Optimising spotting bandits in VR

[Hadeda]

I'm trying to get into warbird and cold-war PvP but struggling to spot bandits and feel I'm at a disadvantage to those with flatscreens. What's the general consensus on optimising your ability to spot planes both far and close in VR?

Is a lower resolution always better? Use quad views or not? Upscaling (DLSS) on or off? Does anti-aliasing make it better or worse? Sharpening? Lower Gamma? 

Using a Quest Pro with Virtual Desktop.

Any thoughts on personal experience would be appreciated! 

[speed-of-heat]

so i would set spotting dots to 2 pixels, if you are using quadviews or DLSS, both of which will limit your ability to see things (as it can get "rounded out")  same with anti-aliasing 

[Tensorial_Architect]

Well said, Speed. 

Edited April 7 by Tensorial_Architect

[Stellatny45]

On 4/7/2025 at 3:19 AM, speed-of-heat said:

so i would set spotting dots to 2 pixels

How to set that?

[jackd]

Options, gameplay .... but to be honest, 2 pix is still very mediocre  ...

I like DCS a lot because of all the often 3rd party options, ships, (drive-able vehicles.

But the flying around & dogfighting etc is done graphically better in IL2 greatbattles, even Rise of Flight.

[Hadeda]

So here's how I've set up my warbird/cold-war PvP profile for DCS:

- 2 pixel spotting dots

- Keep super-sampling to 1.0 in DCS and one notch below 'god mode' in VD

- Quad views off 

- DLSS off, no anti-aliasing like MSAA

- lowered gamma from 2 to 1.8 in the hope it will help bring out bandits a bit more

- some basic sharpening in VD but otherwise no further sharpening in DCS settings

- running at 90mhz

It seems to help but further testing required...

[Joch1955]

Given the nature of fast jet combat in the game, I don't find much of a difference between VR and monitors in spotting. 2 Pixel spotting dots will help since under perfect conditions, the dots will stick out at 20+ miles.

What really helps though is knowing where to look and using all your sensors (AWACS, radar, RWR, wingmen, etc.) and visual clues (contrails, engine smoke) to know where to focus your attention.

[Hadeda]

On 4/10/2025 at 12:16 PM, Joch1955 said:

Given the nature of fast jet combat in the game, I don't find much of a difference between VR and monitors in spotting. 2 Pixel spotting dots will help since under perfect conditions, the dots will stick out at 20+ miles.

What really helps though is knowing where to look and using all your sensors (AWACS, radar, RWR, wingmen, etc.) and visual clues (contrails, engine smoke) to know where to focus your attention.

I'm talking about warbirds and cold war jets. I don't have any issues locating and locking up bandits in the hornet or viper.

[Morat]

My issue is the mid-range between spotting dot and 3D model. If I fly straight at another plane there's a definite phase when the 3D model is invisible/very hard to spot before the range falls enough and the target grows enough to be seen.

[hind75]

20nm = dot
10nm = invisible, you lost your SA
5nm = 3d model popup

you died

I think main spotting problem is they don't reflect various lights until 2-3nm (include ground unit), The human eye has evolved to instantly detect subtle changes in light but DCS  don't

Edited April 17 by hind75

[SharpeXB]

29 minutes ago, hind75 said:

20nm = dot
10nm = invisible, you lost your SA
5nm = 3d model popup

5nm is a realistic range for spotting a small fighter aircraft. The spotting dot is the problem. 20nm isn’t realistic at all and then there’s the inevitable transition to the 3D model where the bandit will “vanish”. So just turn off the spotting dots. Solved. 

[hind75]

https://youtu.be/FvrJmmYx7H0?si=fMLbHGh-1hYSk8YM

 

 

Edited April 17 by hind75

[Morat]

I think 5nm is too close, but I can agree that 20nm is optimistic. I'd compromise at 10nm for a WW2 fighter for spotting dots and the 3D model builds around/ontop of the spotting dot. I think colour is also important. Black dots are easy to spot, they should be similar to the colour of the target so there's good chance they'll be lost against the ground anyway.

In any event, the targets should be visible to VR users just as they are to 50" TV users.

8 minutes ago, hind75 said:

https://youtu.be/FvrJmmYx7H0?si=fMLbHGh-1hYSk8YM

 

 

Do we know how far away that jet was?

