Case

Where's the comparison? It's just a load of numbers...

Would make sense, as they are probably not that computationally expensive as computing the full graphics frames.

Yes, these 'steps' is essentially numerical integration. Because you are dealing with a differential equation, smaller time steps improve accuracy, so it might be beneficial to update the derivatives each time step. Still, does anyone have a document describing the differential equations that need to be solved?

I vividly remember having to program a solar system integrator for physics classes. Especially the Runge-Kutta method was very much fun and enlightening to code. Sorry to digress... ;)

Obviously, you probably couldn't even analytically solve them. But as you say I'd expect them to be numerically integrated. Hell, if the time steps are small enough, like the few tens of Hz in FC, simple Euler integration should be adequate enough, where in each time step the user input can be taken into account. The equations of motion probably are not all that hard. Does anyone have a reference besides the stuff on the lockon.co.uk site?

Interesting discussion. I'm curious though about the nomenclature, cause I haven't heard anyone talk about solving differential equations, which is what I think should be happening, and the assumptions or simplifications that are made to do the simulations in realtime.

Very interesting. So you're saying you get the data from the debrief.log?

Make sure config/export/config.lua has EnableExportScript = true. Note that some servers will have exports off, in which case you will get these empty recordings.

Excellent! Thanks c0ff!

Then you misread my post, as I said nothing about present doctrine.

Yes, water vapour will absorb infrared radiation, but not at all wavelengths, and never for 100%. Yes, clouds are in the sky, but hardly at all times at all altitudes and in all directions. Yes, targets may change their throttle so IR radiation diminishes, but targets may be visible out of afterburners. Yes, radars may go STT on a target in LockOn, but perhaps they do not in the real world. These systems ADD to the radar, and if you can do track targets passively, albeit not always, it will always be better than doing it actively.

That is why I said "in the future". Radar warning receivers will obviously improve just like radars do. What may be common practice and hard to detect now will not stay like that for ever. That is why I think passive systems such as IRST will become more common place and will be linked with radars.

That would be awesome!

Ok, that means that it will probably not work this way. However, Servman has the ability to load a mission, but I suspect it is only possible if the server is already running, as if it is not there is no LUA code that gets executed.

:shocking: This is independent of unit skill?

Any word on how to fix this Panzer?

The debrief.log contains events coded like this: {t=46139.210, type='shot', initiatorID=16805633, initiator="Unit #93", initiator_country=16, weaponID=34490113, weapon="2A33_152", weapon_type='shell',}, {t=46149.327, type='land', initiatorID=16777730, initiator="USA A-10 02", initiator_country=2, place="Kutaisi", place_id=5000029,}, {t=46156.927, type='shot', initiatorID=16805633, initiator="Unit #93", initiator_country=16, weaponID=34490881, weapon="2A33_152", weapon_type='shell',}, {t=46184.910, type='shot', initiatorID=16805633, initiator="Unit #93", initiator_country=16, weaponID=34491137, weapon="2A33_152", weapon_type='shell',}, {t=46411.404, type='shot', initiatorID=16777731, initiator="USA A-10 01", initiator_country=2, weaponID=16779523, weapon="AGM-65D Maverick", weapon_type='missile',}, {t=46448.420, type='hit', initiatorID=16777731, initiator="USA A-10 01", initiator_country=2, targetID=16784897, target="Unit #68", target_country=0, weaponID=16779523, weapon="AGM-65D Maverick", weapon_type='',}, {t=46448.420, type='dead', initiatorID=16784897, initiator="Unit #68", initiator_country=0,}, {t=46448.420, type='hit', initiatorID=16777731, initiator="USA A-10 01", initiator_country=2, targetID=16784897, target="Unit #68", target_country=0, weaponID=16779523, weapon="AGM-65D Maverick", we What is the relation between the ID's (initiatorID and targetID) and unit type? How can one figure out that initiatorID=16777731 is an A-10?

You don't understand. You use IRST for tracking, and AESA for ranging. Once you know where the target is relative to your plane, and IRST gives you this to the arcminute level, you can just do a targeted send with the AESA and do a targeted receive, all this done with minimal radar energy.

Have you tried just giving the mission name as an argument? It probably won't work, but you might try it. I asked about the do things, and got this PM from c0ff: Nope. -s/-c only affect some configuration settings (the same as autoexec.cfg) I'm not entirely sure what it means.

Where does it say it replaces radar? In the future we'll probably see a synergy between ISRT tracking and AESA ranging. The ISRT would be used only for tracking targets, and their positions on the sky would be used to phase up the AESA so it needs minimal radar energy to obtain range and LOS velocity. It'll have to big advantages; first the AESA radar doesn't have to do tracking, so it'll be free to range more targets, and second, it'll use much less radar energy so it will be much harder for targets to detect they are being tracked and ranged.

Very interesting indeed. More here: http://ericpalmer.wordpress.com/2010/04/03/irst-the-fa-18e-super-hornet-canada-and-australia/ Lockheed Martin brochure: http://www.lockheedmartin.com/data/assets/IRST-FA18-Product_Card.pdf The "40 times more accurate than radar" probably refers to the angular resolution. This is set by the diffraction limit which scales as the wavelength of the radiation over the diameter of the receiver. So for an X-band radar (3 cm wavelength), a 50cm diameter receiver has an angular resolution of order 3 degrees. This IRST pod is said to work at "long-wave infrared", so if we assume wavelengths of 100 micron, the 23cm sensor would have a diffraction limit of 0.03 degrees, so easily a 100 times better.

Got my fingers crossed there's an easy solution...

The problem is not if it is possible to check one rearm file and not another, as the integrity check already has shown it can do that. The problem is whether or not it is possible to split the original rearm.lua into separate files. I would expect it should be possible, but I haven't had time to test it thoroughly. However, you can do the test yourself using the rearm.rar I attached to the post I referred to. Make sure to back up your own and then try it out.

NOOOOOOOOOOOO...................... There goes the possibility of making a stats page using events.lua :shocking::cry::cry_2:

That's no problem, as there's no rush. Funny thing is that the default events.lua does have the right data, but this may be only because it is a client. Do you know if and where the coalition of an airbase is stored? Are the airbases part of the unit table?