Having NVG's closer to eyes?

[H60MTI]

Is there a way to make the NVG's closer to your eyes? You shouldn't really see the outside of the tube/s. They should be almost touching your eyes in real life. In the game it seems like their 6 inches from the eyes and it's unrealistic as crap. 

[ASAP]

13 hours ago, H60MTI said:

Is there a way to make the NVG's closer to your eyes? You shouldn't really see the outside of the tube/s. They should be almost touching your eyes in real life. In the game it seems like their 6 inches from the eyes and it's unrealistic as crap. 

That is incorrect. The NVGs sit about 1/2-3/4 of an inch in front of the eyes. Pilots have to look under the NVG tubes to see anything inside the cockpit. It's like flying with bifocals. The NVGs are only good for seeing outside the jet. Everything inside the jet is an unreadable blur. The NVGS cannot be closer to the eye than the HMCS monocle, assuming you are using HMCS.

Granted, that's not the way DCS represents it, and you can't really simulate looking beneath the NVGS to look inside. On the NVGS everything is unrealistically in focus in the game.

[jaylw314]

I've heard opposite things about NVG's from two different buddies who worked in maintenance.  I just haven't gotten them in the same room at the same time to hash it out

FWIW, in VR, the NVG's now seem to subtend an angle of about 50-60 degrees, so if it's a 1" eyepiece, it'd be about 1"-1.5" away from your eye.  

[ASAP]

3 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

I've heard opposite things about NVG's from two different buddies who worked in maintenance.  I just haven't gotten them in the same room at the same time to hash it out

FWIW, in VR, the NVG's now seem to subtend an angle of about 50-60 degrees, so if it's a 1" eyepiece, it'd be about 1"-1.5" away from your eye.  

Real world each tube covers a 40 degree field of view, obviously overlapping in the middle. It would probably be pretty difficult to make it look right and give the user the same ability to look under the NVGs due to VR FOV limits and all though... Anyway, a picture is worth a thousand words, so here's a photo of what the NVGs look like on a pilot. This isn't an A-10 helmet, and it has something other than the HOBBIT on it, but bracket and NVGs themselves look the same.

 

The second picture is the HMCS. when wearing NVGs with the HMCS on, the NVGs are even further from your eye because there has to be room for the monocle to fit between the goggles and your eye.

[Goose489]

So do the NVGs

30 minutes ago, ASAP said:

Real world each tube covers a 40 degree field of view, obviously overlapping in the middle. It would probably be pretty difficult to make it look right and give the user the same ability to look under the NVGs due to VR FOV limits and all though... Anyway, a picture is worth a thousand words, so here's a photo of what the NVGs look like on a pilot. This isn't an A-10 helmet, and it has something other than the HOBBIT on it, but bracket and NVGs themselves look the same.

 

The second picture is the HMCS. when wearing NVGs with the HMCS on, the NVGs are even further from your eye because there has to be room for the monocle to fit between the goggles and your eye.

rest on the optical?

[ASAP]

15 minutes ago, Goose489 said:

So do the NVGs

rest on the optical?

Do you mean on the HMCS monocle? I wouldn't say they "rest on" the monocle, The NVG bracket should be supporting all the load of the NVGs. But they would be adjusted to nearly be touching if not lightly making contact with them.

[jaylw314]

2 hours ago, ASAP said:

Real world each tube covers a 40 degree field of view, obviously overlapping in the middle. It would probably be pretty difficult to make it look right and give the user the same ability to look under the NVGs due to VR FOV limits and all though... 

Hmm, most VR headsets have an FOV about 80-100 deg or so, so a 40 degree eyepiece would be completely doable in VR.  Does the image go away when you are not looking directly at the eyepiece, or can you see the image in your peripheral view when you look away (like binoculars)?  The first effect would probably be tough to do in VR but would be neat/annoying

[ASAP]

1 hour ago, jaylw314 said:

Hmm, most VR headsets have an FOV about 80-100 deg or so, so a 40 degree eyepiece would be completely doable in VR.  Does the image go away when you are not looking directly at the eyepiece, or can you see the image in your peripheral view when you look away (like binoculars)?  The first effect would probably be tough to do in VR but would be neat/annoying

You could still see it the whole time no matter where your eyes are looking. It might be doable, it just seems to me like you might not have enough screen area at the bottom of the VR headset to make it look accurate and convincing.

It would be a really cool because it would present a real world problem that you no longer have any peripheral view of the horizon which can be really disorienting.

Edited December 5, 2023 by ASAP

[jaylw314]

27 minutes ago, ASAP said:

You could still see it the whole time no matter where your eyes are looking. It might be doable, it just seems to me like you might not have enough screen area at the bottom of the VR headset to make it look accurate and convincing.

