#4369740 - 07/18/17 08:29 AM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: LOF_Rugg]
|
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 797
leaf_on_the_wind
Member
|
Member
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 797
|
Tally Ho is "I see my ex girlfriend". best post in this thread by far
Ferengi Rule of acquisition #1 Once you have their money ... never give it back.
|
|
#4369748 - 07/18/17 09:34 AM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: heloguy]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
Wasn't talking about swapping tally and visual, but correctly using the word CONTACT. Sorry about that... was replying to both Frederf's post and yours and he was talking about tally/visual. That's fine in the sim world, but IRL it's not, especially when related to known friendly contacts. Yeah, I didn't mean KNOWN friendly... it could well be friendly (or Lead!!) but until certain, I call TALLY. Sorry for the confusion, I guess I wrote it that way as it was leading to my next sentence (Lead and smoke). Again, TALLY bogey and TALLY bandit are both correct. Again, this is in question. In fact, the pub I reference below uses the word 'CONTACT' to describe a bogey. It's only in question because you refuse to accept the APP-7 document... in which the (D) version is 2007 but you link me to a document that is dated 2005... interestingly, the FM 1-02.1 that you link defines CONTACT ***exactly*** as I've written above and ***exactly*** as written on the APP-7(D). It also doesn't "describe a bogey," it just says "sensor contact" or "radar return" which can be bogey/bandit/friendly/etc. The ATP 1-02.1 is now used by all services, and oddly enough specifically states that a bogey is an unidentified air CONTACT. A BOGEY is an air CONTACT whose identity is unknown (FM 1-02.1) or an unidentified aircraft (APP-07). A BOGEY may be acquired via sensors/radar or visually (FM 1.02.1). TALLY is sighting a target or non-friendly aircraft (FM 1-02.1). We agree on those definitions, right? Therefore, you can TALLY (see) a BOGEY (unidentified or non-friendly aircraft) and once you figure out (identify) that he's actually your Lead, you then call VISUAL. The pub (and most of the previous references) state that contact is used to describe visual (mk1 eyeball) and sensor acquisition from air-to-surface. Air-to-air doesn't seem to make the distinction, and only references radar. I fail to see where it says "air-to-surface." It says sensor contact or visual acquisition but doesn't seem to care whether the sensor platform or the individual is airborne or ground-based. Having said that, I guess CONTACT bogey and CONTACT bandit are both correct too, provided that this is done through a sensor (radar, TGP, FLIR, etc.). CONTACT red car on the parking lot is also correct.
Correct, well done. Thank you. Maybe now you can drop the patronizing tone? I think the distinction of CONTACT and TALLY with reference to airborne targets carry with it the indication of the user's range or distance to the target.
This is not referenced anywhere. Hence the first two words being "I think." An unidentified aircraft, vehicle, thing, etc is in fact a reference point. Source? TALLY is no longer associated with landmarks. As I stated above, it is only used with targets, non-friendly aircraft, or enemy positions. And a BOGEY is non-friendly... until proven otherwise.
- Ice
|
|
#4369750 - 07/18/17 09:37 AM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: Frederf]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
If it were my squadron I would push heavily toward tally being used exclusively with enemy status. "I tally bandit to the south." "Looks to be an airliner to the west. You see 'im?" "Yeah I tally." That kind of exchange has bad news written all over it. Just used an airliner as an extreme example, the airliner being a "target" and not necessarily an enemy....
- Ice
|
|
#4369782 - 07/18/17 03:15 PM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
heloguy
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
|
It's only in question because you refuse to accept the APP-7 document... in which the (D) version is 2007
This is because there is most likely a newer version, with updated definitions in it. I've searched at work, but haven't found it, most likely since it's a NATO pub. I've only been able to find the ATP 1-02.1 (the successor to the FM1-02.1). but you link me to a document that is dated 2005... interestingly,
I explained at the close of my post that a newer version exists, that it was released last year, and I have had a chance to check the differences with the terms that have been discussed. the FM 1-02.1 that you link defines CONTACT ***exactly*** as I've written above and ***exactly*** as written on the APP-7(D).
