Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.14

Take command of air and naval assets from post-WW2 to the near future in tactical and operational scale, complete with historical and hypothetical scenarios and an integrated scenario editor.

Moderator: MOD_Command

gsalvar
Posts: 76
Joined: Sun Oct 22, 2017 3:09 pm

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.14

Post by gsalvar »

Thanks for your support.
Kobu
Posts: 281
Joined: Mon May 14, 2018 8:36 pm

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Kobu »

ORIGINAL: KC45

Is there anyway we can get the status of missile is guided by datalink, INS or ARH?


Yes, in the databse of the missil this indicates what kind of guided use the missile. And below indicates at what range the seeker (active, semiactive, ir etc...) is active.

For an amraam is guided by mid course data-link and have an active seeker that is active at 5NM to the estimated range to the target.

Regards
ExNusquam
Posts: 528
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 11:26 pm
Location: Washington, D.C.

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by ExNusquam »

Also, you can enable the datalink layer, which will show what is talking to what.
User avatar
KC45
Posts: 310
Joined: Thu Nov 23, 2017 8:35 pm
Location: JPN

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by KC45 »

Umm, but It is hard to identify the missile like AIM-120 is using datalink or INS at that time, I know it will be on the msg log, but I want to get the info in the Units Status or beside uint. When too many missles out now I can't identify which missile is using a Datalink from fighter and which missile is using INS(which means blind).
Wargame is fun if war is unreal
User avatar
tjhkkr
Posts: 2430
Joined: Wed Jun 02, 2010 11:15 pm
Contact:

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by tjhkkr »

Thank you!
Remember that the evil which is now in the world will become yet more powerful, and that it is not evil which conquers evil, but only love -- Olga Romanov.
Dwaltemath
Posts: 11
Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2015 3:36 pm

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Dwaltemath »

I checked my game and I have build 998.4 does this mean that the build 998.14 is already been installed

Thanks Don
DWalt
Dimitris
Posts: 14773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Dimitris »

ORIGINAL: Dwaltemath
I checked my game and I have build 998.4 does this mean that the build 998.14 is already been installed

Thanks Don

Hi, no this means you are several versions behind. Use the updater app to update tot he current official release (IIRC B998.12) and then optionally you can get the most recent unofficial update, from the OP. (This will eventually also be released through the official channels, once we are 100% happy with it).

Thanks.
User avatar
Comodoro
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:36 am

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Comodoro »

also works on Steam version?
bcbarnesRR
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2014 9:20 am

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by bcbarnesRR »

Yes - I've played the '.14' and the newer '.15' updates on my steam version. Works just fine.
User avatar
Comodoro
Posts: 22
Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2018 9:36 am

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Comodoro »

so I must to patch with this link into my Steam version of the game? Steam only seems to reach build 998.12 [:(]
Scorpion86
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 1:19 pm

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Scorpion86 »

There is another, more recent version out, 988.15. Go to that thread, download the zip file, extract it into the games steam directory and you should be good to go! The files in the zip will over-write the current game files.
hasler
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:28 pm

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by hasler »

So did this remove the ability to do a Maddog launch. Lower probability yes but a pure ban on launch? The missile should go active off the rail and lock on anything in its cone friend or foe
Dimitris
Posts: 14773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Dimitris »

ORIGINAL: hasler
So did this remove the ability to do a Maddog launch. Lower probability yes but a pure ban on launch? The missile should go active off the rail and lock on anything in its cone friend or foe

So are you are asking for an exception to the datalink restriction or the own-radar lock restriction?

And at what range is such a shot practical? (ie. not a waste of a very expensive weapon).
Scorpion86
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2017 1:19 pm

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Scorpion86 »

Isn't a Maddog launch essentially a "Bearing Only Launch"? Lobbing an AMRAAM in a certain direction and hoping the active sensor picks up on something?
User avatar
Sharana
Posts: 347
Joined: Wed Feb 03, 2016 9:58 pm

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Sharana »

ORIGINAL: Scorpion86

Isn't a Maddog launch essentially a "Bearing Only Launch"? Lobbing an AMRAAM in a certain direction and hoping the active sensor picks up on something?

