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

[xon2 102]

I am still struggling with the new targeting mechanics and how to reliably achieve a ground target lock. Before the Sensor overhaul, i used to only lock targets "magically" with 'target next vehicle' or with 'lock target' keybinding. I think I never used 'reveal target' before trying lock a target. I had set individual non default keybindigs for reveal target, locl target, next target etc. I defaulted those bindings back and 'laser range, reveal target, and lock target' all share T as the default key binding.

 

So with the A-164 for instance, I place the tgp over a target, and it does not change from area track to point track. This happens only when I press T now. So which function is responsible for this, the laser range or the reveal target?

 

Coulr somebody pls shortly explain in checklist style how the new system works with Agms/Macers for instance?

[snoops_213 74]

2 hours ago, darksidesixofficial said:

Could this also be used for new possibilities like Air Burst munitions/bombs?

Can you say M261 MPSM or british starstreak sam? Not sure about bombs but i have a funny feeling that cbus could be done aswell but it does say mainly for missiles and shells. If it doesnt work for bombs you could make a missile with 0 thrust that fell like a bomb. I tried mpsm in arma2 when they introduced the feature with the shotguns, didnt work with missiles at the time but the side effect was it worked like a cbu :) Now It can have multiple types of submunitions though so a mix of AT HE hell even mines or a mix of the lot? and percentages of the mix can also be defined. As oukej said earlier in this thread it can get resource intensive, especially if you start using real world numbers for submunitions. One question relating to this would be if we can apply the new sensors to the submunitions so a mix of ir top attack and a radar ( with limited range and sensor angles) top attack? 

 

1 hour ago, pipyn1970 said:

I would love to see maps covered with the enemies radar & connected to static SAM sites within the hills or even vehicle AA's could hook up to. I think it would be a game changer where they would be heavily defended from both air & ground attack but to win the ECM war then they must be taken out. Reading all this thread about the radars has got me wishing that you guys at Arma could & would make this for us & make a map update to place them all over your maps & make them extremely well hidden from the air by maybe not allowing them to have a signature maybe? I'm not sure how that would work but the idea around it could be they are extremely hard to hit from the air, very well defended from the ground but when they go active not only will they fire at the aircraft within range but maybe they could JAM his radar or something for a couple of minutes? From the air they could be made almost impossible to see maybe?

Do you mean devs build this into existing maps? If so that wont happen. One it means redoing all the maps and two it means it will break too many missions and 3 it forces it on people that may not want it. The data link makes strides in this area but unfortunately it doesn't allow remote targeting from other platforms sensors. Hopefully they find a way to do this for radars ( other sensors would be overkill in this sense). 

25 minutes ago, xon2 said:

I am still struggling with the new targeting mechanics and how to reliably achieve a ground target lock. Before the Sensor overhaul, i used to only lock targets "magically" with 'target next vehicle' or with 'lock target' keybinding. I think I never used 'reveal target' before trying lock a target. I had set individual non default keybindigs for reveal target, locl target, next target etc. I defaulted those bindings back and 'laser range, reveal target, and lock target' all share T as the default key binding.

 

So with the A-164 for instance, I place the tgp over a target, and it does not change from area track to point track. This happens only when I press T now. So which function is responsible for this, the laser range or the reveal target?

 

Coulr somebody pls shortly explain in checklist style how the new system works with Agms/Macers for instance?

First it helps to know the area to look in. The wipeout really makes FAC/JTAC worthwhile for target locating. With radar equipped vehicles less of a challenge but for wipeout helps so much.

1. If you know the area to look in go into tgp and scan area. Sometimes i find that flying around my sensors will pick up tgts and show them on the sensor diaplay and then i can go looking via tgp, or i point my nose towards tgt and spam t until i lock something( only when i cant find the damn target cause unheated and hidden objects  are hard as buggery to find) 

2. Once a target is spotted either hit t and target the vehicle with agm and wait for lock or press ctrl t to lock the sensor onto the ground. 

