oukej

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

832 posts in this topic

6 hours ago, xxgetbuck123 said:

 

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

 

 

Yea didn't someone suggest making the active radar on the AA actually move with the spinning radar disk on top? Hoping for TGT Camera now

 

 

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

 

 

 

Wasn't the spinning dish request for a visually splendid way to tell if the AA had its radar active?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, chortles said:

Is that regarding 'active radar on AA moving with spinning radar disk on top' -- I imagine that it's doable by config modding the active radar's angleRangelHorizontal value to < 360 and the animDirection value to the model selection name of said spinning dish -- or about whatever xxgetbuck123 meant by "TGT Camera"?

 

The new targeting cameras that old mate Oukej and his mates added back in April, 2016. 

 

37 minutes ago, oukej said:

Air and GroundTarget classes only relate to the target's background. For LaserSensorComponent you'd probably want to use the same ranges for both.

 

Ahh yeah I think I get ya. I think I keep confusing 'AirTarget/LandTarget' with an actual target, not something like 'AirBackground/LandBackground'. But yea I think shes good. 

 

31 minutes ago, teabagginpeople said:

Wasn't the spinning dish request for a visually splendid way to tell if the AA had its radar active?

 

Yea that's what I remember. A good visual indicator when a vehicle has its sensors active so people can determine whether its active or not etc.. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, chortles said:

Is that regarding 'active radar on AA moving with spinning radar disk on top' -- I imagine that it's doable by config modding the active radar's angleRangelHorizontal value to < 360 and the animDirection value to the model selection name of said spinning dish -- or about whatever xxgetbuck123 meant by "TGT Camera"?

 

What I believe he is saying is that radar isn't checking each frame for targets in it's detection radius, so depending on the configuration of the animation source you attached your radar detection radius to, you have a good chance of radar not working as intended.

 

For example, let's assume you have targets all around you at every degree, and your radar detects everything in 180 degree radius. The radar might be spinning fast enough, where you will always see targets in front of you, but never behind you due to the timing of the target updates and rotation of the detection area, even tho you will see the radar cover every direction.

 

Theoretically this could happen even with turret mounted radar if you flick the detection radius fast enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4. 2. 2017 at 1:43 PM, x3kj said:

And even if they have no sensors, there is no way to relay the information from sensors to another unit right now.

On 4. 2. 2017 at 1:57 PM, snoops_213 said:

receiveRemoteTargets

reportRemoteTargets

reportOwnPosition

@snoops_213@chortles - forgot to mention - good job on monitoring the wiki ;)

Few packets back the HLAD-link (Highly Lethal Automatic Data Link, STARMAG 5302) got silently uplinked to Dev-Branch.
The sharing is performed through Side's "center" and individual vehicles can be configured to share their target data, share their own position and/or receive target data from the center.
Datalinked targets use hollow symbols.

You can try the datalink with Drones (transmit only) and VTOLs (transmit & receive). You can also use script commands for testing it out.

As always - wip, may not be final, subject to possible naming and functionality changes. Give us your feedback!

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh My Lanta..... 
I cannot wait to

  1.  See the JETS DLC with all this awesome new sensor and targeting framework.
  2. See what new Air frames you are working on.
  3. See all the mods that will be possible from this framework.

Are Drones and VTOLS set up in DEV already for the datalink, with script commands usable on other vehicles via script commands? 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, oukej said:

@snoops_213@chortles - forgot to mention - good job on monitoring the wiki ;)

Few packets back the HLAD-link (Highly Lethal Automatic Data Link, STARMAG 5302) got silently uplinked to Dev-Branch.
The sharing is performed through Side's "center" and individual vehicles can be configured to share their target data, share their own position and/or receive target data from the center.
Datalinked targets use hollow symbols.

You can try the datalink with Drones (transmit only) and VTOLs (transmit & receive). You can also use script commands for testing it out.

As always - wip, may not be final, subject to possible naming and functionality changes. Give us your feedback!

 

Getting into some DCS level stuff here haha, loving it!!

 

Though are you able to elaborate on how it works in the Armaverse? I get the general gist how Datalink works, but in Arma not so much. Will I be able to lock things outside my usual lock range due to someone else sharing target data? Stuff like that

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, xxgetbuck123 said:

Though are you able to elaborate on how it works in the Armaverse? I get the general gist how Datalink works, but in Arma not so much. Will I be able to lock things outside my usual lock range due to someone else sharing target data? Stuff like that

So far the datalink seems to simply mean what oukej said, that drone/VTOL sensor-detected targets show up on the VTOLs' sensor displays as hollowed squares/triangles; as far as I can tell you still need to detect them on your own sensors (appearing as solid squares/triangles on your sensor display) before they can be marked them via "Reveal target" or "Next target"... however you can tell a group subordinate to target a datalinked contact (i.e. 2-2-1 in the Arma 3 Apex keybind preset) even if you don't have line of sight to it.