I explained in my earlier post, the definition was changed as of last year in the updated ATP 1-02.1. It also doesn't "describe a bogey," it just says "sensor contact" or "radar return" which can be bogey/bandit/friendly/etc.
I was referring to the use of the word CONTACT in the definition of a bogey. It does not say sensor in that definition. In fact, it says 'Radar or visual air contact whose identity is unknown'. I fail to see where it says "air-to-surface." It says sensor contact or visual acquisition but doesn't seem to care whether the sensor platform or the individual is airborne or ground-based.
You fail to see it because it's in the newer pub as I described. The newer ATP 1-02.1 places a A/A or S/A or A/S in front of each definition of a term. An unidentified aircraft, vehicle, thing, etc is in fact a reference point. Source? Unfortunately, reference point is not defined in any of the pubs. And a BOGEY is non-friendly... until proven otherwise.
This is an interpretation. I'm curious to hear now what the current interpretation is in the USAF.
Sim 1 I7 8700k Nvidia GTX 1080ti 32gb RAM Windows 10 x64 Samsung Odyssey Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, BRD Black Stork, BRD F1 Pedals Rotary Wing: Microhelis EC-135 Collective, Komodosim Cyclic (135)
Sim 2 I7 3770k Nvidia GTX 1080 32gb RAM Windows 10 x64 Oculus Rift Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, VKB Gunfighter, Slaw Viper Pedals Rotary Wing: Komodosim Collective (135)
|
|
#4369899 - 07/18/17 09:49 PM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: heloguy]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
This is because there is most likely a newer version, with updated definitions in it. I've searched at work, but haven't found it, most likely since it's a NATO pub. I've only been able to find the ATP 1-02.1 (the successor to the FM1-02.1). It didn't match your CAS version so you rejected it.... however, it now meshes more closesly with the other stuff you've linked so maybe you'll open your mind up? It may well be replaced by newer publications, but I can only really go with what's available. I explained at the close of my post that a newer version exists, that it was released last year, and I have had a chance to check the differences with the terms that have been discussed. TALLY is no longer associated with landmarks. As I stated above, it is only used with targets, non-friendly aircraft, or enemy positions. CONTACT adds the phrase "either visually or via sensor" to the second definition (I think this is in one of the previous references). And none of the differences really changes what I've posted before. You can still TALLY a BOGEY. I explained in my earlier post, the definition was changed as of last year in the updated ATP 1-02.1. You can still TALLY a BOGEY. I was referring to the use of the word CONTACT in the definition of a bogey. It does not say sensor in that definition. In fact, it says 'Radar or visual air contact whose identity is unknown'. And radar is not a sensor? Tell me, what is a sensor then? You fail to see it because it's in the newer pub as I described. The newer ATP 1-02.1 places a A/A or S/A or A/S in front of each definition of a term. Er, no. The FM 1-02.1 puts [A/A] or whatever as appropriate. So does the APP-7. So if A/S defines CONTACT as a visual/sensor acquisition from an A-S platform, then what do you call a visual/sensor acquisition from an A-A platform? Unfortunately, reference point is not defined in any of the pubs. Interesting how you call me out on something that is not referenced, but yet you do the same thing. This is an interpretation. I'm curious to hear now what the current interpretation is in the USAF. If it is a FRIENDLY, then it's FRIENDLY. If it isn't friendly and you don't know if it's hostile or neutral or friendly, what do you call it?
- Ice
|
|
#4369900 - 07/18/17 09:50 PM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: VF9_Longbow]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
Just ain't the case, ice. Which one? standardized phraseology people Indeed, Longbow, but apparently, different groups "standardize" differently And different people accept different "standards."
