Jump to content

AV-8BNA is feature complete according to Razbam


Pikey

Recommended Posts

i guess what Fri13 wanted to say is that SVG might fit perfectly for the mfds but not for the hud because of degrading the visual experience there, eg glow and so on.

u can simply look at the viggens hud which is imo most beautiful and immersive , this won t be possible with SVG

 

Until I see the end result, I'll reserve my judgement. The images I HAVE seen of the Harrier-HUD in SVG seems to have little to no loss of quality compared to the DDS-method. And if I get a performace-gain without a quality-gain, I'm happy.

Regards

Fjordmonkey

Clustermunitions is just another way of saying that you don't like someone.

 

I used to like people, then people ruined that for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trying to stay within the bounds of the OP, will the Harrier accurately model the interaction with JTAC? It's not specifically mentioned on the store page list of features, but I would assume that it would be.

 

 

Can JTAC send coordinates and info directly to the CAS page?

 

 

How is this to be answered based on the features listed?

Night Ops in the Harrier

IYAOYAS


 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Very well said Pikey

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

The SVG-change only applies to symbology on the HUD and MPCD's. Which are all simple graphics (the moving map is NOT affected by this, as that's delivered by ED's systems). The reasoning for using SVG is simple: Far less memory intensive than .DDS-textures, far easier to render for the system and both clearer and faster, especially for the VR-users. We all know that DCS is a bit of a CPU- and memory-hog, so this change should help a bit with that.

 

Yes I know, but I can't see such a difference that should be even mentioned. And vector graphics are not "makes your performance better" kind answers really. And likely not either with their quality.

 

I work a lot with vector and bitmap graphics to know that there is a "silver bullet" to be offered by Razbam as explanation.

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

Until I see the end result, I'll reserve my judgement. The images I HAVE seen of the Harrier-HUD in SVG seems to have little to no loss of quality compared to the DDS-method. And if I get a performace-gain without a quality-gain, I'm happy.

 

It all depends about what is your starting point. If your previous work is bad, then any improvement will be an improvement.

But these things ain't silver bullets.

 

One example just needs to go take a look a history of a computer graphics font rendering, example how you right now are reading this text, that how many problems and challenges there has been about getting text crisp and easily readable.... And answer for that has not been "Let's make it SVG and all problems are gone" without own kind problems and challenges.

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

Trying to stay within the bounds of the OP, will the Harrier accurately model the interaction with JTAC? It's not specifically mentioned on the store page list of features, but I would assume that it would be.

 

 

A problem really is about trust here that what is expected from a Early Access itself, and Razbam truly seems to be trying to go through where the fence is lowest and where rules are shady.

 

 

How is this to be answered based on the features listed?

 

It really isn't answered, as the product description does just gather major features that should somewhere include that feature too.

 

But I would already know the answer that is, we are not going to see a TPOD video (with coordinates and all) transmitted to JTAC as that is a ED task to do first. (Who doesn't know, the targeting pod allows transmit video to ground forces who basically can just select the source of transmission and see what is seen by all kind drones and targeting pods. So for a JTAC driver on ground they would get a better quality video screen with them).

And we likely don't get JTAC to hand-off 9-LINE data digitally to Harrier pilot CAS PAGE to be seen and even edited etc. Meaning the JTAC could be making multiple requests and Harrier pilot gets all automatically filled in.

 

IMHO all these fall in the Harrier core features as it is digital Attack aircraft after all. But likely this will go to "ED needs to do it first".

So likely breast they can do is to use a F10 map with markers, as after all Combined Arms IS ED's product.


Edited by Fri13

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

  • 2 weeks later...

So has there been any actual answer on if the ARBS and other systems are gonna actually get credibly modeled?

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally Posted by ruxtmp View Post

So does this mean that a core functionality of this aircraft will not be implemented until Razbam gets access to how it functions? As NATOPS would not be available to them due to export limitations are we also to assume that the possibility of it being implemented is pretty much nil? Finally does this also hold true for ARBS implementation?

I cannot say for certain but when I have information regarding it I will share it.

 

This Question was posted in another thread regarding the LOFT mode but I think Elmo's response may also include the ARBS. I would not expect an answer anytime soon based on the response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So has there been any actual answer on if the ARBS and other systems are gonna actually get credibly modeled?

 

I can not trust that, as I can't currently trust Early Access system.

Talk is cheap, promises are even cheaper, and all comes with costs higher.

 

This was not just Razbam project that got affected, but all and future Early Access modules.

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

They're correctly modeled

 

 

No, not at all. Currently, the ARBS acts like a perfect "INS" mode, with the INS designation mode not even implemented.

 

 

The ARBS needs a track for a certain time to compute an accurate slant range. Currently, it is instantly "perfect" and can track anything, including untextured flat terrain.

