Being detected at night and behind cover. the screenshots says it all.

[AirSenpai]

null

Edited April 22, 2024 by AirSenpai
bad words on chat. redacted

[AirSenpai]

9 minutes ago, AirSenpai said:

null

 

Su 27/MIG detected me at a night mission so many times specially hidden behind  buildings.

[NeedzWD40]

They don't even need radar to see you. Assume that everything AI knows about you at all times and plan appropriately. At least in the case of jets, they come in low and slow, so it's very easy to ambush them with ADA or friendly fighters. Alternatively, someone with a Gazelle and Mistral might be up for helo escort.

Sucks, but that's what we have to work with right now.

[Oldahpilot]

I assume the AI coding would be very complicated to map every structure and tree between them and the player, adding an unwanted penalty to CPU etc. I agree it's particularly annoying to use every tactic in the book and still be detected as if you're the only object on the map, might as well hover at 500' in the middle of a desert with all your lights and radar on.

Also annoying is my AI wingman's habit of flying higher than me to advertise our position, I'm working hard at 20' and he's following in trail at 50'.

[Tom P]

inserts first time meme. It's a pain that's been around for a very long time unfortunately. 

[shagrat]

IRL your rotor disc will reflect radar waves like a beacon. Any jet with a radar that just happens to look down in your rotor disc should(!) be able to detect you. In addition DCS simulates AI using radio comms to share information about enemy.

On group/flight level this means, if one detects you, all are aware and know where to look (they still need to lock on, but they know you are there). Once detected, it's hard to hide again.

That said, the Line-Of-Sight calculation is a tricky thing in DCS. Trees do block LOS, but to my understanding it has simplifications for performance reasons. A Tank driving along a treeline will have its LOS broken by each tree, yet the enemy Tank will see him through the treeline and shoot him between trees.

Depending on how high an aircraft flys its radar or LOS may have enough angle to look down "into the trees".

The AI isn't actually omnipotent, but the detection algorithm basically works with a timer that's based on how long you are "in Line-Of-Sight" adjusted by multiple factors, like distance, time of day (light), silhouette facing the enemy, background, enemy sensors active and others. If you have been detected before they spot you easier, if you are in close proximity to other aircraft they spot you easier, if have your external lights on, if you fire weapons, if you fly against a blue sky... you guessed it, they spot you faster.

[NeedzWD40]

7 hours ago, shagrat said:

IRL your rotor disc will reflect radar waves like a beacon. Any jet with a radar that just happens to look down in your rotor disc should(!) be able to detect you. In addition DCS simulates AI using radio comms to share information about enemy.

Well yes, but actually no, yet actually it depends. An F-5? Probably not. MiG-29? Maybe. MiG-31? High probability. It also depends on the rotor blades being made from traditional reflective materials, which is pretty common in a lot of helicopters for durability/longevity reasons, but ~20 years ago there was an upgrade program for the AH-64's blades that shifted to an even more composite construction compared to the past. I don't have all the details, but suffice to say that the radar reflecting material has been grossly reduced and that it's not a solid assumption that a radar will easily pick up an AH-64 based upon the blade returns alone. This dates back even further to the AH-1's K747 blades, where radar signature reduction was a design goal. Older types with traditional metal blades, ie UH-1H, Mi-8, Mi-24, are where the effect really comes into play, provided the radar is a modern-ish set.

[shagrat]

Reduced, yes. Invisible, no. Blades rotate at high speeds, the return may be smaller, but will still stand out against the ground clutter, as you can't hide in a speed gate unless the blades stop moving... again, the problem here isn't only the "rotor", the simplifications to assess LOS with a sensor is, maybe also communication between assets on the same coalition.

There's a need to balance between performance and radar beam modeling, based on ray tracing. I suspect the elevation angle of the jet is part of the LOS calculation, and it simply "looks down" enough, to get a valid LOS... or the tree collision "box" is not high enough...

 

[simo-dj]

This is indeed a very good topic!

