Jets - Sensor overhaul (Radars, IRs, Lazors, PGMs)

[xxgetbuck123 945]

@oukej Is there a way for the 'cameraViewAvailable' to be available for PIP on a cockpit display instead of having the weapon camera in the box? Some mods have done this, (i.e Firewills F16 [VIa scripts]), was just curious if this was possible? 

[veles-zv 176]

ever since the new update PIP for bombs, rockets, and cannon does not work. :( 

[x3kj 1247]

It would be really usefull to get read access to the sensor informations via script. Right now, if you want to expand or build on the sensor/scanner system - well you are out of luck. You have to rebuilt one from scratch if you want to to add or use any sensor functionality.

 

On 20.12.2016 at 8:56 AM, dr. hladik said:

Radar range change and target filtering - it is easy to implement, however it is hard to find keys to control it. Any ideas?

While it wouldnt replace hotkeys - what about a pop up menu where you can select/unselect target types for filtering and also select the range. It would make it easier to use for newer and more "casual" player because they dont have to remember yet even more hotkeys.

[taro8 806]

Is there a way to have simple target locking on as well? I had my custom tank cannon set up so it could lock onto laser designated targets for automatic correction of distance and leading the target. However, I cannot do that anymore on dev.

 

Also, I'm working on a gunship aircraft and I'm looking for a way to have the weapons automatically adjusted so they aim at the point gunner is looking at. So what I want is automatic leading.

[themaster303 22]

On 21.12.2016 at 0:41 AM, dragon01 said:

Speed-based zoomout needs to go, IMO. It's ridiculous and makes cockpits hard to use. If anything, head movement needs to be tied to acceleration and revert to default after it subsides.

 

i can second this. it really have to be disabled. at least in heli / planes , but would be a dream if it will be disabled in cars too! in fast cars you have the same effect!

[Primaate 5]

An idea would be to -

 

Associate radar signals commensurate with the real world attributes of vehicles

e.g  (This is all related to KotH gaming)

1. A 'Little Bird' flying at 5m through trees and terrain should be essentially, invisible to a Jet 5kms away, and same for a Quad bike/Car etc

 

2. The 'Blackfoot' inspired by the Boeing–Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche have a radar cross-section (RCS) which is less than that of a Hellfire missile; WHY (oh god why) then are they so easy to 'see', lock and kill by jets, AA, Manpads etc?

Please address that and the Jet rape of spawns would disappear.

 

Additionally with respect to KotH spawn areas, if a vehicle is 'invulnerable' perhaps make it invisible/unlockable too? It's so easy to 'lock and wait' choppers/AA/tanks etc while still in spawn then obliterate them once out of spawn area.

(For full disclosure I jet and play within the rules and spirit of the game but, .... points are points.)

 

We need Autopilot (so we can go for a piss while in flight : ) and a choice of multiple 'Waypoints' (Red/Blue/Green etc) to help identify airfields etc.

Also in KotH, real time shading of spawn areas to help us identify boundries. Spawn camping in Jets is usually because we don't know boundries as we fly toward them, and looking on map and using the one and only waypoint is difficult.

 

We all love ARMA (I just discovered gaming in 2016 and A3 last April, at 47 years of age : ) and its possibilities are huge, keep up the awesome job BISTUDIO.

 

P.s. If you're into Jets/Neos, and like the challenge of landing them, check out this vid on Youtube --> (ARMA3 Neophron ALTIS ABDERA Landing and TakeOff )

Can anyone else do this consistently? My best on Editor now is 8x in a row without damage.

 

 

Edited January 3, 2017 by Primaate
OCD and other ideas come to mind

[jonkaya 17]

An autopilot is something that would greatly improve pilot's abilities to provide good Close Air Support.

 

The UAV console does this almost perfectly, but a better example would be the autopilot parameters menu for the USAF mod's AC-130. Being able to select the point on the map, altitude above sea level (for a much more stable flight than Above Ground Level), and orbit radius. The only addition I would make to this would be to set the speed so as to conserve fuel.

