How We Want To Fly?

[FierceLV]

Hi.

While flying the Ka-50, I have noticed that the KU-31 Shkval can't lock onto destroyed wrecks of vehicles, even after the flame and smoke is gone (in this scenario it is hard to distinguish the wrecks of vehicles from live targets, same like in the real world, which is how it must be.

So I think, if on a Shkval screen there is a live tank and a wreck of the tank, the pilot must have the possibility to lock onto the wreck of a tank due to failure to distinguish the actual target from a dead target, and waste the precious Vikhr ATGM, which costs big $$$$$.

In this case, if the Vikhr missile is wasted, that means that the pilot has poor competency - which is a big minus for the pilot.

So, Pilots, what do you think? How WE want to fly?

Do we need a help from a machine to chose to be dumb? Or should we start playing seriously, like in the real world?

Totally up to you, but keep in mind that the real world will not forgive stupidity.

[Pavlin_33]

I think in RL it's easier to see that a tank has already burned, than in DCS.

 

[WarbossPetross]

I think it's just the game engine marking an object as inactive, so the Shkval doesn't bother with it. Mind you, this is the original DCS module from times before ray-tracing and whatnot, so it may not be emulating signal contrast lock mechanics from the real aircraft (which might take more processing power than was at hand back then) and just makes do in a believable fashion. Maybe they will model that later, who knows?

[Pavlin_33]

10 hours ago, WarbossPetross said:

I think it's just the game engine marking an object as inactive, so the Shkval doesn't bother with it. Mind you, this is the original DCS module from times before ray-tracing and whatnot, so it may not be emulating signal contrast lock mechanics from the real aircraft (which might take more processing power than was at hand back then) and just makes do in a believable fashion. Maybe they will model that later, who knows?

I've heard this lock contrast mentioned many times before, but in all the cockpit videos od Ka-52 it seems that the operator is the one mantaining the lock on target.

There is a possibility that the Ka-50 has it and Ka-52 doesn't also.

[bies]

It's just an old simplification of the game during the time Ka-50 was being made. In more recent and more realistically modeled modules like Apache, you can lock any target, including destroyed or damaged, Hellfire L will hit the wreckages as well.

[Czar66]

18 minutes ago, bies said:

It's just an old simplification of the game during the time Ka-50 was being made. In more recent and more realistically modeled modules like Apache, you can lock any target, including destroyed or damaged, Hellfire L will hit the wreckages as well.

Black Shark 3 is almost just as recent as the Apache and the devs should of had updated the logic on par with other modules. I get the point of the original module age, but I don't think it is a valid argument as they released paid upgrades and the Shkval is a major core component.

[bies]

21 minutes ago, Czar66 said:

and the devs should of had updated the logic on par with other modules.

Yes. They definitely should. It require some new logic though so it may not be a trivial task.