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

[dragon01 902]

Lx2 would be somewhat unreliable, I found "double tap" controls annoying to use. Also, "L" is on the right side of the keyboard, I'd prefer something closer to center. Laser is an important function.

 

On the other hand, lights are not, seeing as they're in most cases landing lights (and due to the way ArmA lights work, they aren't of much use anyway).

[xon2 102]

does it really matter which key binding is default for the laser? Just add the laser as a bindable key, without a default keybinding for all i care. Those who want to make use of it will find a proper key combo that does not interfer with one's specific setup i reckon.

 

So i am on dev branch now and flying the A-164 with proper laser tgp is lots of fun. Personally i'd like macers to only be able to lock what's under the tgp, but limiting to the tgp viewign scope is a good compromise i think.

 

1. Would you consider increasing the tgp cam to continous full 360 degrees? That limitation seems a bit artificial i think. Situations may arise were the camera cannot track the target anymore before the LGB impacts screwing up the laser paint.

2. I really like that the macer lockon distance is wastly superior when the tgp is looking on target. But we definetely need a pointer cue in the HUD of were the tgp is looking/pointing at. Its damn hard to get you HUD centred on the target under the tgp to achieve a lock from greater distance when you need to guesstimate where the tgp points at. Though locking it a great distance when looking through the tgp works quite nice so this HUD pointer cue is not absolutely a must i reckon. The problem is atm, that the 'point track mode' is not reliably activating. When i place a couple of Sochors in the great salt lake on Altis and move the tgp over them, some get switched to poin track, but most keep in area track mode.

3. Now that we can properly employ the A-164, are there any plans to give 'PILOTS' of the attack helos access to the main gunner's turret for proper single player fun (just as the awesome AH-64 Apache mod be Franze and Nodunit provides)?

4. Plane analogue thrust still only increases past the 50% margin (Thrusmaster TWCS throttle), sometimes no input is recogized at all. 

 

[Jnr4817 215]

14 hours ago, oukej said:

 

 

Any keybind ideas? :) Ideally coupled with a contextually similar but not conflicting. Light and col. lights come to mind, but those would conflict. Other ideas?

 

 

Anything that is easily bindable. I use a HOTAS Warthog and have plenty of open buttons or switches to bind this to.

 

 

[xon2 102]

actually, any function of the action menu, vehicle, weapon and gadget should have its own keybinding in the controls. The more exotic functions are not bound by default and players pick and bind on a need basis themselves. DCS for instance does this quite nice as well. There you are not limited to default modifiers like left/right ctrl and alt but you can assign any keyboard, mouse or joystick/throttle (directx keys?) button as a modifier. Disadvantage is that thses modifiers are modifiers only and do not work as a single key.

[snoops_213 75]

I do like the idea of everything having the option of its own keybinding. As one of the posts above said even if you dont assign a key, the option would be great. 

On a completely different matter will helicopters get the same stabilized turrets/tgps that planes have gotten? The attack helicopters at the very least should have this ability. 

[Jnr4817 215]

Another unrelated noted, but can involve sensors would be a slewable searchlight. With the ability to have day time and IR functionally. With its own keybinds. 

[gatordev 219]

11 hours ago, dragon01 said:

What do you mean "communicate"? I'm not sure what's the problem here. Can't you just say that in VR training or the manual? I don't think any indication of "if you fire now, the missile will lock later" will make sense. LOAL should be available on both LGBs and laser-guided missiles. In fact, marking a laser target seems redundant and somewhat silly to me (you already "mark" a target by pointing the laser at it. Why should it be needed to "lock on" to that?).

 

It kind of depends on the system and how it's set up.  I can't speak to LGBs, but with Hellfires, all of the missiles aren't all looking for energy all the time.  Generally only one sensor is active when armed and while it's not a "this is now locked" type setup, you still confirm the sensor is seeing the energy.  IRL, you have to set the profile of the missile for when it starts looking.  You're absolutely correct this isn't the same thing as "locking on energy," but in a way the game mechanic is a simplified version of making some sort of decision that happens in real life (select which missile, confirm egg on sensor if there's energy, set LOAL profile if it isn't already set, check inhibits and constraints, wait for firing range based on profile...SHOOT).

 

I can see the logic of what you're getting at, but when actually firing a missile, there is a box that changes from the dashed-line square (kinda sorta like in-game, but not really) that then turns solid when all of the constraints and inhibits are met.  The one exception will be the NO LASER constraint.  I'd need to go play in the sim to confirm, but I think the box goes solid even with that constraint displayed.

