Jump to content

SAM Simulator?


dpatt711

SAM Simulator?  

169 members have voted

  1. 1. SAM Simulator?

    • Yes, even "Flaming Cliffs" fidelity SAM sim would be awesome.
    • Yes, but it'd need to be "A-10C" fidelity.
    • No. Point and Click with limited number of platforms offers superior immersion and realism.


Recommended Posts

So I noticed the new PPI for SA-15.

Does this mean we are getting higher fidelity SAM operation?

What I'd like to see personally (And is a realistic goal) is:

Basic Generic 2D vector graphics. It doesn't need to be like the game SAM simulator where you have photorealistic 2D graphics for each SAM. For instance, all fire buttons can look alike, all the A-Scopes can look alike, all the B-Scopes can look alike, etc, etc.

All the different scopes modeled.

Ability to scroll through units in a battery.

This would allow for simplistic control of any SAM unit in the game. Adding a lot of fun to CA.

This would allow game-play as follows.

You take control of a SAM command station. You power everything on. You switch to the search radar station. Here you basically just have a PPI (Or a B-Scope depending on the radar), you can adjust range, azimuth, and "lock" targets. (Basic Functionality, already implemented in the SA-15). When you "Lock" a target, it slews the tracking radar to the approximated azimuth and altitude.

You now switch over to the Fire Control Station. Here you have the fire controls and most likely an augmented B-Scope (Think like the F-15 in TWS, X axis is azimuth, Y axis is range, you see IFF and Attitude) and then you change the altitude you wish to search.) Once you find the target you hard lock it (This is when your target's RWR starts going crazy). Next to the scope you have read outs like you'd see on the F-15 HUD. You'll have an engagement range indexer, time to target, altitude, attitude, velocity, etc. If everything is in order and you have LA you can fire the missile!

It's all basic functionality that already exists in the game. The UI could be simple 2D vector graphics, and the theory, flows, and operation in general is realistic. (More realistic than it is now)

 

I made some sketches in photoshop of what I mean by Generic 2D graphics)

pSq92h4.png

RHZT4Vk.png


Edited by dpatt711
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at the expense of time taken from core projects

 

Cibit, Noone suggests this. Be free and do not fear things that would never happen. This test uses GUI elements just like the F10 map. It is evolution of existing code.

 

Try to answer without fear.

 

===

 

To the OP

 

Does this mean we are getting higher fidelity SAM operation?

 

dpatt711, I think that people who could know the answer won't answer. I think that progress in this area will slow and steady and maybe they will watch what people say. B-Scope and A-scope I do not expect to see before a TV type display showing the locked target.

 

Question for me is would I like to see SAMs get much much more detailed or for this idea of a interactive display to make it's way to many more vehicles.

 

For me it would be more valuable to have an MFD type display for many things than to have just one SAM unit with very detailed functions. This is just my preference and my own opinion.

 

I see a lot of potential for adding MFD controls to CA vehicles and maybe to buildings and also AI aircraft.

 

Add an MFD to a SAM site and and a SAM vehicle?

Add an MFD to an AI A-50 Mainstay and AI E-3 Sentry?

Add an MFD to an airport tower?

Add an MFD for Ground Command (Commanding from forward base or command vehicle)?

Add an MFD to artillery units (Howitzers and Rocket)?

 

===

 

Off topic but what I really want in CA is Drones with target designation and hellfires!!

 

For sure offtopic ... please at least answer to the topic and then add your request. Would it be OK for the drone to have a simple gui display ... probably not a simulation of reaper?

 

So far the GUI for the SAM unit is very simple and we don't know if that will change to become a high level simulation. It may not be the goal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me I'd just be happy (at the moment) with far more realistic RADAR displays, and a proper simulation of VL missiles (like the SA-15 Tor) and back up target tracking systems taken into account - AFAIK most of the Russian SAM systems feature a secondary Electro-Optical tracking system (which is what's actually used half the time to acquire targets). I'd also like to see the missiles flight path not be so 'slide show' like (if you slow down time they appear to not move smoothly etc), proper animations of missiles fins unfolding after launch and improved realism for the VL missiles already implemented (http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=2502456).


