AMRAAM a bit too smokeless... - Page 2 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-11-2019, 03:17 PM   #11
FoxAlfa
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 58
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGTharos View Post
I suppose it might help the red side some times. But given that atmospheric moisture content doesn't appear to be simulated at all in-game, I have my doubts that it would help (or should help) anywhere outside of contrail zones, if that.
So, technically, no it's not really possible to simulate this accurately.
If you check both videos, neither of the planes are contrailing, since the missile burns at a higher temperature it will generate contrails/vapor at a much lower altitude.

At since, in my humble experience, most of the engagements on PG Blue Flag start near contrail altitude of 6000-8500m where it would help a lot with launch detection. And once Hornet gets TWS I think it will become vital.
FoxAlfa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 03:42 PM   #12
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,730
Default

I also checked videos where no contrails are produced.

The smokeless motor is there because it is an advantage. It's not going away just because it may be helpful in some cases to some people. The entire point is to deny you that vital launch detection (it's really not that vital IMHO) and degrade your SA. And I doubt that ED will implement it without having a proper simulation framework around it either, but who knows.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 04:05 PM   #13
FoxAlfa
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 58
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGTharos View Post
I also checked videos where no contrails are produced.

The smokeless motor is there because it is an advantage. It's not going away just because it may be helpful in some cases to some people. The entire point is to deny you that vital launch detection (it's really not that vital IMHO) and degrade your SA. And I doubt that ED will implement it without having a proper simulation framework around it either, but who knows.
Ok, just to clarify.

Nobody is saying to change the smokeless motor in the one with the smokes to give the advantage to the 'red' players since that would not have to do anything with the reality.

The proposal is that to apply the contrailing/vapor effects (for which there is already a framework for planes) to the missiles with the wider altitude range like in reality, in the end, making a better and more realistic simulation.

And I do respect your opinion, but I would love to hear EDs opinion on this also.
FoxAlfa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 04:45 PM   #14
100KIAP_Falcon
Senior Member
 
100KIAP_Falcon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Република Српска
Posts: 1,139
Default

"Smokeless" in DCS is gift from God. They will not ruin it with some simulations of contrailing/vapor effects.
__________________



100☭ Discord: https://discord.gg/EGrVBHt
100☭ Forum: https://100kiap.org/forum
Teamspeak: 100kiap.teamspeak3.com

If you are a dedicated Flanker pilot, a team player ... join us !!!

100-й Корабельный Истребительный Авиационный Полк

Немој ништа силом, узми већи чекић!
100KIAP_Falcon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 06:07 PM   #15
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,730
Default

And I respect yours but I don't agree with it: The simulation of contrails in DCS is on/off. There are no parameters other than altitude ... well, to be clear my disagreement is this:

I doubt that ED will do this, because to simulate it correctly you would need some sort of moisture content modelling. Depending on how that's done, it might require re-tuning all FMs as well.

Given that missiles may or may not produce contrails (there are plenty of videos where they do not), on/off just takes away from what there is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by FoxAlfa View Post
The proposal is that to apply the contrailing/vapor effects (for which there is already a framework for planes) to the missiles with the wider altitude range like in reality, in the end, making a better and more realistic simulation.

And I do respect your opinion, but I would love to hear EDs opinion on this also.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 07:11 PM   #16
FoxAlfa
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 58
Default

Noted, take it from a former medical simulator/shader programmer, you would be surprised how many stuff in simulations is just on and off since it is "close enough for government work" otherwise everybody would have 5 fps
FoxAlfa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 08:23 PM   #17
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,730
Default

I believe you

I went looking through contrail prediction stuff in the meantime.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 08:34 PM   #18
<Blaze>
Senior Member
 
<Blaze>'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,113
Default

In unrelated news I wonder when we'll get actual weather systems and their effect on IR seekers modeled.
__________________


How do you kill 2 flankers with 1 wing?


A good fighter pilot is either trying to get high or is already high!
<Blaze> is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 08:42 PM   #19
=4c=Nikola
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 274
Default

Quote:
...because to simulate it correctly you would need some sort of moisture content modelling.
And I guess for F-18 intake ice, vapour over wings, wing vortex effects... we do not need some sort of moisture content modeling.
__________________
Do not expect fairness.
The times of chivalry and fair competition are long gone.
=4c=Nikola is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-11-2019, 09:20 PM   #20
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 29,730
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by =4c=Nikola View Post
And I guess for F-18 intake ice, vapour over wings, wing vortex effects... we do not need some sort of moisture content modeling.
They don't. It's just going by temperature, and frankly other than over-wing vapors (which don't make you more/less detectable) the only effect is whether you turn your pitot tube de-ice on/off.

And I'm with blaze, I'd like heat seekers to have limited sight into/through clouds or precipitation first.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos 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 06:11 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.