It would be a really cool because it would present a real world problem that you no longer have any peripheral view of the horizon which can be really disorienting.

OK, then the current implementation does look like that--I have enough space to peek under the NVG's.  The implementation has changed over the years, there were some times the lenses took up 75% of the width of the FOV, which didn't leave enough room to peek under or around them, but this current one actually seems consistent with your description.  However, it seems to be implemented this way with at least one other module, I assume different aircraft would have different configurations

[ASAP]

1 hour ago, jaylw314 said:

OK, then the current implementation does look like that--I have enough space to peek under the NVG's.  The implementation has changed over the years, there were some times the lenses took up 75% of the width of the FOV, which didn't leave enough room to peek under or around them, but this current one actually seems consistent with your description.  However, it seems to be implemented this way with at least one other module, I assume different aircraft would have different configurations

I could very possibly be wrong about this, someone please correct me if I am, but I think every US fighter (F-35 being the obvious exception) uses the same helmet, and at least very similar NVG setup. At least while google searching the images I posted above they all looked to be set up the same way

[H60MTI]

So, when I was in the Army, I was a crewchief on the UH-60 Blackhawk. I wore a Gentex HGU-56/P Helmet. For NVG's we wore ANVIS-6V(3)'s. 3rd gen NVG tech. Each tube had an FOV of 40*. You have an adjuster on the tilt shelf that moved the NVG's closer or further away from your eyes. Rule of thumb, you get them to just about touch your eye lashes. If I wanted to look under them, I had to raise my head then look down. Obviously, I didn't wear an O2 mask like zoomies do in their cockpit but the adjuster is still there since they all wear a form of the ANVIS-6 or ANVIS-9.

I was just hoping they had the adjuster in the game to move the goggles closer to your eyes and I was just missing it.

That's me with the Stewie patch at Fort Riley back in 2006/2007

[jaylw314]

8 hours ago, H60MTI said:

So, when I was in the Army, I was a crewchief on the UH-60 Blackhawk. I wore a Gentex HGU-56/P Helmet. For NVG's we wore ANVIS-6V(3)'s. 3rd gen NVG tech. Each tube had an FOV of 40*. You have an adjuster on the tilt shelf that moved the NVG's closer or further away from your eyes. Rule of thumb, you get them to just about touch your eye lashes. If I wanted to look under them, I had to raise my head then look down. Obviously, I didn't wear an O2 mask like zoomies do in their cockpit but the adjuster is still there since they all wear a form of the ANVIS-6 or ANVIS-9.

I was just hoping they had the adjuster in the game to move the goggles closer to your eyes and I was just missing it.

That's me with the Stewie patch at Fort Riley back in 2006/2007

 

Out of curiosity, are the NVG's you used really unable to focus close up?  I knew someone who claimed to have worked maintenance on A-10's, and he claimed the NVG's did not really have that limitation

[Insonia]

1 hour ago, jaylw314 said:

Out of curiosity, are the NVG's you used really unable to focus close up?  I knew someone who claimed to have worked maintenance on A-10's, and he claimed the NVG's did not really have that limitation

It depends on the type of NVG and accessories. ANVIS F-number is about 1~2 very small number, minimum focus range is about 10inches. at minimum focus setting it should able to read. if it focuses to star/infinity, closer object can be very blurry.

the aperture did not only restrict how many light going through; it can also increase or decrease the Dof( depth of focus). smaller the aperture, will filter out more unfocused light from outer part of lens. 

the bigger the F-number the wilder the focus range.

Some NVG do have adjustable aperture accessories, some NVG have fixed-size "focus caps," and some NVG just have lenses with big F-number.

 

"DIY" focus caps:

You can have far-distant focus settings while maintaining adequate close focus with the cap

Edited December 8, 2023 by Insonia

[jaylw314]

7 hours ago, Insonia said:

It depends on the type of NVG and accessories. ANVIS F-number is about 1~2 very small number, minimum focus range is about 10inches. at minimum focus setting it should able to read. if it focuses to star/infinity, closer object can be very blurry.

the aperture did not only restrict how many light going through; it can also increase or decrease the Dof( depth of focus). smaller the aperture, will filter out more unfocused light from outer part of lens. 

 

the bigger the F-number the wilder the focus range.

Some NVG do have adjustable aperture accessories, some NVG have fixed-size "focus caps," and some NVG just have lenses with big F-number.

