Aircraft Visibility

[Flagrum]

6 I can find :)

lol ... omg. now as you say it ... :doh:

i really did not see the other two ...

 

edit:

relevant:

[winz]

From A-10C Warthog Pilot Interview on SimHq

http://www.simhq.com/air-combat/air-combat-interviews/warthog-pilot-interview.html

 

Q:Erik: What issues do you have going from the simulator to the real plane? What are the differences or challenges there?

 

Captain Lanto: The challenges you know is probably just keeping the software on the simulators up-to-date – as we change a lot and it’s hard to mimic everything in the simulator that we do in the aircraft. Also, just the visuals really. When you think about it, I can see certain things from 15,000 feet with my naked eye up here but it’s very hard to replicate that on a computer screen where I may be able to see a truck driving along the road but on a computer screen … maybe not so much. Those are the kind of drawbacks that you have with a simulator but manipulating the HOTAS and switchology are exactly the same as in the jet.

 

Yes, finding camouflaged units is hard. But in sim you have problem to spot things, that are easy to spot IRL, i.e. vehicles moving on the road.

There are also other topics that make spotting targets such a problem in SIM - mission design and player - a.i. interaction (i.e. the ability to be talked to the target)

Edited April 15, 2014 by winz

[PFunk1606688187]

Are your fishermen camouflaged? Incidentally, there are sources for air to air visibility, but I haven't seen studies of air to ground visibility (though I'm certain they exist). I've been up high, had a look down low, too. Yeah, I can see all the contrasty cars.

 

But there are images out there - if you know who to ask for them - where a certain area contains military vehicles and you can't see squat. And that's from a couple thousand feet up - don't know the slant range, but it didn't seem all that far.

 

Perhaps we should also bear in mind the difference between not being able to spot camouflaged targets that you don't know are there versus being talked onto their positions and then being able to see them once you're aware of them. We've all had that moment where we had someone trying to get us to see something and then it suddenly becoming apparent to us and then afterwards its easier to find it again whenever you cast your eye over it.

 

Also, since when do we ever see vehicles in DCS camouflaged? Maybe I missed the "Perform" Camouflage" waypoint action in the ME.

[Wolf Rider]

The paint scheme on the vehicles and planes is camouflage... it would be real nice though to have a "perform" advanced camouflage function to apply some branches, dig in etc to ground vehicles etc... real nice

[PFunk1606688187]

The paint scheme on the vehicles and planes is camouflage...

 

Its hardly the same as camo nets and twigs and all that good stuff they do when they want to hide. Infantry dug in are pretty much impossible to spot with the naked eye when its done right, but nobody would say they're "camouflaged" standing in the open just because they have UCP on.

 

Vehicles stationary in the middle of a field with no nets or shrubs on them, even with relevant paint, aren't what any commander would call "camouflaged" either so its a bit simplistic to just say that.

 

You're just generalizing the broad definition of the word, but its not like that statement is relevant to the specifics. I can spot vehicles in an open field just fine in DCS once I enter the critical range where the pixel resolution allows me to see them nearly as well as a real person would see them from further away.

[Wolf Rider]

Its hardly the same as camo nets and twigs and all that good stuff they do when they want to hide. Infantry dug in are pretty much impossible to spot with the naked eye when its done right, but nobody would say they're "camouflaged" standing in the open just because they have UCP on.

 

Vehicles stationary in the middle of a field with no nets or shrubs on them, even with relevant paint, aren't what any commander would call "camouflaged" either so its a bit simplistic to just say that.

 

actually, that is camouflaged... it may be effective (as the photo posted up earlier shows) or ineffective, but an attempt to conceal or blend into the local terrain through the use of materials or colour or other forms of masking (such as IR paint) is camouflage...

 

You're just generalizing the broad definition of the word, but its not like that statement is relevant to the specifics. I can spot vehicles in an open field just fine in DCS once I enter the critical range where the pixel resolution allows me to see them nearly as well as a real person would see them from further away.

 

yes, the same for anybody else ingame or in real life - once you get close enough... how you see the definition of the word as being generalised or definitive, is up to you

[PFunk1606688187]

actually, that is camouflaged... it may be effective (as the photo posted up earlier shows) or ineffective, but an attempt to conceal or blend into the local terrain through the use of materials or colour or other forms of masking (such as IR paint) is camouflage...

You're conflating the intent or attempt to camouflage to no particularly defined degree with the state of being actually camouflaged. Yours is a noun, what I was discussing was the verb and how it relates to a practical degree.

