Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads

Technical threads All discussions about technical issues

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #1  
Old 10-25-2011, 07:23 PM
6S.Manu 6S.Manu is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Venice - Italy
Posts: 585
Default Target visibility - UPDATE at post #97

I would like to open a new discussion about this subject.

It's great having a sim where the aircraft's 3D models are close to reality, where performances are very similar to the real ones, where we act on the strumentation as the WW2 pilots did.

When we're infllight the complete picture is really photorealistic. The effects are great and it's almost like flying in a real aircraft (with physical limitation impossible to simulate, like G force,flames ect...).

But IL2 (1946 and CloD) is not only a flight simulator... it's a COMBAT simulator.

Here DMs are detailed enough and the weapons should be already modelled in the correct way.

But you can shoot at an enemy only if you see it and here we have a serious problem: visibility is the most important thing in WW2 air warfare.

I'm not talking about tracking a contact: I'm talking of DETECTION and IDENTIFICATION.

With the help of 3D Studio Max we have reproduced a picture of a 109 at various distances. Then I've taken a pair CloD pictures from the "screenshot" thread (I hope the authors will not complain about this) and from these I've built new images. The error should be in the range of 1 pixel (I'm working with a 24" monitor, 1920x1080)

As first we have the image taken with a 50mm (39.6 fov) to have what the human eyes see.



Below is what we have in IL2's normal view (fov 70):


Note that planes at 3km are already dots...

But at which distance can a pilot detect a flying object?
There are many variables: camouflage (already proved that it's not a magical tool http://www.dtic.mil/cgi-bin/GetTRDoc...c=GetTRDoc.pdf), human eye's threshold of acuity, eye's accommodation, glare, atmospheric haze, target speed differential, target profile, ect... some are really important, others are modest factors.

I was looking for an analysis and here's I found something interesting:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:...l.pone.0005594
Quote:
Howell [5] carried out a field study in which pilots attempted to detect another aircraft (DC-3) approaching on a collision course. Over various conditions, the average distance at which detection by the pilot occurred (“detection distance”) was from 5.5 to 8.7 km. Of greater relevance to this study, the subject aircraft also carried an experimenter who knew exactly the approach angle of the target aircraft, and “kept constant vigil with his naked eye” until he detected the intruder aircraft. This “threshold distance”, over the same conditions, averaged from 17.3 to 23 km, about three times larger than the detection distance. We will return to these results later in this paper. Analyzing these data, Graham and Orr concluded that see and avoid failures were due primarily to failure to detect the target [1]. No attempt was made to predict aircraft visibility.
It says "over various conditions"; we don't know the color of the dc3 and the background's color (that's the real factor in target detection, not the plane's color but the contrast between it and the background), we don't know if the persons are professional pilots or not (or better, trained military pilots), but the distances are really higher than the ones in IL2 and they still SEE contacts...

But what's the problem? Dots can replace the flight object but what about identification?
A Dot is always the same at +3km, it does not give to us the profile of plane, its direction, the model of that plane. And more Dots are not always plane... in CloD ships are showed as dots at very long distance.

Additionally dots are merging with the background and in the case of the detailed ground we don't have our eyes focusing on it and "excluding" the objects around it: the wider is the speed differential the easier is for our eye to focus on the target...

Don't misread me... target identification is not a easy thing to simulate: they are still studying it and there are dozens of variables. Maybe one we all will be playing on monitor with amazing resolutions and it will be a lesser problem.. but in these days I think that Luther and Co. need to find a solution to it.

Otherwise CloD will be a great flight simulator but an half WW2 combat simulator.

I think that Dots are not the answer. What your opinion?
__________________

A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria.

Last edited by 6S.Manu; 12-13-2011 at 07:15 PM.
Reply With Quote
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:40 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.