A-10C TGP display: Targets hard to see

[AstroEma]

Starway's textures are much better for FLIR visibility. It's not only about the noise value, but also the textures themselves.

 

Actually I don't find that to be true from my experience.

I have an easier time finding targets using Barthek's textures than Starway's.

 

Moreover, the hot trees must be changed somehow. In the forests, there is no way to spot anything.

[Gliptal]

Actually I don't find that to be true from my experience.

I have an easier time finding targets using Barthek's textures than Starway's.

 

Moreover, the hot trees must be changed somehow. In the forests, there is no way to spot anything.

I meant compared to the vanilla textures, I also use Barthek's mod.

[AstroEma]

I meant compared to the vanilla textures, I also use Barthek's mod.

 

All good. Yes, Agree to that.

[Maverick Su-35S]

Just look how clear these images are in comparison to the shared images of the topic:

 

 

In the past, the A-10's TGP and SU-25T's LLTV were able to make targets look very similar to this video, but now..., it's a total mess, we can't see anything with the naked eye unless we are 1km away (which is pure death), we can't find anything on TGP infrared and LLTV either, we can't fight. What should we do? Use labels? The model enlargement is broken now too. I'd rather not play a mission at all than use labels to spot what should normally be easily spotted.

[Fakum]

Its been a long hard topic, I gave up for now,, I have jumped back into the BlackShark for now as i am too frustrated with the current TGP characteristics. I have tried for months to make adjustments, using different terrain MODS etc. I love the HOG! Just have to wait for FLIR fix,, who knows when that will be resolved?

[Enduro14]

Well they are supposedly working on a new thermal imagery which i doubt we will see until f18 comes out....

[Enduro14]

Just look how clear these images are in comparison to the shared images of the topic:

 

 

In the past, the A-10's TGP and SU-25T's LLTV were able to make targets look very similar to this video, but now..., it's a total mess, we can't see anything with the naked eye unless we are 1km away (which is pure death), we can't find anything on TGP infrared and LLTV either, we can't fight. What should we do? Use labels? The model enlargement is broken now too. I'd rather not play a mission at all than use labels to spot what should normally be easily spotted.

 

I hope that when the new system they are making comes out its an actual thermal based system and its dynamic similar to another land based simulator/game.

Currently its not based on thermals at all.

[Fakum]

Ahhh,,,,, waiting for the F-18,,,,, yeah,,,, ummm,,,,,thats a little concerning,,, should I go back to PacMan?

[Enduro14]

Ahhh,,,,, waiting for the F-18,,,,, yeah,,,, ummm,,,,,thats a little concerning,,, should I go back to PacMan?

 

Ya i have allot to say but its not allowed in this forum. But its frustrating this stuff gets pushed to the right and ww2 stuff seems to be the focus.... I would rather the current air frames we have be fully functional rather than the state they are in now..

[ChillyWillies]

I understand the issue. Hawg is the main reason I started DCS in the first place. Let's be patient. It is very possible DCS 2.5 has what we need here. :)

[norbot]

I agree with Enduro14 when he says the focus seems to be on WW2 stuff. I have tried some of the WW2 aircraft out (FW190 and Spitfire), but it's not why I started with DCS years ago. Rolling on the ground with these planes is a pain in the ass in my opinion. Especially the Spitfire drives me crazy, because I can't use the toebrakes of my Crosswind with it. WW2 is not my world, as said before and if I could choose again, I wouldn't buy these modules anymore.

 

Now this is just my personal opinion, but instead of developing a new WW2 map and aircraft, ED should have concentrated on bringing out DCS 2.5 in a reasonable time.

[Fakum]

We might want to keep the focus of this thread on the TGP before the boss shows up. Lets hope for something soon that we can at least fiddle with. Making adjustments in the lua script for noisemax etc no longer makes much of an improvement so standing by,,,,,

[ac5]

Same issue here.... In 2.04.

Indeed, in 1.2.xx it was far better.

[JDarksword]

Ya i have allot to say but its not allowed in this forum. But its frustrating this stuff gets pushed to the right and ww2 stuff seems to be the focus.... I would rather the current air frames we have be fully functional rather than the state they are in now..

 

A bit off topic but,

In the F-18 discussion thread there was a big discussion about this. This is what Sith eventually said (paraphrased). "The newsletter was from the world war 2 team working on Normandy not from the F-18 team working on WW2. The WW2 team had updates to share and the F-18 team didn't, so no F-18 news in that newsletter." It's not being pushed aside, there are two separate teams and now Belsimtek is helping with the Hornet as well, meaning you'll get it sooner.

Anyways back to the topic, I certainly hope we get realistic FLIR in the future and as said it'll probably be with the F-18. And I do agree, I wish that the current airframes were fully functional.

Edited January 2, 2017 by JDarksword

[Enduro14]

A bit off topic but,

In the F-18 discussion thread there was a big discussion about this. This is what Sith eventually said (paraphrased). "The newsletter was from the world war 2 team working on Normandy not from the F-18 team working on WW2. The WW2 team had updates to share and the F-18 team didn't, so no F-18 news in that newsletter." It's not being pushed aside, there are two separate teams and now Belsimtek is helping with the Hornet as well, meaning you'll get it sooner.

