at soldier

[jakerod 254]

I watched an OPFOR AT Soldier fire his RPG into an unarmed Independent Medic from about 20 meters away. It was interesting. What is that, three violations of the geneva conventions?

[max power 21]

It's locks into image. You can lock it into anything as long as target's image can be processed and locked. I don't know how it works, but it basically can hit anything, individual men even, maybe even bare ground (or in your case fence). Spike has same system, i dont' recall technology's name, but it bases on processing image and basically locking into shape(s).

Raytheon's website claims that it has Infrared Homing, as opposed to Electo-Optical or Infrared Imaging (as various versions of the Maverick has, respectively).

[Second 0]

Others sites states that it's imaging infrared . Anyways what ever is the name (and they probably mean the same), it does have ability to lock on for example bunkers and buildings. So it doesn't need strong tank-like strong heat signature, as long as it can process the heat signature target leaves.

Seems like Javelin in bit more simplier with less options in terms of guiding and sensoring than Spike MR is.

[max power 21]

I don't think they are the same... I mean the terms. I think Infrared homing means 'heat-seeking', where as infrared imaging means heat-image-seeing-and-processing-to-pick-out-targets-off-of-a-2d-image. Whatever the truth of the matter, it must be sensitive enough to differentiate people from the background! I find that disturbing, actually.

[Second 0]

I don't think they are the same... I mean the terms.  I think Infrared homing means 'heat-seeking', where as infrared imaging means heat-image-seeing-and-processing-to-pick-out-targets-off-of-a-2d-image.  

From wikipedia conserning infrared homing:

Quote[/b] ]Infrared homing refers to a passive missile guidance system which uses the emission from a target of electromagnetic radiation in the infrared part of the spectrum to track it

...snip...

Very modern heat-seeking missiles utilise imaging infrared (IIR), where the IR/UV sensor is a focal plane array which is able to "see" in infra-red, much like the CCD in a digital camera. This requires much more signal processing but can be much more accurate and harder to fool with decoys. In addition to being more flare-resistant, newer seekers are also less likely to be fooled into locking onto the sun, another common trick for avoiding heat-seeking missiles.

So techinically it seems to be same. If wiki is to be trusted

[wipman 1]

Hi, it's a common tactic/procedure to fire the LAW-72 & M136 AT4

at bunkers, trenches and fortified possitions; you're trained to do

it. Tecnically... "you're aming AND firing..." to an OPFOR fortified

fire possition, which don't goes againist "the Geneva convention",

what happens to those inside the confirmed or suspected OPFOR

possition it's not of your bussines, the possition it's the confirmed

enemy target, not (always) what's inside.

Now returning to the game that's what we've a better chance to

improve by offering our views to BIS (if they ever hear us from up

there in the zcech rep. woods) It's very pittiful to see the only AT

man in your squad firing all his cucumbers at the OPFOR monkeys

with less hit provability than Dick Chenney when he goes to hunt.

To hunt (four legs) animals, i mean... the AI shouldn't fire the

cucumbers at on foot OPFOR units, they should only fire 'em at

soft or hard armoured vehicles or entrenched/fortified OPFOR.

Even fire at car size/armoured vehicles shouldn't happen for the

good of the playability and the mission's success; order your AT

men to hold fire isn't really a solution too, because when you order

the AI monkey to hold fire, you've just loosen one more rifle in the

squad, so you've loosen fire power = bigger chance to die.

There should/must be some way of make the AIs don't shot theyr

RPGs at only armoured vehicles (lock/target by 'emselves on the

vehicle class = tank or whatever the BMP & Stryker/LAV-25 be)

and... very important too... to player/Squad Leader designated

fortified possitions; like bunkers, half entire walls, cars or any

other cover that they OPFOR units may be using as cover in that

moment. Im sure that BIS knows how to do this and that they could

do it; i don't know if they could/want to do it for the ArmA, but

i hope that they do it for the ArmA2, otherwise it'll be a shame.

Let's C ya

[Col. Faulkner 0]

Hi, it's a common tactic/procedure to fire the LAW-72 & M136 AT4

at bunkers, trenches and fortified possitions...

Is it really? These anti-armour HEAT munitions actually do

very little damage to such structures. They just punch rather

disappointingly small holes in walls. Ironically, the hole it

makes if it goes right through without detonating is often

bigger (I once used to know a guy who actually watched an

RPG 7 grenade - fired by the PIRA -  pass through both walls

of the room he was in), and do little physical harm to the

occupants unless they are hit directly. The Carl Gustav

(which fired exactly the same 84mm HEAT round as the M136

uses) fired at a concrete wall, for example, used to make a

hole that you could just stick two fingers into. The 66mm

LAW, for some bizarre reason, made bigger holes than the

84mm. This deficiency is why nowadays you get fancy new

warheads that do things like penetrating armour before

exploding inside a structure (eg. the British Army's LASM -

Light Anti Structure Mathingummy).