 

 

There's a lot more depth to targeting systems than just "put the thing on the thing". The A-10C does a good job of explaining that, so does the Viggen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're correctly modeled

 

LOFL... Nope... not even remotely close.

New hotness: I7 9700k 4.8ghz, 32gb ddr4, 2080ti, :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, HP Reverb (formermly CV1)

Old-N-busted: i7 4720HQ ~3.5GHZ, +32GB DDR3 + Nvidia GTX980m (4GB VRAM) :joystick: TM Warthog. TrackIR, Rift CV1 (yes really).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we will have to just accept Flaming Cliffs level of simulation with the benefit of a clickable cockpit.

 

Or employ the shocking concept of having a bit of patience.

 

Yes yes, I know. You've been patient up to this point etc etc etc.

 

Demanding things right away AND expecting them to be perfect is a surefire sign of the times, I guess.

Regards

Fjordmonkey

Clustermunitions is just another way of saying that you don't like someone.

 

I used to like people, then people ruined that for me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny how people complain that things are not completed and yet 99% of the users here are on open beta.

Supercarrier | Flaming Cliffs 3 | M-2000C | AJS-37 Viggen| MIG-21Bis | L-39 Albatros | Yak-52 | Spitfire LF MK IX | Mig-15Bis | Mig-19P Farmer | P-51D Mustang | F/A-18 | F-14 | F-5E Tiger II | C-101 Aviojet | I-16 | UH-1H Huey | Mil MI-8tv2 | Sa 342M Gazelle | Combined Arms | NS-430 Navigation System | NEVADA | Persian Gulf | Normandy1944 | World war II assets pack | Black Shark 2 | F-5E Agressors ACM campaign |F-5E Agressors BFM Campaign | L-39 Albatros Kursant Campaign | DCS:Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My mistake...are those features completed on Stable release first? I'll transition my install over immediately...

 

 

NO, but the willingness to accept software in a not ready for release state within this community seems very selective. Things have been in EA for years and years without these kinds of blowouts by the community so why the sudden war on Razbam?

Supercarrier | Flaming Cliffs 3 | M-2000C | AJS-37 Viggen| MIG-21Bis | L-39 Albatros | Yak-52 | Spitfire LF MK IX | Mig-15Bis | Mig-19P Farmer | P-51D Mustang | F/A-18 | F-14 | F-5E Tiger II | C-101 Aviojet | I-16 | UH-1H Huey | Mil MI-8tv2 | Sa 342M Gazelle | Combined Arms | NS-430 Navigation System | NEVADA | Persian Gulf | Normandy1944 | World war II assets pack | Black Shark 2 | F-5E Agressors ACM campaign |F-5E Agressors BFM Campaign | L-39 Albatros Kursant Campaign | DCS:Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because status of the module has changed, quietly.

 

And years of silence from DEVs on bugs and missing features, is the difference.

 

In this thread, 10 days ago, I asked:

Trying to stay within the bounds of the OP, will the Harrier accurately model the interaction with JTAC? It's not specifically mentioned on the store page list of features, but I would assume that it would be.

How is this to be answered based on the features listed?

 

I would think that an easy question to answer.

Night Ops in the Harrier

IYAOYAS


 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're correctly modeled

 

Harrier_ARBS1.thumb.jpg.144f11a1b472141b631a2defd1e96799.jpg

 

Harrier_ARBS2.thumb.jpg.0a38b4c4a401310b3ba9147cbc8f41d5.jpg

 

Harrier_ARBS3.thumb.png.2b8e4b518da23457089d5197e680dd65.png

 

We do not have anything like that simulated.

 

  1. ARBS is not calculating accurate release as it should be for bomb delivery as bombs often fall too long or too short from the proper calculated time and flight.
     
  2. DMT is perfect on the moment you lock it using the ground lock, while it should be contrast lock and to calculate the solution you need to give it the angle rate change so you can't just fly toward target etc.
     
  3. We have way too high resolution from TV. This is common problem in DCS that all targeting pods are way too high resolution and way too high contrast, FLIR systems are unrealistic etc (at least FLIR is being redone by ED, so hopefully all optical systems gets serious nerfing).
     
  4. DMT loses totally odd manners the target coordinates after gentle turn back to target, your target coordinates can be now couple kilometers off from the original designation. There is suppose to be some movement because INS drifting and if your aircraft turn rate in seconds goes too high the system can't put the target point back to original but just near by.
     
  5. You can lock the TV up in the air, at the sky or something totally unrealistic. It is contrast based system, you can't lock it on thin air. If you don't have contrast, you don't get the lock.
     
  6. We are missing a contrast lock on air targets, and no it is not same thing as following IR missile seeker point, but actually you can point it at the aircraft in the air and try to get a lock on it if there is a contrast, and you can lose the lock too same way as on the ground.
     
