Yellonet Posted November 3, 2005 Posted November 3, 2005 Yes, this is my dream... Just like Vietnam, and Falcon 3.0... Imagine, modern day "Il-2", where we actually get to see each others' amazing 3D models and aircraft skins from the cockpit, instead of just external-view forum screenshots... All thanks to ECM. I'd rep you again! but it won't let me; seems I've already repped everybody in sight. It's the thought that counts? :) -SKUhmm... but is that how air warfare is fought today, or a few years in the future (LockOn)? 1 i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5
Yellonet Posted November 3, 2005 Posted November 3, 2005 Pretty much bang on but as pilots and WSOs get more exposure to ECM, they learn very quickly to recognise it and to tactically employ their aircraft to get around it.And that is why it would be nice to have it modeled. Players will have more stuff to learn and improve upon :D i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5
Yellonet Posted November 3, 2005 Posted November 3, 2005 Hey guys... you could almost think that radar and electronic warfair is some of the most advanced things to model in the game, maybe you could even write a whole book about it!! </sarcasm> i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5
SwingKid Posted November 3, 2005 Posted November 3, 2005 Uhmm... but is that how air warfare is fought today, or a few years in the future (LockOn)? Hehe... I like you too. You're the first person I ever saw who said Lock On was set "a few years in the future." :) I don't think ECM is so hard to model as missile physics. THAT is really hard IMHO, but just as important. The ECM prevents the missile from using an optimal trajectory, and thus increases its drag and shortens its range. So in order for ECM to bring us properly into WVR combat, we need good missile physics too, that knows how to behave differently when fired on different trajectories. It's a dream, but I think it's possible... one day... if we ever stop making helicopters. ;) -SK
Yellonet Posted November 3, 2005 Posted November 3, 2005 Hehe... I like you too. You're the first person I ever saw who said Lock On was set "a few years in the future." :)Isn't it... anymore? I don't think ECM is so hard to model as missile physics. THAT is really hard IMHO, but just as important. The ECM prevents the missile from using an optimal trajectory, and thus increases its drag and shortens its range. So in order for ECM to bring us properly into WVR combat, we need good missile physics too, that knows how to behave differently when fired on different trajectories. It's a dream, but I think it's possible... one day... if we ever stop making helicopters. ;) -SKSo... we have a anti-helo person here :o Hehe... nah, seriously, I care more about the general improvements to the game that 1.2 will hopefully bring than I care about the Hokum. And physics in games get better all the time, if they implement some nice physics engine that can model air, gravity and all that somewhat realistically they should be able to "just" make the missiles with the right power engine/rocket and their correct speed and stuff and the physics would then force the missiles to behave like they would in reality... now then.. get going ED I just told you how to do it! :p i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5
leafer Posted November 4, 2005 Posted November 4, 2005 man...my head hurts! now I understand what it takes to qualify for a beta tester position for these sims. more importantly, y they never picked me. teh... What's "WVR combat"? ED have been taking my money since 1995. :P
EvilBivol-1 Posted November 4, 2005 Posted November 4, 2005 man...my head hurts! now I understand what it takes to qualify for a beta tester position for these sims. Haha! You don't know the error of your words... :D SK, I'll get back to you with a PM, in school right now. - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules
Yellonet Posted November 4, 2005 Posted November 4, 2005 man...my head hurts! now I understand what it takes to qualify for a beta tester position for these sims. more importantly, y they never picked me. teh... What's "WVR combat"?Within Visual Range, as opposed to BVR, Beyond Visual Range. i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5
raptorman Posted November 4, 2005 Posted November 4, 2005 What's "WVR combat"? Something you don't need if you're good at beyond visual range combat :D
MBot Posted November 4, 2005 Posted November 4, 2005 What's "WVR combat"? It's the fun part of aircombat ;)
Force_Feedback Posted November 4, 2005 Posted November 4, 2005 It's the fun part of aircombat ;) Unless you're in a su-25T ;) No Su-27 ECM manual translations for you, terrorist thread hijackers :p Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy:
