Is there a way to identify targets with the Shkval?

[GGTharos]

You can do this in-game. The PV-800 lets you store 10 target points ... up to you to recall what's what though.

[Karon]

Hey,

I know that I'm a bit OT, but I think that the best way to identify a target is knowing how it is done. Therefore I started two docs about the vehicles and the air defenses contained in DCS.

 

These are actually far from being finished, I still have to verify everything and I still miss a lot of images (and it's still in italian in some parts). When I'll finish them I'll release them in a dedicated thread, as I've already done with TARS and Sharing Data.

 

Hope can be useful!

 

www.fightercombatsims.net/ServizioUtenti/red.devil/FCS-Threats-AirDefense.pdf

 

www.fightercombatsims.net/ServizioUtenti/red.devil/FCS-Threats-Vehicles.pdf

 

Nummero Uno

it's "Numero uno" ;)

[PhoenixBvo]

Looking very nice :thumbup:

As for a bit of constuctive criticism: I know the docs aren't finished yet, but some of the Shkval images look distorted. And perhaps you can make two versions. One for the A-10C and one for the KA-50 and use only the corresponding imagery. You could then make the images larger for easier ID and add some more info, like armament and engagement range.

 

Keep up the good work.

[Karon]

Thank you for your suggestion Phoenix:)

 

The orginal idea was to create a document for the Ka-50 only with 3 images: close (1km), medium range (4km), far (10km). However there weren't always significant differences. Therefore I have decided to leave only one pic from the Shkval and use Tog's ones instead (isometric and IR).

I know that some pics is distorted, it's Shkval's fault. However, when you are in battle, you will see these images, not some perfect one. You will no probably engage within 5-6km from the target, so what's the point of having fully-zoomed images (However, you are right, some images are event too much distorted and I will replace them)?

 

I try to explain better my point of view:

http://war-hawks.net/TVIMAGE/TVView/TVIMAGENATO.htm

The images here are very nice and detailed, but.. well, if I find myself so close to an enemy tank I wouldn't stay there an look at those nice tracks! :D

I need to identify a target from distance, and some important details maybe don't appear so far.

 

add some more info, like armament and engagement range.

Some info are already written, for each vehicle are indicated:

- main weapons (range in [m] and [ft], type, caliber)

- seconday weapons (range in [m] and [ft], type, caliber)

- nationality

- role

- speed (road, cross country, swimming - not for each vehicle)

- armour (not for each vehicle)

 

In the empty space below the weapon/equipment table I would like to add some sort of comparison diagram or graph but I still miss some data.

For example to draw the behaviour of a 2A42 (BMP2's autocannon) I need to know the maximum traverse angle and the maximum distance before the bullets start to lose energy.

[_Heater_]

Well done m8 :)

[PhoenixBvo]

You will no probably engage within 5-6km from the target, so what's the point of having fully-zoomed images

 

...

 

I try to explain better my point of view:

http://war-hawks.net/TVIMAGE/TVView/TVIMAGENATO.htm

The images here are very nice and detailed, but.. well, if I find myself so close to an enemy tank I wouldn't stay there an look at those nice tracks! :D

I need to identify a target from distance, and some important details maybe don't appear so far.

 

I didn't mean close-up Shkval images, you already have close-ups. I meant that for printing purposes and quick combat reference it might help to simply make the images bigger on the page, but still showing the target at a realistic range.

 

It appears that the aspect ratio (height/width) for the Shkval is different (more towards a square) than for the Litening TGP. If you simply adjust the aspect ratio for the Shkval images, you should be fine.

 

That info sounds already quite ambitious. The weapon angagement envelope should only be added for significant threats to the KA-50 I think. But indeed, the BMP2's 2A42 definitely is a threat, as are the main guns of tanks... Hmm, good luck getting those ballistics straight :book:

Edited April 27, 2012 by PhoenixBvo

[Karon]

I didn't mean close-up Shkval images, you already have close-ups. I meant that for printing purposes and quick combat reference it might help to simply make the images bigger on the page, but still showing the target at a realistic range.

I didn't understand what did you mean before, sorry. This is a good idea but I don't know where I can place that image in the page. I could cut an A-10 pic, leaving the rendering, an isometric from the A-10 an one, bigger, from the Shkval..

 

It appears that the aspect ratio (height/width) for the Shkval is different (more towards a square) than for the Litening TGP. If you simply adjust the aspect ratio for the Shkval images, you should be fine.

Each image has been cut out from a screenshot, I didn't change the aspect ratio (nor for TGP or Shkval). Excuse me but I don't get your point.

 

That info sounds already quite ambitious. The weapon angagement envelope should only be added for significant threats to the KA-50 I think. But indeed, the BMP2's 2A42 definitely is a threat, as are the main guns of tanks... Hmm, good luck getting those ballistics straight

Yep, it will be a hard work. The most difficult part will be finding reliable sources.

[PhoenixBvo]

OK, I'll have to look at the Shkval in the sim again. But it seems that your images have another height-to-width ratio (causing the vehicles to look more elongated) than in the sim.

I only mean, it should look similar to what you see on screen. So just check that and if necessary adjust the height-to-width ratio to match.

(It is also possible that your setup has the Shkval slightly distorted, e.g. if you use a second monitor for the Shkval.)

[Karon]

It seems but it's correct. Look here: http://i.imgur.com/BJemj.jpg

this one is distorted too, even if the pic seems to be taken from in front of the Shkval. Mine are from pilot's pov, so maybe are a bit more distorted.

 

I don't use any second monitor. I just spot, lock, zoom in and take the screenshot :)