam for example?

 

So many times I have heard this line of reasoning as to why not in Thirdwire, but it just doesn't sit with the facts as they appear in so many sources I have seen. Maybe those who have themselves operated multi million dollar equipment in the last 40 years can confirm or deny that they were trained to use fire control systems? I am pretty optimistic that they can confirm what I have read otherwise a good proportion of my and my father's book/magazine collection dating back to the 1970's.. is a gigantic lie.

 

As familiar as we have become with the way things are depicted in Thirdwire sims, it doesn't alter the fact that in reality it was very, very different. I don't expect TK to go out of his way to recreate that, only to make it less "very, very", and leave it as just "very" different. One small step, like when he added ccip for example, in regards to fire control and in my estimation that would make this sim a lot more fun.

[Wrench 9,850]

1st, I must commend you on you statements; they're well written and conscise. They state the questions most elequontly (sp?), and show that somebody's been doing their homework!

 

But....

 

I think you're missing the whole point

 

Simply stated, as best as I can recall from nearly 6 years involvement with the series, thousands of posts, including statements from TK hisself....

 

It ain't built that way. The games are as TK wants them to be.

 

Now, having said that, TK has done a magnificent job updating and allowing for us, both as End Users ™ and Modders to add all kinds of bells and whistles.

 

Obviously, this isn't Falcon 4 or LOMAC or any of those other study sims...like one of our other members has in his sig, (paraphrased, as I can't remember it exactly) "a simple, fun sim with interesting aircraft"

 

Unfortunately, I don't think ANY personal computer is going to give you the level of "fire control systems" detail you're wishing for, outside of a Corporate or Military simulator. I really don't think that's possible (mind you given a big enough budget...... :yes: ). Or outside of the Real Life ™ aircraft themselves.

 

Honestly, the question pops up again and again and again. And has been answered everytime. To no one's total satisfaction.

 

I, in my own heart, don't think there IS an answer...

after all, it IS just a game!

 

But keep asking the questions...who knows what we'll get next!

 

Wrench

kevin stein

[GwynO 16]

1st, I must commend you on you statements; they're well written and conscise. They state the questions most elequontly (sp?), and show that somebody's been doing their homework!

 

But....

 

I think you're missing the whole point

 

Simply stated, as best as I can recall from nearly 6 years involvement with the series, thousands of posts, including statements from TK hisself....

 

It ain't built that way. The games are as TK wants them to be.

 

Now, having said that, TK has done a magnificent job updating and allowing for us, both as End Users and Modders to add all kinds of bells and whistles.

 

Obviously, this isn't Falcon 4 or LOMAC or any of those other study sims...like one of our other members has in his sig, (paraphrased, as I can't remember it exactly) "a simple, fun sim with interesting aircraft"

 

Unfortunately, I don't think ANY personal computer is going to give you the level of "fire control systems" detail you're wishing for, outside of a Corporate or Military simulator. I really don't think that's possible (mind you given a big enough budget...... :yes: ). Or outside of the Real Life aircraft themselves.

 

Honestly, the question pops up again and again and again. And has been answered everytime. To no one's total satisfaction.

 

I, in my own heart, don't think there IS an answer...

after all, it IS just a game!

 

But keep asking the questions...who knows what we'll get next!

 

Wrench

kevin stein

 

Thank you for your kind observations Wrench. I understand the points you make, however I still believe it to be within easy reach of TK's talent to satisfy my vision of a rudimentary fire control computation. The code in the avionics70.dll is clever enough to show graphically a ccip, which itself contains all the information needed for a ccrp type fire control, it literally is only a few lines of code away from a dive toss functionality.

 

Of course TK can't be expected to open up everything to modding, but I seriously believe that most people would welcome the chance to have a try at modding some of the reality of air to ground delivery post World War.

 

Knowledge of the optical bombing aids, standard even as early in the history of flight as the Great War, something that we don't find in many competing sims that include such as the A-10 and F-16 feels somewhat lacking in aspiration to me. That is why I ask for your thoughts as a community on this issue, I wonder how many like me share that aspiration, and how many have decided not to even attempt to go there so to speak.

 

Given TK's track record, I share your anticipation eagerly Wrench, I believe this series can and will deliver a lot more!

 

Gwyn.

 

P.S. anyone know how I can change my display name?

Edited January 13, 2009 by Mab Glyndwr

[Wrench 9,850]

(off topic)

Mab:

Can't you change it in the control panel for you profile?? If not, PM one of the Admins with what you want.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

back on topic:

 

the old question: who do I have to "convince" to give us workable toss bombing, and working LABS timer???" !!!

 

I DO hope he's got more up his sleeve...given the past track record, I'd guess he does. Here's hoping the situation (both in the gaming world, and our current economic "difficulties") will allow for it!

 

Wrench

kevin st

[GwynO 16]

(off topic)

Mab:

Can't you change it in the control panel for you profile?? If not, PM one of the Admins with what you want.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

back on topic:

 

the old question: who do I have to "convince" to give us workable toss bombing, and working LABS timer???" !!!

 

I DO hope he's got more up his sleeve...given the past track record, I'd guess he does. Here's hoping the situation (both in the gaming world, and our current economic "difficulties") will allow for it!

 

Wrench

kevin st

 

My fingers are crossed on the economic outlook! Certainly it is easier to have a sunny disposition on the former, the difference in the RWR on SFP2 for example, we know he has more to enthral us as the story of early jet aviation is full of stories to be told. :pioneer: :scout:

 

Off topic: PM'ing Dave eminently! I saw the option to change it in the help section, alas not so in the controls panel for some reason.