I had a similar experience but with tanks and laser. I was well behind cover at roughly 9 ft from ground but laser warning receiver was warning continuosly that i was tracked by a tank. The explosion against the tree in front of me marked that the gunner in the tank took the chance to hit me...

 

[Raptor9]

2 hours ago, shagrat said:

Reduced, yes. Invisible, no. Blades rotate at high speeds, the return may be smaller, but will still stand out against the ground clutter, as you can't hide in a speed gate unless the blades stop moving...

The whole "rotor acts like a beacon on radar because of Doppler" idea is sort of a misconception that has taken on a life of its own in modern military gaming, and is generally treated as a catch-all explanation that helicopters are always easy to detect on radar. Reality is much more complicated.

A radar is a sensor, and like any other type of sensor out there, each type of radar is designed to perform a specific purpose within one or several specific environments. When you start using a sensor outside of the optimal conditions it was designed to operate within, and in a manner it was not designed to be employed, you will typically get sub-optimal performance or results. A radar on a fighter, a ship, a long-range SAM battery, or a short-range air defense vehicle are all quite different in design, characteristics, and employment. Within the context of these systems detecting an aircraft with radar, each of these systems rely on a set of assumptions in their design.

• What type of aircraft are we anticipating that we will be detecting?
• What speeds and altitudes are we expecting it to be flying?
• At what range do we need to detect and/or engage it?
• What environment are we expecting to be operating in? (open ocean, look-up angles, look-down angles, background clutter, number of potential targets, heavy jamming, etc)
• What sort of weapon system, if any, are we planning to employ against it?
• What RF power requirements are necessary to achieve this versus how much can we generate onboard the aircraft, ship, or vehicle?
• Others....

Based on all of these variables, the rotating rotor disk of a helicopter will often times have no effect on increasing the chances the helicopter will be detected as a target for a given radar system. Even if the radar is designed to detect low-flying helicopters amongst terrain clutter, unless that radar is specifically designed to exploit the radar signature of a helicopter's rotor system, it is not a given the rotor disk will have an effect on the helicopter's detection rate.

Having said that, many modern radars have multiple modes of operation that they can switch between, due to modern electronics, processors, and advanced antenna design. So even if a radar is not originally designed for detecting helicopters in a high-clutter environment, it could be equipped or upgraded with various sub-modes that change how the radar works or how the targets are processed based on selectable target parameters; and one of those parameters it may exploit could be the signature of a helicopter's spinning rotor. But again, the fact that a helicopter rotor spins at a high rate of speed does not universally determine how easily a helicopter can be detected.
_____________________________________________________

With that out of the way, we are always looking at and working on ways to make target detection by AI more realistic. But at the same time, it must be done in a way that does not bring DCS framerates or CPU processing to a crawl.

[shagrat]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb Raptor9:

The whole "rotor acts like a beacon on radar because of Doppler" idea is sort of a misconception that has taken on a life of its own in modern military gaming, and is generally treated as a catch-all explanation that helicopters are always easy to detect on radar. Reality is much more complicated.

(...)

With that out of the way, we are always looking at and working on ways to make target detection by AI more realistic. But at the same time, it must be done in a way that does not bring DCS framerates or CPU processing to a crawl.

Totally agree. Just wanted to point out, you can't simply "stealth away" the moving blades. Even modern "stealth" jets aren't "invisible", but harder/later to detect and more difficult to get a lock.

The key factor for DCS is the detection (spotting) calculation, that AI uses. One issue that's common to all spotting by AI is the timer used. If you are in line of sight to an AI you will ultimately be spotted if inside the maximum detection range. The time is what is adjusted by multiple factors, but you cannot hide forever in the background through camouflage or between trees, if parts of the collision box are "visible", also the boxes of trees, buildings or brush, may differ from the visual model, so while you can't see through the foliage of trees in front of you, the box used for LOS may have a gap... and if another AI spotted you, or the mission designer uses the script command/trigger to have the AI "know" your position, you are exposed. (Though I doubt that is a factor in the above example).