- Ice
|
|
#4369949 - 07/19/17 04:19 AM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
heloguy
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
|
This is because there is most likely a newer version, with updated definitions in it. I've searched at work, but haven't found it, most likely since it's a NATO pub. I've only been able to find the ATP 1-02.1 (the successor to the FM1-02.1). It didn't match your CAS version so you rejected it.... however, it now meshes more closesly with the other stuff you've linked so maybe you'll open your mind up? It may well be replaced by newer publications, but I can only really go with what's available. I simply haven't accepted your interpretation, and would like to see a newer version of the APP-7 is all. It really is ok to disagree. And none of the differences really changes what I've posted before.
It gets rid of the part where you can tally a landmark. That is old terminology. I was referring to the use of the word CONTACT in the definition of a bogey. It does not say sensor in that definition. In fact, it says 'Radar or visual air contact whose identity is unknown'. And radar is not a sensor? Tell me, what is a sensor then? I was referring to the fact that it does not exclude the word 'visual' by only including the word 'radar'. You fail to see it because it's in the newer pub as I described. The newer ATP 1-02.1 places a A/A or S/A or A/S in front of each definition of a term. Er, no. The FM 1-02.1 puts [A/A] or whatever as appropriate. So does the APP-7. So if A/S defines CONTACT as a visual/sensor acquisition from an A-S platform, then what do you call a visual/sensor acquisition from an A-A platform? The reference was to the fact that the ATP 1-02.1 places the A/A, A/S, or S/A identifiers in front of each definition specifically for the term CONTACT. It's changed, only slightly, but doesn't really change the definition. You didn't see this in the FM 1-02.1 because the identifiers for each definition in CONTACT are not there for bullets 1 and 2. For bullet 2, it actually says A/S, which I believe supports your claim. Interesting how you call me out on something that is not referenced, but yet you do the same thing.
Contact/Tally differentiation by definition are not associated with range. I understood reference point to mean a point in three-dimensional space. Unfortunately, as I said, it's not defined in the pubs. If it is a FRIENDLY, then it's FRIENDLY. If it isn't friendly and you don't know if it's hostile or neutral or friendly, what do you call it?
An unidentified contact, which would be a BOGEY in the air, and plain language on the ground, unless there is a pro-word/brevity term assigned to it. Non-friendly, and enemy are easily interchangeable, and where the ambiguity lies.
Sim 1 I7 8700k Nvidia GTX 1080ti 32gb RAM Windows 10 x64 Samsung Odyssey Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, BRD Black Stork, BRD F1 Pedals Rotary Wing: Microhelis EC-135 Collective, Komodosim Cyclic (135)
Sim 2 I7 3770k Nvidia GTX 1080 32gb RAM Windows 10 x64 Oculus Rift Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, VKB Gunfighter, Slaw Viper Pedals Rotary Wing: Komodosim Collective (135)
|
|
#4370052 - 07/19/17 08:29 PM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: heloguy]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
I simply haven't accepted your interpretation, and would like to see a newer version of the APP-7 is all. It really is ok to disagree. What "interpretation"?? You've initially rejected it on the basis of your JP 3-09. Please point out where I've "interpreted" stuff in error. It gets rid of the part where you can tally a landmark. That is old terminology. So what? Moot point. We were never arguing about tallying a landmark. I did say this was possible, and it was correct as per the old documentation, and if what you say is true, then that statement about TALLY a landmark is no longer correct.... but bottom line, we were never arguing about TALLYing a landmark. I was referring to the fact that it does not exclude the word 'visual' by only including the word 'radar'. What? The reference was to the fact that the ATP 1-02.1 places the A/A, A/S, or S/A identifiers in front of each definition specifically for the term CONTACT. It's changed, only slightly, but doesn't really change the definition. You didn't see this in the FM 1-02.1 because the identifiers for each definition in CONTACT are not there for bullets 1 and 2. For bullet 2, it actually says A/S, which I believe supports your