Fri13
-
Posts
8051 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Fri13
-
-
:). This is a nice appeal to authority in the first post BUT you must think in Russian.
Most important thing to do in a Blackshark is to NOT burn the laser out. Laser standby button cannot be on a hat switch. You must drill a new hole in your throttle and add a red button just for this.
Everything else is fine.
It is actually good to be, so laser can be turn off so it can't be in mistake fired to calculate distance or try to get a Shkval lock on target. This allows minimize the burn possibility to very low and get even 36 Vikhr fired without burning laser when being very careful.
-
I never experienced this issue - not with the G940. I just trim when the helo is in the desired attitude and that's it. But maybe I am misunderstanding you ... what exactly do you mean with "brings leveled flight to center point"? You have forward speed and have your stick centered?? That would be weired ... if that is the case, what are you settings under Options for FFB and Central Position Trimmer Mode?
Example, I get off from ramp and I level up to 220km/h speed with single trimmer release and stick is forward little bit as should.
After maneuvers, time passed by etc without real COG point moving around (releasing weapons, consuming fuel as much) my required trimmer mode is now almost on maximal joystick movement position or further from where it would be in same leveled flight profile (same altitude, speed, direction) and only reseting trimmer allows me to reposition the stick to place where it originally was in same flight profile.
The trimmer sets cyclic center to the position where the trimmer was released, so FFB stick new center is at new physical position. The virtual controls OSD confirms that stick is moving correctly but KA-50 just requires now and then trimming reset, as not even just holding trimmer down does set the trimmer correctly.
It has always been so, after few reinstall, reconfiguration etc. Only happening with a KA-50 in DCS.
And as said, not configured anything to confuse the FFB, although long time ago tried different axis settings from defaults.
-
Afaik the "reset trim" function does not exist on the real aircraft, it is more a conviniece function for us sim pilots. I never found any situation where I whished I could actually reset the trim (i.e. = re-trim to the default stick center) as it makes the helo usually react rather violently. But I am using the G940 FFB. But for non-FFB sticks it might be helpful if you managed to cumulate "trim errors" because of the necessity to re-center all controls each time you trim the aircraft. But as said earlier, to use it as "temporary disable the trim" sounds a bit strange to me.
I use G940 too and I need to reset trim now and then as after some time and maneuvers, the virtual control centerpoint is in joystick limits to get a leveled flight. But resetting trim and then applying new trim brings the leveled flight almost to center point. I don't naturally use any curves etc to mess axis.
And I know real stick doesn't have a reset trim, but in KA-50 it is required to be.
But to use it temporarily disable AP channels or avoid using AP FD mode (or just hold and press trim) it is wrong.
-
Allow to draw a waypoints that doesn't belong to any group.
Then allow to name that route so it can be called.
Then give possibility to assign new routes to groups via triggers and the waypoint number in those routes.
So example, make a group with a waypoints for attack, then with a trigger just command group to switch route with new sets of ROE etc.
Or randomize group to select one of the many routes to randomize the mission.
-
;2214013']anyone using 4K? I just bought a 28" 4K with GSYNC.. not arrived yet
What are people's experiences with the high resolutions?
Huge difference to 4K. And it doesn't require much as DCS is same running either on 4k or 1920x1200 or 1650x1050 on computer that has specs of AMD 8350 (8x4Ghz), 16GiB DDR3, Nvidia GTX750 or GTX760. DCS runs as smoothly (55-60fps depending altitude, flying either KA-50 or Fighter, always having VSync on) and as laggy when ever there is smoke and explosion effects around, dropping FPS to halt or 1-2 for a moment. Every effect at full (cockpit shadows enabled).
The difference is that the ground units does pop-up from very far distance and makes planes like SU-25A so pleasure to fly as it is possible to exploit weapons at about max range to ground units.
Not have tested those mods to add super-mega-ultimate ground quality.
Now my dream is to get a 55" 4K television as they are pretty (dirty?) cheap being around 799€. It would be dedicated flight Sim display then as possibility see targets further really is awesome.
-
In all videos and pics provided by claiming it to be "shkval" it seems its quality is really low - in this movie object is 2-3 km and it looks bad so I more less imagine how it would look like in 10 km :D
I don't know if ED knew what is the real resolution of this system in Ka-50 when they were modelling module.
