work in progress Improved FLIR improvement discussion

[gmangnall]

Lets be honest the new FLIR system is utterly ludicrous. Some vehicles like the T-90 are impossible to see - they start cold irrespective of if they are ticked to start cold and even when hot are nigh on invisible.  - whilst some vehicles (esp trucks) can be seen from the moon. It was better then we had the old model as at least it was consistent. The current system is an utter joke. Either get all models working correctly or none.   Here is a video of FLIR looking at a rabbit (10:06) and we cannot see a tank!

 

[AMBUSH]

Not a fix, but I have found that if you set the mission time to winter (even if the temp is not cold) the objects show up on FLIR much better. It is a work around I have used until the everything has FLIR thermal textures.

That being said, ED does need to get this corrected as it was something that has been stated known since the announcement that the Apache would require better thermal textures and the first iteration of the new FLIR

Edited March 24, 2023 by AMBUSH

[Thx1137]

Here is what it looks like in the current open beta. 

The video cycles through White Hot, Black Hot and CCTV for December and June. Only the month changed.

In December the vehicle had a layer of snow over it even though it wasn't in snowing conditions. The temperature was 15C with clear skies and from what I read, snow requires temps less than 3C. 

 

[silverdevil]

i totally agree that the FLIR is hosed. i am placing my bet that ED will claim this video is modern tech that was not available in the 80s. but my own experience with thermal imaging from that time, the tech worked much better than "correct-as-is" DCS does. unfortunately they will not consider my testimony because there is no evidence. any video or other proof from that period would be a breach of clearances we all had. pictures or documentation was / is highly illegal. when the plywood targets popped up on range, they were easily seen. they got their heat merely by being horizontal before pop-up and gathered radiant energy.

[Flappie]

Let's make a list of vehicles missing a correct FLIR signature, then I'll make a track and report.

• T-90
• T-72

 

What else?

Edited March 25, 2023 by Flappie
added T-72

[silverdevil]

7 hours ago, Flappie said:

Let's make a list of vehicles missing a correct FLIR signature, then I'll make a track and report.

T-90. What else?

hey flappie. in the free flight mission caucuses, there is a line of t-72s on the road at a WP and other vehicles that i cannot see except TV (f-16). there are some artillery that are just randomly shooting. they can be seen with IR.

[Ephedrin]

vor 22 Stunden schrieb silverdevil:

i totally agree that the FLIR is hosed. i am placing my bet that ED will claim this video is modern tech that was not available in the 80s. but my own experience with thermal imaging from that time, the tech worked much better than "correct-as-is" DCS does. unfortunately they will not consider my testimony because there is no evidence. any video or other proof from that period would be a breach of clearances we all had. pictures or documentation was / is highly illegal. when the plywood targets popped up on range, they were easily seen. they got their heat merely by being horizontal before pop-up and gathered radiant energy.

There is plenty of material completely publicly available, even at the Tube, that shows how well 80's and 90's FLIR worked. I found it astonishing to see old tapes of Mike Pietrucha (Starbaby) from his Strike Eagle sorties where he digitalized stone old material and it's a clearer contrast (Not picture, let's be fair lol) than in DCS. In DCS howevery it's impossible to see anything that has its engines off and even if it's driving or fighting it's barely visible above the green background.

[Ephedrin]

vor 22 Stunden schrieb Flappie:

Let's make a list of vehicles missing a correct FLIR signature, then I'll make a track and report.

• T-90
• T-72

 

What else?

 

huh? everything? If you look through the ATFLIR and see absolutely nothing although there are supposed to be all kind of tanks, APCs and stuff down there that list is going to be long.. Good luck finding an SA-3 P19 Radar even though the sun is burning down on it.. Your best bet is using TV.

 

The FLIR is completely borked, it's not about some models lacking a good heat signature.

Edited March 26, 2023 by Ephedrin

[silverdevil]

2 hours ago, Ephedrin said:

huh? everything? If you look through the ATFLIR and see absolutely nothing although there are supposed to be all kind of tanks, APCs and stuff down there that list is going to be long.. Good luck finding an SA-3 P19 Radar even though the sun is burning down on it.. Your best bet is using TV.

 

The FLIR is completely borked, it's not about some models lacking a good heat signature.

 

as i understand the issue, it is that each model needs to have additional textures to show its heat sig in IR, pic in TV, and normal. one of the ED team had said in a post i remember but i cannot find it. so it would not be that easy to fix. what baffles me is all this worked before. a fix was made to some other aspect and it is ruined IR. doesn't the apache work though? i do not use the apache except for merry-go-round.