3. Once locked onto ground you''ll see "area"  displayed on screen. If you move the sights over a vehicle you should see this replaced by "point". This means the tgp has picked the vehicle and will track it even if its moving.This will let you fine tune what or where your looking. Again here when you see your target hit t to target it with agm and wait for lock.

This is is also how to self designate for lbgs. Once you have your tgt turn laser on and select lgbs then press t to lock the laser tgt. Then basically wait for lock( or lob the bomb in the general tgt direction works well now)  and wait for the boom. Just remember the area/point locking is different than the uavs. If you move your mouse your sight will move too unlike uavs where ctrl t is fully fixed to the area/vehicle and wont respond to mouse movement until unlocked again. Hope this helps you some

[xon2 102]

@snoops_213thx for your take on it. So at the moment ground targets seem to be only tracked (change from area to point track) when each is 'revealed' with T individually. Achieving a lock with the AGMs is another story. Is the acutal locking now dependet on heat/ir emission? Some vehicles albeit being pontracked and locked up with T will not give me an AGM firing solution no matter what. I thought the AGMs/Macer are handled as an visually guided weapon like the RL thing.

[dragon01 902]

Real AGMs are not visually guided. Early Mavericks ('Nam era) used a "contrast seeker" that worked in the visual spectrum, but it was so failure-prone that the missiles were known to turn away from the target (usually a tank) at the last moment and hit a so called "tactical bush". :) They switched to IR guidance later on, which is what most real air to ground fire and forget missiles use now.

[oukej 2910]

2 hours ago, xon2 said:

So at the moment ground targets seem to be only tracked (change from area to point track) when each is 'revealed' with T individually.

That shouldn't be the case. As long as the target is within sensors FoV (in this case same as the camera fov) and detection conditions are met (speed, range...) it should automatically pop up on the display and you should be able to acquire it by pressing "R" (Next Target (veh)). Or by Lock target action - which marks a target in the center of view/under cursor (which, as I've mentioned in my prev post.,

 

49 minutes ago, dragon01 said:

They switched to IR guidance later on,

But also back to vis. spectrum - some environments are just too hot.
Truth is, currently we only have IR guided Macers. We want to eventually add variants.

[arkhir 135]

10 minutes ago, oukej said:

We want to eventually add variants.

Can't wait to test them. Any sneak-preview on what sort of missile variants can we expect to see? :P

[dragon01 902]

1 hour ago, oukej said:

But also back to vis. spectrum - some environments are just too hot.
Truth is, currently we only have IR guided Macers. We want to eventually add variants.

Visual has advantages in deserts, but it's still not exactly the paragon of reliability. It would be nice as an option for Macer, though. Laser guidance could be good as well.

 

Besides the Macer, I'd love to see Scalpel get different versions. The current "one missile for everything" approach is silly. I'd suggest making an LG version and a radar-guided one ("Longbow Scalpel", if you will), with the "manual guidance" (SACLOS) being left to the Jian (OPFOR only, but it's not like real NATO uses a lot of SACLOS missiles on aircraft. It's a Russian thing, mostly). Also on the OPFOR side, the Kh-25 has variants with just about every guidance system available, even TV guidance (manual control with a view from the missile) and an anti-radiation variant.

[xxgetbuck123 945]

1 hour ago, arkhir said:

Can't wait to test them. Any sneak-preview on what sort of missile variants can we expect to see? :P

 

Laser guided Macers ;) 

[xon2 102]

@oukej

10 hours ago, xon2 said:

So at the moment ground targets seem to be only tracked (change from area to point track) when each is 'revealed' with T individually.