Regarding 250 being too low - again the video and pics aren't too good evein in such close object, so perhaps?
The quality in those are actually good as you can recognize target, target directions, markings and even individual parts of those units at that size on monitor.
It isn't the distance that is problem, but the object size relatively to gate.
The display can be low resolution, but we don't know how accurate the camera itself is. Low output doesn't mean input is low. As the Shkval isn't tracking it trough the monitor, but trough the feed that is sent to computer before monitor.
And soviets claiming 10-12km engagement ranges would require a good tracking/targeting capability, that is now for some reason dropped to 6-8km.
-
Todays PC have a lot of power, they are mostly limited only by programmers will and their financial resources.
We don't have to do image processing of whole area visible by Shkval, only center of it (gate size) because the target is always in the center, just gate size changes.
exactly as the gate is always adjusted by pilot around target, the low resolution and sampling is enough. In my video the first sample is how huge the full view would required to be. The last sample is like only gate s size is calculated in two ways.
I've heard it could be even lower, around 256 lines. Regarding quality we have now Full HD standard in DCS. It is wrong, I don't know why they don't want to degrade quality of image, if even in old FC1 it was more realistic by just layered filter which degraded resolution.
Same goes for Ka-50.
I like to keep it in 512 and skip frames.
The 256 lines sounds way too low to identify anything.
-
Our PCs could probably do the image processing quite well - but our CPU(s) also have to do a ton of other things to do as well in DCS. Also the algorithm would have to work somewhat reliably to replicate the real behaviour ... but under different conditions: our world does in fact look quite differently than the real world.
The old computers could do it pretty fast and analog computers did it well. But the impact really is very very small as we are talking about processing center of targeting gate and very limited resolution and time it is in use. Even today DCS runs well enough (until something blows up next to you) and it is just with a two threads (graphics+simulation & sound, as far I know, internally dozens of threads fighting about priority) while good multitasking programming should give huge improvement to current system, releasing even more processing power from each client computer to do simple calculation from their own computer. Same way as rest of the simulations, we don't need to send data of all aircraft functions to every client and server, it is enough to do simulation on client and send result to server and other clients. Like no need simulate fuel tank fill rate or fuid momentums on server and other clients, it is enough client does it and then send result how aircraft behave at that moment to others.
And I would draw a line to the simulation depth/accuracy as replicating the algorithms the original engineers and mathematics designed and build own computer for it did, isn't viable. The current system looks and behaves badly after longer time using it, but it has done its work well enough.
It is enough to know how it should work (contrast lock, lock on everything where is contrast and in what situations comes problems etc) simply offer that.
-
As for the changing image of a moving target: maybe the comparasation between the current image and the reference image is not done with a fixed, initial image, but with the image a few moments ago as the reference image.
That is what I wrote, as we can do it like on security cameras indoor as otherwise you an cheat them, why they use predefined sample. But outdoor and anything tracking something moving requires sampling from few previous seconds at top and then sometimes even to original sample (security cameras).
Like compare last 10-15 frames and subject can turn pretty fast without losing a lock.
-
I have no doubt this wouldn't be doable on current systems for single sensor. The problems is that you would need to model every contrast locking sensor the same way which could be a problem. Imagine multiple AI A-10s ripple firing mavericks at the same time. Other thing is that there could be efficiency problems with rendering pipeline to get the sensor images to the algorithm handling lock simulation in a timely manner.
The AI doesn't need it at all, for AI it is enough to just aim to target and depending skill level variate the release and aiming accuracy or reaction speed to aim.
Only players would need it to experience the difficulty and possibilities.
The sample I shown is just made with simple pixelisation and then then threshold 50% what is done on decades olds compute d security cameras and some targeting systems as well today in modern image recognitions algorithms as well.
It is very accurate and very fast way to recognize subjects from video or photo. It can even be used to recognize objects by colors.
16x16px goes very far and can be applied even in very crucial situations like cars early warning systems avoiding other cars or humans (or animals).
Sure some might use edge detection but it is far more complex calculations to be done and use.
-
I made a ugly (rough?) example how I believe the contrast detection targeting works.
First is the sample of the view on Shkval monitor, then how it more likely would look for Shkval if the targeting gate is around the view. (The last sample is how it could be today with improved processing power).