 

"DIY" focus caps:

 

You can have far-distant focus settings while maintaining adequate close focus with the cap

 

 

OK, that is hella cool info and pics, thank you!  Did not realize some have adjustable f-stops

[H60MTI]

14 hours ago, jaylw314 said:

Out of curiosity, are the NVG's you used really unable to focus close up?  I knew someone who claimed to have worked maintenance on A-10's, and he claimed the NVG's did not really have that limitation

Yes and no. The V(3) have an infinity focus on the objective side of the goggle. Typically, you focus the goggles further out so you can see where you're going but you can adjust them so you can see close up. You can make out shapes and what not and see objects, but you can't read anything up close. It's like being far sighted and trying to read a menu. Depth perception is the biggest issue. Trying to view a 3D world through green 2D lenses. I biffed it multiple times trying to walk over rocks under NVG's at our parking pads in Iraq.

Looking at the white phosphorus NVG's pictured above, it's the one on the left, but green. You can see distance great but up close like that is just a shape. 

[Aquorys]

There is at least one model with a ~97 degrees field of view, the L3/Harris GPNVG-18, but despite them having been around for a while, only very few units have them (Delta, DEVGRU, 24th STS, outside of the US, I only know for sure the German KSK and GSG 9, but with different electronics), and they were not designed for flying (the "G" is short for "Ground").

Anyway, I would not be surprised if some special helo folks, like maybe the 160th SOAR, had tried them or even introduced them by now. However, the GPNVG-18 are still very expensive, at around $45k, so I doubt they will be standard issue for every pilot anytime soon. Also, they're big and comparatively heavy (light considering they're quads, but heavier than the usual binocular/monocular ones).

[H60MTI]

I haven't heard of Regiment using them in an aircraft. There is a HUD you can put on the ANVIS-6's called the ANVIS-7. It only works on the ANVIS-6's that have been modded to use them. There's a ring you have to install on the 6's for the HUD to attach to. Don't think they have that for the pano's though. That doesn't mean they haven't tried them. I'd also be worried about smacking them on pieces in the cockpit.

[ASAP]

On 12/8/2023 at 2:03 AM, jaylw314 said:

Out of curiosity, are the NVG's you used really unable to focus close up?  I knew someone who claimed to have worked maintenance on A-10's, and he claimed the NVG's did not really have that limitation

They can focus close up. But that’s not where a pilot needs NVGs to be able to see better. They have lights in the cockpit. Outside is dark so they are focused to look outside that’s where the targets and the terrain that will kill them is. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by ASAP

[ASAP]

On 12/8/2023 at 6:35 PM, Aquorys said:

so I doubt they will be standard issue for every pilot anytime soon. Also, they're big and comparatively heavy (light considering they're quads, but heavier than the usual binocular/monocular ones).

the panoramic NVGs have been tested and to the best of my knowledge I think they were approved for use in the A-10C. But they are heavy, and from what I've heard the benefit they provide doesn't really justify the extra weight/neck pain that comes with them, much less the cost. I don't think they are being widely used in any fighters, if at all.

[Rainmaker]

Knew a few back seaters that had them many many moons ago in the -15 world.  A few of them also would come back with busted nose bridges from them too.  After a while, I saw none of them being used.  Have heard they still do exist in the wild, but dunno how many might actually use them.  Likely not many.

[TED]

I fly a lot with nvg, especially this time of year. We are using the newer generations of white phos goggles, so the image is black and white. 
Just to be clear, we do not view anything in the cockpit through the goggles. If and when u need to check anything inside, we look under the goggles. This means the goggles cannot be too close to the eye. As a rule 2-3 fingers between the eye and the goggle tube is what I use. Then looking under is pretty simple and comfortable not requiring too much head movement. You can absolutely see the outer rims of the tubes when using them. Very often when new pilots start using nvg they do try to adjust them as close to the eye as possible, as it’s natural to want to be able to see as much as possible, and it feels a little unnatural in the beginning to have such a narrow fov. However training this away is an important skill and a perishable one. After 25 years of flying with nvg, I still feel rusty quickly if I haven’t flown goggles for a while. Good scanning techniques  and discipline are vital as well as regular looking outside under the goggles for LED lit masts. Unfortunately many of the modern gen, whilst offering greater clarity and sensitivity, do not pick up light from LED lighting. 
What dcs could probably do is simulate this double environment with the goggle fov, then outside that, instead of black, it’s the normal night lit environment, with clear view of cockpit elements and outside environments according to the light conditions. 

[H60MTI]

Yeah. It's hard to duplicate the effect of them if you haven't flown with them before.

I also put them as close as possible to my eyes when I flew with them. Granted, I was a crewchief on the Blackhawk so I didn't have gauges to look at. I still had enough to look down with my eyes for fuel checks or taking notes. Most of my time was out the window scanning. I went a couple months without goggle time cause our birds were on a boat to Iraq. Really weird getting goggles back on a adjusting to them again. The whole depth perception thing Lol I agree with the lit towers. Some of the lights just got filtered out through the tubes. I also noticed weather would get filtered out as well. Fog and rain didn't make it through. I've landed before and it was raining and foggy as all get up out and the crew didn't know until we went unaided.