Vehicles radar system

[maddogx 13]

Since when is this fixed? Last night I was driving a Quad and was detected by an enemy APC nearly 2000 m away? I do not belive the detection skills for AI gunners are this enhanced.

It should be fixed on dev branch since Tuesday. If you can still repro it, you know what to do. ;)

[king homer 1]

Thanks for the hint. Will try this evening.

[DancZer 65]

The next step should be removing the side detection. On the radar screen should be only gray icons(triangle and square). With this little change the air units have to make sure what they are shooting, just as AA and AT infantry.

This would perfectly fit in the Helicopter DLC.

[the_demongod 31]

Hey, I like your ideas here. I too am very interested in fixing the radar, although I am mainly focusing on aircraft.

Please give my thread on removing the "magic" aspects of Arma's technology a read, I have added a section marked "PART 2" that has information about the radar that you might like.

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?178508-We-need-worse-weapon-systems

My idea is to replace the magical radar with a Radar Warning Receiver.

(If you don't know what that is, expand this spoiler below, otherwise continue reading)

A radar warning receiver is a passive radar-detection system which does not emit waves of its own, but instead it detects and classifies radar emissions it sees around itself.

For example, tanks do not show up on the radar warning receiver, because they are not emitting radiation.

However, an enemy jet will show up because it has a radar and is emitting radiation.

The Radar Warning Receiver can detect a few things: It can detect radar in scanning/search mode. It will tell you when you are being locked by a radar (because then you will be bombarded by radiation from the radar - means you are being tracked), and it will tell you when a radar guided missile is launched at you.

It doesn't, however, tell you where the missile is. It only tells you the direction it comes from.

Read my post linked above for more information.

It would make it so that only threats that have radar would show up on your own radar, and it would not update so quickly. It would require the pilot to use his eyes in game to find the targets, instead of just cycling through radar contacts.

It would also mean that vehicles like MRAPs and civilian vehicles would not show up, as they do not emit radar.

Perhaps helicopters could have a millimetre-wave radar FCR as well, but I don't know how that works well enough to write about that yet :P

[squirrel0311 16]

My idea is to replace the magical radar with a Radar Warning Receiver.

Yep, that’s what I asked for on page 2. (It's buried in the middle of my post though.) :/

I would like to see a Passive Detection System and an Active Protection System if they could make it work right. ....It could even be magically contained in one sensor hub, I don't care.

The Passive Detection System just alerts the crew when they are being radar scanned or laser designated/targeted…. Sounds an alarm and something that shows the general direction of the threat on their situational awareness screen.

The Active Protection System would Track missiles and fire an interceptor countermeasure to blow up incoming missiles as long as they are within the parameters of its capabilities. (Not fired too close or traveling too fast... Cant stop tank rounds, that sort of thing.) e.g. Trophy or Arena systems

[the_demongod 31]

Yep, that’s what I asked for on page 2. (It's buried in the middle of my post though.) :/

I would like to see a Passive Detection System and an Active Protection System if they could make it work right. ....It could even be magically contained in one sensor hub, I don't care.

The Passive Detection System just alerts the crew when they are being radar scanned or laser designated/targeted…. Sounds an alarm and something that shows the general direction of the threat on their situational awareness screen.

The Active Protection System would Track missiles and fire an interceptor countermeasure to blow up incoming missiles as long as they are within the parameters of its capabilities. (Not fired too close or traveling too fast... Cant stop tank rounds, that sort of thing.) e.g. Trophy or Arena systems

yep, passive detection would be great. It would tell you when you were being lased, illuminated by radar, etc.

but it wouldn't tell you where things like quadbikes and pickup trucks (which wouldn't be picked up by said passive detection since they don't emit radiation) were.

as interesting as it would be to see active protection, we still have to keep in mind that it's a video game and while we want to avoid "balancing," it would be pretty difficult to implement without it being too powerful.

[squirrel0311 16]

yep, passive detection would be great.

Yeah, and like I said in my wish list, I wish for that Passive Detection Hub to be vulnerable to higher caliber rifle fire, the same as I wish the optics were. If it were vulnerable to anti-material fire then that would be an easy way to defeat the Active Protection System too.. ...Or if it had APS scanning hubs on each side...That specific side would need to be disabled before a rocket/missile would get through on that side.... At any rate the APS shouldn't have more than 2 protective rounds per side.