[CapnCoke]

Even if some of the thermal models are fixed and we can see IR emissions from a tank engine, it's still awkward to use for scanning because of the other little things that are bugged, which adds up becoming a major problem. For example, if you have a hot vehicle placed on the outskirts of a village and you want to scan your targeting pod to find it, you will have trouble locating it. It's because a couple of parked static vehicles are glowing bright white, and windows of houses are glowing as if the interior is on fire, and as far as I know, windows reflect thermal infrared radiation. You'll be checking every single heat source to make sure it's not the tank's engine, and even it was, the rest of the cold body blends in with the green/gray background for some reason. I once had a group of 10 vehicles and a waypoint designation on top of it. I tried every contrast/gain settings and couldn't see them at all.

Also, season and weather temperature also requires some tweaks. For someone who has been in Syria and the Persian Gulf region, Syria can have deserts but the weather is mostly warm/temperate/dry during the summer, not scorching hot. In the Persian Gulf, it can get really hot but anything that is metal becomes scorching hot. However, you can still see both a person and a hot parked vehicle standing next to each other in a thermal camera because it works by measuring difference in temperature. In this case, the vehicle is hotter than the sand/asphalt it is on, while a person who stepped out of a building is colder than his/her surroundings.

[Flappie]

I can plead for a better FLIR, but I need:

1. real life FLIR footage showing urban evnrionment (such as the one above, which is great),
2. a DCS track mimicing the real life FLIR footage so devs can see the difference like night and day.

[silverdevil]

1 hour ago, Flappie said:

I can plead for a better FLIR, but I need:

1. real life FLIR footage showing urban evnrionment (such as the one above, which is great),
2. a DCS track mimicing the real life FLIR footage so devs can see the difference like night and day.

hey flappie. this video is from about a decade ago. the first two are the sniper pod that i believe will eventually make it to the viper. the last one is showing a planned ejection. one can even see the ejected canopy.

 

[NineLine]

On 3/24/2023 at 6:18 AM, gmangnall said:

they start cold irrespective of if they are ticked to start cold and even when hot are nigh on invisible. 

The starting hot or cold fix should be coming in the next update, a hot unit not showing has not been my experience. So I need much more info than what you have given me to report and issue. I need to know what units, what module, I need tracks etc. This is a bug section we need properly reported bugs, please. 

[gmangnall]

I have added a TRK file and several screen shots. I have a column of tanks, apcs and trucks. The close up of the truck has clearly visible tryes irrespective of hot or cold start. The close up of the T-90 is virtually invisible irrespective of hot or colt start. With the wider view you can see 6 vehicles in TV mode but only 3 in FLIR.

Having the hot start fixed in the next patch is going to be a big improvement.....but there is still the issue of some models. As I said a T-90 is almost invisilbe when cold....which is fair enough.  Ural 375 has hot wheels.....whereas a Zil135 seems to show white hot instead of black hot.

Then we have dust trails clearly visible....but only on wheeled vehicles and not tracked vehicles

After 5 minutes running most tanks can barely be seen with just a little heat from the engine deck (far harder to see than a dust trail)....hot exhaust should sufely be immediately visible and more so than a dust trail. Even after 10 minutes it's hard to see the T-90 but it's becoming visible.

These are all from the Harrier as it's got the clearest display but it's the same in the viper etc.

 

I understand the ambition...but we need to have consistency. This should never have been rushed out for the Apache. I love DCS but this seems to sum up EDs decision making which seems to prioritise things which can be put on a You Tube video for the latest module and hell to what's actually good for the game and the old model is actually better then the current half implemented & inconsistent system. There appears to be no common sense applied. Tank engine firing up obviously gives out heat. A vehicle driving at 10mph isn't going to kick up dust visible from further away than the tank exhaust. Accuracy and realism is great...but consistency is more important.

 

FLIR test.trk

Edited March 27, 2023 by gmangnall
-

[Laurion]

I have to agree. This much needed feature was introduced but then left half-done. Devs need to finish it for once.

 

 

[GumidekCZ]

It is really stupid idea to create FLIR textures on base of some pictures or video records. What we need is to implement some physics laws of nature into DCS. Like different materials properties of heat reflection, emission and absorbtion. Put into math the power of Sun rays during the Year and Day cycle. At the end of equation, add factors of precipitation, clouds, dust or smoke, sunny or shady side of object. Also darker matt material absorb heat much better than glossy bright paints. Small/thin objects heat up quicker than large/thick ones. Tracks of moving heavy tank warms more than light tank and much more than tires of wheeled vehicle.

Everything not corresponding to above well known physics is not realistic.

In DCS I'm sure this is impossible, but we can get very close to it. If Devs will not focus on pictures, but rather than to physics... than we can get reasonable FLIR simulation here.

Getting FLIR image of static tank in the middle of grass field at summer noon, where you can't recognize it even if Gain and Level is adjusted is just nonsense.

Speaking of Level and Gain, AT-FLIR auto Level-Gain at Hornet is still bugged since the release. It will adjust even if it's not boxed.