 

The benefits to this would be that the pilot wouldn't have to focus on multitasking. This would allow them to take notes on what the ground is passing to them as well as be able to more effectively use their sensors. This would also allow manned aircraft to act as "manned UAVs" in a Non-Traditional ISR role for ground forces. Sensor use in support of the ground multiplies a platform's usefulness in addition to any ordnance they may be carrying.

 

I concur with adding the ability to LASE with from the TGP. Another plus would be the ability to enter grid coordinates into the TGP so that it's already looking at an area of interest as passed from the ground.

[Primaate 5]

YES! Autopilot (so we can go for a piss while in flight : ) and a choice of multiple 'Waypoints' (Red/Blue/Green etc) to help identify airfields.

Also in KotH, real time shading of spawn areas to help us identify boundries.

[jone_kone 158]

3 hours ago, Primaate said:

YES! Autopilot (so we can go for a piss while in flight : ) and a choice of multiple 'Waypoints' (Red/Blue/Green etc) to help identify airfields.

Also in KotH, real time shading of spawn areas to help us identify boundries.

 

Same here, autopilot would be great! My community has disabled the "shift-click on map" because it reveals the target exact position in the UI so you can basically shoot at something outside your object view distance.  Without the "shift-click" you have to rely on navigating with the map, "compass" and GPS view and then engage targets based on visual reference points. 

 

Considering the above, would it be possible to add (as an option ,or item (advanced GPS?)) a line indicating the direction and distance to the shift-click target in the GPS view? This would help with navigation and targeting but still not be too OP as the UI element. This is pretty much also something what you get on a IRL GPS NAV system.  

[maffa 29]

A moving GPS/map on a Hud with waypoints on it would be good...

[gatordev 219]

On 1/1/2017 at 10:36 PM, Primaate said:

2. The 'Blackfoot' inspired by the Boeing–Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche have a radar cross-section (RCS) which is less than that of a Hellfire missile; WHY (oh god why) then are they so easy to 'see', lock and kill by jets, AA, Manpads etc?

Please address that and the Jet rape of spawns would disappear.

 

 

I take your point, and for a Gen 1 jet with an old school radar, sure, the RCS matters.  And for a Gen 1 MANPAD, yeah, the suppression is going to help a lot.  But for more modern MANPADs (for heat signature issues) and more modern phased-array radars that work off of doppler, RCS isn't the only thing it can detect and track.

[bl4dekk 9]

 

The air vehicles with radar will have a locking warning ?

I saw the blackfoot and the mq-12 falcon with this feature, but basically all missile-sensing vehicles have this, And this may open something to the next question!

 

Are they going to implement a more realistic system of countermeasures ?

 

The flare is not only effective after the locking, effective during the locking, and it is perhaps interesting to use the threat with the launcher is nearby (I am talking about infantry, since the vehicles have the ability to lock By radar and these are to be confused with the chaff).

 

/*off

But of course this is not simple to implement, there are some issues to be raised, taking into account that in 2035, infantry launchers are not active radar missiles and can be deceived by flares, so the locking system can also be deceived in this way. And other technical issues that can be encountered by developers in implementing this, bugs and tons of code, making it too hard to develop

*/off

 

Are we going to have different countermeasure modes ? Like the chaff ?

The ctrl + c to change the mode of countermeasure is only used by community modders, developers think of something else in the vanilla ?

[Rampagers_83 3]

I disagree with some people's comments about how Arma 3 shouldn't turn into a flight sim. You're right, it shouldn't be a flight sim only, it's combined arms which is why it's such a great game! Thanks for everyone's hard work at Bohemia and modders who make free content, you guys really make the experience awesome. Here are a few things I'd like to see, i know it's a s*%$ ton of work, but if these additions were made, it would make this game more insane than it already is.

