SA page design/concerns - Page 2 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-11-2019, 01:23 PM   #11
QuiGon
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 8,377
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gekoiq View Post
I don't think NCTR by itself would mark a target as friend/foe, NCTR attempts to identify what type of aircraft it is, since there are aircraft that are flown by both sides in some conflicts you would not be able to positively ID a contact as enemy based on what type of aircraft. However the pilot using his judgement could manually mark a contact based on what type of aircraft NCTR showed.
Depending on the conflict you would know if a certain type of aircraft is hostile. If the system gets configured prior to the flight that a certain aircraft type can only be hostile, then it would be able to automatically classify them based on NCTR.
__________________
Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + Windows 10 64Bit

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

QuiGon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 01:27 PM   #12
burritto
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 6
Default

It seems a very common misperception that IFF is able to be used as a sole means to declare someone hostile but this is very rarely the case. The decision to declare an aircraft/track as hostile will depend upon the rules of engagement in force, which in turn will depend upon the situation. They are 'operator' decisions, not technological ones. A positive response to IFF will generally mean that the track is a friend, but a non-positive return just means that the status of the track is unknown. It could be hostile, or neutral, or even friendly (as your interrogator may be unserviceable, or their transponder unserviceable). The confusion is worsened when people refer to the HUD symbology on the F/A18 for IFF response as either friend or hostile - it should start as Unknown, and then if there is a POSITIVE response to IFF interrogation it would change to friendly, but UNKNOWN would be the default state. Other methods of NCTR may aid the declaration of hostile, if for example an aircraft type is only operated by one side or the other (which is often not the case). This potential for confusion could even apply to visual ID, if an aircraft type is operated by both sides. But overall, it would be an operator's, decision taken with the help of the technology, on whether an aircraft is hostile, friendly or unknown (unknown should be the default until decided otherwise). Self defence aside, ROE would decide if the operator able to make the decision was in the fighter, or in the command aircraft/position. I do not know if the buttons on the displays referred to above are filters, or a means to declare a track. Or if they are used to classify a track, whether that information is sent to others on the datalink and into the recognised air picture. To me, they look like filters. My own experience from Link 16 operations was that only command units (for example AWACS or GCI) had the ability to declare any particular track as hostile, and we as fighter aircraft would output tracks as Unknowns. Our tracks may have then subsequently been classified by a command unit as Hostile, and would be correlated on our in cockpit displays. If we had a valid IFF response from a radar track, then those would generally be passed as a Friendly by our system. That was from an older RAF system no longer in service, so I don't know if things have changed in more recent times.
burritto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 01:35 PM   #13
QuiGon
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 8,377
Default

Thanks burrito for making that clear! That shows how important operator input is and that not everything can happen automagically.
__________________
Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + Windows 10 64Bit

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!


Last edited by QuiGon; 01-11-2019 at 02:34 PM.
QuiGon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 02:18 PM   #14
Banzaiib
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 331
Default

If i read the OP correctly, he's worried about people trolling or incorrectly assigning friendly to tracks on purpose. The same was said for RIO's ejecting in the F-14. I frequent DDCS a lot and have been exclusively engaged in multiplayer DCS for 5 years. (I literally have 0 time in single player). I don't think this is a great concern. Especially in DDCS, there is a pretty good respect for the community, and if you get black balled, it's not like you can just go find another server like that to troll around on. There's blue-flag, and then the 104th when they're running a campaign style map, TAW has a good continuous campaign server, and that's about it. It's a tiny community (compared to many other online games) and with that means there isn't as much troll-anonymity as typical of a lot of gaming communities. You get identified pretty quickly, and the consequences are pretty severe.

Just my 2 cents (which is all its worth).

Last edited by Banzaiib; 01-11-2019 at 02:23 PM.
Banzaiib is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 02:26 PM   #15
QuiGon
Veteran
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Germany
Posts: 8,377
Default

I don't think he's referring to trolling. He says that with all that automation in regards to contact classification there will be a huge loss for the players part in regards to target identification, especially on servers with human AWACS/GCI.
__________________
Intel i7-4790K @ 4x4GHz + 16 GB DDR3 + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + Windows 10 64Bit

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

QuiGon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 02:31 PM   #16
(504)Blade+
Posting Rights Revoked
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: aka (504)Rusky
Posts: 135
Default

Burrito good job explaining that, guess the man in the loop still has the final say. The gives good credence to what Piky was saying really.
(504)Blade is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 05:31 PM   #17
burritto
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Posts: 6
Default

With regards to what Pikey was saying, I would expect that an AWACS aircraft that was Link capable would indeed classify tracks and that these would appear on a fighter's screen as hostiles. In much the same way that a call from these AWACS aircraft call hostile aircraft, though the SA building is so much easier with a picture in front of you. In the case of multiplayer, you would have the option of not having an AWACS for those automated calls (and datelined tracks), or having it. I guess if you wanted an AWACS not to contribute to the picture (by having it manned by someone rather than the AI), then you would want the option to put the AWACS on a different L16 Net, which will come down to how well the datalink is modelled. Given that on multiplayer you may want L16 capable aircraft on different sides, I would hope that different nets would be an option.
burritto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-12-2019, 03:15 AM   #18
verana_ss
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 104
Default

nvm...

Last edited by verana_ss; 01-12-2019 at 11:14 AM. Reason: thread was about gameplay expansion..
verana_ss is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 08:44 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.