[gmangnall]

The problem with physics is it takes a lot of computing power so you have to take shortcuts for less important things. 20 years ago thats why we had primitive hit based damaged models.....which DCS still has now. FLIR is important but can be "faked" well enough without doing physicals modelling which is likely to be far too intensive for CPUs

On 3/28/2023 at 6:34 AM, Laurion said:

I have to agree. This much needed feature was introduced but then left half-done. Devs need to finish it for once.

 

 

100% This have baked implementation is the worst possible situation....unless you are making a You Tube video to sell a few copies of Apache

[gmangnall]

On 3/25/2023 at 12:08 PM, Flappie said:

Let's make a list of vehicles missing a correct FLIR signature, then I'll make a track and report.

• T-90
• T-72

 

What else?

 

I don't think very many - if any are correct.  I think ED need ot start from scratch. What we need though is consistency. As soon an an engine starts there should be visibility.

 

[TerminallyIrish]

@NineLine I think the non-functioning FLIR is pretty self evident at this point. 
 

Is DCS honestly trying to tell me a METAL vehicle sitting in an open field in the summer is not hotter than the surrounding grass!?!?  

I love DCS, and want it to be the best it can, it’s just the A/G role in so many airframes is just borked right now due to thermally camouflaged targets!

[oldcrusty]

On 3/28/2023 at 1:17 AM, GumidekCZ said:

...Getting FLIR image of static tank in the middle of grass field at summer noon, where you can't recognize it even if Gain and Level is adjusted is just nonsense.

Speaking of Level and Gain, AT-FLIR auto Level-Gain at Hornet is still bugged since the release. It will adjust even if it's not boxed.

Not a fix, just a workaround (in case there's someone out there that doesn't know   )

In case I need to play with gain during daylight, on any DDI or MPCD, I switch each of them to 'night' mode, crank the brightness/contrast enough to see the image/map, etc., then play with gain. Most of the time it won't make that much of a difference but I've seen some improvement on occasion.

[GumidekCZ]

On 3/30/2023 at 11:19 AM, gmangnall said:

The problem with physics is it takes a lot of computing power so you have to take shortcuts for less important things. 20 years ago thats why we had primitive hit based damaged models.....which DCS still has now. FLIR is important but can be "faked" well enough without doing physicals modelling which is likely to be far too intensive for CPUs

100% This have baked implementation is the worst possible situation....unless you are making a You Tube video to sell a few copies of Apache

I was not suggesting use of all the physics in DCS directly. Non of user PC would handle that. But rather than to use proper physics simulations by dev team to get proper results what we should have see in our FLIRs. Level of simplification should than cover most of the variables present nowadays/ or in future DCS missions.

Edited March 31, 2023 by GumidekCZ

[TobiasA]

Am 27.3.2023 um 19:05 schrieb NineLine:

The starting hot or cold fix should be coming in the next update, a hot unit not showing has not been my experience. So I need much more info than what you have given me to report and issue. I need to know what units, what module, I need tracks etc. This is a bug section we need properly reported bugs, please. 

What do you need? Tests with various units? Tracks? A thread for every unit? Or should we open a thread that contains all the tracks and units? I mean the Viper will lose TV mode pretty soon, so the issue should have a higher priority.
I am willing to contribute to a solution. But some units simply remain close to invisible.
As an example, the SA-6. Here is a track and two screenshots that show very clearly that the launcher that just fired on me remains cold. Or... somewhat warm, but nowhere near as it should be. The hot exhausts that are usually very visible are not modelled at all, on no unit. Ok, that might come later, but it can't be that units that fire a hundreds degree hot missile don't show up. There are certain things wrong in the current implementation. Everything gets better at night, so does FLIR, but units are way too hidden right now.  Especially the fact that the generator is running a gas turbine should make it very clear that something is wrong here.
SAM-Test_SA-6.trk

[TobiasA]

The A-10 is indeed better. I just wish we had the same FLIR picture on the SAM as on the civilian cars on the road behind.

SAM-Test_SA-6_A-10.trk

Still, it is far from accurate. Would this help you to sort out the issues?

[TobiasA]

 One more- moving column of MBTs, IFV, some AAA, some artillery. They are moving, but they are cold.

Just say what you need, it isn't hard to reproduce this. At least not in the F-16.

 Column_Test.trk

[TobiasA]

Another with ALARM STATE set to RED at mission start.

Interesting is that the gun is heating up, while the vehicle does not- even if it was driving some time ago.

A solution would be that everything that is driving is just hot, since you usually don't start a tank and go driving with a cold engine- and exhausts aren't even modelled yet. A partial model would have better results than what we have now. I personally think that the FLIR rework was pushed out too early, and too ambitious for the state is was in. The overall idea is really cool, and it will be awesome one day.

Column_Test_2.trk