TGP Spotting targets.... I'm lost

[Sn0w_Lynx]

Ok game max settings highest resolution my monitor can handle. I only play online I don't fool with single player. And I can't see targets very well.

 

Granted:

-I fly around 20000 ft to avoid strela's so I'm not going to visually aquire targets

-military's don't design their vehicles and equipment to be spotted easily

 

But I run on WHOT. Very methodical on my scans. But I don't know if it's just that thermal signatures aren't modeled well or what. I play with level and gain but if I darken the terrain to make heat stand out more it just matches the terrain to the same extent that I changed.

 

And I know for a fact that vehicles are easier to spot with flir from personal experience. A stationary vehicle that's been running transfers heat to the Ground underneath. Even during the hottest day in the desert and then you have the cool spots from the shadows. So you still have this slight bloom. And exhaust. You get where I'm going.

 

I hate! Labels. I will never use them or play a server that does. I notice that some people use f-11 and roam around to find the targets. But that's even worse! I'm all about realism. But surely there's something I'm missing to make hot targets stand out better?

 

I mean I'm scanning and I'll pass over a target 2-3 times with tgp and never see it. Then I'll bring it down for guns on some tanks and there's a strela in a alley between 2 buildings that I couldn't tell apart from the buildings heat signature because they appear to be at the same temp. But a bunch of metal in the sun would be hotter than a wood or 1story brick house

 

I apologize in advance for any spelling or grammar problems I'm on my iPhone and big fingers make it hard to type fast :)

Edited May 31, 2013 by Sn0w_Lynx
Spelling

[dotChuckles]

Hi there, unfortunately this has been discussed before. I think the situation is still the same, but the TGP uses a post process of some kind for the IR view rather then actual heat maps. It's just textures, thermal transfer isn't modelled.

 

I am quite prepared to be wrong on that though should someone with a better understanding care to comment. But as far as I'm aware that is still the case.

 

If you do a search you should come a cross some threads talking about it.

 

If it helps, I find B-HOT and playing with the contrast gives me the best results.

 

Good luck.

[Irregular programming]

Yes, there is no thermal modeling in the game.

 

That said don't just run on white hot, keep switching from WHOT to BHOT and back again, it will make it endlessly easier to spot targets.

[311Gryphon]

I'm kind of in the same boat. I try and try and try to find targets and unless there is a steer point or mark point right on top of them (and at ground level) or someone else's SPI already there that I can jump on....I can't find them. Even when I put them in there with the mission editor myself I have trouble finding targets. I don't want it to be too easy but it's very difficult.

 

I also hate labels and refuse to use them. Maybe I should until I get a little better. But anyway, I've played several of the single player missions and I do okay up until the point where the targets aren't exactly where the mission plan says they are. That's okay, because again I like realism and a little bit of a challenge. It just gets frustrating to scan and scan and scan and not find anything only to drop in and purposely allow yourself to become a target so you can hopefully see a missile launch, defeat the missile, and refine you scan to the direction the missile came from. I still can't find targets after that; however.

 

So.....I'll keep experimenting!

[npole]

It's like and it's like it's meant to be (with a A10C), the main problem is that the thermal is not reproduced correctly, so the target (sometime) blends into the the environment, but for the rest keep in mind that our main role is to engage designated target (lased, smoked, ..via JTAC.. ops), when the research area is small enough you won't have much trouble to find those targets, it's not supposed to fly high the whole map looking for targets.

[NineLine]

Well some situations its going to be tough to pick up your target right? The example you give is the target was in an alley between two buildings, depending on your flight path you might only have a few seconds where you could be picking him up anyways, so its not out of the question that you wouldnt or couldnt. Its just a matter of practice and target recognition... as with anything you will start seeing things better as you gain more experience, that said, sometimes they find really good hiding spots :)

 

Ok game max settings highest resolution my monitor can handle. I only play online I don't fool with single player. And I can't see targets very well.

 

Granted:

-I fly around 20000 ft to avoid strela's so I'm not going to visually aquire targets

-military's don't design their vehicles and equipment to be spotted easily

 

But I run on WHOT. Very methodical on my scans. But I don't know if it's just that thermal signatures aren't modeled well or what. I play with level and gain but if I darken the terrain to make heat stand out more it just matches the terrain to the same extent that I changed.

 

And I know for a fact that vehicles are easier to spot with flir from personal experience. A stationary vehicle that's been running transfers heat to the Ground underneath. Even during the hottest day in the desert and then you have the cool spots from the shadows. So you still have this slight bloom. And exhaust. You get where I'm going.

 

I hate! Labels. I will never use them or play a server that does. I notice that some people use f-11 and roam around to find the targets. But that's even worse! I'm all about realism. But surely there's something I'm missing to make hot targets stand out better?