[dragon01 902]

I think that a better approximation would be an indicator showing "Laser/No Laser", just indicating if missile is going to guide right after launch, or if you're going for LOAL. Would be good for LGBs, too (it would then became the "drop" cue for level bombing). Other considerations, inhibits, etc. are not modeled in ArmA (except for range, but we already have some indicators for that). You can launch a missile when standing on the runway if you feel like it. IMO, using the lock-on system just feels gamey, as if it was the same kind of sensor doing everything.

[Strike_NOR 898]

11 hours ago, gatordev said:

I can't speak to LGBs,

 

LGB's are far simpler in my opinion. They have no propulsion and so do not require the firing platform to "set up" within the missiles capabilities in order to guarantee a hit. The thing that makes LGB's different though is that they usually only guide the last few seconds before impact. This means that the pilot essentially drops it with CCIP (continuously calculated impact point) or CCRP (continuously calculated release point), as if it were a "dumb bomb". The result of this is that the bomb follows a ballistic trajectory towards the target area and does not guide. The TGP of the aircraft does not emit laser energy until the last few seconds before impact. The laser then goes active and the bomb picks it up, meaning that if the bomb is off-course, it will adjust towards the laser in the terminal flight phase.

 

The reason that an LGB normally never guides from the start, is that the laser guidance system is quite crude. It will basically zig-zag in and out of the reflected laser energy, causing massive drag and reduced range. The other reason, of course, is not to alert enemies of your laser guided bomb until the very last possible moment.

 

Some huge advantages of LOAL is that if the designator is by FAC, the aircraft dropping the bomb can go defensive immediately after release. You can also "lob"/"loft" bombs over hills or terrain (which means dropping the bomb in an upwards trajectory so you "throw" it into a trajectory. Although this is seldom or never practiced with LGB's, there are other GBU types, such as JDAM (GPS) guided bombs, that are excellent for this purpose. Naturally, since you can't see the target during these attacks, they are commonly used on buildings because they have a low probability of moving around. :)

[dragon01 902]

I'm not sure if toss bombing even works in ArmA, though it'd be nice if it did. Dive toss is a good way to bombing something while avoiding air defense that might be lurking nearby. On the other hand, it's a difficult technique. It's also commonly used for deploying nukes (as it gives the aircraft more time to get out of blast radius). 

[Giampy87 0]

What I really miss with laser guided bombs, is the possibility that the laser seeker in the warhead finds the source of the laser energy instead of the energy which is reflected from the target. For example an JTAC is deploying it's laser northwards and the delivering airplane is coming out of north the bomb will always identify the LTD as the biggest laser energy source and never the target. But not in ArmA. I would love this feature! It would add so much realism to CAS missions or JTAC duties in field. 

[AV8R_Six 110]

On certain vehicles with minimal target cross-section, can we even eliminate tracking capability (other than visual) for say Quad Bikes and Water Scooters?  Does player occupancy affect the values of the vehicles in vanilla ArmA to the point where getting on the quad bike would make it automatically detectable by radar or missile lock?

[sammael 366]

maybe already said

In 99.9 Cases   missile  can be jammed by the flares. The only chance to hit the plane is to fire two missiles with a break in 1 second. In  reality  there is a 50-60%  chance that flare can jam missile.
For comparison, IGLA -S (MANPADS) have a 80-90% chance to hit target. In AA missiles this parameter is not less.

This situation completely breaks the air gameplay

[dragon01 902]

The delay can be adjusted by AI skill. Also, keep in mind that the only flare mode we have dumps a large number of CMs at once (both chaff and flares). This will spoof most MANPADS and a good number of AA missiles as well. In a normal situation, however, this mode is not employed. Instead, aircraft periodically drop one or two flares when over an area with possible MANPADS danger. This is a bit less effective, but saves flares and also doesn't require constant attention from the pilot. The big chaff+flares dump is used in a dogfight when you get shot at with a missile at short range and you don't know what it is, but do know it's not going to be easy to shake. Against ground fire, you'd usually have a decent idea whether you're being attacked by heat-seeking MANPADS or radar guided SAMs, and as such you would launch a suitable type of CMs.

[gatordev 219]

13 hours ago, Strike_NOR said:

The thing that makes LGB's different though is that they usually only guide the last few seconds before impact.

 

Hellfires are actually very similar when shot in LOAL. They'll fly their profile, pitch over, and then start looking, all assuming that the shooter and the designator (or one and the same) are within the fan of acquisition.

 

But all good stuff.