[AirSenpai]

 Problem with me is being detected on inside a forest, behind a building, behind trees. AND yep and the rotor blades on itself is easier to spot, the apache is far away from being the  rah-66. specially when there is no enemy a50 to spot me or any enemy  EWRS around to vector them, it seems as if those ai bots has a sixth sense. wwwwwwwwww

What bothers me the most is the following:

 My flight regimes are consisted of : flying  70~ 80kts at 20~30 feet or lower, nothing too radical, i love taking the time, detours, the longer routes if it is safe and if my fuel allows.

 There were instances that these planes were too far away on hoggit/trough the inferno, and i was being detected around 60nm, locked at around 30nm with grade lock and when i went to check on the f10 map, and i use the ruler, it tells me roughtly 45nm + the EWRS  to confirm it.

 Flying behind terrain, hills, gorges saved me a few times and i even got some ai pilot kills.

the day in question that i have posted this issue, has been occurring for a while specially at night. I took my gunner to teach him how to use the tads and do the LOAL attack and there were instances where the flak saw me trough trees arriving at the place we were supposed to practice on the 162 training server, my gunner and i were shocked that the flak radar ( i do not remember the name of it, i'll have to look on dcs later) was seeing us behind cover. i do believe it was the sukhumi airbase < it was 2months ago>.

I fly low to avoid detection in the first place, those were the issues bothering me for a long while and i just came up to report that, i was browsing trough the sections to see if someone reported the same thing and apparently have not found yet.

I flew the huey since 2014 and ofc no rwr and i was always oblivious to the dangers, i had no metrics on this matter, with the apache rwr its apparent someone is searching, detected and if he/she wants to lock you, you will be locked.

[ShuRugal]

Just wanted to chime in with my experience being detected when i feel i shouldn't in the AH-64.

For me, the biggest problem is surface radar units like S300 or 2S6 detecting me while i cannot detect them back because there are trees or buildings in the way.

The way i've been circumventing this issue has been to use George, who can cheat and see ground radar units using whatever broken mechanic allows them to cheat and see me, but it kinda breaks immersion to be detected through a dense forest or buildings, sometimes even through actual terrain(!), and have to use George to magic-detect the offending unit in return.

[Floyd1212]

Yeah, I really hope ED fixes this "visibility" issue through buildings and trees when the Kiowa comes out.  If you can't stay masked behind cover and just pop the mast above the roof or tree-line to spot targets, what's the point?  And I would expect an enemy unit would not immediately detect you with just the MMS poking up.  I fear I may be expecting too much...

[Guest]

On 4/23/2024 at 3:00 PM, NeedzWD40 said:

They don't even need radar to see you. Assume that everything AI knows about you at all times and plan appropriately. At least in the case of jets, they come in low and slow, so it's very easy to ambush them with ADA or friendly fighters. Alternatively, someone with a Gazelle and Mistral might be up for helo escort.

Sucks, but that's what we have to work with right now.

I wonder if the fact that the game Engine knows where everything is, could be turned into a (not 100% realistic) way for George to freely call out targets.  

Edited May 15, 2024 by Gunslinger52

[NineLine]

Guys when you see things like this, save a track and submit it, the more user tracks I can throw at the team the better. It all helps. Thanks. 

[Floyd1212]

It sure would be nice if there was a button to "save the previous 60 seconds as a track file" that you could press at any time to get a track snip to share.

[NineLine]

On 4/29/2024 at 10:44 AM, Floyd1212 said:

Yeah, I really hope ED fixes this "visibility" issue through buildings and trees when the Kiowa comes out.  If you can't stay masked behind cover and just pop the mast above the roof or tree-line to spot targets, what's the point?  And I would expect an enemy unit would not immediately detect you with just the MMS poking up.  I fear I may be expecting too much...

If you can show me examples of AI seeing through buildings I will check. This was fixed long ago and in my tests buildings are blocking AI. Trees are an issue and reported, but also it really depends on what sensors the AI has, how much cover you are actually under, etc. 