claim. So A/A or A/S or whatever is placed in in front of the definition.... but is the definition actually CHANGED significantly? If not, then arguing about this is moot. Contact/Tally differentiation by definition are not associated with range. I understood reference point to mean a point in three-dimensional space. Unfortunately, as I said, it's not defined in the pubs. And that's why I said "I think." Your statement, however, did not even though this is your INTERPRETATION or UNDERSTANDING of it and is not actually an official definition. Pot calling kettle black. If it is a FRIENDLY, then it's FRIENDLY. If it isn't friendly and you don't know if it's hostile or neutral or friendly, what do you call it? An unidentified contact, which would be a BOGEY in the air, and plain language on the ground, unless there is a pro-word/brevity term assigned to it. Non-friendly, and enemy are easily interchangeable, and where the ambiguity lies. Done! Sorted! If it isn't friendly (aka non-friendly) and you don't know if it's hostile/neutral/friendly, it is unidentified and is therefore called a BOGEY. TALLY is, as per your FM 1-02.1 (2005), is defined as Sighting of a target, non-friendly aircraft, or enemy position. Opposite of NO JOY. TL;DR - you can TALLY a BOGEY.
- Ice
|
|
#4370066 - 07/19/17 09:42 PM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: *Striker*]
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 467
nadal
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 467
|
Tally for Bogey. IIRC you can even find an example of using tally for bogey in fighter jet employment manual floating on the net.
If you are still not convinced, put it this way.
1: Tally Bogey 10 o'clock high 2: two, contact. 1: (Hmm... my buddy acquired said bogey with radar or IR device...)
Last edited by nadal; 07/19/17 09:44 PM.
|
|
#4370244 - 07/20/17 07:16 PM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: nadal]
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
heloguy
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
|
Tally for Bogey. IIRC you can even find an example of using tally for bogey in fighter jet employment manual floating on the net.
I searched around a bit for exactly that. I found the transcript for the F-14/Mig-23 fight, which I have listened to, a long time ago. The transcript (I only read it this time, so whoever made it might have made mistakes) makes it sound like they only used the word Bogey the whole time, and they definitely used the word Tally quite a bit, just not together. Anyway, as I said, I've dealt only with air-to-surface personally, and it was drilled from the beginning that you only Tally targets (ie, something you will shoot). If air-to-air is that different, cool. It may not be as specific, but as I said before, it seems like any reasonable person would understand.
Sim 1 I7 8700k Nvidia GTX 1080ti 32gb RAM Windows 10 x64 Samsung Odyssey Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, BRD Black Stork, BRD F1 Pedals Rotary Wing: Microhelis EC-135 Collective, Komodosim Cyclic (135)
Sim 2 I7 3770k Nvidia GTX 1080 32gb RAM Windows 10 x64 Oculus Rift Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, VKB Gunfighter, Slaw Viper Pedals Rotary Wing: Komodosim Collective (135)
|
|
#4370255 - 07/20/17 08:54 PM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: heloguy]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
I searched around a bit for exactly that. I found the transcript for the F-14/Mig-23 fight, which I have listened to, a long time ago. The transcript (I only read it this time, so whoever made it might have made mistakes) makes it sound like they only used the word Bogey the whole time, and they definitely used the word Tally quite a bit, just not together. Maybe because TALLY is "I see XXXX"Anyway, as I said, I've dealt only with air-to-surface personally, and it was drilled from the beginning that you only Tally targets (ie, something you will shoot). If air-to-air is that different, cool. It may not be as specific, but as I said before, it seems like any reasonable person would understand. Well, I guess you've been drilled wrong... or you've been very close-minded with your definition that everything else that is outside your "drilled in" definition is wrong. TALLY - Sighting of a target, non-friendly aircraft, landmark, or enemy position. Opposite of NO JOY. FM 1-02.1 (2005) So while TALLY can be used on targets, it can be also used on non-friendlies (BOGEYs). For the upteenth time... you can TALLY a BOGEY.
