An alternative padlock system (natural padlock)

[coldcrew]

For those of us without TrackIR, locating and locking on to the enemy after the merge puts us at a huge disadvantage. Even if the enemy is located in the helmet mode getting the hatswitch to center on the enemy plane and locking on can be the difference between a kill and a death.

 

There are several things wrong with the current padlock system. It only works within 10nm and because it acts like a radar many ace servers disable it for dogfights.

 

The alternative padlock system I'm proposing will padlock any aircraft as long as you can maintain a radar lock on it. If radar lock is broken it just stays where you last lost contact with it and reverts to normal cockpit mode. Non trackir users like me will be able to beam missiles or drag out a bvr fight while maintaining radar lock and situational awareness of where the target is.

 

one more thing, going back to a padlock toggle mode would be better than the current system.

[GGTharos]

Uh...current Padlock works within 5.5nm or less ONLY, and you have to be looking at the target to padlock it. It shoudl have -zero- to do witht he radar. Once the target passes behind you you'll be facing the exact same problem you described anyway.

 

The guys who disable padlock on their servers either have trackIR and they don't care about poor you OR they're masochist, but there is one legit reason for this ... padlock will currently lock onto aircraft rhrough mountains which is not okay.

 

BTW, 10nm? Are you sure you're playing the same game the rest of us are? ... 1.02?

[coldcrew]

yea I don't really care about the details of the current padlock system. I'm suggesting a new padlock system that only works when you have radar lock on the target

[GGTharos]

Well then I completely disagree with your suggestion. Especially since you don't care about the details.

[jeroen79]

Why should padlock work only if you have a radar lock?

 

Padlock is intended to make visually tracking something easier and to compensate for the awkward viewcontrol that the PC offers.

It has nothing to do with radar.

 

I could see some merit in a function that padlocks the radarlocked target (when within visual range) but restricting padlock to the radarlocked target is almost like throwing padlock out entirely.

 

Radar works only in the frontal arc and by the time padlock starts to play a role (the close fight) you may not have radarlock all the time.

[coldcrew]

Why should padlock work only if you have a radar lock?

 

Padlock is intended to make visually tracking something easier and to compensate for the awkward viewcontrol that the PC offers.

It has nothing to do with radar.

 

I could see some merit in a function that padlocks the radarlocked target (when within visual range) but restricting padlock to the radarlocked target is almost like throwing padlock out entirely.

 

Radar works only in the frontal arc and by the time padlock starts to play a role (the close fight) you may not have radarlock all the time.

 

hrm well it doesn't have to be the only way, it could work well with the existing padlock system. The current system has a maximum range that is very close to your AC, the other way I'm suggesting is one that works for targets further away but with the radar lock limitation. This is great for those without trackir to beam the enemy or zigzag after firing a semi-active missile to reduce closure rate without breaking lock, while maintaining SA if lock is lost.

[wsoul2k]

Why this new padlock system Should be called natural padlock :D

if you have to use your radar to activate it :shock:

 

Man this is Insane lol

 

I agree the padlock have to be worked in some way ...but have to sustain Radar lock to use it is pointless

 

cya

 

sorry for the poor english

 

EDIT: Just one more note how i can keep a radar lock in a target comming in HOT after the merge ?? padlock is usefull in a knife figth where many times your enemy is very near to your tail.....you cannt keep the lock in this situation... :!:

[GGTharos]

Why should padlock work only if you have a radar lock?

 

Padlock is intended to make visually tracking something easier and to compensate for the awkward viewcontrol that the PC offers.

It has nothing to do with radar.

 

I could see some merit in a function that padlocks the radarlocked target (when within visual range) but restricting padlock to the radarlocked target is almost like throwing padlock out entirely.

 

Radar works only in the frontal arc and by the time padlock starts to play a role (the close fight) you may not have radarlock all the time.

 

hrm well it doesn't have to be the only way, it could work well with the existing padlock system. The current system has a maximum range that is very close to your AC, the other way I'm suggesting is one that works for targets further away but with the radar lock limitation. This is great for those without trackir to beam the enemy or zigzag after firing a semi-active missile to reduce closure rate without breaking lock, while maintaining SA if lock is lost.

 

No, actually it's utterly unnecessary since when you're cranking you want to be looking at yoru radar, not the enemy aircraft. There is no rush at those ranges for moving the view aorund, so the hatswitch is pretty fine.

[Ice]

I used to like padlock. But now there is Track Ir padlock should be phased out conpletely. There are plenty of track ir 1's on the market second hand and it is a million times better than padlock.

 

Buy Track IR !!!

[GGTharos]

Send me the money.

[Ice]

Get a Job

[coldcrew]

Why should padlock work only if you have a radar lock?

 

Padlock is intended to make visually tracking something easier and to compensate for the awkward viewcontrol that the PC offers.

It has nothing to do with radar.

 

I could see some merit in a function that padlocks the radarlocked target (when within visual range) but restricting padlock to the radarlocked target is almost like throwing padlock out entirely.

 

Radar works only in the frontal arc and by the time padlock starts to play a role (the close fight) you may not have radarlock all the time.

 

hrm well it doesn't have to be the only way, it could work well with the existing padlock system. The current system has a maximum range that is very close to your AC, the other way I'm suggesting is one that works for targets further away but with the radar lock limitation. This is great for those without trackir to beam the enemy or zigzag after firing a semi-active missile to reduce closure rate without breaking lock, while maintaining SA if lock is lost.

 

No, actually it's utterly unnecessary since when you're cranking you want to be looking at yoru radar, not the enemy aircraft. There is no rush at those ranges for moving the view aorund, so the hatswitch is pretty fine.

