Topper81 Posted September 14, 2022 Posted September 14, 2022 The FLIR of the AGM-65D is extremly bad compared to previous versions as I remember. Even from a distance of just 3.4 miles it's hard to recognize targets. null bad_agm_flir.trk 1
Bunny Clark Posted September 16, 2022 Posted September 16, 2022 The new FLIR system is definitely still being worked on and refined, but overall it should look worse. The previous FLIR system was far too clear to be realistic. Oil In The Water Hornet Campaign. Bunny's: Form-Fillable Controller Layout PDFs | HOTAS Kneeboards | Checklist Kneeboards
MARLAN_ Posted September 16, 2022 Posted September 16, 2022 To be fair, as far as I know, metal (like vehicles) shouldn't be matching the terrain even if the vehicle is "cold", ambient temperature would heat up the metal faster than the earth, and vice versa when night falls, there would be a temporary transitionary period where the metal is the same temperature as the earth. Currently in DCS, "cold" vehicles are nearly invisible to IR. Virtual CVW-8 - The mission of Virtual Carrier Air Wing EIGHT is to provide its members with an organization committed to presenting an authentic representation of U.S. Navy Carrier Air Wing operations in training and combat environments based on the real world experience of its real fighter pilots, air intercept controllers, airbosses, and many others.
falcon_120 Posted September 16, 2022 Posted September 16, 2022 Just as reference, this in an old video showing a Flir maverick at 0.55 Another one in here As it can be seen, identification of targets is nearly imposible due to bad resolution, however tanks does stand as bright spots against the ground. I find the current version of our IR maverick lacking in that regard, is really difficult to find bright spots to lock into. I agree past version had too good resoulition and now is more realistic though.
Bunny Clark Posted September 16, 2022 Posted September 16, 2022 3 hours ago, MARLAN_ said: To be fair, as far as I know, metal (like vehicles) shouldn't be matching the terrain even if the vehicle is "cold", ambient temperature would heat up the metal faster than the earth, and vice versa when night falls That depends entirely on the terrain. In the desert, sun-baked sand and rocks will get just as hot as sun-baked metal. There's a reason the CCD seeker H and K Mavericks exist. 1 Oil In The Water Hornet Campaign. Bunny's: Form-Fillable Controller Layout PDFs | HOTAS Kneeboards | Checklist Kneeboards
ED Team BIGNEWY Posted September 20, 2022 ED Team Posted September 20, 2022 Hi it is correct as is, but we do have some tweaks coming for some units. thanks 1 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, PIMAX Crystal
Dragon1-1 Posted September 20, 2022 Posted September 20, 2022 Mavs are not a good substitute for the TGP, although they can ID targets in a pinch. Even if you zoom in, the zoom isn't large. All you should be doing from the Mav display is lock targets.
ebabil Posted September 23, 2022 Posted September 23, 2022 mavs are pretty useless after the last update. wheter correct as it is or not. even flir itself almost useless. there is no joy using this combo anymore. FC3 | UH-1 | Mi-8 | A-10C II | F/A-18 | Ka-50 III | F-14 | F-16 | AH-64 | Mi-24 | F-5 | F-15E| F-4| Tornado Persian Gulf | Nevada | Syria | NS-430 | Supercarrier // Wishlist: CH-53 | UH-60 Youtube MS FFB2 - TM Warthog - CH Pro Pedals - Trackir 5
Dragon1-1 Posted September 23, 2022 Posted September 23, 2022 It's not a magic enemy finder any more. In some lighting conditions, they still work great (unless the target is cold, of course). In others TV Mavs work better. The LMAV, despite not being fire and forget, is usually a superior choice to either.
Recommended Posts