That shouldn't be the case. As long as the target is within sensors FoV (in this case same as the camera fov) and detection conditions are met (speed, range...) it should automatically pop up on the display and you should be able to acquire it by pressing "R" (Next Target (veh)). Or by Lock target action - which marks a target in the center of view/under cursor (which, as I've mentioned in my prev post.,

 

9 hours ago, dragon01 said:

They switched to IR guidance later on,

But also back to vis. spectrum - some environments are just too hot.
Truth is, currently we only have IR guided Macers. We want to eventually add variants.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

This is definetly not happing for me. No mods and in absolute superstition i removed the userconfig folder from arma 3's mainfolder for testing purposes and 'point track mode' happens only when i either 'reveal' or outright 'lock target' each target individually, i.e. move A-164 tgp crosshair over mobiel/immobile target and then press either reveal or lock target. So i reckon its something wrong with my setup, since i seem to be the only one hitting this issue. Should i make a feedback ticket for this or is this something that will be ironed outin the coming weeks? 

 

Concerning IR macers that you mentioned. From my dcs A-10c knowledge i recall the AGM-65s acquire a lock by vehicle contrast from background which seems not necessarily mean the vehicle needs to be hot. The macers implemented in arma 3 devbranch are purely IR guided atm? Hence, a Sochor with an off/cold engine will not give a firing solution for the macer, right?

 

[oukej 2910]

Ok. Let's find out - would you be able please to send me a simple mission or a video so I can see the situation?

[xon2 102]

So the behaviour i found is the following with A-164 at 1000 angels vs bunch of CSAT vehicles on Altis's saltlake (FLIR modes don't make a difference):

 

1. Ground stabilized tgp hovering over immobile or moving (CSAT) vehicles will not start point tracking automatically. 'Lock target' (individual keybinding i.e. not bound to anything else like reveal or laser range key) will not lock immobile or moving vehicle. TGP hovering over immobile or moving vehicle will switch to 'point track' when i press individually bound 'reveal' and then slightly move tgp curser. I can 'lock target' under the tgp now.

 

 

As you can see in the video, i hover over each target for 2-3 seconds without getting point track, i then press 'reveal target' and slightly moved the tgp curser with my mouse and then it switches to point track.

 

2. Without pressing 'reveal' target, i can lock moving targets with individually bound 'next target/ next target (in vehicle)' but not immobile ones. After that, point track and 'lock target' work as intended, but only for those targets that i have locked with 'next target' previously or 'revealed' invidually, independtly of whether they are still moving or have come to a stop.

 

Here you can see that locking moving targets (first two vehicles) with 'next target' key (which again is individually bound i.e. not together with 'reveal target' key) works without previously revealing them. And the last two moving vehicles that i do not lock with 'next vehicle' but only hover with the tgp over, are not being point tracked and thus are not able to be locked up with 'lock target', until i press 'reveal target' or 'next target'.

 

3. If 'lock target', 'laser range' and 'reveal target' are all bound to the default T key, i can 'lock target' immobile or moving target when tgp hovers over them on first try, but only because 'lock target' and 'reveal target' key are pressed simulaneously.

 

So i guess using that double keybinding of 'reveal target' and 'lock target' is my panacea atm, but if i did not consistently misread your statements, point track should not be depending on revealing targets first. Anyway, let me know whether this is normal behaviour or something is off. Cheers and have a nice weekend, cya next week.

 

 

[snoops_213 74]

14 hours ago, dragon01 said:

Real AGMs are not visually guided. Early Mavericks ('Nam era) used a "contrast seeker" that worked in the visual spectrum, but it was so failure-prone that the missiles were known to turn away from the target (usually a tank) at the last moment and hit a so called "tactical bush". :) They switched to IR guidance later on, which is what most real air to ground fire and forget missiles use now.

No they were successful in nam and yom kippur wars. The fear was that both environments were favourable for its seekers but might struggle in European environment against warsaw vehicles  so the D was born with IIR seeker.  The latest H/J/K  use a ccd seeker which is in the visible spectrum and has a further and more reliable lock but cant be used at night. And the E model is a laser guided version. The F/G models are IIR too. F for navy has software upgrade to track ships better and the G allows pilots to track larger targets and has bigger warhead. Also heard somewhere that a gps version or a gps backup for the other versions was being looked at.