The processing power from late 80's or early 90's isnt today's standard impressive. But thinking about shkval itself, computer only needs to deal binary data (black and white, not even different shades) and to get accurate enough, only 16x16 grid is required. If grid is example 32x32 the accuracy is much better but processing is slower.
Skhval targeting:
If we guess that the targeting grid is 16x16, binary colors and it gets updated 10-15 times a second, it doesn't require much processing power to do the tracking.
And if the grid always stay 16x16, tracking can be done on any target size because optical zoom and Shkval targeting gate resizing.
The pilot is required to adjust the gate around the target. That is cropping the area away that has complex contrast noise pattern, only focusing to pilot own target he spotted visually trough Shkval video. So the pilot does the hard work visually. Then resize gate to fit target and Shkval adjust itself to that area to get optimal contrast, if it does, it informs pilot of lock.
The shkval isn't good at low light, because contrast is so low that shkval can't adjust itself to get high contrast scenery. And for that the low-light television mode would be required.
A thermal camera already gets this same thing naturally via monochrome/B&W conversion. So it is easier to track subject.
Today Shkval kind targeting can be simulated easily on client computer that is targeting. It would not require at all heavy CPU processing as even 32x32 would be possible to do thousands of times per second without impact. Doing it when player activates lock with 10-15 frame per seconds has no impact.
-
Yes, they say real time image processing is too high CPU hungry for now.
It is weird as in Ka-50 times and other lawn mowers - 1980-1990 era computers installed in these helicopters were slower than nowadays cell phones.
Regarding size of Shkval gate and locking - I think there is bug because try to set it at minimum size and lock object far away. It will do but how is it possible if resolution of whole system is really low - how could it distinguish "pixels" in locked gate size which are not contrast enough in such distance?
As far I know in reality it could lock road trepassing (white "zebra"), puffy cloud ect. I don't know how it can keep lock on something when angle of view changes - so the image in buffer which is used to compare is old. There must be some kind of margin..... and that all with very weak CPU when we look from today's POV.
I don't know what is real Shkval monitor resolution but I would guess it is around high end TV from that era as military budget, so around 768x576 as PAL TV cameras had that already and it would support the quality: Russian FLIR - Laser guided anti tank missile - 9…:
The contrast based pattern lock isn't hard to do in reality. Especially if you have a dedicated computer to process the data.
As we know, even the KA-50 HUD is a slow to respond on changes, around 10-15 times a second: KA-50 In Cockpit Flight Video:
So I would guess that is the contrast pattern processing speed per frame and it is shown as each update on target gate move on Shkval screen.
-
.....You can lock on Aircraft with the shkval to engage them......just saying.
Also try the most smallest Target frame size.
Yes you can but it is about pure luck when the lock happens and it is limited to Shkval laser range etc.
It isn't difficult for me to even get target gate kept over enemy aircraft while maneuvering (tweaked settings for minijoystick, combination using Shkval, HUD and HMS) but the locking not being possible is frustrating as either never getting it or burning laser because already on second or third loadout for Vikhrs.
Sometimes same thing happens for ground units, never getting a lock.
The smallest is the best option now in DCS, but in reality it is worst as the contrast pattern inside the targeting gate is most likely to change radically in short time. While the largest covering target gives change to maintain lock as pattern change would be much smaller between updates.
That has as well led me to believe that the Shkval targeting mode button for Moving Ground Target is not just to tell target being moving so Shkval can estimate lead to it, but it is to configure Shkval locking pattern and ease the pilot task to get a lock.
Example, you move targeting gate front of a target instead trying to keep gate on it. You enable moving target -mode and adjust gate to target size. When the target moves inside gate, the contrast pattern of ground/background changes to pattern of target and Shkval knows that new contrast pattern is a moving target and locks on it.
As for contrast based targeting the system needs to get optimal contrast pattern what to follow.
It doesn't know which changing pattern is the target (need to send examples) and what is background so switching algorithms would make things easier. And that would as well help to lock on aerial target as usually they are against clear background and moving fast. It would allow pilot to move gate front of a target and wait it to fly inside gate that allows Shkval autolock changing contrast pattern.
-
Wow ... wall of text ... ;o)
Some remarks added in blue:
You didn't get change to use quote?