 

This is true but where the hatswitch becomes ineffective is at the merge. For example you're head on with an F-15, you begin to drag out your bvr fight firing missiles at each other. You just evaded his last missile and you at about 10nm and merging fast. You lose radar contact and you know he's somewhere on your left but your hatswitch is too clumsly to effectively use helmet mode. If there was a radar/padlock you could just switch to helmet mounted mode and lock him up immediately after losing the lock at the merge.

 

I really don't see any downside to padlocking a radar lock, all it would be doing is slewing the helmet to the contact. With trackir it's not even an issue, but that trackir money could help with a new videocard or cpu or an x52 :wink:

[Drakkhen]

Get a Job

When you'll have one, you'll see there's not necessarily money to waste on such an interface. Enjoy daddy's funds while you still can!

 

@coldscrew: How do you think the "natural" padlock would work for [EOS without radar] users (most of russian non-air2air flights)?

Ah... forgot you don't really care about details... :?

 

Anyway, that was funny to read. :roll:

[GGTharos]

Why should padlock work only if you have a radar lock?

 

Padlock is intended to make visually tracking something easier and to compensate for the awkward viewcontrol that the PC offers.

It has nothing to do with radar.

 

I could see some merit in a function that padlocks the radarlocked target (when within visual range) but restricting padlock to the radarlocked target is almost like throwing padlock out entirely.

 

Radar works only in the frontal arc and by the time padlock starts to play a role (the close fight) you may not have radarlock all the time.

 

hrm well it doesn't have to be the only way, it could work well with the existing padlock system. The current system has a maximum range that is very close to your AC, the other way I'm suggesting is one that works for targets further away but with the radar lock limitation. This is great for those without trackir to beam the enemy or zigzag after firing a semi-active missile to reduce closure rate without breaking lock, while maintaining SA if lock is lost.

 

No, actually it's utterly unnecessary since when you're cranking you want to be looking at yoru radar, not the enemy aircraft. There is no rush at those ranges for moving the view aorund, so the hatswitch is pretty fine.

 

This is true but where the hatswitch becomes ineffective is at the merge. For example you're head on with an F-15, you begin to drag out your bvr fight firing missiles at each other. You just evaded his last missile and you at about 10nm and merging fast. You lose radar contact and you know he's somewhere on your left but your hatswitch is too clumsly to effectively use helmet mode. If there was a radar/padlock you could just switch to helmet mounted mode and lock him up immediately after losing the lock at the merge.

 

I really don't see any downside to padlocking a radar lock, all it would be doing is slewing the helmet to the contact. With trackir it's not even an issue, but that trackir money could help with a new videocard or cpu or an x52 :wink:

 

Right, but the thing is with current padlock, if you have a radar lock, you'll be looking right at him, padlock him as he comes in, and you won't lose him at the merger, whereas you -will- lose radar contact almost every time since your radar can only see 60 to 70 degrees to either side. So padlocking to radar lock is simply not good enough. See what I mean? ;)

[SwingKid]

I'm still interested in this topic. If there are constructive suggestions, please make proposals in the previous topic:

 

http://forum.lockon.ru/viewtopic.php?t=2270

 

This way they are all in one place and easier to find for later consideration.

 

Thanks,

 

-SK

[cmeliak]

I would say...

 

buy a track ir man, padlock is not real.

may be sounds hard but if you use a padlock you can play Mickey Mouse vs. Donald Duck Dogfight Sim or stg. like this.

On the other hand its a good feature for a student pilots. :roll:

[Cosmonaut]

Forget TIR and padlock just use the mouse Muhaha :butthead: !! Place your mouse on the left side of your joystick and with your left hand you can look around never loosing sight of the enemy aircraft. It takes about an hour to get used to and then you’ll never have SA probs again.. you can even drink beer with out affecting your view, unlike TIR users lol :drinkers: .. a couple of tips; place chaff/flares on the “right” mouse button and map the “i” key to any convenient button on your mouse.

[Perry]

Forget TIR and padlock just use the mouse Muhaha :butthead: !! Place your mouse on the left side of your joystick and with your left hand you can look around never loosing sight of the enemy aircraft. It takes about an hour to get used to and then you’ll never have SA probs again.. you can even drink beer with out affecting your view, unlike TIR users lol :drinkers: .. a couple of tips; place chaff/flares on the “right” mouse button and map the “i” key to any convenient button on your mouse.

 

thanks for sharing ! i will try asap !!

[Jester_159th]

It's an interesting idea. But I agree that linking the padlock to the radar defeats the object of the exercise.

 

The pilot can turn his (or her) head far beyond the gimbal limits of the radar array. So with you suggestion as it stands padlocking a bandit at 90deg off your nose would not be possible. Let alone a bandit passed head on that's now off one of your wings.

 

I fully agree that the padlock system goes too far in it's abilities to track, and with the increasing capabilities of modern PC's it should be possible to refine the system to make it more life-like. Perhaps something along the lines of IL2 where if the bandit remains out of your field of view for a short time the padlock is broken? Not that the system in IL2 is perfect, but it is somewhat better than LOMAC's at present IMHO.

 

As far as "Buy TrackIR" comments go, well You have a point. But surely it would be foolish to expect the combat flight sim designer to rely on third party hardware that's out of their control, to add a neccessary functionality to their product?

 

And as far as the hat switch being pretty well useless after the merge, I fully agree with Coldcrew. My personal solution to that has been to enable mouselook in the conifg and I use the mouse rather than the hatswitch to move my view around. There again this only works for me since I haven't got a HOTAS set up. I would imagine that using mouselook with a HOTAS setup might be inconvenient.