Target visibility

[pupaxx]

guys,
your disquisition is cleverly conducted with high technical competence, you have my cheering and regard,..but my question is...would be relistic in CloD and contemporary flight sims reproduce a convincing target spotting considering that a contact, spotted 5 miles away, (considering at the common resolutions we actually play) is rendered by no more than 4-5 pixels?
I mean, if you consider 4-5 pixels (but even with 15-20) with all the permutations they can be arranged in and color gradients they can assume, can be possible differentiate a me109 from a spit or mustang or F16; and reproduce all of them in all brightness conditions? I think the res is the limit.
Cheers

[6S.Manu]

Originally Posted by pupaxx

guys,
your disquisition is cleverly conducted with high technical competence, you have my cheering and regard,..but my question is...would be relistic in CloD and contemporary flight sims reproduce a convincing target spotting considering that a contact, spotted 5 miles away, (considering at the common resolutions we actually play) is rendered by no more than 4-5 pixels?
I mean, if you consider 4-5 pixels (but even with 15-20) with all the permutations they can be arranged in and color gradients they can assume, can be possible differentiate a me109 from a spit or mustang or F16; and reproduce all of them in all brightness conditions? I think the res is the limit.
Cheers

You are right pupaxx, it's our initial problem.

The solution is a background function that give you informations about that the virtual pilot see even if you (the player) are not able to see anything in your monitor (in reality you can not see the 3D model or its lod if you don't detect it).

We need to show to the player those informations: it has not to be something arcade as tha hated IL2's F6 key or full time labels.

[pupaxx]

For me would be satisfactory a linear scaling of LODs, with no holes approaching, and ensure the visibility of the target by a clever usage of contrasts (balancing the contrast of the background and A/C based on color/camo and brightness).
I consider natural to sniff the contact to ascertain the nature of it before consider a reaction; when my opponent is Human, whatever is the condition of advantage or disadvantage( in terms of tactical position or visibility), I'm assured by the fact we both have equal footing. Against AI, and this make me crazy in all sims, we are eternally in disadvantage, AI knows all of us since 15 miles away.GRRRRR.... and it never lost sight of us (behind a cloud...ops.. in CloD clouds are not modeled yet eh eh..another thread...or sun blinded)
Ciao, thanks

[MBF]

Originally Posted by 6S.Manu

You are right pupaxx, it's our initial problem.

The solution is a background function that give you informations about that the virtual pilot see even if you (the player) are not able to see anything in your monitor (in reality you can not see the 3D model or its lod if you don't detect it).

We need to show to the player those informations: it has not to be something arcade as tha hated IL2's F6 key or full time labels.

No, the solution is to increase your screen resolution if you want improved detection.

You cannot compare real life values to game values if your screen resolution is within regular commercial ranges (1920x1200 or lower). If they changed the dot to be whatever you'd see ingame at a given range and the aircraft model at that range had less than 1x1 pixels^2 projected surface, you'd still see a dot.

So if you want better detection and better viewing range, get more screens

[6S.Tamat]

pupaxx indeed that is the problem: the limit of the rendering-monitor and the real life.
So there are people that want not a real life sight system because an icon system is hurting their feelings.
I understand perfectly that the icons are terrible (at least as they are in Il2 and Cod), invasive, immersion killing etc etc, but i felt also with manu that there were things not realistic in the way that the contact were simulated.

But for beeing sure and stop all the "i think that you are wrong" we searched for documents wrote from reliable sources.
The collecting is still in going and the scheme about the f-16 contact seeing is interesting ( where did u take it?).

At the end i think that, once a reasonable and verified data collection is made, we should test out the results on Cod and, if the results as it seems now are different from the reality ones, start to think about how to solve that problem in a way that is affordable from the community and implementable from the programmers.

Obviously nothing is assuring us that the programmers will not throw everything off as junk or simply not reading at all about it, but our goal is to have a correct simulator to fly and to enjoy, without pretending to be aces because we see contacts 100 km away or to be blind because we see barely at 3 Km..

[Insuber]

BTW with the new settings, in ATAG the dots are now visible (sometimes) from far away, but they still tend to disappear suddenly.
Farther dots are grayish, a nice effect imho, and closer dots are darker. Maybe as a stopgap measure it's just enough to improve and debug the present dot system (contrast, visibility at all distances, LOD) as pupaxx was suggesting, and adding the radio vectoring system for historical and playability reasons. Then the long term solution could be further evaluated, but with a more playable (and sellable) game.

Cheers!

[Anders_And]

rHey guys, I work as an airline pilot and I read this post before I went to work this morning and thought that I will try this out today while on cruise altitude. We have a so called Multifunction display on the flight deck that shows all the traffic around you as you fly.

This is my conclusion (My eyesight is perfect... so far...)
At 5nm (9.2km) I can usually easily spot an AC and i can even tell what type is it is. However at thi distance its very difficult to tell if is a 737 or an Airbus as the share similiar shapes. Smaller planes are very difficult to ID at this distance. You can usually tell, if its a Kingair (due to its T-tail) or smaller, but to know exactly is almost impossible.
Remember that a 737 or Airbus are alot bigger than the planes we talk about in game!!
Also these planes are white against a blue or green background and that makes them alot easier to spot! many times someone is passing you, according to your instruments, at say 15km and same altitude and both of us try hard to see him but in some light conditions u see noone even though u know he is there somewhere! Obviosuly at night its alot easier with the strobes and beacons flashing.

Im not so sure i would be able to even see a 109 at 10km or maybe even 6-7km and I certainly would not be able to ID such as small plane untill ALOT closer!

[6S.Tamat]

I obviously agree totally with you; indeed we were talking about seeing a contact, not identificating.

We can think also about identification but perhaps is a slippery slope..

[6S.Manu]

Hi Anders, thanks for your addition to the thread.

With your experience can you help us to better understand the result of the test on the document? Note that the ones on the graph are max distances, so they could only decrease.

In the first post we have a test where pilots look for a DC3 and detect it (unassisted) in collision path at 5,5-8,7km (being in a collision path I assume that they are looking at front/side). According to the graph the DC3 should have a MAX distance of detection of 9km FV and 14,5km SV (FV = 226sf, SV = 592sf... measures taken with not so detailed blueprints). If they are not trained in spotting ACs I think it can be a truthful result and anyway it's probable that optimal conditions are not available.

A 737 is bigger than a DC3 and in the same conditions it should be more visible.

Can I ask if you are using a specific method to scan the sky? Is it like the one explained in the doc?

[6S.Manu]

It's not an official document but I think the site's name is notable.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...raft-early.htm

During World War I (!!!), visual detection in daylight did not exceed 15 miles. Experiments with stealth capabilities occurred as far back as the early part of the 1900s when Germany tested an aircraft with a transparent wing, designed to make it difficult to spot by observers on the ground.

During WWII, The US Navy's Project Yehudi used lights mounted on the leading edges of the wings of a torpedo bomber to successfully hide the plane in broad daylight when attacking a submarine. Visual detection range in the tests dropped substantially from 12 to 2 miles.

EDIT: About Project Yehudi, in the test they used an TBM 3D Avenger.

http://books.google.com/books?id=q06...bomber&f=false