 

 Im glad to hear that they would like to/plan to add more diversity to the missiles and i hope it extends beyond this into bombs and rocket variations too. The best thing for them would be (apart from different bombs) no new models would be needed to be made as the biggest variations are in the seeker type and the size/types of the warheads, so mainly config work. Smoke rockets would be good for marking  or even wp for really marking the target but thats for a different thread :) 

@xon2 yeah i found the same thing now you pointed it out. Most of my tests have been against aa so one of my sensors had already revealed the target so point would work straight away for me. But against other vehicles I just tried I would have to reveal it before point would work.

[xon2 102]

yeah....i am not alone anymore on this one Maybe most people use the default keybinding T and thus don't notice that it reveals targets when locking them simultaneously Albeit this does not explain the not atuomatically point track issue when simply hovering over a target with the tgp. Though we'll see what oukej says about it. I actually had all those targeting keybindings seperated to individual keys for the longest time and did not reset them when i moved to dev branch.

 

And i tested what you mentioned about AA targets. I placed a Tigris on Stratis and although i see it popping up on my A-164 'radar/ warning receiver' and the Tigris engaging me with missiles and its gun, still i have to reveal it first before point track works.

[Greenfist 1863]

@xon2 It's not a key issue. The "problem" is that you have disabled automatic reporting in the difficulty settings. This makes the tgp require a manual reveal.

[ski2060 167]

So did target indicators  on the radar display change at some point?  My target indicators have not been showing up as squares (either empty or filled) in the last couple of days.  I am seeing a point with a semi-circle over it, or a point with a full circle around it

[Flax 397]

So someone has managed to make PIP render out to 8km using a memory edit - I would love to see this added in the game. Even it was limited to 5km. It would make such a difference to the game.
 

 

 

[xon2 102]

@Greenfist....great find man. Thats it. I disabled auto reporting a long time ago, didn't think of it at all as being the culprit here. So enabling it gives me the correct behaviour and the area to point track switch happens without me having to manually reveal first. The question now is: in relation to the tgp, is this the devs intended behaviour or should automatic reporting on or off not affect the tgp at all? I guess we'll fing out next week.

[Grumpy Old Man 3540]

10 hours ago, Flax said:

So someone has managed to make PIP render out to 8km using a memory edit - I would love to see this added in the game. Even it was limited to 5km. It would make such a difference to the game.
 

 

 

Making the distance a user option would suffice.

Todays gpus are powerful enough to handle this.

 

Cheers

[xxgetbuck123 945]

1 hour ago, Grumpy Old Man said:

Making the distance a user option would suffice.

Todays gpus are powerful enough to handle this.

 

Cheers

 

Exactly! If people want to run *insert range here* for their PIP they should have that option! Like any other options really, if peoples PCs can handle it, then they should be able to use it. 

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

BI:

The Taru currently does have a visual sensor available to the co-pilot when the aircraft itself does not have one modeled.

The Huron currently does not have a visual sensor available to the co-pilot when the aircraft itself does have one modeled.

See video here:

 

If this issue is fixed it would mean that the Huron would also need it's corresponding IR and Visual sensors added to it's config.

 

Finally; the Wildcat has an optics/FLIR pod on the front of the helicopter which is available to the Co-Pilot (with BHOT and WHOT modes) but does not currently have the corresponding IR and Visual sensors added to it's config.

[iratus 71]

The throwable IR strobes do not show up on the sensors MFD. I tried all three faction variants and they all seem to behave in the same way. I was able to see them blinking in NV (alltough they could do with a more prominent effect as they are sometimes hard to see) and I was able to "lock on" LGBs. The only IR strobe that shows up in the sensors MFD is the one placed in the editor that came with Zeus.

 

As for locking on LGBs: That's a bit weird, sometimes I get the target lock chevrons, sometimes not and the square flickers a bit permanently.

[venthorror 117]

Currently "old" CAS jets that are now using new IR sensors are unable to lock AA missiles using only HUD.