 

Targeting Pod:

 

-Should emulate the Air Force's Sniper ATP-SE (Advanced Target Pod - Sensor Enhancement) as far as zoom levels and metadata, and like people have said before... The ability to put in 8-10 dig grid and slew. The RQ-4 UAV sensor adds (1) extra zoom level compared to most, so that'd be an easier recommendation is to take that sensor or something similar.

 

Stand-off Weapons:

Preface - I know view distances are somewhat limited, but the targeting distances should more closely match the real life ones.

 

-SLAM-ER (AGM-84H): For Arma, this weapon does have one of the longest ranges (14-17km if i remember correctly from my testing) but considering it is a man in the loop (MITL) weapon, you should have "TV-guided control" during the last phase of the weapons life, before striking the intended target.

 

-SDB I & II (GBU-39 and 53): the current targeting distance (please tell me if i'm wrong) when i tested it and continue to test the weapons seems to be 4-5km max. That almost defeats the purpose of having it since it's a stand off weapon. I'd like to see atleast a 7.5km to 15km distance.

 

-HARM (AGM-88): Works on the F-35 from the USAF pack, kind of... the Firewill version hasn't been working for me. Let alone how close you have to be to scan, find and fire. Recommendation is that the targeting distance be moved to at least 7.5-10 km (even though real life is much farther). HARMs are most effective for SAM Radars, not necessarily the vehicles that it normally recognizes as radars. 

 

"Regular" Weapons:

 

-Firewill Weapons Menu: I really like his menu, i'd like to see it added across the spectrum of all jets, vanilla or modded. I know that coordination piece would be big, and i know you can technically do it yourself, but if it was pre-built in to everyone's that'd be sick.

 

-M61 Vulcan 20mm: Firewill's cannons in my opinion have a decent spread pattern and speed, but in real life the M61 only really has about 5 seconds of "trigger" pull before empty. Recommendation would be to find somewhere in between, possibly 7-8 seconds of total trigger time before Winchester. 

 

-Low Collateral Damage bomb 38V3 and GBU-54V4/5 are the low collateral versions (correct me if i'm wrong) which would be useful in certain maps/situations where there might be a need for low collateral (not destroying as much local infrastructure, lower probability of civilian casualties, friendlies danger close) when other 'lower collateral options' are not available i.e. rockets and guns are winchester (completely out of ammo).

 

-AIM-120D AMRAAM: This air-to-air missile is generally fired beyond visual range (BVR) via Passive Electronically Scanned Array/Active Electronically Scanned Array radar. This A2A weapon system is fire-and-forget, and has a semi-active seeker to guide it to the target.

 

Avionics/Misc:

 

-Constantly Computed Impact Point/Release Point: What happened to the working CCIP/somewhat CCRP? 

 

-When you lock onto a GPS target or Laser target, some aircraft have a TOF (time of flight) number in seconds in the game, but it's not accurate and seems to be just for show. It'd be nice to give the FAC/JTAC a realistic TOF. Shouldn't have to explain why this is important, but giving ground forces a TOF helps the JTAC/FAC/Ground Force Commander a time frame so they can plan ground force movements and a myriad of other things.

 

-Autopilot: enough people had posts about this.

 

-Nomenclature: For Firewill's AWS, the GBU-38 is in fact visually and performance wise (more or less) a GBU-54 Laser JDAM, as it is dual-mode in game and in real life. Changing the nomenclature to GBU-54 is a petty thing, but would be nice for realism.

 

-Countermeasures: Enough people had good ideas for this topic.

 

Surface-to-Air:

 

-To make it fair for the ground forces, adding more & more SAM systems (like POOKs SAM pack) needs to be constantly updated so it's realistic. Realistic 'Arma' distances for the Surface-to-air missiles.