 

UCP is a perfect example. It was an attempt at camouflage, but in most cases it failed to adequately camouflage infantry in Afghanistan, hence they changed to Multicam. UCP was not very camouflaging even if it was a camouflage material.

 

Whats relevant is discussing the plausible conspicuity of typical military materiel, particularly aircraft and vehicles, in this or other sims and how it relates to real life. A tank in the open is still just a tank in the open, even if its painted green, which is different from being under a camo net laden with natural vegetation to help it blend in while being emplaced in or near a treeline or copse. The thing is there are no tanks in DCS that are done up that way so when we're talking visibility and whats realistic we're not talking about the practical kind of camouflage you'd actually see in real life with real people dressing it up.

 

In this game we've got issues with seeing things which are poorly camouflaged and how effective real life camouflage is and how well executed it is isn't much important, so when we start getting into the semantics of what the word camouflage means its just a waste of time.

 

You cannot see from the air in game what you would see at the same alt in real life, camo be damned. The whole "there are pictures where you can't see vehicles" thing is just a red herring because if you saw that picture through real eyes and then through what I guess you'd call "DCS Eyes" the real eyes would still find the vehicles, if at all possible, more readily for already clearly articulated reasons.

[Wolf Rider]

@P*Funk...

you're the one doing the semantics though, even though a lot what you have said has already been said, including by me.

So, just what is you're trying to get across to the interested readers, that may actually be helpful to the areas of the sim which could use greater attention by the developers?

[doveman]

One thing I have trouble understanding is that watching tv/video on my 720P TV looks real, so why should games need to go 4K or higher to look real?

 

I don't suppose if it would be possible to spot vehicles on the ground, from a plane at x thousand feet, whilst watching footage on my TV as easily as it would be in real-life but I reckon it would be easier than in DCS, despite the low resolution, so isn't concentrating on upping the resolution, which obviously places additional burden on the card, somewhat the wrong approach and developers should instead be looking at making the image closer to real footage (increasing terrain detail, contrast between things, etc) at 720P? Obviously this would place an extra burden on the hardware as well but it seems like it would be a more productive use of it.

[Flagrum]

One thing I have trouble understanding is that watching tv/video on my 720P TV looks real, so why should games need to go 4K or higher to look real?

 

I don't suppose if it would be possible to spot vehicles on the ground, from a plane at x thousand feet, whilst watching footage on my TV as easily as it would be in real-life but I reckon it would be easier than in DCS, despite the low resolution, so isn't concentrating on upping the resolution, which obviously places additional burden on the card, somewhat the wrong approach and developers should instead be looking at making the image closer to real footage (increasing terrain detail, contrast between things, etc) at 720P? Obviously this would place an extra burden on the hardware as well but it seems like it would be a more productive use of it.

... based on what?

[slowhand]

I took this at 3000 ft at about 80knts can you find waldo?:megalol::music_whistling::smartass:

[AtaliaA1]

He is on third base in the baseball field.

 

Ok can't really see him:) What city is this? It is a very good Photo Professional image, nice job.

[NineLine]

Ok, he can see a truck driving on a road at 15000 feet... but can he determine if its his target, is it friendly, is it civilian? Specially now a days where the enemy doesnt paint a big target on the side or top, its not always as simple as that. Again, I go back to mission design... its part of the issue, if you dont know where to look, you arent going to find much.

 

From A-10C Warthog Pilot Interview on SimHq

http://www.simhq.com/air-combat/air-combat-interviews/warthog-pilot-interview.html

 

 

 

Yes, finding camouflaged units is hard. But in sim you have problem to spot things, that are easy to spot IRL, i.e. vehicles moving on the road.

There are also other topics that make spotting targets such a problem in SIM - mission design and player - a.i. interaction (i.e. the ability to be talked to the target)

[KaspeR32]

Q:Erik: What issues do you have going from the simulator to the real plane? What are the differences or challenges there?

 

Captain Lanto: The challenges you know is probably just keeping the software on the simulators up-to-date – as we change a lot and it’s hard to mimic everything in the simulator that we do in the aircraft. Also, just the visuals really. When you think about it, I can see certain things from 15,000 feet with my naked eye up here but it’s very hard to replicate that on a computer screen where I may be able to see a truck driving along the road but on a computer screen … maybe not so much. Those are the kind of drawbacks that you have with a simulator but manipulating the HOTAS and switchology are exactly the same as in the jet.