It is, yet I'm not sure you actually understand how small the missile radar cone is. In 99.99% of the cases that would be a waste of very expensive missile and for that reason it's not really something used. Where it actually has bigger then 0.01% chance of not being a waste is in the range where you have the AIM-9s (rarely used usually, so not really missing capability that could affect the gameplay in most cases).
Image
hasler
Posts: 39
Joined: Mon Jul 31, 2017 8:28 pm

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by hasler »

ORIGINAL: Dimitris

So are you are asking for an exception to the datalink restriction or the own-radar lock restriction?

And at what range is such a shot practical? (ie. not a waste of a very expensive weapon).


A maddog launch, is basically a bearing only shot. The missile comes off the rails active since no guidance data has been sent. It is primarily a defensive shot taken at under 10 miles, though it also works in a nose cold situation where you either have visual or another sensor to sneak up on your target. Anywhere inside the seeker cone should have no noted difference in PK. Outside the active radar limits it depends on how far and the intercept geometry. I don't have a copy of the -1 non nuclear release manuals for the F-15, F-16, or F-18, but there are several civilianized versions floating around that explain employment of the AIM-120 with out a radar lock that go with DCS, Falcon+, FSX TAC Pack, and their various third party sub contractors. Though I would assume Warfare sims would have access to the -1 manuals based on gov clients. The best I can do for actual launching procedures is link the 1998 F-16 MLU document from Lockheed. Pg 140 of the manual/ pg 150 of the reader Deals with Amraam capability.

here is the link: https://www.scribd.com/doc/2326267/F-16 ... ual-Part-1

Quote: The missile may be launched along a fixed line-of-sight (BORE) or it can be commanded to attack the radar target of interest (SLAVE). If the missile is launched in BORE, it flies along a line 6 degrees below the aircraft body axis and acquires its own target. If launched in SLAVE, the missile flies an inertially guid-ed course to intercept the target of interest. The aircraft transmits updated target information to the missile via data link for inflight correction. The missile uses the data link information until it activates its onboard radar and acquires the target.

As for the Data link modeling, I assumed when you said the missile will fly straight you meant it will fly out to its last known intercept point and lock onto anything in its way. Unless that is not what you meant, and you mean the shot is completely trashed which would be incorrect behavior, as the missile will fly on INS to its last updated intercept point when the missile is snipped.

The friendly fire danger of a maddog or snipped missile should also probably be modeled if its not. I have only seen friendly fire incidents on comm damage, so it could be a product of the all seeing eye for ARH we had before.
ORIGINAL: Sharana
ORIGINAL: Scorpion86

Isn't a Maddog launch essentially a "Bearing Only Launch"? Lobbing an AMRAAM in a certain direction and hoping the active sensor picks up on something?

It is, yet I'm not sure you actually understand how small the missile radar cone is. In 99.99% of the cases that would be a waste of very expensive missile and for that reason it's not really something used. Where it actually has bigger then 0.01% chance of not being a waste is in the range where you have the AIM-9s (rarely used usually, so not really missing capability that could affect the gameplay in most cases).

The cone is actually bigger than you think. The Hud symbology for a no lock launch is about a 30 X 10 degrees off the nose. So if the enemy aircraft is in a 30 X10 degree cone? (im not sure what to call that shape) within 10 miles it is a pretty good shot.




Dimitris
Posts: 14773
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2005 10:29 am
Contact:

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by Dimitris »

Thanks, we'll see if the behavior can be covered by the BOL logics or it needs to expanded on its own.

Also filed the blue-on-blue request (ISTR this was working already, at least for Harpoon class weapons, but we'll check). If you can provide a suitable save for this it would be great.

Cheers.
DWReese
Posts: 2294
Joined: Fri Mar 21, 2014 11:40 am
Location: Miami, Florida

RE: Command v1.14 Update - Build 998.13

Post by DWReese »

If it's of any help, when playing in a NO COMMs environment (due to previous damage), I have often had a blue-on-blue situation occur. I know, all too well, that that works.

Doug
Post Reply

Return to “Command: Modern Operations series”