 

Aircraft:

 

-AC-130W Stinger II: I'm not too much of a C-130 guy because it feels like i'm cheating when I'm using it. But if we're going to have AC-130's, then the Stinger II would be a great addition since it's the new toy of the Air Force. 30mm autocannon that they use in the 'sniper' mode. Instead of having the 25mm, 40mm, and 105, it has the 30mm, and the ability to drop AGM-176 Griffons and GBU-39 & GBU-53 (When they're operational) out of the back. Watch a YouTube video on it, pretty cool.

 

-Vanilla: We'll see what the Jets DLC brings as far as the vanilla aircraft, but i'd like to see some of the Air Forces and US Navy's proposed 2030(+) aircraft in the mix. Air Force needs to replace the F-22A's with the F/A-XX program, the US Navy just decided not to go with the F/A-XX and do their own multiple aircraft Next Gen program 'Family of Systems' (several systems to fill the strike and air warfare missions in the carrier air-wing).

 

-Chengdu J-10, J-20, and Shenyang J-31: China's 'F-35 and F-22'

 

End Remarks:

 

Thanks for everything you guys do. I really do appreciate all the unseen hard work that most people might not consider.

Edited January 4, 2017 by Rampagers_83

[flight1700 22]

Instead of binding the cas and gunship radar to the direction the weapons systems are pointing, would it not be better to tie it to the direction the pilot or gunner is looking? This would be infinitely better for those with tractir while keeping the functionality for those who don't essentially the same.

[Rampagers_83 3]

Also, in reference to the AGM-84H/K SLAM-ER from firewill's pack. The SLAM-ER is a man-in-the-loop (MITL) air launched cruise missile weapon system, meaning that it can be launched approx. 150nm (wikipedia) away from the target and while in the air, can be re-directed in flight and in the terminal phase before the weapon detonates for the most accurate effects. It'd be cool if at least in Arma 3, the SLAM-ER had a terminal phase "TV-guided mode" like it does in real life.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

On 05/01/2017 at 0:40 PM, flight1700 said:

Instead of binding the cas and gunship radar to the direction the weapons systems are pointing, would it not be better to tie it to the direction the pilot or gunner is looking? This would be infinitely better for those with tractir while keeping the functionality for those who don't essentially the same.

 

Not the pilot, maybe gunner. When I use TrackIR is move my head fuckin heaps so having radar point where my head is looking would literally be 360 coverage 24/7. Plus it also means if I actually want to lock onto something I have to be looking at it, which is not always the case. 

[dragon01 902]

It makes no sense to slew the "radar" (actually IR/VIS contrast sensors sensors, IRL CAS vehicles tend not to have actual radar) to the gunner's look direction, either. The cameras are usually physically located in the turret, so they generally point where the weapons do and have the same slew limits as them.

[jonkaya 17]

In addition to UAV and possible future autopilot use, could the altitude inputted be changed to above Mean Sea Level as opposed to Above Ground Level? These are two different values and in real life MSL is what aircraft mainly go off of (RW use AGL since they rarely fly at their maximum altitude) and this provide a smoother picture from the UAV feed as it's not constantly changing altitude in its orbit.

[dragon01 902]

Agreed. I've been arguing this for quite a while. "Loiter Altitude" specifically (but also altitude for player-set waypoints) should be ASL and not AGL. Right now this is only doable using scripting. Of course, with ASL you could get AI to fly into a mountain, but if that happens on an aircraft you control (either AP or a remote UAV), then it's your own bloody fault.

 

A good way of doing that would be having all altitudes (on player-created WPs) above 100m use ASL, while ones below 100m they would be "terrain-following mode" that'd use AGL.

[chortles 263]

Questions for oukej or any other dev:

 

After taking a look at the missile config example on the Arma 3 Sensors BIKI page I noticed that it inherited from the active radar -- if I wanted to set up an Anti-Radiation Missile, would I need to do more than simply having the missile inherit from the passive radar instead? What additional steps might I need to take to make it only work versus radar emitters? Also, how does the CfgVehicles radarTarget parameter work as far as radar emitters? (That is to say, does radarTarget only mean that the target can be revealed by active radar, or does passive radar already limit what appears/can be tracked?) Finally, any chance of some method for "AEW&C plane with radar would transmit to other planes in arma"?