Edited by Northstar98

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I haven't seen 1.5 update, but from the experience with the current stable version I can tell that the Combined Arms is begging for a SAM control Panel/Station with at least what the images by @dpatt711 show. Good job dpatt711.

 

The main pain is probably, that you can't lock targets from the radar screen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just discovered RCtrl-F10 using a SA-15 "Tor"

 

Something is already WIP :thumbup:

Screen_151129_152155.thumb.jpg.bac96384427c4462d635b8e7ebcfc08d.jpg

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Waiting to build a F/A-18C home-pit...

ex - Swiss Air Force Pilatus PC-21 Ground Crew

SFM? AFM? EFM?? What's this?

 

 

i7-5960X (8 core @3.00GHz)¦32GB DDR4 RAM¦Asus X99-WS/IPMI¦2x GTX970 4GB SLI¦Samsung 850 PRO 512GB SSD¦TrackIR 5 Pro¦TM Warthog¦MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

check them mig29movt

 

Whilst I think this new display for the SA-15 is a step in the right direction - it still needs major improving in terms of realism. What about the secondary EO targetting for instance? It'd be fantastic if this display is improved with a 3D one that connotes more to what a real SA-15 display would look like

Modules I own: F-14A/B, Mi-24P, AV-8B N/A, AJS 37, F-5E-3, MiG-21bis, F-16CM, F/A-18C, Supercarrier, Mi-8MTV2, UH-1H, Mirage 2000C, FC3, MiG-15bis, Ka-50, A-10C (+ A-10C II), P-47D, P-51D, C-101, Yak-52, WWII Assets, CA, NS430, Hawk.

Terrains I own: South Atlantic, Syria, The Channel, SoH/PG, Marianas.

System:

GIGABYTE B650 AORUS ELITE AX, AMD Ryzen 5 7600, Corsair Vengeance DDR5-5200 32 GB, Western Digital Black SN850X 1 TB (DCS dedicated) & 2 TB NVMe SSDs, Corsair RM850X 850 W, NZXT H7 Flow, MSI G274CV.

Peripherals: VKB Gunfighter Mk.II w. MCG Pro, MFG Crosswind V3 Graphite, Logitech Extreme 3D Pro.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now there is no SA-2Guideline in DCS so maybe someone could do it as full module rather than simplified? Maybe the guy who make Sam Simulator? Because i think it would be strange to have somthing like full Sa-15 Tor with 3d interior and simplified 2d, one version for free and one paid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at the expense of time taken from core projects

 

While this may not be the case for the current pace of the development, I'd actually say that an update to CA to greatly improve player run SAMs should be given priority. The ground game has huge potential and can greatly vary up the current pace of multiplayer gameplay. This is a giant untapped well of content, and streamlineing, refining and improving CA, especially with the introduction of EDGE and better terrain, should most certainly be a priority.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not at the expense of time taken from core projects

 

And what are - in your opinion - the core projects for ED?

 

I would say that everyone would benefit far more if ED would focus for a change to the Combined Arms module and the Black Sea map.

 

And by how?

 

1) While porting BS map to DCS 2.0, just try to get impact model to every three.

So every three would block line of sight, laser, wire, thermal imagine, radar wave etc.

And while at it, change how easily ground units can move trough different terrain. Like infantry moves easily trough a forest and urban area. 4x4 wheeled APC would move easily trough forests while tracked ones would be little slower or requiring more help.

 

2) While porting BS map back, check if there is possibility to use random terrain generation for mapping trees and bushes around satellite imagery where there should be more trees and bushes.

Just so that ground units would not stand out from the terrain so easily and there would be far more cover to them to hide and behave.

 

3) Improving the AI behavior at the ground units by adding basic simulation of the moral and visual senses.

Meaning that AI can't just spot a aircraft from max range or react perfectly and quickly to other unit once being fired upon by surprise.

This would mean a helicopter or other ground unit firing ATGM would have a element of surprise to engage from closer distances than just max, use cannon and rockets with higher success. And naturally there would be far better intelligence for AI to move on roads as first hit near by would not just cause every unit to spread out wide open to be killed in that position, but there would actually be AI doing something smart like driving to nearest concealment (at least), unload infantry and quick prepare defensive to counter air-strikes.