 

I mean I'm scanning and I'll pass over a target 2-3 times with tgp and never see it. Then I'll bring it down for guns on some tanks and there's a strela in a alley between 2 buildings that I couldn't tell apart from the buildings heat signature because they appear to be at the same temp. But a bunch of metal in the sun would be hotter than a wood or 1story brick house

 

I apologize in advance for any spelling or grammar problems I'm on my iPhone and big fingers make it hard to type fast :)

[HugePanic]

according to wikipedia the sa-18 does maximum 3500m/12000ft.

 

so if you higher than 12000 you should be ok regarding SA-18.

 

That brings you 8000ft less distance to search for.

 

I recently installed tacview and analaysed some of my missions. I played "serious" mission and "dumb" missions, just to find out how the ground units engage me.

 

It is veryvery intresting to see the results.

 

Right now i am shocked how good the sa-18 really is, but it´s range is limited.

 

Know your enemy....

[NineLine]

Of course depending on the elevation changes in the area, have to watch out he isnt sitting on a hill close by, buying himself a few extra 100 feet to get ya :)

 

according to wikipedia the sa-18 does maximum 3500m/12000ft.

 

so if you higher than 12000 you should be ok regarding SA-18.

 

That brings you 8000ft less distance to search for.

 

I recently installed tacview and analaysed some of my missions. I played "serious" mission and "dumb" missions, just to find out how the ground units engage me.

 

It is veryvery intresting to see the results.

 

Right now i am shocked how good the sa-18 really is, but it´s range is limited.

 

Know your enemy....

[Watari]

Its tricky to find and identify targets only from TGP.

 

As in RL use awacs (BE bearing), JTAC and in coop your wingmen to find your tgts faster. share your SPI and tgt coord, make markpoints etc, simply communicate in TS with your flightmembers about what you/they see.

When you have that data you can plan your attacks, in and outs much better.

 

maybe that helps you on your way to tgt :-)

[NoCarrier]

so if you higher than 12000 you should be ok regarding SA-18

In my experience, you can't trust the figures on Wikipedia, at least as far as DCS goes. I can't count the number of times I got zapped by Strelas or Tunguskas at altitudes that Wikipedia says they shouldn't be able to reach.

[Spetz]

I use "binoculars". After reading A10's over Kosovo, where almost every Hog pilot used 8x or 12x gyro stabilized bino's to look for targets, I didn't feel like it was cheating to zoom in when searching. I simply establish an orbit around the area I think a targets in, as sometimes indicated by the RWR, then zoom in using the " friction" lever on the Warthog HOTAS and I'm good to go.

[taps]

In a recent incident in Afghanistan - according to media reports - taliban fighters successfully hid from A-10s overwatching the area and lured German KSK into an ambush.

 

So the guys in the real world sometimes have problems finding targets as well.

[JetlinerX]

Oh phew! I thought I was just blind, but I am having this problem too! Even with labels on it is still tough for me. :/ I am soooo n00by.

 

Though I only use BHOT because I forgot how to switch. x) So that's prolly part of my problem, since I HATE BHOT.

Edited May 31, 2013 by JetlinerX

[Nealius]

I'm in the same boat as you guys. It takes quite a bit of searching with the TGP and in some cases I forget what area I have already searched. After finding something on the TGP it's still hard to then find it with my eyeballs.

 

I haven't had much luck with WHOT though; everything is so washed out. BHOT works so much better for me.

[Sn0w_Lynx]

Yeah I do zoom also. On my example of the vehicle it was a head on and 90 angle from my plane and the vehicle was broadsided. But I thought modeling would be the case. I don't know what it is but if I get below 18000 by just an inch missile launch and it says strella 10. My only advantage is that I remember the general area targets are in when repeatedly playing same multi maps.

 

On the Afghanistan comment infantry should be very hard to spot even at low alts small heat sigs and hard to see with naked eye. But a t72 in an open field should be a lot easier. But as I said I try to be very methodical. Circle 2-5 times depending on TA size, and then go directly over a few times toget a birds eye view, then circle 2-5 times in opposite direction. Just so I can spot those hiding behind a hill or around buildings because that's realistically where'd they be.

 

And I know they shouldn't be like a match in the dark but still. Hopefully it's something that can be improved on in future patches thank you all for the replies.

Edited June 1, 2013 by Sn0w_Lynx
Corrections

[ENO]

The biggest mistake a lot of people make is going to the target area and then orbiting directly above it. This really REALLY decreases the amount of ground you can cover with the TGP- no matter what your technique with markpoints or whathaveyou.

 

What seems to work really well is to "pull over" about 15-20 miles from your target area at high altitude (15-20k) and do the scans of the area from that distance. That way your TGP covers maximum ground and you get an angle that allows for easier detection. If you are directly above a target looking through the soda straw you have a much more difficult time trying to pick out a target texture from the background texture. Things look less discernible-

 

There is NOTHING cheating about using the zoom feature... the concept is (as it was described to me) that it emulates focusing on an object- something you can't technically do "automatically" in the sim.

 

In fact I've recently heard of a way you can go in and edit the FOV to better simulate the effects / performance of the 12-18 magnification binos mentioned in many of the books I've read (Warthog and A-10s over Kosovo.)