Makes my quote impossible for some reason.... 
Well, i only touch to parts.
The Hellfire L-model is F&F in that purest form with its own active millimeter radar seeker at homing phase (from launch to that point it is inertial guided), but the F&F is as well that you don't need to guide missile as the system takes care of it, just lock, fire and forget (focus to other things). And that Shkval fills as well. Sure I have the opinion that the forget part requires that launching platform can be destroyed or gone, but if pilot/gunner doesn't need to do guidance, it is still same to them. But it isn't this topic
And I forgot to ask about the screen adjustments affecting to Shkval anyways on others? I have tried to adjust Shkval but my understanding is it would not affect it at all, as those are TV settings instead the targeting data controls. It would mean that the video feed would need to be a digital so it would be possible be adjusted that manner, being analog signal doesn't allow such adjustments to signal before it is fed to display, after Shkval system has got own feed. Unless controls goes to both.... who knows.
-
I have wondered for long time why Shkval works so differently between targets and between even KA-50 and Su-25T.
What I understand is that Vikhr missiles can't be "Locked" as some people say (there is own thread about that) as it just steers itself to middle of the laser beam, in otherwords it flies where ever pilot is guiding it.
Shkval is Soviet 'Fire and forget' targeting system, meaning that after the Shkval is locked to target and missile is fired, pilot doesn't need to keep targeting gate on target anymore like with SACLOS and its previous system MCLOS systems required. So all what pilot does is to fly aircraft without exceeding the Shkval targeting limits to maintain lock or the missile limits (launch altitude, launch speed etc).
In a sense Vikhr is exactly like many any other missile with a F&F feature like Hellfire as they too require target being maintained in line of sight by launch platform radar or laser or second party laser.
The Shkval itself is interesting as its lock capability is contrast based as far I understand. It doesn't even know what kind a target it is being pointed at. It can lock on anything that has contrast and is inside the targeting gate. After pilot press Shkval "Lock" the Shkval memories the contrast pattern inside the gate and keeps pointing at it.
Only when the contrast pattern in memory doesn't anymore match what the Shkval targeting gate has, does it lose the lock and Shkval changes to either of two modes, depending the targeting mode was used prior lock.
Either it keeps moving three seconds the last linear line to check if the pattern does appear and re-lock, or it doesn't and Shkval keeps inertial movement.
Or the second where inertial mode is enabled and Shkval gate stays at the point on ground (and target can continue moving away from that point).
As long the contrast pattern stays equivalent, Shkval keeps pointing at it. So radical target movement changing its silhouette or obstacle blocking the line of sight does cause Shkval lose the lock.
But how does the Shkval know what it is suppose to follow?
It doesnt by any other manner than the contrast pattern. Why pilot chosing the correct targeting gate size is crucial so the target pattern fills optimal area in gate.
But why does Su-25T Shkval then autolock on ground units and KA-50 doesn't? Is there some kind change done in Su-25T Shkval in reality to auto-lock on diamond shaped or square contrast patterns?
As my understanding is, it is from Lock-On level feature and shouldn't be there.
Same problem seems to exist with a KA-50 Shkval, disobedience to pilot commands to lock unless there is a unit inside a gate. Sometimes pilot can lock on some other contrasty objects like buildings or parts of buildings but i have never read or experienced that it could be locked on ground or anything when wanted.
this brings to other question, shouldn't the KA-50 Shkval lock everytime on anything that has high enough contrast pattern?
Like an enemy helicopter against blue sky, it being only a very contrasty shape against light grey background?
As then targeting gate being large enough to fill whole aircraft is important so the contrast pattern change would be a minimal. What brings a another question, does Shkval contrast lock pattern system allow specific amount of contrast pattern change?
like with a motion detection systems in secure cameras, the camera/computer takes series of shots in a second and I'd there is 5-10% (as example) change in contrast to previous two frames shapes, it detects movement. But if target change speed is slow enough, the system doesn't recognize the subject as a movement but as normal scene change.
The contrast pattern change system would be very logical as it does change if flying over or a side of the target instead toward it. Or if target is turning.
I have now last few days spent many hours flying quick missions in KA-50 only focusing to Shkval lock behavior.
And i have came to conclusion that it doesn't work as suppose at all.