 

4) Finally as the OP suggesting, a SAM simulator where there would be far more players in the servers just operating air defences and even operating AWACS and GCI. It would be great experience for Su-25/A-10/F-18/KA-50/AH-1W/Mi-24 pilots to actually fly against human ground operators.

 

 

All those would make Combined Arms far more useful module and give big challenge for aircraft pilots to fly.

 

Let me quote from "Red Eagles, America's Secret MIGs"

 

The Aggressors mimicked the Soviet use of GCI in order to complete their re-enactment of Soviet fighter doctrine. According to Robert "Kobe" Mayo, then a major in the initial cadre of Aggressors back at the 64th FWS, Nellis:

 

They were fantastic assets. These guys flew with us, briefed with us, were part of the post-fight debriefing, and made it possible for us to do our mission. During our air-to-air engagements they were in there with us and we felt that they were as valuable as another wingman. I remember flying against a flight of two F-4s. During the debrief, I was playing my tape recording of the engagements and you could hear my GCI controller talking to me as if he were another fighter pilot participating in the fight.

 

At one poin in the fight I was engaged with one of the F-4s and "Stump", my GCI guy, was talking almost non-stop. "Kobe, you can press your fight... the other F-4 is across the circle from you ... Kobe, you've got 40 seconds left before he's a threat ... Kobe, come off hard right. The other F-4 is your 5 o'clock and 9000ft, closing." I did break right, picked up the other F-4 and continued the fight. During the debrief when the F-4 guys heard my tape they were convinced that I had brought another wingman in to the engagement.

 

They said, "There is no way any GCI controller could have that much awareness of what's going on by looking at a radar screen. And he is not talking like a GCI controller, he's talking like the fighter pilot that he is!"

They were really upset and I'm not sure to this day that I convinced them that I was the only T-38 in the fight. Our GCI controllers were absolutely fantastic.

Edited by Fri13
Added quotation

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, human players controlling SAM's would be a nice touch for this game. If they implement the tactics of Zoltán Dani it would be a real threat for the people in the sky, rendering them not so immortal any more :thumbup:

 

It would as well render flying low very dangerous, forcing fighters up to the skies to fight among each others.

 

As humans could easily make the NEZ and ambush fighters, changing locations now and then etc.

 

But would it in the end ruin the DCS when fighter pilots couldn't feel to be the gods? ;)

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4) Finally as the OP suggesting, a SAM simulator where there would be far more players in the servers just operating air defences and even operating AWACS and GCI. It would be great experience for Su-25/A-10/F-18/KA-50/AH-1W/Mi-24 pilots to actually fly against human ground operators.

 

Even currently it's amazing to play against a human commander, you'll get punished for every little mistake, it's just a shame not many servers run it, and it causes a lot of lag.

 

Of course if you like turkey shoots, which most players in MP seem to enjoy, it's not the thing for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even currently it's amazing to play against a human commander, you'll get punished for every little mistake, it's just a shame not many servers run it, and it causes a lot of lag.

 

Of course if you like turkey shoots, which most players in MP seem to enjoy, it's not the thing for you.

 

 

I wish that CA would get a far better RTS elements for the tactical map and the view. So we could attract RTS fans to buy the CA and play it.

 

Who would need a dynamic campaign so much if there would be possible to go online and fight against human players doing ground missions and air missions?

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wish that CA would get a far better RTS elements for the tactical map and the view. So we could attract RTS fans to buy the CA and play it.

 

Who would need a dynamic campaign so much if there would be possible to go online and fight against human players doing ground missions and air missions?

 

I think just have a selection box, would be enough for now at least.

 

Server stability is something that is a big issue with CA which is really sad, since it's really fun.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I believe that they should allow control of sam's at least to the degree that tanks are currently modelled in game, and then focus on fc3 style and maybe even high fidelity sam's. So yes, i would love to see sam's in game *cough* patriot and s-300 :music_whistling: :smilewink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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