[hind75]

70,000ft chinese balloon (25-30m)

58,000ft (about 10nm, but video not taken right below its very far distance) F-22 (18.5m)  looks also bright white DOT because light reflection

 little bit zoomed, but its  phone camera... you can see much bigger with your naked eyes  i think 2.0 vision pilot can spot

Remember this video taken ground level, higher you go less air dense, further you can see

Edited April 18 by hind75

[USA_Recon]

On 4/17/2025 at 1:05 PM, SharpeXB said:

5nm is a realistic range for spotting a small fighter aircraft. The spotting dot is the problem. 20nm isn’t realistic at all and then there’s the inevitable transition to the 3D model where the bandit will “vanish”. So just turn off the spotting dots. Solved. 

Agree, the debacle of “dots”, or artificial pixels is really bad .  I wish ED would just stop catering this study sim to the gamers who think seeing black blobs at 20 miles is realistic .

its not even very well done, the transition to LOD is terrible as well

[RoboHackfeld]

So you guys would say, spotting a plane from up to 5nm is realistic, everything above that should not be realistic? 

I`m looking for information like that now for quiet a few years and never found a specific point where someone says, "you can not spot a plane that is above XX distance". Would be nice to get some information from real fighter pilots. 

 

Beside the tweaking for better performance in relation to good graphics, the spotting of other fighters is my major issue since I am in VR. 

 

And what I found out so far: 

No AA is better than MSAA is better than DLSS.

But I think in my last test ist was like: 

No AA ~ 13nm (A10CII)

MSAA 4x ~ 11nm (A10CII)

DLSS ~ 8nm (A10CII)

All tested in VD - high; PD 1.2 - with my Quest 2. 

 

Since I moved from VD to Meta Link because of performance I have to update this test. Maybe will do it today. 

 

The Spotting Dots Feature, I really dont like. Its just not realistic and looks awfull. 

Edited April 24 by RoboHackfeld

[SharpeXB]

5 hours ago, RoboHackfeld said:

So you guys would say, spotting a plane from up to 5nm is realistic, everything above that should not be realistic?

It depends on the size of the aircraft and the aspect. A large modern fighter like an F-14 from the top view vs a small one like a Bf-109 from head on. 

5 hours ago, RoboHackfeld said:

I`m looking for information like that now for quiet a few years and never found a specific point where someone says, "you can not spot a plane that is above XX distance". Would be nice to get some information from real fighter pilots.

There are of course many real world studies on this. They are usually cited here since this topic comes up a lot. The bottom line is the real values are a lot less than many people realize. 

[RoboHackfeld]

Well I got an idea.... dont tell me why I havent done this earlier...  I asked mighty ChatGPT

 

The Answere: 

 

The distance at which a jet pilot can clearly see another jet with naked eye depends on several factors including:

- Size and contrast of the other jet

- Lighting and weather condistions

- Background (e.g. sky, clouds, sun)

- Movement and speed of the aircraft

 

Under ideal conditions (clear sky, good visibility, good lightin), a pilot can visually detect another aircraft at approximately:

- 10 - 15 km (6 - 9 mi/ 5.2 - 7.8 nm) : The jet appears as a small dot

- 5 - 8 km (3 - 5 mi/ 2.6 - 4.35 nm) : Shape and direction of movement become distinguishable.

- 1 - 2 km (0.6 - 1.2 mi/ 0.5 - 1 nm) and closer: Good visual tracking, also important for tactical maneuvers in dogfights.

In a dogfight, visual detection within a few km is crucial. However, in modern combat, targets are usually acquired at much greater distances using radar and infrared sensors. 

 

So this I think could match with what we get in DCS VR. 

Edited April 24 by RoboHackfeld

[speed-of-heat]

there are a few other factors that impact VR for example your FOV in most cases doesn't match your real world FOV meaning your visual scan needs to be quicker than it would be in real life to cover the same arc in the same time, which means things get missed, which means you need more "clues" to help you find things in the sim ... my 0.02GBP

But this is all very different from the OP's original question ... and a separate topic... 

[Morat]

Yep, the original question is about VR being penalised vs 2D. I think that without spotting dots it's much harder to find planes in VR. My only evidence is flying an F14 in VR with a human RIO using a flat screen TV. He spots a/c way before I do.