Reason for this is that they are using TGP (pointed at the ground) for finding targets.

While I think this "handicap" is a step in the right direction, shouldn't short range AA made for self defense look for targets using their own sensors?

 

Game-play wise this definitely puts CAS jets in their place.

 

But could it be made so that AA missiles in those jets have the ability to lock Air targets in a very, very small circle in the boresight, without the need to enter TGP?

Just like Titan AA now has a smaller radius at which it can "pick up" targets...

 

 CAS jets are now unable to lock any air target above them.

[pipyn1970 19]

On ‎4‎/‎4‎/‎2017 at 9:36 AM, chortles said:

Unfortunately what you propose means having to have two different sets of keybinds depending on whether the TGP is full-screen or not, even if one of those sets (the current keybinds) still works when full-screened. That, and considering that Bohemia hasn't rolled out any keybinds yet for this with the current Custom Info panel ("CAM DRIVER") the lack could be intentional design.

The main issue with "if he can do it, BIS can do it" is that while in theory Bohemia could do it for the DLC jets -- and to be fair this could be a TGP view --

I think the PiP within the cockpits could be the new TGP instead of the full-screen way we do things now. I understand how hard it must be but what if the full-screen mode was disabled in 1st person? would be nice to have different views also like IR & Night mode. Would be nice to toggle a MAP page there maybe?

On the Wasp, maybe there would be a scroll action for the different pages that's in the MFD's? SO just like on the old 3rd party Mod of this jet the view we wanted to see would feel the MFD middle panel or split the middle screen into 2 screens so the pilot could see the TGP PiP as well as maybe his weapons & or the TAC page?

I know I'm dreaming, but who knows? 

[nodunit 397]

It's a fun idea but the problem is that PIP has many things going against it for use as a TGP.
First off is the frame rate,  picture in picture is just too demanding and even if you have a great computer setup that can run everything just fine, there is still the problem of the rate at which the PIP refreshes, you won't have the same image smoothness in PIP as you would by going to the optic, and that will effect movement and reaction times.

Second is PIP's render distance versus player view distance, even on Ultra settings.  One method of overcoming this is to place the PIP memory point well ahead of the aircraft but that brings us to the third problem.

Third, the camera handling, DCS had this feature designed from the start as a core function, not a feature, so it was given the same if not more attention than the aircraft systems themselves.  In current PIP we don't have the same control as we do in optics, the camera remains fixed and the optic mode cannot be changed from day, night, and thermal, it's either one or the other and while having this function would be awesome, it still suffers the first problem.

Now if we disable optics and rely soley on PIP then that brings in a fourth problem.. people who can't run PIP now have only the HUD to target anything, goodbye lasing and bombing accurately.

[pingopete 26]

9 hours ago, nodunit said:

It's a fun idea but the problem is that PIP has many things going against it for use as a TGP.
First off is the frame rate,  picture in picture is just too demanding and even if you have a great computer setup that can run everything just fine, there is still the problem of the rate at which the PIP refreshes, you won't have the same image smoothness in PIP as you would by going to the optic, and that will effect movement and reaction times.

Second is PIP's render distance versus player view distance, even on Ultra settings.  One method of overcoming this is to place the PIP memory point well ahead of the aircraft but that brings us to the third problem.

Third, the camera handling, DCS had this feature designed from the start as a core function, not a feature, so it was given the same if not more attention than the aircraft systems themselves.  In current PIP we don't have the same control as we do in optics, the camera remains fixed and the optic mode cannot be changed from day, night, and thermal, it's either one or the other and while having this function would be awesome, it still suffers the first problem.

Now if we disable optics and rely soley on PIP then that brings in a fourth problem.. people who can't run PIP now have only the HUD to target anything, goodbye lasing and bombing accurately.

PIP rendering at 8km and 60fps (60 only in first scene with venom with only one render target, the a10 had 3 mirrors RTT targets which brought the performance of the TGP screen way down): 

 

I implore Bohemia to take another run at PIP rendering in Arma