I still maintain that, unless they have these new anti-

structure/anti-personnel munitions, the ArmA AI guys should

keep their anti-tank weapons for use against AFVs only.

[max power 21]

I don't think they are the same... I mean the terms.  I think Infrared homing means 'heat-seeking', where as infrared imaging means heat-image-seeing-and-processing-to-pick-out-targets-off-of-a-2d-image.  

From wikipedia conserning infrared homing:

Quote[/b] ]Infrared homing refers to a passive missile guidance system which uses the emission from a target of electromagnetic radiation in the infrared part of the spectrum to track it

...snip...

Very modern heat-seeking missiles utilise imaging infrared (IIR), where the IR/UV sensor is a focal plane array which is able to "see" in infra-red, much like the CCD in a digital camera. This requires much more signal processing but can be much more accurate and harder to fool with decoys. In addition to being more flare-resistant, newer seekers are also less likely to be fooled into locking onto the sun, another common trick for avoiding heat-seeking missiles.

So techinically it seems to be same. If wiki is to be trusted  

I don't find anything similar about those descriptions other than they are both sensors and they are both tuned to the infrared spectrum. It's like the difference between a night-light that comes on when it's dark and a tv camera that knows to some extent what it's looking at.

[Second 0]

I don't think they are the same... I mean the terms.  I think Infrared homing means 'heat-seeking', where as infrared imaging means heat-image-seeing-and-processing-to-pick-out-targets-off-of-a-2d-image.  

From wikipedia conserning infrared homing:

Quote[/b] ]Infrared homing refers to a passive missile guidance system which uses the emission from a target of electromagnetic radiation in the infrared part of the spectrum to track it

...snip...

Very modern heat-seeking missiles utilise imaging infrared (IIR), where the IR/UV sensor is a focal plane array which is able to "see" in infra-red, much like the CCD in a digital camera. This requires much more signal processing but can be much more accurate and harder to fool with decoys. In addition to being more flare-resistant, newer seekers are also less likely to be fooled into locking onto the sun, another common trick for avoiding heat-seeking missiles.

So techinically it seems to be same. If wiki is to be trusted  

I don't find anything similar about those descriptions other than they are both sensors and they are both tuned to the infrared spectrum.  It's like the difference between a night-light that comes on when it's dark and a tv camera that knows to some extent what it's looking at.

And by wikipedia they are put under term 'infrared homing'. That is only similarity i'm after and reason why some sites states is as infrared homing and others as imaging infrared.

[max power 21]

I don't find anything similar about those descriptions other than they are both sensors and they are both tuned to the infrared spectrum.  It's like the difference between a night-light that comes on when it's dark and a tv camera that knows to some extent what it's looking at.

And by wikipedia they are put under term 'infrared homing'. That is only similarity i'm after and reason why some sites states is as infrared homing and others as imaging infrared.

Oh, I see what you are saying. You're saying that infrared homing can refer to both. I get it now.

[wipman 1]

Hi, @Faulker, the pourpouse of our training was to make us able

of put a LAW-72 HEAT cucumber through a 50x20cm hole acting

as place for shot for the silouetes inside and harm 'em badly with

the resoulting cucumber's detonation, this was at 80m; and... it's

not againist the Geneva convention to do it, if "you've confirmed

the OPFOR presence inside". But i agree, the AIs shouldn't use their

AT/RPG weapons againist infantry and use it only againist armoured

targets. AT lasts for: Anti-Tank. The name says it all. Let's C ya

[Second 0]

Oh, I see what you are saying.  You're saying that infrared homing can refer to both.  I get it now.

Yup.

About your earlier post:

Quote[/b] ]Whatever the truth of the matter, it must be sensitive enough to differentiate people from the background! I find that disturbing, actually.

Have you played Combat Mission: Shock Force? That models Stryker brigade attack into Syria. They have huge amount of Javelins. Each Stryker starts with 3 missiles and CLU (command launcher unit), and it seems that supply is able to keep supply Strykers with new ones after each battle. If you give those to you riflesquads and use them when facing resistance (be it building, tank, bunker, trench) i bet you get even more distrubtance

[max power 21]

A friend of mine keeps trying to get me to play the ww2 combat mission games. Having the javelin able to lock on to people is almost as bad as that brimstone missile that can optically recognize what it's fired at, and then plans a terminal path that will take it to the weakest part. Soon these weapons won't need people anymore.