I am highly probably wrong, but i can't find any reasoning why i can't get lock to hovering helicopter against light background or dark main battle tank on light ground.
or why i cant lock easily to anything very clear contrasty target?
Shkval shouldn't require lasering distance to target to achieve a lock, as it shouldn't need that data to control camera movement, as it follows contrast pattern and not inertial movement.
The accurate distance is required for other things like ABRIS map and datalink. But lock should be possible be acquired to anything where is enough contrast, no matter of targeting gate size or distance.
That way too it makes sense why laser is a switch instead automatic, as Shkval should be possible be locked without consuming laser.
Locking to helicopter as far as 15-20km should be possible as long there is enough contrast. To Shkval the target is just a specific pattern at specific direction and it follows it as long Shkval limits doesn't deny it.
Same way Su-25T Shkval should be possible used as now it auto locks to any unit inside gate, while even being inside a forest and pilot can't spot the unit.
Same way it looks that non-functional contrast locking disallows KA-50 pilot from locking Shkval to ground so easily while maneuvering.
I can be very wrong, but i believe the DCS just doesn't include actual functions to do a correct contrast detection but it is cheated as it knows when there is a unit targeted, and then it just follows specific requirements for distance. This way example A-10C TGP or Maverick can work easily as when in thermal mode or point tracking, it is simply checked is there a unit inside cross.
To me it is frustratingly huge immersion breaker when KA-50 Shkval can't lock on clear object on sky only to find out that it would be always better use mouse and guide Vikhr without Shkval lock to enemy.
Can we expect in future Shkval system being fixed?
If we get trees that offers concealment from radars and lasers and depending thickness, cover from missiles and kinectic projectiles, the Shkval system locking should be working one.
-
The A/A Hardpoint select is that useless that it hurts, and thats just one example.
My understanding is that isn't A/A hardpoint selection, but a double config for A/A mode for some reason (unless it was meant that there would be such switch that would allow to select R-73 missiles on wingtips).
1/2 of the setup is useless in combat where you nearly never have time to switch around inside the Cockpit.HOTAS isn't just for combat, it is for flying as well on good time. Like example managing ABRIS to zoom in/out map can be very valuable task while hovering behind cover.
You can setup the DL system instead of the ABRIS as a another example.It would be better to be just included, not to replace ABRIS functions. I have both and I use often the PRTz than ABRIS but controlling ABRIS is important feature.
The UV-26 can easily be one button also.Actually UV-26 is better to be have at least three, Start, Stop and Side. As it is better to program it before entering hostile area if wanted, so you need to start and stop the programming to save flares. On sudden moments you can launch just one by at the time as well. And the side selection is better to do for improved change to avoid missile by launching flares on the other side than the threat, so you are not behind the flare when the missile pass it. But you can still choose quickly which side you flare, to save flares and have different ways.
And why do you need the reset trim, autodescent and Throttle as keybindings?Sometimes trimmer needs to be reseted, it gets weird for longer periods and instead fighting against AP or solving why holding trimmer down doesn't command AP correctly, you just reset trimmer and trim again.
Autodescent is a one way switch, what you need to hold down while in hovering mode, in combat situations you fly behind cover and where you are in hover and you want to peak now and then over the cover and then get back down. Using automatic descent mode is very valuable to avoid getting to vortex ring or avoid moving collective from otherwise perfect position.
And in combat situation when you are hit and other engine shuts down, you need quickly to cut off valve, open mixed fuel crossfeed valve and raise RPM of working engine to 100%, then do other emergency tasks for engine.
What I spotted on that setup as problematic (for my style) is that I could not hold Trim down, designate target and fire cannon same time. That would make cannon runs in close range or in fast situations impossible, unless you hit the Flight Director mode On.
-
Because of that, shots have to be taken from only a couple of hundred metres. Is that the reason why the Vikhr could only launch when within 6 km? Would be nice to be able to launch from further off.
Basically the higher you are, longer Vikhr will glide. So if you are engaging armor (staying still) that at 10km range from either 50m altitude or 500m altitude, there is difference does your Vikhr hit the target or does it fall to ground at 9.5km range.
I don't know anymore (never actually did) what is Vikhr real range, as it use to be 10-12km in higher altitudes than 50m and around 9.5km at lower altitudes.