 

Example: Stuck a Tayran (CSAT AR-2) and an ammo-less Xi'an with a UAV Terminal-equipped pilot behind a hill, the active radar off and the gunner-operated IR/visual sensor pointed away from where I'd stuck three Hummingbirds and a HEMTT Ammo on the other side of the hill some distance away... once the Tayran had moved into position to detect them their hollowed symbols appeared, and though I couldn't mark them they had been identified by the Tayran enough for me to tell my AI gunner to target them via the (complex) command menu in anticipation of a "pop-up" attack, leading to the gunner pointing the turret with its sensors in their direction.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, oukej said:

Few packets back the HLAD-link (Highly Lethal Automatic Data Link, STARMAG 5302) got silently uplinked to Dev-Branch.

Very nice! Can the AI use the information it receives from sensor transmissions properly yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is great news! Will this work for all suitable vehicles? And only vehicles? Could this be then added to say a tatical radio so that troops could send/get said info? This has great potential if so. Only problem would be info over load. Maybe a way to filter who should see what? Maybe cas aircraft only get info on ground tgts and a2a aircraft only get info on similar, infantry and ground vehicles same as cas unless they are anti air? Or make different radar types in aircraft a2a mode a2g mode which would let you see whats possibly out their? And does the reported tgt dissappear after a certain time of lost contact? And as x3kj asked what is the AI like with this info? If this was added to say mortar or bigger artillery would they engage the tgt? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

great job on new radar system but i think they are a big problem with range for jet.

 

In a jet like F16,  AA radar can detect plane with a range of 80 nm (148km) and AG radar can detect ground unit at 40 nm (74 km).

The actual max range 12km is clearly too short, in air to air combat  you can't have BVR (behind visual range) fight because  you are all time in range of IR missile like AIM 9 sidewinder (range 18km) before can lock and engage a target. The radar missile like AIM 120 (range 50-70km) are uselless because no have range of radar to use the power of a fox 3 fire.

 

The TGP system is good but need something like auto pilot to keep altitude and vector of the plane to permit at the pilot to looking for target and lock it.

 

The important point is to improve the range of view because a jet can release a gbu at 20 000 feet (6km) altitude without problem and at this moment the fog in pip is very too thick to have something good.

 

Sorry for my english not my native language.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, theunitbettyblue said:

In a jet like F16,  AA radar can detect plane with a range of 80 nm (148km) and AG radar can detect ground unit at 40 nm (74 km).

The actual max range 12km is clearly too short, in air to air combat  you can't have BVR (behind visual range) fight because  you are all time in range of IR missile like AIM 9 sidewinder (range 18km) before can lock and engage a target. The radar missile like AIM 120 (range 50-70km) are uselless because no have range of radar to use the power of a fox 3 fire.

It has been one of the concerns. We can't aim for the realistic values here. Arma terrains are too small for proper BVR. Currently we are looking at something like ranges above 4km as the Radar's territory and squeezing the others below. Partially based on data we get about what view distances the players use.
We need to scale things down. Thinking about how to best convey the properties, pros and cons, and usage of each system to provide that #buzzword "authentic experience"  even within the game limits. For example we realize that modern IRST and optical systems can extend the usual within visual range combat well into BVR territory. But that's something we couldn't turn into fair gameplay without simulating tons of other aspects. Every game has its certain level of abstraction :)

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So, assuming BIS is balancing for "Vanilla" game play and base game, will the framework allow mods such as ACE, or other airframe mods such as Firewills F16's/F18's/A-10s to expand those ranges to a greater extent?

POOK's SAM pack gives a more realistic engagement range for SAM sites to greater challenge pilots that want that sort of thing.  Will the new JETS DLC content allow mod creators to push those boundaries for near or actual BVR in their mods?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank to take time answer.

 

Sure i m agree with you about game limits and i m sure is hard thing to you change some aspect in game and have all player happy.

 

But i think new content need change tactical and gameplay aspect like helicopter DLC do it. I m little afraid that dlc will no really change the gameplay and the possibilty of the game.

If sensor stay the same as helicopter or current plane we have, new jet will no have real reason to be use (buy) because : why i will use a jet (buy) when A10 or heli can do the same job.

By lot aspect jet dlc can be very nice if he improve tactical and aerial superioty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Could always have AIM-120 style missiles have way higher speeds but low turning radius, while AIM-9 style missiles have slower speed but really good turning radius. 

