Jump to content

ALR-56M Tones


Beamscanner

Recommended Posts

  • ED Team

If you have evidence I am happy to look at it, but as mentioned we have already spoken with an SME on the subject 

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

posts merged

The thread by Ahmed doesn't talk about PRF sound though, but the launch recycle and the new airborne contact. We understand no PRF sound is correct as is. Please don't merge them. They are unrelated.


Edited by Comrade Doge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NineLine said:

These still appear to be ALR-69, not the ALR-56M. Just to stress this point, our SME has had hundreds upon hundreds of hours in the F-16 with both ALR-69 and ALR-56M. We will need hard proof to overturn that experience.

Since the threads got merged, does your SME confirm that the launch recycle tone, and the new contact tones have also been removed since the ALR-69? If no, then can we expect those in the future as part of an audio overhaul?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
20 minutes ago, Comrade Doge said:

Since the threads got merged, does your SME confirm that the launch recycle tone, and the new contact tones have also been removed since the ALR-69? If no, then can we expect those in the future as part of an audio overhaul?

SME reviewed all ALR-56M tones in the game and was happy with it.


 

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
12 minutes ago, NineLine said:

SME reviewed all ALR-56M tones in the game and was happy with it.


 

 

1 minute ago, Comrade Doge said:

Did the SME also review the order in which these tones are played, for example, the launch tone being repeated non-stop?

Yes... when I said ALL, he reviewed the entire operation of the ALR-56M. If you have evidence that states otherwise, we are happy to take a look. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I can tell of -56M is that "audio heard is equal to the PRF of the emitter". So if emitter PRF is 2050Hz then audio heard will be 2050Hz in the helmet. I don't know if that constitutes "raw" audio or not. There are clamping frequencies for surface and airborne emitters, if PRF is higher then the PRF audio is the clamped limit pulsed at ~5% cycle.

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/15/2022 at 8:07 PM, NineLine said:

 

Yes... when I said ALL, he reviewed the entire operation of the ALR-56M. If you have evidence that states otherwise, we are happy to take a look. 

You either have an internal miscommunication or need your SME to take another look at these particular issues:

- Missile launch recycle tone: the missile launch recycle tone is 515hz instead of the 1000hz of the "initial" missile launch tone. This sounds every 15 seconds after the initial missile launch tone. You can hear this on the Serbia shootdown video...

- New threat audio: whenever a new threat is detected, there is a chirped tone of either 3000hz (air or unknown threat) or 500hz (surface threat). Again you can hear them in both the Serbia and Alaska videos.

- Hand-off mode audio: indeed not the same as in the ALR-69, but there is still PRF audio/chirped tones for the "diamond" emitter. Yet again, you can hear the tones in both videos.

I have no idea of how you can assert that your ALR-56M implementation is fully correct when it is literally missing all tone features from the real one, and when even your missile launch tone is repeated continuously instead of being "recycled" every 15 seconds. Maybe the DCS viper is headed for a similar future than the DCS hornet.

  • Like 12
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

On 6/15/2022 at 12:41 PM, Frederf said:

All I can tell of -56M is that "audio heard is equal to the PRF of the emitter". So if emitter PRF is 2050Hz then audio heard will be 2050Hz in the helmet. I don't know if that constitutes "raw" audio or not. There are clamping frequencies for surface and airborne emitters, if PRF is higher then the PRF audio is the clamped limit pulsed at ~5% cycle.

Do you have a public source for this? Your info is correct at least as of 2012. But newer ALR-56M has digital components that can be field-upgraded. 

I suspect the SME is misremembering or not giving a very critical look at this one detail.

But it's also possible that the RWR software features changed over time and the SME is correct for the mid 2000s viper. Without a public source, I don't think ED is likely to change this.

4 minutes ago, Ahmed said:

Again you can hear them in both the Serbia and Alaska videos.

Do you have any way of tying specific RWR models to specific videos? I happen to know you are correct regarding the tones (at least of 2012), but to overcome their SME's (likely mistaken) feedback, we need a source that can be traced.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, abelian said:

Do you have any way of tying specific RWR models to specific videos? I happen to know you are correct regarding the tones (at least of 2012), but to overcome their SME's (likely mistaken) feedback, we need a source that can be traced.

You can probably trace back specific equipment to specific squadron at the specific date of those videos. It is very easy though to distinguish ALR-69 from ALR-56M tones as they are completely different.

The SME issue is a recurring one in flight simulators, that I've seen first hand. Usually for a SME not familiar with the degree of accuracy of modern PC simulator, everything is surprisingly accurate. It is only when you are aware of the current state-of-the-art of PC flight sims that you start to be nitpicky. I've seen this phenomena personally in specific stuff (non-DCS) in which I'm a SME and where the producers kept stating that their product was "SME approved" while they were full of inaccuracies.

Thus my post, where I recommend ED to run those very specific points by their SME, before confidently announcing that their implementation is correct when it is not, as you yourself know too.

I'm sure that if they ask those very specific points to their SME they will get feedback on how their ALR-56M is currently wrong.


Edited by Ahmed
  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ahmed said:

You can probably track back specific equipment to specific squadron at the specific date of those videos. It is very easy though to distinguish ALR-69 from ALR-56M tones as they are completely different.

The SME issue is a recurring one in flight simulators, that I've seen first hand. Usually for a SME not familiar with the degree of accuracy of modern PC simulator, everything is surprisingly accurate.

I'm sure that if they ask those very specific points to their SME they will get feedback on how their ALR-56M is currently wrong.

Yes, absolutely, this times a thousand. For an SME who is not a passionate DCS player, they may see this and say "good enough" for a video game. But also, if they haven't flown in 15 years, it's very easy for pilots to remember this kind of detail incorrectly.

  • Like 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Upon an exhaustive search, we were able to locate data that supports the handoff tones that we are comfortable using it. As some may have noticed, it never left the Viper roadmap. As for the conflicting SME information, it seems that even seasoned Viper pilots make mistakes.

This and other ALR-56M improvements are planned for after EA.

  • Like 13
  • Thanks 7

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, NineLine said:

Upon an exhaustive search, we were able to locate data that supports the handoff tones that we are comfortable using it. As some may have noticed, it never left the Viper roadmap. As for the conflicting SME information, it seems that even seasoned Viper pilots make mistakes.

This and other ALR-56M improvements are planned for after EA.

Any chance of referencing what the data was that overturned the previous SME conclusion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
1 hour ago, Stackhouse said:

Any chance of referencing what the data was that overturned the previous SME conclusion?

I'm sorry, we generally do not share specific information, that said I will run it by the leads on the F-16 and see if they can. 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
4 hours ago, Beamscanner said:

 

This is a custom made PRF tone of an STT lock by another F-16. I think I've got the distortion figured out pretty well. 

Every time I hear one of your PRF tones my soul sheds a tear. I sincerely hope your work gets implemented by ED! 😍

  • Like 6

-Col. Russ Everts opinion on surface-to-air missiles: "It makes you feel a little better if it's coming for one of your buddies. However, if it's coming for you, it doesn't make you feel too good, but it does rearrange your priorities."

 

DCS Wishlist:

MC-130E Combat Talon   |   F/A-18F Lot 26   |   HH-60G Pave Hawk   |   E-2 Hawkeye/C-2 Greyhound   |   EA-6A/B Prowler   |   J-35F2/J Draken   |   RA-5C Vigilante

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

its marked as planned, constantly going on about wont make it happen any quicker. Just give the team the time they need. 

thanks

  • Like 2

smallCATPILOT.PNG.04bbece1b27ff1b2c193b174ec410fc0.PNG

Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status

Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...