Plane spotting in VR

[Gunfreak]

I'm having a real hard time telling planes a part with my Reverb G2.

Even telling Spitfires with the big rounded wings apart from the small square wings of the Fw190s

 

It's just black points.  I have to be super close be see the cammo paint of the spits vs the 190s

 

This was at 27 000 feet. Even when I'm behind a plane at just 300 yards. It's hard to tell.

[crippler]

Wow! nobody even answered!

 

change pixel density .6 ymmv. change steam vr to less than 150% I am st]ill experimenting.

 

Also, planes are vanishing but still can see me on SOW.

[Nirvi]

This is one of the reasons I haven't used my G2 for months now. VR is just not ready yet to replace a monitor.

[GreyGamer]

I am new to VR and still learning. The problem you've mentioned is annoying. So far the only usable thing i've found to assist is VR zoom.

 

[Mogster]

I agree it’s too hard in sims but potting wasn’t easy in real life though. There are comments from Luftwaffe pilots saying the thing they disliked about fighting P51s the most was how much the P51 looked like a FW190 from a distance. The P47 and P38 were easy to tell apart from German types, particularly the P38, it’s big distinctive outline is often cited as a deficiency of the type. 
 

You wouldn’t think it was possible to confuse a P51 with a FW190 in real life, but there you go.

[=475FG= Dawger]

3 hours ago, Mogster said:

I agree it’s too hard in sims but potting wasn’t easy in real life though. There are comments from Luftwaffe pilots saying the thing they disliked about fighting P51s the most was how much the P51 looked like a FW190 from a distance. The P47 and P38 were easy to tell apart from German types, particularly the P38, it’s big distinctive outline is often cited as a deficiency of the type. 
 

You wouldn’t think it was possible to confuse a P51 with a FW190 in real life, but there you go.

The examples you quote are not spotting issues, they are identification issues. Real world aircraft spotting is much easier than it is in DCS VR. Very recently, I was flying with someone who does air combat for a living and his comment was “ Spotting aircraft against the ground in here is really horrible”. Having spent several decades flying in the real world, I agree wholeheartedly. DCS doesn’t light aircraft properly is the root of the issue. Hopefully, someday it will be corrected.

[Doc3908]

1 hour ago, pmiceli said:

The examples you quote are not spotting issues, they are identification issues. Real world aircraft spotting is much easier than it is in DCS VR. Very recently, I was flying with someone who does air combat for a living and his comment was “ Spotting aircraft against the ground in here is really horrible”. Having spent several decades flying in the real world, I agree wholeheartedly. DCS doesn’t light aircraft properly is the root of the issue. Hopefully, someday it will be corrected.

I agree with pmiceli - spotting is less of an issue for me than identification. The Mustang's wings are more mid-fuselage and the Dora has a longer nose. But the Spitfire and the Bf109 have the wings mounted closer to the front, so until I'm close enough to see the elliptical wing, I have no idea who it is. At any rate, I'm a poor shot at a distance - I need to get real close so as not to waste any ammo. By then, I know exactly who I'm about to engage. 

 

As for spotting planes off in the distance - that doesn't bother me as much because if I see their "dot" a few seconds" after they see my "dot" - they still have to get close enough to engage me. And if they are close enough to engage, I will certainly see them if I'm paying attention. What bothers me more is the fact that monitor people can zoom in and get much higher aiming accuracy from a larger distance. That and the fact that they can swivel their "head" 180 to look behind at a click of a button... All that I consider unfair advantages over VR players. Not to mention both are totally unrealistic...

Edited July 3, 2021 by Doc3908

[zaelu]

I see dots of planes in VR before I see them on my Mig21 radar.
It is ridiculous as is now and having people complaining they want more arcade is painful.

Few years ago a lot of people complained about viz in 2D, most of them having hard time understanding the physical reality constraints on this matter. In VR this is worse. a hundred times worse.

Everyone can play on 1000 models of panels with rgb or penta pixels and lenses with or without Fresnel and resolutions passed through several reprojectors and supersamplings made by the game or steam or virtual desktop or whatnot and quality settings to hearts will. These things multiply each other and create a nightmare for developer. The only solution is to man up, stop complaining and let it be as physically realistic as possible represented and not re-imaginations of stories and impressions or wishes of gamifying rebalances.

