** UPDATE: Ground Radar 2.0 & Multiplayer Flight Planning ** - Page 16 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-11-2018, 09:31 PM   #151
Holton181
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Far north
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Grover View Post
Could you try the default radar settings with "Rocket Attack" mission? Also, could you check that you have no controller axis assigned to the radar gain axis? If you have an axis assigned, could you disable it for the test? It looks that your radar gain settings might have been very far from the default value.

The screenshots from the first post in this topic were taken in the default air start settings - LOG - with no more than two clicks on the gain used and without changing the antenna elevation.
Here they come. Nothing changed unless otherwise stated.

All settings default, radar gain on axis assignment max.
Click image for larger version

Name:	All default RG on Axis.jpg
Views:	76
Size:	611.9 KB
ID:	199660

All settings default, radar gain not on axis assignment.
Click image for larger version

Name:	All default RG not on Axis.jpg
Views:	64
Size:	741.1 KB
ID:	199661

All settings default except gain, on max with keys, radar gain not on axis assignment.
Click image for larger version

Name:	Gain max RG not on Axis.jpg
Views:	53
Size:	605.9 KB
ID:	199662

All settings default, radar gain not on axis assignment, July same time of day and "summer clear sky no wind" weather preset.
Click image for larger version

Name:	All default RG not on Axis Summer CAVOK.jpg
Views:	47
Size:	672.7 KB
ID:	199663

On all above I had about 25 FPS while heads down on radar screen. I also tested to turn off the mirrors, increased FPS to around 35 but did not have any effect on the image. Turning to summer had basically the same effect as turning up the gain slightly, and also increased the FPS a bit.
All game settings and modification to the miz file was followed by a DCS restart.


LOG mode still not really usable in this situation while perfect in 1.5.7.



My conclusion on the Radar Gain with axis assignment problem is that I don't seem to have it? When I have it assigned to an axis my default gain is the same as if not assigned to an axis and tuned up with key commands. And my lowest gain axis setting result in a completely blank screen, same as for keys only.

Both missions I have used for the tests are attached.


I did test the "Rocket Attack" mission, same modification procedure as with Interdiction (filename explains it all):
Click image for larger version

Name:	View 10km @ 1500m 1.5.7.jpg
Views:	38
Size:	965.9 KB
ID:	199666
Click image for larger version

Name:	All default 10km @ 1500m 1.5.7.jpg
Views:	46
Size:	716.2 KB
ID:	199667
Click image for larger version

Name:	View 10km @ 1500m 2.5.3.jpg
Views:	31
Size:	970.2 KB
ID:	199668
Click image for larger version

Name:	All default 10km @ 1500m 2.5.3.jpg
Views:	44
Size:	778.3 KB
ID:	199669
Click image for larger version

Name:	View 5km @ 1000m 1.5.7.jpg
Views:	33
Size:	1.05 MB
ID:	199670
Click image for larger version

Name:	All default 5km @ 1000m 1.5.7.jpg
Views:	45
Size:	721.2 KB
ID:	199671
Click image for larger version

Name:	View 5km @ 1000m 2.5.3.jpg
Views:	36
Size:	1.04 MB
ID:	199672
Click image for larger version

Name:	All default 5km @ 1000m 2.5.3.jpg
Views:	45
Size:	736.7 KB
ID:	199673
The default seams to be usable here but more washed out than 1.5.7. The missions for 2.5.3 are attached.




EDIT:
When I talk about "usable" in this context, I refer to nav fix situations, not target acquisition.
Attached Files
File Type: miz Interdiction radar test.miz (741.2 KB, 1 views)
File Type: miz Interdiction radar test summer CAVOK.miz (741.4 KB, 1 views)
File Type: miz AJS-37 Rocket attack radar test.miz (10.0 KB, 1 views)
File Type: miz AJS-37 Rocket attack radar test 10km.miz (10.0 KB, 1 views)
__________________
Helicopters and Viggen
DCS 1.5.7 and OpenAlpha
Win7 Pro 64bit
i7-3820 3.60GHz
P9X79 Pro
32GB
GTX 670 2GB
VG278H + a Dell
PFT Lynx
TrackIR 5

Last edited by Holton181; 12-11-2018 at 09:34 PM.
Holton181 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2018, 12:19 AM   #152
Super Grover
Junior Member
 
Super Grover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22
Default

Great, now, your second radar image is very close to mine. So indeed your previous pictures were taken with very high gain settings.
I thought that was the issue - a very dark terrain - as it was very different from the screenshots everyone presented. However, now I believe that you might refer to the shape of the lake that was visible in 1.5.7 and now is gone. And it's all related to the interpolation algorithm used. Previously, the algorithm was very aggressive and tried to fill even very long gaps in the returned signal. Now, it's improved and should not present false information about the terrain when no information is available. Let me illustrate it with an example:

The view:




And the corresponding radar image, using both the old and the new algorithms:



There are more empty areas when using the new algorithm than when using the old algorithm, and those areas represent the invisible sides of the hills and ridges. This way you can properly interpret the rising terrain (darker shade), the ridges (the edges) and the regions which are invisible for the radar. Unfortunately, those obscured areas look very similar to water.

