# Jets dlc - AG MACER

## Recommended Posts

Hi so after the jets update i can't lock on ground targets using AG MACER is that a bug ? Or its me ? thanks

##### Share on other sites

i have also had a lot of problems locking on to targets. I think its due to the new sensor overhaul. making a new missions with tanks just sitting there doesnt give them a very high IR signature (Im unsure if it would go up with time if they are moving). I can't seem to get a lock if I'm over 2km away, which is a very very short distance when going 1,000 kph.

My solution has been to modify the pylon loadout, and instead of macers, I'll add DAGR pods or scalpel racks, and just lase all my targets.

##### Share on other sites

first of all tank must run engine on and be HOT / in this situation you can lock at target maximum 6km from target. But it is direct  horizontal value. That mean if you fly at height for example 3km you can lock on target only at 1-2 km from target...

• 1

##### Share on other sites

Pythagoras disagrees. If 6km is the maximum straight line distance, then x^2 = sqrt (6^2- 3^2) = 5.19 km

I don't know how long a tank has to run to get its engine hot, but I gave them waypoints to go from one end of the runway to the other and then back to the middle (so over 1km of driving), and could still not achieve a lock at over 2 km

##### Share on other sites

I have had same problems during my tests, macers seems to be pretty useless to be honest. I mean, I can understand BI conception, but in Arma enviroment.... It is easier to lock with gbu :)

##### Share on other sites

Yeah macers dont work for me either :( Never managed them to lock on a target.

##### Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Ex3B said:

Pythagoras disagrees. If 6km is the maximum straight line distance, then x^2 = sqrt (6^2- 3^2) = 5.19 km

I say for exmple. But in game as I say previos I can get lock only at 2-3 km from target when fly at 1500-2000m.  It seems Pythagoras hate arma 3 engine

##### Share on other sites

Well, if 6km is the maximum range, that doesn't mean you'll detect something 6km away. That should depend on the IR signature and the sensitivity of the seeker.

It seems that the IR signature of tanks that are idling/moved a KM or two is not strong enough to be detected by the macer seekers much more than 2km away.

• 1

##### Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ex3B said:

not strong enough to be detected by the macer seekers much more than 2km away.

yes...in 90% in my tests I can lock only at 2-3km. All jets become CAS

double post

##### Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, sammael said:

yes...in 90% in my tests I can lock only at 2-3km. All jets become CAS

Well, the solution is to not use Macers, they are useless to me now.

Set your viewdistance to >5km, use the camera, IR view helps spot targets. Lase targets, drob GBUs. Turn away from target, but make sure you maneuver such that you can keep lasing the target (ctrl -T to have the camera follow a specific point/target for those that dont know).

Its not fire and forget anymore... but at least the computer can handle keeping the laser pointed at the target for you.

Also, by setting pylon loadout in the init, you can load scalpels, which can on hit AA systems (tigris/cheetah). Scalpels are nicer because they fly out ahead of your plane unlike the bombs, greatly reducing the time you need to lase the target.

DAGRs also work well

Guided missiles + stabilized laser targeting pod allows for some very effective air support even without ground troops lasing the targets. So forget about macers, load up on LGBs. If you're willing to edit the pylon loadout via the init field, then load up on scalpel racks/DAGR pods.

The Macer is worthless in comparison

##### Share on other sites

As I said before. With jet DLC all jets in game become CAS like an old Sukhoi Su-25 with short radar and everything manual

##### Share on other sites

Well, for CAS, yes, they work as CAS.

For A2A, the detection ranges seem fine to me - certainly better than the old CAS jets (although the buzzard with Zephyrs is probably halfway decent, but I havent tried) with just short range IR missiles.

But CAS implies "close" to infantry air support. With the targeting pod, they can operate effectively quite far away from friendly forces.

With friendly forces lasing targets, they can stay much farther back when releasing munitions, but that is CAS, whereas going deep  behind the front lines to eliminate enemy assets (such as self propelled artillery) is not CAS even if its done low and slow and with a gun

Quote

close air support (CAS) is defined as air action by fixed or rotary-winged aircraft against hostile targets, that are in close proximity to friendly forces

There's a reason that the air force wanted to replace the A-10 for CAS roles. You don't need a plane that performs well at lower speeds and altitudes to provide the level of precision needed to provide air support in close proximity to friendly troops.

Guided munitions and very good targeting systems + data links with slower drones means that a much faster jet, flying much farther away can provide the air support with enough precision to avoid friendly fire.

"Danger Close" doesn't mean the supporting aircraft is going to be flying really low, it means its going to be firing at a location dangerously close to friendly troops on the ground.

This is for artillery, but I'm pretty sure the same terminology is used by FACs:

Quote

If the forward observer or any friendly troops are within 600 meters of the impact point, to keep themselves safe, the forward observer would declare "danger close" in this last element.

• Danger close ranges[1]
1. 600 meters, generally
2. 750 meters, naval guns 5-inch and under
3. 1000 meters, naval guns over 5"
4. 2000 meters, naval 16"

##### Share on other sites
On 5/20/2017 at 11:03 AM, Ex3B said:

There's a reason that the air force wanted to replace the A-10 for CAS roles. You don't need a plane that performs well at lower speeds and altitudes to provide the level of precision needed to provide air support in close proximity to friendly troops.

Guided munitions and very good targeting systems + data links with slower drones means that a much faster jet, flying much farther away can provide the air support with enough precision to avoid friendly fire.

The Air Force didn't want to get rid of the A-10. Only corrupt generals who wanted a fat commission for building a replacement did.

The A-10 can find/lock/track up to 8 targets simultaneously day/night with radar/IR, from a stand off distance, in 2017.

The Wipeout is aptly named, because you will wipe-out!

##### Share on other sites

"The A-10 can find/lock/track up to 8 targets simultaneously day/night with radar" The A-10 has no radar

• 2