I still have nightmares of popping oil radiators of Emils and gears from Stukas from Il-2 back in the day. May its mistakes never be resurrected again!

Edited July 4, 2021 by zaelu

[Qiou87]

On 6/28/2021 at 8:21 AM, Nirvi said:

This is one of the reasons I haven't used my G2 for months now. VR is just not ready yet to replace a monitor.

I seriously don't know how you can say that. I respect your opinion, and you have a right to think that ; I tried flat screen a few times, especially for some tests in mission building, and flying is just plain horrible in flatscreen. So I personally have a completely opposite opinion to yours - funny how mileage may vary from one person to the next!

 

I used to play with a Rift S and thought spotting was difficult. With a G2 (100% SteamVR resolution, PD 1.0, high settings) I find spotting actually quite easy. From a distance you can usually see a group against a clear sky. It is harder against the ground, but that seems like a DCS limitation and not exclusive to VR. The identification is indeed not ideal, but much easier with a G2.

As for WWII specifically, although VR forces you to flex your neck in a dogfight, it also provides a huge advantage I find: the capacity to gauge the fight in 3D, where your enemy is in space including gauging the distance to them, "feel" your aircraft more... all of which provide a solid advantage in a fight. 

[Mr_sukebe]

Can’t say I’m concerned with “spotting” with a Rift S.  However, IDing is a different matter entirely, and I really struggle with that 

Edited July 5, 2021 by Mr_sukebe

[Qiou87]

3 minutes ago, Mr_sukebe said:

Can’t say I’m concerned with “spotting” with a Rift S.  However, IDing is a different matter entering and I really struggle with that 

This is a point where I can honestly say the G2 improved my experience immensely. Before (with Rift S) I had to use labels 100% of the time, otherwise I would shoot a friendly half the time. Now with the G2, due to the higher clarity/resolution, I am able to ID aircraft at engagement distances. Of course, it could still be better, but it is not impossible anymore.

 

So IMHO it is not a VR problem, it depends on the headset resolution. Some problems (like spotting against the ground) are DCS core problems, not VR specific. Future technology will make it even easier still. 

Edited July 5, 2021 by Qiou87

[Pikey]

I actually find the inverse to the OP, just to represent the Devil's advocate, but this is something I beleive after trying both for many years.

On my 4K monitor with x4 MSAA and all the nice things, spotting and ID'ing are harder in 2D than in VR, where things are more aliased (because they have to be to support a workable FPS). VR brings with it, detection of speed and energy and point of collisions, aspects and geometry improvements, which in dogfighting and positioning, is everything. The core advantage to 2D is FPS, which affects "Movement" as a detection. Shape is the same for both, Shine is same for both, shadow, depends on your graphics settings (and altitude and sun position), and "silouette" depends on graphics settings and aliasing and background, of which VR cannot use aliasing easily without making FPS unworkable. 1:1 acuity down to pixel level is pretty good now in VR, I use Reverb G1. I pickup dots in good conditions over ten miles, so its clearly not that.

If the target is behind you, how do you know? You either let it go there or never detected it. So "Owl head" is not an advantage I want to exchange in trackir. The ability to see your killer is worthless at the end of the day. It's called the control zone for a reason. You lost.

If you never detected your enemy, welcome to reality club and read the same from the German aces. Work on flying more erraticaly with good rear checks and observation technique.

In terms of ID versus detection there are important questions.
Mutual detection is absolutely and most commonly in neutral advantage situations for aircraft armed with guns. Given the convergence of guns at say 300yards, lucky shots at 600yards, normal detection is way way way outside weapons ranges and outside a complete turning circle. The actual figures matter not, all you need to do is prevent your enemy converting his detection to an ambush, and that is via good observation that nobody really has the energy to do in a simulation, I tried it a few times and I was so exhausted I gave up.

 

Which brings us to ID. I don't believe 2D offers much more advantage, given that between detection and ID you are always going to manouver as if to ambush the target. Your choice comes at point blank range to fire. If you mutually detect and manouver to gain advantage, it will end in a head to head pass, at which point, players will more than likely have come to their own conclusion before pulling the trigger. I usually shake my wings if I am in a situation where I was manouvering for advantage but then ID'd him as friendly. You can show your profile and manouver with your flank on show in a gentle manner to reduce the misidentification of your own plane. I haven't often been shot by my own side in guns only fights. I've been killed more times than I can remember in the last ten years in jets.