 

For everyone else:

 

Any interested in a sample dev branch-only-for-now config/mission for this? Currently only got it rigged up for the driver's seat, unless anyone knows just how much inheritance I need to get it working in the gunner/commander seats as well.

[oukej 2911]

2 hours ago, chortles said:

After taking a look at the missile config example on the Arma 3 Sensors BIKI page I noticed that it inherited from the active radar -- if I wanted to set up an Anti-Radiation Missile, would I need to do more than simply having the missile inherit from the passive radar instead? What additional steps might I need to take to make it only work versus radar emitters?

You need this

componentType = "PassiveRadarSensorComponent";

inside

configfile >> "CfgAmmo" >> "My_Antiradiation_Missile"  >> "Components" >> "SensorsManagerComponent" >> "Components" >> "MyAntiradiationSensorComponent"

You can set up the other properties as you need. (Sometimes inheritance from templates can be used to simplify the process). As long as you don't add any other sensor component (you can have multiple on one vehicle or weapon) the missile will only be able to lock and track radar emitters.

 

2 hours ago, chortles said:

Also, how does the CfgVehicles radarTarget parameter work as far as radar emitters? (That is to say, does radarTarget only mean that the target can be revealed by active radar, or does passive radar already limit what appears/can be tracked?)

RadarTarget and RadarTargetSize only say if and how detectable you are by an Active Radar. They are an equivalent to RCS.
Detectability of radar emittors on the other hand is given by the range and search angle of that particular radar.  

 

2 hours ago, chortles said:

Finally, any chance of some method for "AEW&C plane with radar would transmit to other planes in arma"?

Can't say yes or no atm.

 

[oukej 2911]

2 hours ago, chortles said:

Currently only got it rigged up for the driver's seat, unless anyone knows just how much inheritance I need to get it working in the gunner/commander seats as well.

Sensors are only defined in the main vehicle's components and can be used by the whole crew (with exception)
The UI panels, Custom info, are however defined inside each turret's component and each turret needs a definition if you don't want to use the default.
You can start simple by adding

class Components
{
	class VehicleSystemsDisplayManagerComponentLeft : VehicleSystemsTemplateLeftSensorsCommander {};
	class VehicleSystemsDisplayManagerComponentRight : VehicleSystemsTemplateRightSensorsCommander {};
};

to the commander's turret.
Don't forget to declare the templates located in root first. Left/Right, Commander/Gunner/Driver.

Also for safety it's better to inherit and only amend the whole Components class. There's nothing critical in turrets at the moment, but in vehicles you'd want to retain the AICarSteeringComponent and TransportCountermeasuresComponent classes.

[O.Languedoc 67]

On 12/16/2016 at 2:02 PM, oukej said:

 

• Tanks have a narrow field (60°) IR sensor to allow for ballistic computer and targeting aids. Tanks however don't have any sensor display.

 

FYI . I know its more for the ARMOR DLC but..

 

The new LAV6 has some crazy sensors for detecting incoming threat. If it gets marked via IR Lasers the crew knows immediatly and they know where the lasing source is. If the function is ON, the Turret can automatically rotate to face the source and aim at it ready to engage. It is also linked to a counter measure system.

[oukej 2911]

Moved the message into Jet DLC thread.

1 hour ago, S3blapin said:

- For the Active radar, use Ctrl+R to activate/deactivate, Rshift-R to increase range anb Lalt-R to descrease range. It's simple and everything is bind to the "same key" (R)

- Tied the IR and visual Sensor to the TGP instead of the fuselage of CAS airplane (if they have one of course) . It make much more sense as it's the main tool we use to locate a target. And when the TGP is in idle position, it's aligned with the fuselage, so no problem.

- We really need to be able to switch between target...

[WastedMike_ 27]

Does this mean that stealth vehicles will also be in the game?