[Tom P]

On 5/22/2024 at 11:43 PM, NineLine said:

Guys when you see things like this, save a track and submit it, the more user tracks I can throw at the team the better. It all helps. Thanks. 

The thing about tracks is most of the time they're too big to share here. Especially in the 64 when the average flight to a "combat" zone take more than 15 minutes. A 15min trackfile is still to big to send.

Go on a server like rotorheads and you're flying 20+ minutes before you see action.

Edited May 26, 2024 by Tom P
Correction.

[NineLine]

Well, I can create different scenarios that the AI shouldn't see and most times they do not see. I have reported a while back about trees not blocking AI well enough but buildings that I have seen block view and night is pretty decent at hiding from AI unless you are lit up, etc. If you can at least describe the scenario, map, units etc I can recreate and test myself.

The reason a track works best is that the mission could have something affecting the AI as well, although I totally understand the track size issues. ANother option is reaching out to the Server owner and telling them what they saw and have them make sure there is nothing off in the mission and if not see if they will reach out to me as well. 

[AirSenpai]

On 5/26/2024 at 2:40 AM, NineLine said:

Well, I can create different scenarios that the AI shouldn't see and most times they do not see. I have reported a while back about trees not blocking AI well enough but buildings that I have seen block view and night is pretty decent at hiding from AI unless you are lit up, etc. If you can at least describe the scenario, map, units etc I can recreate and test myself.

The reason a track works best is that the mission could have something affecting the AI as well, although I totally understand the track size issues. ANother option is reaching out to the Server owner and telling them what they saw and have them make sure there is nothing off in the mission and if not see if they will reach out to me as well. 

Yeah indeed and i agree and in my case the nav lights/ collision lighs are always off, i only use them on the farp/air base when lading. fence in off and fence out only reaching the airbase to land/rearm/refuel.

[Gracey]

On 5/24/2024 at 2:04 PM, NineLine said:

If you can show me examples of AI seeing through buildings I will check. This was fixed long ago and in my tests buildings are blocking AI. Trees are an issue and reported, but also it really depends on what sensors the AI has, how much cover you are actually under, etc. 

Sorry to necro this a bit @NineLine but, at least as far as I can see one unit is totally seeing through buildings. 
This guy here is just a ECS, not even sure why he has a radar, maybe because he is attached to a Radome. 

I am in the Kiowa, sitting behind the building

Using s simple detection script, I got this information from him:

Line of Sight, as calculated by land.isVisible, confirms that I am indeed not visible. However he things I am, and one radar at that.

I did more testing on this topic after my first post about radars not working correctly. Seen here

After that specific type of Radar issue was resolved another user posted an issue he found. Seems it was the same issue, I thought that was odd and decided to further test again to see why or what units it was effecting. Seen here

I think I may just make a new post with all my findings over the past week so that they are in one topic. Seems things get lost, specially when marked "Fixed" or "Resolved" Even if they are NOT(after further testing)

[AirSenpai]

On 6/17/2024 at 10:53 PM, Gracey said:

Sorry to necro this a bit @NineLine but, at least as far as I can see one unit is totally seeing through buildings. 
This guy here is just a ECS, not even sure why he has a radar, maybe because he is attached to a Radome. 

I am in the Kiowa, sitting behind the building

Using s simple detection script, I got this information from him:

Line of Sight, as calculated by land.isVisible, confirms that I am indeed not visible. However he things I am, and one radar at that.

I did more testing on this topic after my first post about radars not working correctly. Seen here

After that specific type of Radar issue was resolved another user posted an issue he found. Seems it was the same issue, I thought that was odd and decided to further test again to see why or what units it was effecting. Seen here

I think I may just make a new post with all my findings over the past week so that they are in one topic. Seems things get lost, specially when marked "Fixed" or "Resolved" Even if they are NOT(after further testing)

they also see trough vegetation

[Gracey]

On 4/7/2025 at 11:53 PM, AirSenpai said:

they also see trough vegetation

Yeah I've noticed this a little bit. But not always. I am not sure what is going on there. This is the same for the Apache radar as well oddly enough.