Back to your original testing spot. By coincidence, at that specific location, the old interpolation algorithm filled the gaps, recreating the shape of the lake on the radar display. It looked like the map of that region, but it was less realistic as the radar had no information about those points.

I hope that this explains the difference you observed.
Regards
__________________
Krzysztof Sobczak

Heatblur Simulations
https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Last edited by Super Grover; 12-12-2018 at 01:25 AM.
Super Grover is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2018, 05:41 AM   #153
Holton181
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Far north
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Grover View Post
...
Yes, I understand that the radar needs line of sight and should not give information about things behind obstacles. That part is much better, thanks. But my problem is different. If you look at the first picture in post #142, the ocular view (or whatever I should call it), you can see it has line of sight of that particular part of the lake I'm interested in, the beak straight below B3 and perfect for a radar fix (I'm not a native English speaker, "beak" is the best word I found for what we Sweeds call an "udde", that small land mas stretching out in the lake). When using LIN I do get a good picture (after some tricky, sensitive adjustments of the elevation using only buttons since no axis can be assigned), but in LOG it's basically impossible, especially for B-scope. You did get a return showing the beak in post #148 (but it was very washed out and hard to see), I guess it was maybe due to slightly different location/altitude than in my examples.
Now, I don't know enough about radars to say that this issue, if an issue at all, is wrong or realistic, it's just that I get the feeling that on this distance (10km), elevation difference (about 400m) and line of sight, a better and more clear picture in both LIN and LOG mode should be possible, with less hassle with the elevation (i.e. in a wider range).
Never since the introduction of DCS 2.x I have been able to use that B3 as a radar fix point while actually flying (no active pause), well in no mission actually, while in 1.5.x it is very easy. I do believe the Ground Radar 2.0 will make it better and easier overall, but I really looked forward to be able to use that B3 again... ;-)
__________________
Helicopters and Viggen
DCS 1.5.7 and OpenAlpha
Win7 Pro 64bit
i7-3820 3.60GHz
P9X79 Pro
32GB
GTX 670 2GB
VG278H + a Dell
PFT Lynx
TrackIR 5
Holton181 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2018, 05:49 AM   #154
amalahama
Senior Member
 
amalahama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Ein helles, bitte
Posts: 1,275
Default

Looking at the first picture in #142, I can see that new radar 2.0 representation is indeed more correct; you have some hills obscuring the radar LOS that are not shown in the old version. Just pay attention to the right side, there are hills whose radar Shadow is not existing in 1.5.7.

The problem is that hills' shadows and water bodies share same color which makes the picture somewhat confusing, but it's correct; water absorbs almost all radar energy so no return is detected.
__________________

amalahama is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2018, 05:57 AM   #155
Holton181
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Far north
Posts: 966
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amalahama View Post
...
Yes I know that, but I'm not interested in the overall shape of the lake, only that landmass (wrong spelling before, sorry) below B3 going out in the lake, clearly visible for the pilot and in line of sight for the radar.
__________________
Helicopters and Viggen
DCS 1.5.7 and OpenAlpha
Win7 Pro 64bit
i7-3820 3.60GHz
P9X79 Pro
32GB
GTX 670 2GB
VG278H + a Dell
PFT Lynx
TrackIR 5
Holton181 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2018, 08:21 PM   #156
corvinus
Member
 
corvinus's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Posts: 203
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amalahama View Post
Looking at the first picture in #142, I can see that new radar 2.0 representation is indeed more correct; you have some hills obscuring the radar LOS that are not shown in the old version. Just pay attention to the right side, there are hills whose radar Shadow is not existing in 1.5.7.

The problem is that hills' shadows and water bodies share same color which makes the picture somewhat confusing, but it's correct; water absorbs almost all radar energy so no return is detected.
Actually at shallow angles water reflects almost all waves in the forward direction. There is some backscatter which is not very pronounced compared to hills etc. For radio waves to be absorbed you have to transmit at very steep angles, which typically do not happen in a low flying Viggen. The conclusion does not change though.
corvinus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2018, 06:23 AM   #157
Cobra847
3rd Party Developer
 
Cobra847's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Helsingborg, Sweden
Posts: 2,682
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amalahama View Post
Thank you very much heatblur! I tested it yesterday and I'm really pleased with the results, now it behaves how it should! Impact on fps is minimal, if any. I know praise and encourage are important for you, so I wanted to spend some minutes to leave my positive feedback!
Thank you!
__________________
Nicholas Dackard

Founder & Lead Artist
Heatblur Simulations

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/
Cobra847 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-13-2018, 05:47 PM   #158
=Bobby=
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 56
Default

Thank you for supporting this excellent module !
=Bobby= 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 07:39 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.