SUBS17 Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 Hi Raptorman, First let me say welcome to our forum, and thanks for your article! I often visit the Frugalsworld board for a second opinion, and notwithstanding some of my earlier comments in this thread, there are many knowledgeable posters there. Even the topic I linked, that at first didn't get any replies, eventually evolved into a fascinating discussion. The radar in Lock On is IMHO more complex than in Falcon 4 - there are two doppler notches modelled that vary according to fighter/radar type, and sidelobe noise that affects detection range at low altitude - realistic features I've never seen in a sim before. The ECM on the other hand is not much more realistic than in Falcon 4. It seems to be a very wide-band, low-power pure-noise jamming that is modelled, allowing bearing-only tracking and also a significant burn-through range. At least, it looks a little nicer and easier to recognize in the HUD and HDD, nice vertical strobes that you can lock onto without any range information at all. If I'm not mistaken, an ECM target co-bearing with a non-ECM target can even mask it with its own jamming - something I don't think is implemented in F4. My personal gripe is that we often get requests for ECCM features that lack a solid understanding of ECM in the first place. I would love to see the ECM in Lock On improved so that you could no longer make lofted-missile attacks on ECM targets, and so that you would need to use triangulation maneuvering to compute the range to an ECM emitter, but if there is a 25-nm burn-through range as exists in other sims, none of that ECCM stuff is ever going to make sense. Sometimes people seem to want to carry over their favourite features from their own imagination, or from their other favourite sims - like "picking up ECM targets in Standby mode". From your post it sounds like in addition to a detailed review of Falcon 4, you've also done some research of real-world techniques. Have you seen Stimson's "Introduction to Airborne Radar"? There are many interesting details in that book. I don't know why more sim makers don't try to use it, instead of inventing their own "abstract" ECM that is never quite realistic. It blows away a lot of the veil of official secrecy from the topic, and seems to be just waiting to be discovered and used by an enterprising team of programmers. Thanks for interest, -SK I notice that the ECM in F4AF also models Gate Stealers. It is an interesting effect, I observed this while on CAP with friendlys arriving in my area with ECM on. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
SwingKid Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 I notice that the ECM in F4AF also models Gate Stealers. It is an interesting effect, I observed this while on CAP with friendlys arriving in my area with ECM on. Azimuth or range? Azimuth gate-stealer should be filtered away by a slotted-array radar antenna. -SK
muamshai Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 If ED is going to model everything perfectly then Uncle Sam will kidnap them -or- we should be ready to pay 19,000$/copy. Think about the efforts, the complex mathematical calculations and the man hours to make a sim. Also, it is really hard to model such things for multiplayer (consider the amount of exchange of data between server and 6+ clients). ED is here to develop flight sim for home users, and for people who can effort a copy of sim in less than 100$. Give them some credit:) Of course it is good to fix minor things (like blast radius of bombs and so on) but expecation of heavy mathematical implementations.....:dreaming: This space is available for your advertisement
Yellonet Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 No one is asking for perfection, we're just asking for a bit more realism for each update. And multiplayer isn't really an issue as most calculations should be done server-side and the actual data that needs to be sent isn't all that large. A dedicated server would be nice. We're giving them credit, they're the best, simple as that, that's why I'm here. I'm just trying to inspire them to do an even better job at making this sim better, it's already a really good sim, but in all honesty we all know that there are much to improve. i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5
TucksonSonny Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 If ED is going to model everything perfectly then Uncle Sam will kidnap them -or- we should be ready to pay 19,000$/copy. Think about the efforts, the complex mathematical calculations and the man hours to make a sim. Also, it is really hard to model such things for multiplayer (consider the amount of exchange of data between server and 6+ clients). ED is here to develop flight sim for home users, and for people who can effort a copy of sim in less than 100$. Give them some credit:) Of course it is good to fix minor things (like blast radius of bombs and so on) but expecation of heavy mathematical implementations.....:dreaming: You don’t need necessary heavy mathematical implementations for simulating stuff. Implementing an effect can be done with simple programming tricks. Complex stealth technology you can simulate by simply decrease the lock-on range for example. BTW, CPU’s love heavy mathematical calculations. DELL Intel® Core™ i7 Processor 940 2,93 GHz @3 GHz, 8 MB cache | 8.192 MB 1.067 MHz Tri Channel DDR3 | 512 MB ATI® Radeon™ 4850 | 500 GB 7200 rpm Serial ATA | Samsung SM 2693 HM 25.5 " | HOTAS Cougar Thrustmaster |
Guest IguanaKing Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 Well said, Yellonet. Its like in social situations....if your buddy is going out on a hot date, if you notice something obvious that's gonna immediately put that fine young lady off of him, such as maybe a huge chunk of spinach caught in his teeth, you'd tell him about it...right? A real friend would do that. :D
SUBS17 Posted November 20, 2005 Posted November 20, 2005 Azimuth or range? Azimuth gate-stealer should be filtered away by a slotted-array radar antenna. -SK Range from what I've seen, very cool to observe. I never realised before just what was going on. [sIGPIC] [/sIGPIC]
Recommended Posts