You can't really compare 2d to 3d to real life well and probably shouldnt. The only thing you have to compare is that, competitively, people will attempt any advantage, a better GPU with very low presets will beat you more than 3d vs 2d on its own. Best to play with people you know.

 

 

[=475FG= Dawger]

7 hours ago, Qiou87 said:

This is a point where I can honestly say the G2 improved my experience immensely. Before (with Rift S) I had to use labels 100% of the time, otherwise I would shoot a friendly half the time. Now with the G2, due to the higher clarity/resolution, I am able to ID aircraft at engagement distances. Of course, it could still be better, but it is not impossible anymore.

 

So IMHO it is not a VR problem, it depends on the headset resolution. Some problems (like spotting against the ground) are DCS core problems, not VR specific. Future technology will make it even easier still. 

 

The only major VR aircraft visibility issue I have with the G2 and a high end machine is at .9 to 1.2 nautical miles for WWII sized fighter aircraft. At these ranges, the aircraft are essentially de-rendered against any non-white background. In my group we call it the mid-range cloak of invisibility. It affects all VR HMD's in our group to some extent but higher resolutions and narrower FOV's are the most affected. It is a serious problem for any guns BFM engagement. Our tactics against is to try to operate in wing pairs and hope the wing man can direct the fight for the periods of invisibility for the other guy. It would be nice if this were addressed with some alacrity.

 

[Pikey]

4 hours ago, pmiceli said:

The only major VR aircraft visibility issue I have with the G2 and a high end machine is at .9 to 1.2 nautical miles for WWII sized fighter aircraft. At these ranges, the aircraft are essentially de-rendered against any non-white background. In my group we call it the mid-range cloak of invisibility. It affects all VR HMD's in our group to some extent but higher resolutions and narrower FOV's are the most affected. It is a serious problem for any guns BFM engagement. Our tactics against is to try to operate in wing pairs and hope the wing man can direct the fight for the periods of invisibility for the other guy. It would be nice if this were addressed with some alacrity.

 

Invisible aircraft at .9 to 1.2 nm is a bug you should report with a track. I dont see the same. I do rmemeber the P51 had a LOD problem once, but it was the longer ranges.

 

[Gizzy]

PMICELI is correct, I do not think it is a bug just that DCS in VR for spotting is absolutely terrible, it is totally useless for the HP G2.

The  G2 is a good piece of kit and great with modern jets with systems but for WW2 DCS lets you down big style.  Example, G2 GTX2080t1, CPU running at 5.2GHz most settings on high, visibility set to high ultra or extreme, it makes no difference, HP G2 SteamVR set at 100%, do a simple mission with a client spitfire, and have 4 spits coming at you say 5 miles apart.  Start, jump into cockpit and hit ACTIVE PAUSE, clear the cockpit with ALT F1 and wait.... you MAY see an approaching spitfire at 2nm in normal view if you are lucky, that's it... and often between 2.5 and 1.5 they fade in and out....  

Hit the VR settings in config and dumb everything down, no difference, none just a rubbish projection.

Go to SteamVR and degrade performance by selecting 50% with normal DCS high config settings you still get a rubbish picture but you can see the aircraft well beyond 10 miles.  Reminds me why the guys who like their servers to be pure client and fight WW2 often are in 2D with 42+" TVs as monitors and resolution set at HD not 4K.... they can then see stuff...

Using the G2 to fly WW2 warbirds is fun but not to fight, hence a lot of WW2 planes sit mostly in the hangar... back to jets and radar, SA and friendly AWACS - that side of things is fantastic!!!

Edited November 8, 2021 by Gizzy

[gavagai]

The only solution for this is to enable labels, at least the dot-labels.  A lot of servers are fanatical about no labels whatsoever, but tracking aircraft is already hard enough in 2d, for VR users it is a huge disadvantage.

[flygav]

I think WW2 in DCS was an after thought. Its great for jets with BVR, they need to do some work still on WW2 I believe.
On Storm of War server a good rule of thumb is:

• If you see another plane... its a friendly. 
• It does take some practice to identify German planes, (rounded wingtips and mach speeds. And the big round air vent sticking out of the side)
• Its damn hard to win a dog fight if you lose site of your opponent. And they always disappear on me.