 

^ This. This pretty much sums it up. Ever try to look for a convoy at 15,000 feet in DCS? Without a zoomed in FOV, it's near impossible. Same goes for airplanes. Same goes for all the detail in the game quite honestly. With a zoomed in FOV, things start to look pretty accurate, but we loose our peripheral vision in the game. (not to mention keeping Track IR steady when you're zoomed in full.) I do understand why it's difficult to fix this problem, because if you scale up vehicles to match a more "zoomed FOV" the vehicles no longer match the terrain (or whatever is behind them.) So it is a compromise, but to be honest, Smart scaling vehicles/planes seems to be one of the best options for overcoming the 1080p monitor.

[slowhand]

LOL Naw thats Bob the Grounds keeper:smartass: thats Jacksonville,Florida..

[Haukka81]

If you just want an import, that may be easy, but no guarantees.

 

Thank YOU!!!

 

Thats is really good option to have. Forced import from host, so playground it's same to all. :)

 

 

 

Thanks!

 

 

 

:thumbup:

[KaspeR32]

Ok, he can see a truck driving on a road at 15000 feet... but can he determine if its his target, is it friendly, is it civilian? Specially now a days where the enemy doesnt paint a big target on the side or top, its not always as simple as that. Again, I go back to mission design... its part of the issue, if you dont know where to look, you arent going to find much.

 

Think of it like this.

 

What's easier?

 

to spot a moving vehicle on a road, THEN determine if it's a target, or friendly, or civilian.

 

-OR-

 

to not be able to spot anything moving on a road, and search every square foot of road surface until you come across your target?

 

So, we're back to square one. How can we possibly make the sim compensate for the poor resolution and FOV of our computer monitors compared to real life eyesight?

Edited April 15, 2014 by KaspeR32

[winz]

I took this at 3000 ft at about 80knts can you find waldo?:megalol::music_whistling::smartass:

Dude, if your eyesight is so blurry then you should really see a doctor ;)

 

Ok, he can see a truck driving on a road at 15000 feet... but can he determine if its his target, is it friendly, is it civilian? Specially now a days where the enemy doesnt paint a big target on the side or top, its not always as simple as that. Again, I go back to mission design... its part of the issue, if you dont know where to look, you arent going to find much.

What? Debating wheter or not he can determine if it's friendly or civilian is pretty much useless when in the sim you're not even able to spot that truck.

Edited April 15, 2014 by winz

[NineLine]

Dude, if your eyesight is so blurry then you should really see a doctor ;)

 

 

What? Debating whether or not he can determine if it's friendly or civilian is pretty much useless when in the sim you're not even able to spot that truck.

 

 

Not trying to debate anything, I know things need to improve in the sim, said it earlier in the thread, but also you need to put realistic scenarios as examples... Is a A-10C pilot trying to spot a single truck at 15000 feet with his eyes and has been sent to some vague location to try and find the needle in a haystack...

[MBot]

Not trying to debate anything, I know things need to improve in the sim, said it earlier in the thread, but also you need to put realistic scenarios as examples... Is a A-10C pilot trying to spot a single truck at 15000 feet with his eyes and has been sent to some vague location to try and find the needle in a haystack...

 

Roaming the enemy's rear searching for road traffic is a classic aircraft mission and has been done a lot in the history of warfare. Or to stay with your A-10 example, A-10A in the 80s in Germany would have probably done more autonomous tank-hunting in friedly-free killzones than CAS :)

[slowhand]

my eyes Blurry? Pass it or put it down :megalol::smartass:

[doveman]

... based on what?

 

Based on the fact that there seems to be a lot more detail/contrast in real video, making it easier to distinguish or pick out objects.

[doveman]

I took this at 3000 ft at about 80knts can you find waldo?:megalol::music_whistling::smartass:

 

Have you got a picture of waldo, I need some sort of intel at least ;)

 

Maybe you could take a similar screenshot in DCS and we can compare them to see whether I'm justified in thinking that it's easier to pick out things in real video/pictures?

 

Of course, static pictures aren't a great thing to test the theory with as in video/gameplay, things are going to be moving, which can make them easier to spot (of course, it works both ways and things like trees swaying, etc can distract your attention as well) but it would still be an interesting comparison.

[McBlemmen]

If i have a general idea of my target's location i just turn my TGP to whot and turn the gain to the max

[wolfstriked]

What makes you think a dev should post?

 

Just would like to hear what they have thought about this issue.