But now it seems that the Shkval allows to launch Vikhr only between 1.5-8.5km no matter of altitude.
I don't know what has been done to Vikhr in KA-50 when not even in a perfect weather or situation is it possible to get a lock (strange ways or not at all) to ground targets or air targets. Vikhr can't well stay after targets moving faster than 30-35km/h and range is negligible better than others missiles.
Of course at nights the Skhval range is only about 5-6Km if you wonder that?
-
Is there any new video of the Hawk showing HUD or such things? All what i found were about old alpha level without HUD etc.
-
And to add, before 1.2.7 patch if I remember correctly, the Vikhr laser reticle "basket" was two times bigger, the Auto-Turn did have much better change to be closer optimal launch direction. But with that patch and after the circle is half of the size and it is challenging to get correct launch. Still it is possible to "hip shot" and get Vikhr catch the beam.
I mainly use the auto-turn only when in hover or steady flight and seeking targets manually as it makes slow and steady searches turn chopper all the time to forward. Or then in hover the helmet aiming gives same possibility easily do turns without using pedals.
-
I'm not saying trees don't make good cover. I'm saying that trees are NOT the primary source of cover and concealment for combat helicopters. Terrain features (i.e. hills) are. When my unit did planning for battle positions, they didn't choose them around forested areas, they chose them around terrain features. When they selected routes, they didn't plan on them using trees for cover, they planned on using terrain features. Trees are great cover and great concealment, I do not argue that point, but they just don't compare to hills.
I believe what you mean is that trees only give visual cover but not actual cover against projectiles, unless it is a deep forest and not a tree island or tree line.
And trees are not often mapped or are updated. A small forest can grow in 10-15 years or forest can be cut down in a week or two, but terrain doesn't change so much.
-
Just they are supposed to not go into pursuit and "fight it out". Fire a AA missile to have the enemy break off his attack etc., but don't go into a dogfight and see who wins.
I believe you have misinterpret my messages as I have not said there would be missions where attack helicopters are sent to intercept enemy helicopters. Or that it is their main purpose above anything.
All that I have been saying, is that attack helicopters have capability to engage other helicopter in own limited capability and they can do it if it is required.
It isn't like in some fancy AAA games where players take helicopters so they can get to helicopter dog fights in small map, with limited flight modeling, limited weapon effects and so on.
Just like you wrote (that I have mentioned) is that there isn't often many attack helicopters on areas and destroying a single one can be huge impact to enemy capability to later defend against you.
For many the attack helicopter is like some kind ultimate unit that can destroy battalions from single overpass.
While it is fragile (how much it needs cover), easy to destroy (armor levels are even if can withstand few 23-30mm HEI, structurally weak) it still is very powerful when well used and flied.
How often in DCS we see large infantry placements and use? Small arms fire isn't such a threat often as mission designers don't want to place and command infantry so often if at all. It is still likely be designed from airplane point of view where biggest threat is a ground vehicle with its HMG or some kind anti-aircraft platforms.
But as currently the DCS physics engine and graphics engine are old by design and have limits, it has put biggest impact to helicopters functionality as there is no cover as would be.
Flying behind 300m deep forest doesn't protect against AI as it will fire at you and get you.
I have hopes that in future DCS maps have little more changes in terrain mesh altitude (even if mesh resolution would stay large as now, or as EDGE gives 2/4x better resolution to that too) so there is cover for ground forces against each other, there is possible cover for helicopters too as there can be 20-30m hills, but more like there are blind spots for AA and same way to helicopters so they can't just fly outside of enemy range so AI needs little changes too.
For helicopters and ground forces I hope we could get groups in sense of more higher level commanding where controlling a single unit isn't possible by default but requires zooming closer or "opening" the group to see individual units.
This would make example possible command in CA module a squads or platoons as single symbol on map. So MBT platoon or infantry platoon would be easy to control but have way to get command individuals if needed.
Then using infantry would become a threat to attack helicopters as we could use more often infantry in missions.
I like how infantry now looks and behaves, it is enough to me but still the CA side (and editor) is limited for their usage as each soldier is own unit on map.
I do have high hopes for these because CA module is so great and helicopter modules are so close to CA module that airplane modules are more distant.
