New FLIR (F-16C) 'Cold' ground units vs Ambient Temperature

[Blackdog]

I originally submitted a report because I thought there had been a WHOT/BHOT  regression --

Turns out that I was just unaware that non-moving units started 'cold'.

However, I've been playing with it, and something doesn't seem right with regard to ambient vs unit temperature with these 'cold' starting units.

Screenshots all taken same NTTR mission with just the time/month/temperature changed, screenshots taken immediately after pushing AG/CCRP and zooming pod at mission start -- everything (including TGP settings, which I didn't touch other than to zoom in on the target) is the same.

The 'day' image is July, 3pm, temperature as hot as ME will go (50 degrees C).   So far so good, the ground would be very hot, and so would a unit sitting out in it baking -- I wouldn't expect a ton of contrast.

The night picture on the other hand is taken at 4AM in January with the temperature set as low as it will go in ME (-1.3 degrees C)... and doesn't pass the smell test for me.   During cold clear nights, ground temperature is generally colder than the air temperature -- I can't think of how a vehicle would become significantly colder (stark FLIR contrast) than the surrounding ground.

It looks to me like the 'cold' vehicles need to have their initial temperature set in a way that more closely reflects ambient conditions -- especially in the night/cold.

Hopefully this is taken in the constructive context in which it is meant.

-Blackdog

Edited June 9, 2022 by Blackdog

[Blackdog]

Was reminded of the term 'diurnal crossover' -- would be awesome if thermal simulation in DCS accurately reflected the IR visibility of 'passively' heated/cooled objects including vehicles in relation to a (plausibly) realistically modeled thermal environment,  regardless of mission start time.  The already mentioned (by ED) future ability to set thermal state of a vehicle at mission start in ME would be great as well.

I very much enjoy having to make mission planning choices around HMCS/NV, and having to adapt and make hard choices about TV vs IR mavs, for example, because diurnal crossover during the course of a mission would be awesome.

[RogueRunner]

This is a huge problem with 'static' targets a mission builder has put down that would not move until attacked. They are extremely difficult to find with say the maverick WPN page although how the OP said there should be some contrast if they have been sitting in the sun all day.

 

I have found that moving vehicles that stopped will also cool down to near ambient temperature very very quickly. Please fix this!

[KlarSnow]

The issue here is that metal objects do not heat up and cool down at the same rate as surrounding terrain/ambient air. On a sunny day a metal object like a tank will warm up very quickly and even when off will be hotter than the dirt. The ground will take a long while to warm up and will almost never get as hot as the tank. This will vary depending on the type of terrain. A desert for example will heat up quicker than a grass field for example, but still the metal object will normally heat up much quicker than the surrounding terrain and thus should be visible. 

The reverse happens after the sun goes down, the metal tank does not retain heat as well as the ground does and so will cool off quicker while the ground retains its heat. This is where thermal crossover occurs, as manmade metal objects or buildings cool off from their elevated temperatures throughout the day and match for a while the surrounding terrain temperature providing no contrast, however this is a transitory state usually lasting less than an hour and then the vehicle or building will be cooler than the surrounding terrain. This holds true all night until sunrise, when the object will heat up through the ambient terrain temperature and again lack contrast until it is hotter than the surrounding terrain. This is all without the vehicle engine or any other factor heating or cooling the vehicle.