- Ice
|
|
#4370261 - 07/20/17 09:28 PM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: heloguy]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
I've explained myself thoroughly I think you meant "wrongly" instead of "thoroughly." In the air-to-surface world, my definition is not wrong. That's not the line you were singing until just now. Moving the goalposts, I see.... If it's different in air-to-air, again, cool. Funny how you're now open to differences in definition between services... You seemed so sure before, and even gave air-to-air examples... You may stop with the close-minded accusations now, and settle down. Hahahaha..... I'm the close-minded one now, am I? Mr. No-I-won't-accept-the-APP-7-and-the-AFTTP-because-my-JP-3-09-is-newer-and-more-correct?
- Ice
|
|
#4370262 - 07/20/17 09:41 PM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: - Ice]
|
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
heloguy
Member
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 126
|
I think you meant "wrongly" instead of "thoroughly."
No, thoroughly. The difference here is that for me, this was a discussion. For you, it was an argument, as you stated. In the air-to-surface world, my definition is not wrong. That's not the line you were singing until just now. Moving the goalposts, I see.... Whatever perception makes you feel better. You seemed so sure before, and even gave air-to-air examples...
I've been given air-to-air examples that are similar. Hahahaha..... I'm the close-minded one now, am I?
I never called you anything. Not one to bury the hatchet, are you?
Sim 1 I7 8700k Nvidia GTX 1080ti 32gb RAM Windows 10 x64 Samsung Odyssey Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, BRD Black Stork, BRD F1 Pedals Rotary Wing: Microhelis EC-135 Collective, Komodosim Cyclic (135)
Sim 2 I7 3770k Nvidia GTX 1080 32gb RAM Windows 10 x64 Oculus Rift Fixed Wing: WH Throttle, VKB Gunfighter, Slaw Viper Pedals Rotary Wing: Komodosim Collective (135)
|
|
#4370302 - 07/21/17 07:55 AM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: heloguy]
|
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
- Ice
Veteran
|
Veteran
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 16,082
Philippines / North East UK
|
No, thoroughly. The difference here is that for me, this was a discussion. For you, it was an argument, as you stated. Discussion or argument, it was still wrong. Again, we were talking about correct usage in the air-to-air context, and there is a correct way and a wrong way. It's not like we were discussing favorite colors or something where there's no wrong answer.... Whatever perception makes you feel better. Ah, it's my "perception" now, is it? Just like everything about TALLY BOGEY was my "interpretation"? I've been given air-to-air examples that are similar. While your air-to-air examples can be correct in a context, the conclusion that you pulled out of it that cannot TALLY a BOGEY was wrong. I never called you anything. You may stop with the close-minded accusations now Really? Not one to bury the hatchet, are you? Not one to admit you're wrong, are you? Very funny how you are now doing your best to weasel out of the current corner you're in. Also, your previous posts had absolutely nothing to do with "bury the hatchet".... or do I have to pull out the definition for that phrase so that you can understand THAT as well? Or maybe that's how you "bury the hatchet" in your "air-to-surface world"?
- Ice
|
|
#4370307 - 07/21/17 09:54 AM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: Nate]
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield
model citizen
|
model citizen
Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
|
when your contributions to the community actually had merit... Tester staff Stephen "Nate--IRL--" Barrett oh how times change.
|
|
#4370308 - 07/21/17 09:57 AM
Re: DCS F/A-18C To Be Released Soon
[Re: heloguy]
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
Winfield
model citizen
|
model citizen
Member
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 871
QLD
|
Tally for Bogey. IIRC you can even find an example of using tally for bogey in fighter jet employment manual floating on the net.
I searched around a bit for exactly that. I found the transcript for the F-14/Mig-23 fight, which I have listened to, a long time ago. fire up BMS did we?
|
|
|
|