In regards to air threats…. One thing I wouldn't mind seeing is if they implemented a stationary Radar array trailer or truck….

Basically a HEMTT or Kamaz with a big radar on the back… It has to be stopped and deployed….. When deployed, vehicles like tanks and APC’s are able to see air threats on their Situational Awareness Screen because the information is being sent from the Radar trailer to all friendly vehicles within….1km?

The radar trailer or truck would have a limited detection range (Not sure what the range of the AA is but it should be more than that I think..) and it would be vulnerable to attack due to being a big radar that’s emitting waves and has to be packed up before it can be moved… (Not so much packed up, just lift the stabilizing legs, secure all the wobbly things that might snap off, and then go,)

It would also be cool if AA vehicles could relay that information to vehicles too but in a much smaller radius, say…. 500m - 300m?

Without either of those systems in place, Tanks and APC's shouldn't see any vehicles except what they find through their optics.... Or maybe friendly vehicles thanks to the BlueForce tracker style systems.

(Makes me wish I had a couple million dollars so I could hire some game developers and build my own.... I'll call it CARMA 4 "Including all the cool things that others had to leave out.")

[fn_Quiksilver 1636]

Does anyone know the display code of the radar?

[DancZer 65]

I tried to find once, but i only found the resources. Maybe I am wrong, but I think it is on the engine side for performance reason.

[DancZer 65]

I want to note some progress which iceman mentioned here http://feedback.arma3.com/view.php?id=21563#c83521

Most helicopters now have a compass instead of radar, so it is not showing units and incoming missiles. The only helicopters which still use radar are gunships and Orca with guided rockets.

[nodunit 397]

Modern aircraft should definitely be equipped with radar warning receivers as well as laser, heck this is technology we had back in the 80's.

If you want to go further, modern aircraft of today would have tactical situation displays or something of another name on their digital displays, these displays would give the pilots information and possibly detail the type of vehicle they are looking at.

Helicopters would NOT have infantry on their displays even with radar which is why MANPADS is such a big threat even today.

While normally the information upon the display would be set up in advance, prior to the mission, it wouldn't hurt from a game mechanic to say that the crew automaticly handles the logging of data without the player having to do anything but see it up close (We don't have any actual radars so targets not visible should not be detected).

Further information that should not be included is wether the unit is friendly unless it is equipped with a force tracker of some sort (fixed wing would be the most likely candidate).

This would introduce Arma 3 to something closer in terms of the digital battlefield we know in reality, not only a plethora of information but also the requirement of information verification that what you are shooting at is in fact what you think it is. Believe me when I tell you that it is far more unnerving when you have eyes on dozens of targets but no certainty of wether they are friendly, civil, or the enemy.

tl;dr Aircraft "radar" as it is isn't entirerly unrealistic but it shouldn't tell you exactly what you are looking at, if its friend or foe, and should not display infantry.

Edited November 13, 2014 by NodUnit

[DancZer 65]

Aircraft "radar" as it is isn't entirerly unrealistic but it shouldn't tell you exactly what you are looking at, if its friend or foe, and should not display infantry.

I agree that the vehicle radar shouldn't tell you which vehicle is enemy or friendly. At least it should depend on the difficulty settings. I tested it and currently(1.34) it show green, red colors even on the elite difficulty. It should be gray no matter which side or if the vehicle is empty. Moreover i think it shouldn't show that it is an air or its a ground vehicle.

[nodunit 397]

I agree that the vehicle radar shouldn't tell you which vehicle is enemy or friendly. At least it should depend on the difficulty settings. I tested it and currently(1.34) it show green, red colors even on the elite difficulty. It should be gray no matter which side or if the vehicle is empty. Moreover i think it shouldn't show that it is an air or its a ground vehicle.

Mmmhh..depends, we have technology today that distinguishes a vehicle based on several features but they are all basic.

Does it have wheels? Does it have tracks? Is it fixed wing? Is it a helicopter? Is it giving a radiation signature?