 

Then again that can be user defined in the config if someone is modding so not too sure anyway. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, ski2060 said:

Will the new JETS DLC content allow mod creators to push those boundaries for near or actual BVR in their mods?

its all config based if you haven't payed attention...

 

EDIT:

It would be extremely usefull to be able to change the different sensor target sizes of a vehicle dynamically ingame via script commands (where default is always the config setting). That way we could give boni or mali to specific vehicles based on events or functionalities. E.g. A mobile strategic missile launcher or a large radar would be alot easier to detect when it is operational / in ready state. But when folded up, it would be smaller. Scripted afterburner systems could increase irTargetsize property for a jet while in use, etc etc. and then there is the scifi stuff of course... "Stealth mode engaged captain!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, x3kj said:

its all config based if you haven't payed attention...

Yes, I know modders will be able to config a large portion of the parameters for Sensors/targeting/RCS etc...  but will they be able to modify the Radar Range display?  If you get targets out beyond your Display, will you be able to target them?
Right now the Radar only displays out to 12KM.  If a modder comes along and makes his airframe with a 20KM radar, will he be able to actually lock targets beyond 12KM?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Custom info panels are quite open and customizable. Individual vehicles can have different sets of modules and their submodes (e.g. ranges - it's up to the modder if he or she wants just two - e.g. 2km/4km - submodes or 666km/1337km/2035km/1968km/....). The modules can look differently, have different symbology. There can even be more than two panels (only there are no actions to control them).

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, oukej said:

The Custom info panels are quite open and customizable. Individual vehicles can have different sets of modules and their submodes (e.g. ranges - it's up to the modder if he or she wants just two - e.g. 2km/4km - submodes or 666km/1337km/2035km/1968km/....). The modules can look differently, have different symbology. There can even be more than two panels (only there are no actions to control them).

Wow.. lots of customization there.  So a mod can have a third or more display with custom info, just no ability to change that Display to something else.
I think modders are going to have a field day with this content!  I will certainly be pushing my unit to grab JETS as soon as it is available.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Something I'm curious about, is it feasible to have something like this for Infantry in mod form? IE can we create a man portable non vehicle entity that can share remote targets?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/02/2017 at 1:11 PM, bfgfreak said:

Something I'm curious about, is it feasible to have something like this for Infantry in mod form? IE can we create a man portable non vehicle entity that can share remote targets?

After having a quick play around in its current form it would need to have the AI learn to react to it for that to work. At the moment it just shows a white symbol on your sensor display but you cant target it without your sensors knowing about it. If you connect to the uav while in the vtol and detect the target you can order your gunner to target it as chortles said and if you're copilot your pilot will order the gunner target it, but other wise AI don't react. I think with either scripting or expanding the reported targets this has great potential. However if this was made as part of the stock vehicles with AI reaction it would change/break all the missions/campaigns that have been made. What would be good if this info could go to a central point first (HQ/Radar/FDC) then handed off to vehicles with targetable info the AI can react to, the trick here would be to not over power this. With out this "unit" info sharing stays as it is. If expanded to ground units instead of info on sensor display, unit positions on the map would be more realistic. And as not to break current missions make a tatical radio that can be added to enable all this info sharing. Anyway looking forward to seeing where they do take this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, snoops_213 said:

What would be good if this info could go to a central point first (HQ/Radar/FDC) then handed off to vehicles with targetable info the AI can react to

As per oukej further up on this page, "The sharing is performed through Side's "center" and individual vehicles can be configured to share their target data, share their own position and/or receive target data from the center." Does what you're looking for mandate a 'physical'/'real' hub?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this going to allow for larger battlescapes (aka terrains) to be used in the game? I am talking about Australia or bigger terrains. That to me is the only reason to have the Jets DLC aspect as part of A3 or any ArmA version going forward. With the limitations of ArmA in the current state being able to have relatively complex flight data translated into the game is a tremendous undertaking even to make them super arcade like. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@reschke No idea where you got a connection between terrain size and sensors from, other than the possibility of sensors and the sensor display resolutions being able to go 'that far', because as it stands the engine can already do 122 x 122 km (versus Altis' ~31 x 31 km).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a question. Also show me a persistent multiplayer coop campaign server that is running a 122km x 122km...I want to see how they do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, reschke said:

It was a question. Also show me a persistent multiplayer coop campaign server that is running a 122km x 122km...I want to see how they do it.

That'd require people to make missions for that terrain, which I'm sure you know is a loaded hypothetical due to 'how many communities are large enough to need such a large terrain'... but the terrain does exist.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now