Jump to content

Does the TGP/FLR simulate optical tracking?


Pixar

Recommended Posts

Hi,

 

I have question with respect to the FLIR tracking modes. As you probably know, the Area Track and Point Track of the TGP/FLIR are optical tracking modes. Do you know if that is simulated by DCS?

 

The reason I am asking is that I don't see the value of using Area Track at the moment, especially since you can't move around the crosshair while in that mode, which I find very strange. Of course you can use the offset, but also that behaviour feels a little off and awkward.

 

In real life there is the Stabilized Track, which is an INR mode, subject to drifting and inaccuracies, also for the target height information.

 

Usually, in order to get better and accurate data, the pilot would switch to Area Track. This is a pure optical tracking mode, where the picture infomation is evaluated and the system will get more accurate data.

 

Point Track is usually used for moving targets, and is also a pure optical tracking mode, where the picture is evaluated. However, you could also use this mode on a static target. For example if you want to target a specific point of a building, like a window, chimney etc. This mode provides much better height information for this target location. It is also good to use on static targets, if you have alot of movement arount the target and you don't want the Area Track to be confused by that. In this case you would also you Point Track on a static object.

 

However, I don't think that DCS is simulating real optical tracking and the target data is probably always correct. Am I right?

 

If this is the case, I don't see the benefit between Stabilized Track (INR) and Area Track, as both would give the same target information. In the end it is in there for completeness and I highly appreciate that. But using Stabilized Track or Area track will not give different results. Only the procedure is different and a little strange in Area Track. Therefore, I can imagine a lot of virtual pilots will stick to Stabilized Track and will not use Area Track for targeting static objects.

Asus TUF Gaming Z690 Plus Wifi D4 ** Intel i9-12900K ** RTX3090 Gigabyte Gaming OC ** 64 GB DDR4-3600 G.Skill Ripjaws ** Samsung 980 Pro M.2 ** Windows 11

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it's modelled or not. I've posted before on the subject. In the A-10 I've had a point lock on a target, the TGP got completely masked by the jet, and even though the unit I was tracking changed directions in the meantime, after it was un-obscured, I still had a point lock on it. In the F-18 though, my point lock was lost when the target got obscured from the terrain. Never tested it, just recall the behavior from various sorties. One thing is for sure, I couldn't get a point lock on a unit traveling through trees, but the TGP will happily track a unit that already had a point lock and that unit travels into a forest. I thought it was using inertia to continue to track, but if the unit stops or changes direction, it continues to be tracked, even though I can't see it. So it's not simulating or calculating optical contrast, either its cheating or it's a bug.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@launchedsquid: I use manual bombing. If the enemy is spoofing the gps or my laser has a hickup, I want to be able to deliver manually ;)

 

@Vanguard: The point track is a pure optical tracking mode. So if the pod is masked or the target is driving behind a building or another object, the pod is using a prediction algorithm for the target position, using the velocity vector, before the target was masked. However, that only works for up to 10-15 seconds. After that, the pod would drop out of point track, if it is not picking up the target visually again.

 

So if a target it going in one direction, but then becomes masked by the aircraft structure or another object and is changing direction, the chance that the pod will automatically pick up the target again is very low. In DCS, the target position is known all the time and is also always perfect. Therefore, the pod works better than in real life and sometimes worse ;)

Asus TUF Gaming Z690 Plus Wifi D4 ** Intel i9-12900K ** RTX3090 Gigabyte Gaming OC ** 64 GB DDR4-3600 G.Skill Ripjaws ** Samsung 980 Pro M.2 ** Windows 11

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand how it works and agree with what you're saying, my point was more about the fact that it not only has great precision for a target that changes direction, it certainly isn't modeling the "optical" aspect, as it continues to track a unit through a forest. If I couldn't get a point lock in the first place, it shouldn't be able to continue to track it through the trees either (far more than the 10-15 seconds) I know its tracking because if the unit stops while hidden in the trees, the TGP still maintains lock. It shouldn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it depends right. If you track in IR and have a moving bright contrast in the trees, you could track it. Also if it stops and you still see the bright heat signature and contrast of that vehicle.

 

DCS is probably not simulating that though. It is tracking, because the location is always known.


Edited by Pixar
Typo

Asus TUF Gaming Z690 Plus Wifi D4 ** Intel i9-12900K ** RTX3090 Gigabyte Gaming OC ** 64 GB DDR4-3600 G.Skill Ripjaws ** Samsung 980 Pro M.2 ** Windows 11

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, IRL, it should work. It will be interesting to see if they will update and tweak the TGP behavior modelling along with the upcoming FLIR update. I can still recall lots of footage form the TV show Cops 10 years ago, police helo with a mounted FLIR easily tracking a suspect running through the trees without issue at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...