[oukej 2911]

17 hours ago, AV8R_Six said:

On certain vehicles with minimal target cross-section, can we even eliminate tracking capability (other than visual) for say Quad Bikes and Water Scooters?

We could, but wouldn't that be too much? We can also decrease their "sizes" so they are only detectable at let's say 1/2 of the sensors range.
 

17 hours ago, AV8R_Six said:

Does player occupancy affect the values of the vehicles in vanilla ArmA to the point where getting on the quad bike would make it automatically detectable by radar or missile lock?

Not anymore.
A small exception to that is friendly ID - once a friendly jumps in a vehicle it will turn green on the display. (For sake of game purposes we can assume every unit has a 2035 personal IFF coder that can be plugged into any vehicle ;) :D)
But target visibility depends purely on

• vehicle properties (radarTargetSize, irTargetSize, visualTargetSize)
• situation - relative positions (background), altitude, speed
• ultimately the sensor which is looking at the target, it's configuration and specific innate properties (like IR seeing only heated targets)

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

12 hours ago, oukej said:

We could, but wouldn't that be too much? We can also decrease their "sizes" so they are only detectable at let's say 1/2 of the sensors range.
 

Not anymore.
A small exception to that is friendly ID - once a friendly jumps in a vehicle it will turn green on the display. (For sake of game purposes we can assume every unit has a 2035 personal IFF coder that can be plugged into any vehicle ;) :D)
But target visibility depends purely on

• vehicle properties (radarTargetSize, irTargetSize, visualTargetSize)
• situation - relative positions (background), altitude, speed
• ultimately the sensor which is looking at the target, it's configuration and specific innate properties (like IR seeing only heated targets)

 

Motorbikes and bicycles were not targetable in Arma 2.

[dragon01 902]

They should have the same lock-on rules as infantry. Small vehicles just don't radiate that much heat, even if the engine is on, the total heat output is too small to reliably lock onto. A more complex contrast seeker could probably do it with proper configuration, but then, it would be able to lock onto people as well. Nobody would be launching a Javelin at a water scooter, anyway.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

1 hour ago, dragon01 said:

but then, it would be able to lock onto people as well. Nobody would be launching a Javelin at a water scooter, anyway.

It wouldn't be so unrealistic for that to happen. Javelins can and have been used in conflicts to take out individual people. The seeker can track and lock on a human heat source with enough contrast from background.

 

FGM-148F was developed to optimise the warhead's anti-personnel effects, since so many of the original tandem-HEAT missiles had been used against non-vehicle targets in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Isn't that what the AP rounds can be used for? They are anti personal rounds anyhow.

[Strike_NOR 898]

49 minutes ago, darksidesixofficial said:

Isn't that what the AP rounds can be used for? They are anti personal rounds anyhow.

 

That is exactly one of those greyzone abbrevations.

 

It's easy to distinguish what an AP Mine and AT Mine does....

 

But what about HE Rocket and AP Rocket? Are they Anti-Personnel or Armour-Piercing?

 

Always ends up confusing us.

[CaptainAzimuth 714]

Well I've come to the conclusion it's Anti Personel after hitting Tanks with it, and then getting roasted by 120mm HE because it didn't do jack. Lol 

[gatordev 219]

10 hours ago, dragon01 said:

They should have the same lock-on rules as infantry. Small vehicles just don't radiate that much heat, even if the engine is on, the total heat output is too small to reliably lock onto. A more complex contrast seeker could probably do it with proper configuration, but then, it would be able to lock onto people as well. Nobody would be launching a Javelin at a water scooter, anyway.

 

You need to be careful in specifying what the sensor is that's doing the locking.  A modern MTS can lock onto a quad or person just fine.  A weapon seeker head?  It will depend and really probably shouldn't be elaborated on here anyway.

 

My point is if the weapon is getting guidance from the (modern) host MTS, maintaining a lock is not an issue.  And, again, depending on the weapon system, it's perfectly feasible to fire without an AVT (or whatever the targeting system calls it) lock of the target.

[x3kj 1247]

Quote

Small vehicles just don't radiate that much heat

Combustion temperatures are the same as for large vehicles. Small vehicles generally do not have any extra casing around their engine, cooler and exhaust. So they do emit more heat compared to large vehicles per cm² surface

[dragon01 902]

Yes, but the total heat radiated is much lower due to smaller size of the engine. That's what matters. If the total output is too small, it'll get lost in the noise, especially at long distances. Small areas involved don't help matters. A water scooter in particular does have a shielded engine that is also cooled with seawater, meaning its heat signature won't be big.