 

I haven't made that change yet but there is definitely some value to the capability. Those with TIR just need to learn how to hold their head REALLY still when using them!

 

In Strella environments- if you're up against 9s I find that 9k is a good hard deck while the 13s I find 13k is a good hard deck. Iglas are less usefull around 8k and Tungs shouldn't reach much further than 17k. This is relative height over ground- not baro... so be aware of the local ground height over sea level!

[Nealius]

What seems to work really well is to "pull over" about 15-20 miles from your target area at high altitude (15-20k) and do the scans of the area from that distance. That way your TGP covers maximum ground and you get an angle that allows for easier detection. If you are directly above a target looking through the soda straw you have a much more difficult time trying to pick out a target texture from the background texture. Things look less discernible-

 

I think that depends on your graphics settings :p

 

In my case, even 15-20k directly over the target the ground textures are fuzzy enough that things are completely indiscernible. At 15-20nm away it's even worse. I also noticed, in my case at least. at distances greater than 10nm or so the BHOT of the TGP will show white splotches on buildings.

[Mainstay]

What i find more important to know is : Can we expect proper heat signatures on the IR when EDGE comes out?

[metheluckydonut]

What i find more important to know is : Can we expect proper heat signatures on the IR when EDGE comes out?

 

I dont think EDGE changes how the systems work. What could maybe be done is changing the textures for W and BHOT modes.

[Watari]

If someone want to "improve" the bino:

 

go to server.lua

 

ViewSettings["A-10C"] = {

Cockpit = {

[1] = {-- player slot 1

CockpitLocalPoint = {4.300000,1.282000,0.000000},

 

CameraViewAngleLimits = {1.000000,120.000000}, << zoom

CameraAngleRestriction = {false,90.000000,0.500000},

CameraAngleLimits = {140.000000,-65.000000,90.000000},

EyePoint = {0.000000,0.000000,0.000000},

limits_6DOF = {x = {-0.050000,0.600000},y ={-0.300000,0.100000},z = {-0.250000,0.250000},roll = 90.000000},

},

[SharpeXB]

I don't think there is really anything wrong with labels. Sure they are totally unrealistic but so is having such poor eyesight as a combat pilot. 1080x1920 is not good enough. If your vision was that bad you'd have a very short career. Its challenging and educational to learn to use all the cameras and sensors and so on but in real life a pilot can actually see better than a PC screen. I'm reading "Fighter Pilot" about Robin Olds and when asked how effective the RWR is on the F4 he considers the Mk1 eyeball to be more valuable. His comment is; I know they're always trying to lock me up, I don't need a gizmo to tell me that. It's clear from his writings a pilot can actually see incoming SAMs which is something you can't really do well in DCS.

Rise of Flight works well without labels because of the speed and range and such but modern sims need them. In FC3 without labels you'll just die really quick.

[SharpeXB]

Zoom view is definitely not "cheating". I need zoom just to see my own cockpit. The best thing to do with that command is map it to an axis so you can zoom in really quick or at variable speeds. The rudder toe axis works really well and keeps all your HOTAS buttons free. Of course if I ever fly a real plane I will end up spinning it off the runway stepping on the right brake to look at the dash...

Zoom isn't to simulate binocs. It's to make up for how poor your PC screen vision is. You don't need binocs to see your own cars dashboard do you?

Hey 4K ultra HD is coming, 1080p will be obsolete soon.

 

Actually the real reason a "zoom view" is necessary is your field of view. If everything was 1:1 on your screen it would be like driving your own car looking through a cutout the size of your monitor. To have any peripheral vision your FOV needs to be zoomed out so everything you see is unrealistically small.

Edited June 1, 2013 by SharpeXB

[Blooze]

I have stopped trying to scan for targets. Most of the time I look at the map, locate a target there, move my curser over the target and write down the coordinates. Load them in the CDU and create a waypoint, turn CDU dial to mission and find my waypoint with the steerpoint selector. Then hook it on the TAD in EXP1 mode, then slave my TGP to that waypoint and usually the target will be visable within a short distance from the initial slaved position. If a target is visable on the map I can usually find it pretty quick with this method.

[SharpeXB]

I have stopped trying to scan for targets. Most of the time I look at the map, locate a target there, move my curser over the target and write down the coordinates. Load them in the CDU and create a waypoint, turn CDU dial to mission and find my waypoint with the steerpoint selector. Then hook it on the TAD in EXP1 mode, then slave my TGP to that waypoint and usually the target will be visable within a short distance from the initial slaved position. If a target is visable on the map I can usually find it pretty quick with this method.

You can use Markpoints to accomplish this faster, just hit TMS right short

[Evil.Bonsai]

You can use Markpoints to accomplish this faster, just hit TMS right short

 

I believe he meant the F10 map, not the TAD. If it were the TAD, then yes. With the f10 map, you look for a target, write down the coordinates from bottom, then enter those into CDU.