I believe that if ED manages to improve CA module and then the maps and physics, way to handle squads and platoons opens a door to very wide audience, that is strategy game players. They might not be interested to fly aircrafts but do the ground combats. That opens more reasons to have human helicopter pilots as it is now.
And future co-op piloting sounds great for many as there are those who don't know how to fly or doesn't care it but are interested to know weapons systems and work as co-pilots.
That leads to more interesting helicopter usage and requires helicopter vs helicopter situations to be handles well by players too.
Right now the DCS has very large focus on fighters, and helicopters and ground forces play by fighters rules/exist for them. AH-1W module being more likely first co-op attack helicopter module does change the battlefield below fighters as requirement to have better LOS system for covers, radars, missiles, kinetic projectiles etc does affect greatly to players how to even fly a helicopter or A-10/SU-25.
At the moment (AFAIK) we don't even have Vikhr missiles modeled with A/A mode at all. Missing proximity fuse and fragments (in all missiles and bombs etc) has made helicopter vs helicopter engagements such that you need to thing is there sense to do so. Firing a Vikhr to UH-1 can often require two hits IF you can even hit one, as Vikhr doesn't like to hit anything that moves these days.
At same modeling AH-1W has no sense to engage helicopters from distance as it has limited amount of missiles, so it would be "knife fight" more likely and current terrain design doesn't support it much.
In future with EDGE and possible map mesh updates etc we can see how humans work together in co-op helicopters like AH-1W as they will do differently than AI ordered to not engage helicopters at all in mission editor.
As I hope there would come new players for CA module and new terrain and EDGE, co-op helicopters, it makes things just more interesting as human vs human is more challenging as humans can use any change they see to engage any target.
-
Citation from Steel Beasts Pro manual:
"If you don`t need glasses it is quite possible to spot a moving tank at distanses up to 300m with the naked eye.(...) At 3000 meters, a typical tank would subtend an angleof about 0,057degrees(about 1mil).To Make that tank appear as just a single pixel on your monitor at a resolution of 1600x1200 means that the field of view must be reduced to about 90degrees, far short of a human`s 170 degree FOV, and still the tank would appear as a single dot. Concersely, if you want a natural field of view of 180 degrees, the tank would be smaller than a single pixel at distances above just 1590 meters "
Anyone against smart scaling? (till we have 80 000 x 80 000 pixels gpu/monitors) ?
Interesting as i need to say i believe there is a typo as 300m is way too short now or is it now in steel beast itself? Is it meant to say 3000- meters? As a moving unit is easy to spot at those distances in reality, a moving man can be spotted from 1-1.5km range, but be invisible when still at 5m range.
In DCS I can spot moving ground units from 8-15km distance very easily without zooming, but at 8-10km range I can spot individual units sitting on ground still because they get rendered when zooming in, at 5-6km I can spot without zooming. But then again the camouflage and staying still can very well hide unit for me when I am up in air and I need to spot it top of terrain texture and I am just 400-600m altitude.
For moving ground units spotting the key is to have view still enough to spot dot movement, so locking camera to ground or using TrackIR makes huge difference than trying spot units when own view moves as well.
I hope there will be some resolution to problem of moving and still units. Via transparency (apply a 50-75% transparency to unit when still in forest and you don't easily spot it) or via special shading effects or even in future if there is change to have voxels used or similar to draw grass and such to hide the unit when zooming in.
-
I regret mentioning the word "Dogfight" here.
This is a sim, but for the most part, It's a video-game. We can do what we want ;)
I believe it will happen that as now western attack helicopter is being added there comes helicopter "dog fights" between players more often. But it isn't as many would visualize from movies or game titles like Battlefield and Call of Duty (if you can even fly helicopter in it... No exp from those).
AH-1W will be awesome module alone, not to forget future Co-Op possibilities and EDGE updates. Better choice than AH-1G that I wish will come later as it would be like a A-10A is to a A-10C, both have their fans and scenario wizards would love it.
-
Ok, so you never served in any armed forces. No offense
It is offensive already that you imagine things that other has not revealed. You are allowed to believe many things but don't assume if someone doesn't answer to something, it means what you believe it means.
If you would be in service, you would know that never assume anything.
Mouse free look improvement.
in DCS Wishlist
Posted
The lightening isn't the problem as even the display light cast is enough. Problem is if user wears glasses as face recognition doesn't work well.