Anyways back to the topic, I certainly hope we get realistic FLIR in the future and as said it'll probably be with the F-18. And I do agree, I wish that the current airframes were fully functional.

 

Yup when your not in the know you look like an idiot when you get emotional about these things as i did. Apologies and glad its a multi team effort. Look forward to the future.

[=Mac=]

I haven't been flying much due to work so the Christmas holidays gave me lots of time (not enough) to fly. I hopped into my trusty Hog ready to demo just how an insane killer this bird is to my son-in-law.

 

He now thinks I'm a nut case and can't tie my own shoes.

 

My god, none of the buttons worked as I remembered! I push the landing gear lever down and the windshield wipers turned on. I was going to land but discovered it doesn't land well on water. I was going to shoot a T-72 to pieces only to find that when I pulled over, the cops were waiting for me.

 

No, I don't drink: I'm just that bad of a pilot in a plane I haven't flown in 3 or 4 months!

 

What has happened to my fingers? Or is it actually my brain has been disconnected for lack of payment?????

 

Seriously, though. I found that the TGP has always had some unrealistic display characteristics. I, of course, have watched many times the YT vids recorded from Afghanistan and the like. No similarities almost.

 

I think, like most here, that 2.5 will have addressed this to the point where we can use the TGP a bit more realistically.

 

And, like most here have said, we'll see.

[SilentSierra]

Are there any plans to fix it in DCS 2.5?

 

The TGP is useless if this contrast issue not fixed.

 

You are effective only with JTAC.

 

After 6 years from release date, no solution this yet.

[Yurgon]

After 6 years from release date, no solution this yet.

 

While I share your desire to see this problem addressed, I think it only fair to point out that the TGP FLIR issues were introduced in DCS 1.5 as I recall it, meaning they're a little over 1 year old (1 year, 2 months judging by the first post in this thread).

 

And you can't say ED haven't been hard at work, with Nevada and a bunch of Warbirds released in the meantime, while also supporting 3rd party aircraft and campaign developers and continuing work on new terrains and aircraft themselves.

 

I guess it's one of many, many items on an impressively big ToDo list, and one that doesn't warrant a workaround since it was already stated that the entire FLIR modelling is supposed to be reworked eventually.

[Sierra99]

Are there any plans to fix it in DCS 2.5?

 

The TGP is useless if this contrast issue not fixed.

 

You are effective only with JTAC.

 

After 6 years from release date, no solution this yet.

 

Perhaps you are not using the TGP correctly? While not perfect, I use the TGP quite often with good results...

 

Sierra99

[StandingCow]

The terrain mods out there help with the TGP a lot.

[LeCuvier]

The terrain mods out there help with the TGP a lot.

Which terrain mod? Can you point us to a specific post?

I have played A-10C for years and the TGP worked fine. But since the FLIR problem started I have almost totally abandoned this fine aircraft.

[David OC]

I think it needs a tweak for running or just stopped vehicles, not a major change and not overdone like some "games". It's not far off now for "cold vehicles" I would also like to think if you where in a tank and the air defenses (CAP) was down and A-10C's were flying around, you would go into a defensive position. Cold, dark and hide my ass with camouflage the best I could.

 

I totally get it if you just want to blink tanks, like in Iraq with no where to hide. Other than that I would try, like my life depended on it to make it as hard as I could, not to be found and certainly not sit in the middle of a field.

 

So I hope ED just tweaks the running of hot vehicles and perhaps only tweak the other settings perhaps a little only.

 

 

 

DCS 1.5.6.1648

Starway textures

 

 

NTTR

 

The ground textures seem to have a lot to do with the FLIR Spotting, much better on the NTTR map, perhaps this will be better in 2.5 with the new Caucasus ground textures?

 

 

Sources

Apache

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BArp6RVgZ9k

 

Tank Camouflage - How Effective Is It?

 

FLIR Factory Trip and Thermal Discussion

Edited February 6, 2017 by David OC

[Fakum]

You may have read thru this post and found that not everyone has good Contrast from the TGP, I am also one of them per my postings,, I'm not alone. what your asking for is icing on the cake that is not finished being cooked yet. Lets hope the TGP gets resolved soon, then we can start a wish list.

[David OC]

You may have read thru this post and found that not everyone has good Contrast from the TGP, I am also one of them per my postings,, I'm not alone. what your asking for is icing on the cake that is not finished being cooked yet. Lets hope the TGP gets resolved soon, then we can start a wish list.

 

Perhaps a bit wishful (Hot / Cold layer)...From what I can see the main thing for now is just to remove more noise from the ground textures. I put the images up so you can compare IRL to DCS.

As you can see it is very close, the ground is what I see that's very off compared to the IRL images. Especially take a closer look at the Apache vehicle image above. The vehicle is good, it's the ground with less noise.

 

Has anyone ask Starway if there is a layer in the dds files to cut this noise out?

Edited February 6, 2017 by David OC

[Zabuzard]

Wasn't this already discussed here? Somewhere...

 

DCS/Config/Terrain/

Go into the file Low.lua, High.lua, Ultra.lua, Extreme.lua (depending on your in-game setting). Play with the noise values.

 

There was a terrain mod thread (unsure which one) where they found good values. Unfortunately a quick search was unsuccessful for me.