So for example you have a civilian car, a a military truck, and a wheeled APC sitting beside each other. The radar would display the same symbology for all three vehicles.

Likewise if you take a tracked APC and put it beside a MBT, the radar is just going to think "It has tracks", a basic level of identification wouldn't be unrealistic at all.

[DancZer 65]

And what about aircraft? If you put a jet and a helicopter next to the vehicles you mentioned, do they give you the same radar signal? Or helicopter 2m or 5m above the ground?

[nodunit 397]

And what about aircraft? If you put a jet and a helicopter next to the vehicles you mentioned, do they give you the same radar signal? Or helicopter 2m or 5m above the ground?

Generally speaking the radar would either identify the silhouette as being a helicopter or fixed wing. As for the distance it depends on the radar, assuming we're talking aircraft, you would be using either ground or air mode (better sweeps and less clutter) but you wouldn't need to change to air mode unless the aircraft is 50 or so meters in the air. But if it is and you have the radar in ground mode then it gets no return.

I think that would be pushing it for the default game mechanics though.

In Arma 3's case however no aircraft has a radar, so at best they would need to rely on line of sight which in reality would either require the crew to key in the information for the system to track (however it it doesn't update positions unless done manually) or if the aircraft is advanced enough, the targetting suite would pipe that information into the displays on its own and update target positions as long as it maintains LOS.

Which is another problem the Arma games radar has, it was always tracking and giving you the exact location of your targets.

Edited November 13, 2014 by NodUnit

[the_demongod 31]

The cool thing about a radar warning receiver instead of a radar is that it would display big threats like AAA, enemy gunships, and the like, but it wouldn't display things like pickup trucks, MRAPs, or even most armor. It would be a way of "balancing" the radar. If you use radar to illuminate targets, you're going to make yourself known to the enemy. If you're not going to use radar, you're not going to be able to see as much. It's a trade-off that exists in real life, the only kind of balancing that BI should be doing.

If you can create an Apache mod that simulates an FCR with accuracy (how much, I'm not exactly sure) and displays it on an MFCD, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask BI to add simple RWRs. But BI is forgetting that they need to not only simulate the function of these systems, but also the limitations of them (you've seen my "we need 'worse' weapon systems" thread); it really makes it boring to have a magic radar that tells you where everything 360 degrees around you is, so I'm glad they took the first step in removing it from some vehicles.

[nodunit 397]

Agreed fully, reality funnily enough balances itself with a rock paper scissors system.

As for the FCR I couldn't say exactly as I'm not the one who coded it, I might be able to get my buddy Franze to comment on it though but I couldn't say how difficult it was and how reasonable or unreasonable it would be for BI to do it by reflection.

I would love nothing more than a radar that behaves more another tool in your arsenal that you must know how to use as opposed to an all seeing eye that sees all regardless of clutter, identifies all, and knows exactly where all is.

Don't forget our mod was in development for threeish years (a lot of that being my fault) give or take based on free time, I don't know how much of that went into coding the radar and situation display.

Edited November 13, 2014 by NodUnit

[the_demongod 31]

I don't really know anything about millimeter-wave radar or even air-to-ground radar in general (in fact, most of my knowledge of radar comes from playing DCS and BMS :P), but it would be cool to turn the radar into the typical sweeping pulse-Doppler radar (for whichever vehicles it would be realistic for) that would only update wherever the antenna pointed.

You could go from a full 360 degree long-range search to a narrower back and forth traverse that would update that smaller section of the radar more quickly, trading off accuracy for field of view (kind of like the Apache's FCR AtG mode). And then locking onto a target would mean you could see where your target is in real time, but can't see anything else on the radar (not sure about how Track While Scan modes work to be honest but I don't think you'd be able to track multiple targets at once in real-time without an AESA radar; that level of detail doesn't really have a place in Arma anyways).

It would add another level of depth to the otherwise boring tab method of locking.

Also it would allow for us to make cool SAM sites that require separate radar and launcher, etc.

I would love nothing more than to sit inside the command vehicle of an SA-11 lookalike, just staring at a radar scope waiting for a target of opportunity to show up :P and it would make CAS missions more interesting too if you have to spend all your time flying nap of the earth.