If I play on other servers or single player I can keep track of the other planes... I dont what it is with SOW server (the only server people play on for some reason) but no matter 
how much I'm looking around I never see the plane that gets me... its getting very old. 

[iFoxRomeo]

On 11/19/2021 at 11:23 PM, flygav said:

I think WW2 in DCS was an after thought. Its great for jets with BVR, they need to do some work still on WW2 I believe.
On Storm of War server a good rule of thumb is:

• If you see another plane... its a friendly. 
• It does take some practice to identify German planes, (rounded wingtips and mach speeds. And the big round air vent sticking out of the side)
• Its damn hard to win a dog fight if you lose site of your opponent. And they always disappear on me.

If I play on other servers or single player I can keep track of the other planes... I dont what it is with SOW server (the only server people play on for some reason) but no matter 
how much I'm looking around I never see the plane that gets me... its getting very old. 

A server admin can not reduce your visibility, other than with weather settings.

But it is possible to increase your ability to spot a distant object by allowing labels. Either being a colored dot or even with "text identification".

If you can't spot or identify a target, then it has nothing to do with the server admin tying to make it more difficult for players. Perhaps the other servers you are playing on have black dots enabled?

 

I have no issues with spotting in VR with my HP Reverb. Is it easy? No! Does it appear to be more difficult than what I expect it to be in comparison to reality? No!

Identifying an aircraft can be tricky, especially when motion-reprojection kicks in. But identifying was/is difficult in reality also.

 

Fox

[Mr. Big.Biggs]

I haven’t flown in quite a while but it seemed to me, at least in my index that there were 3 zones.

 Zone one, opponent was a dot bigger than a single pixel but just a dot. Zoom in while looking, poof, gone) 

zone 2, dot flat out disappears zoom or no zoom  you can stare right at it and poof it just disappears  

zone 3  plane reappears from nowhere now in the form of a plane instead of a block of pixels  almost like computer now loads the form instead of just acknowledging it exits  

not going to get into the fact that below you they become transparent and take on the color of the terrain beneath them. 
Vr has some cool points but still not real 1v 1 Friendly  

 

 

[Bisch]

Everything Biggs says on SOW with my G2. It’s a pain

[Nealius]

My experience has been a mix between most users and Pikey's experience. At distance in VR aircraft appear way too visible, but then as you move close they disappear. With 2D it seems to be the inverse.

My solution is custom dot labels using a black ' for friendly and unknown, red ' for enemy within ~10nm or so. 

[pgn]

Resurrecting this old thread, what do people think of this after the latest updates with MT etc? Personally I find spotting to be no problem, but identification still very difficult. Maybe this is partly a skill issue, but even at like 500 yards I feel like in VR I'm looking at a vaguely plane-shaped blob sometimes. Any tips for best setting for identification (Quest 2, 3070).

[peachmonkey]

4 hours ago, pgn said:

Resurrecting this old thread, what do people think of this after the latest updates with MT etc? Personally I find spotting to be no problem, but identification still very difficult. Maybe this is partly a skill issue, but even at like 500 yards I feel like in VR I'm looking at a vaguely plane-shaped blob sometimes. Any tips for best setting for identification (Quest 2, 3070).

for ID'ing in VR it all comes down to the resolution. With Varjo Aero, dynamic foveated rendering, and 37/39ppd resolution in the sweet spot (central focus) the IDing is pretty easy, but it does need a 4090 and .. well, Aero headset.

[Strong05]

Having the same problem with V ID.  Resolution is certainly part of the problem but the other is that the airplanes appear to be way to dark regardless of time of day or clouds.  It's like the plans all have some kind of cloaking device that makes it impossible to see the paint or markings of the plane.

[Gunfreak]

Well, I made this post almost 2 years ago now. Close range ID is stil hard. 

I can tell a spitfire from the other planes to some degree (but still far closer then it would be in real life)  but telling a p51 from a fw190 or 109 is very hard. And telling the difference between the 3 German planes is also hard.

Last year or so I've been playing the closed very beta of another ww2 sim(no not that one. The lesser known one) and it has by far the best spotting and ID in any ww2 sim. Those yellow noses on the 109s can be seen from a great distance. I have no problem telling friend from foe. Even when you add in much more variation then spit/hurricane vs 109.

So fae the only planes I've hard problems telling appart is the Gloster Gladiator and Fiat CR.42.

Edited May 3, 2023 by Gunfreak