  7. The whole TV/LST slewing is totally broken. At least they seem to have fixed the axis problem that slewing stopped when you moved past the N/E/S/W axis. But we do not have a two-speed slewing so at default it is slow speed for finer aiming and holding TDC down you get high speed. This was like 2-3 years ago modeled but then it got broken and never fixed/added back. We do not have a proper slewing process where you can start slewing the DMT off from the VVI and it is stabilized to it. And it will only be ground stabilized once you get a lock on the contrast. So if you are banking 45 degree to left, then DMT slewing left should move it by your point of view straight left in HUD, but relative to ground 45 degree left. Similar way as in the Su-25T.
  8. We do not need to slew LST to scan the terrain for the laser spot by moving scan pattern up/down but it just magically finds it.
     
  9. The DMT system doesn't have a angle rate limitations, as you can't pull too high rate or it loses a lock.

 

 

The DMT is the heart of the AV-8B Harrier, and the ARBS is the brains of it.

Since the release of Harrier in 2017, just over three years ago (fourth year counting by two months now) those two has been broken, missing features or just....

 

Harrier is a very special aircraft by two main features that separates it from Hornet, Viper and all the rest. They are:

 

1) DMT (Dual Mode Tracker, so TV and LST)

2) V/STOL capability.

 

No one (should have) purchased Harrier because they wanted a TPOD (LITENING II), as that they get with A-10C, F/A-18C, F-16C and in future others.

The Harrier still holds the climb speed record up to 9000 feet (or was it up to 12 000 feet), being faster than even mighty F-15C, and that is because the Pegasus engine is crazy powerful and fast accelerator. But no one should have by the Harrier solely because they want to perform climb records or "Viffing" maneuvers in dog fight.

 

The flight performance in Harrier is part of its unique design and capabilities, but V/STOL is the thing what people want to do.

 

Someone believing that Harrier is "ready" or "feature complete" does not know what a real harrier can, and can't do.

Yes, ED can do that same thing and claim that Su-25T Shkval is correct, while anyone who would read about it and do search for its capabilities and performances, would come to conclusion that Shkval in Su-25T and KA-50 are far from the realistic targeting systems. They do what they are suppose to do, 1) Find a target 2) Lock on target 3) Guide a weapon at the target. But how they do it is the discussion, not that can they really do it or not.

 

The devil is in the detail. And it is lacking, for 4th year and counting....

 

How many can rise their hand and honestly think that Razbam will after 4 years, fix and implement the systems, features and functions AFTER the Early Access?

 

The problem was already up in the discussions 2 years ago, when Harrier didn't really progress as expected. At the 3rd year it became almost silent. And now on fourth year it is "You must trust us, we will complete it".

 

Yes, 10 years later ED is finally adding functions and features missing in KA-50, and that came out without Early Access, but it was in the Beta (IIRC) before that. They clearly stated back in the days "This is not implemented" and it was end of that, simple technical reasons that it was not possible back then, but now it is.

 

Other part of the major Harrier features is the topic. Some experienced people could go through the flight modeling or other systems, but people are upset and angry because one of the major core functions is kept purposely broken. It is not a "Oops, we didn't know that didn't work" or it wasn't a minor like "The button function is reversed" or "the binding is missing" that are somethings that even community has come up with fixes.

 

And these thins are not going to be fixed in a year or a two if one looks at the history of last 3 years!

Promises, Promises and promises.... They are nothing in the business really. Everyone break them as soon they can for their benefits. Look example Facebook what they did with Oculus. Promises were given that Facebook account is never to be required to use VR devices. It didn't take than couple years that got completely reversed and it is a requirement or your device is locked out.

 

If Razbam would come in the next 3-6 months with miracle that they would fix all the tens (hundreds) of bugs, they would rewrite all the DMT related codes, they would communicate with every week with a good reports that what they have been doing and their progress and all, there is thins that would lead a far better business for their upcoming modules.

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

Funny how people complain that things are not completed and yet 99% of the users here are on Early Access.

 

Fixed it for you....

 

Early Access, Trunk, Open Beta, Stable, Feature Completed....

 

What does those things mean?

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

Fixed it for you....

 

Early Access, Trunk, Open Beta, Stable, Feature Completed....

 

What does those things mean?

 

 

I said Open Beta, not Early Access.

Supercarrier | Flaming Cliffs 3 | M-2000C | AJS-37 Viggen| MIG-21Bis | L-39 Albatros | Yak-52 | Spitfire LF MK IX | Mig-15Bis | Mig-19P Farmer | P-51D Mustang | F/A-18 | F-14 | F-5E Tiger II | C-101 Aviojet | I-16 | UH-1H Huey | Mil MI-8tv2 | Sa 342M Gazelle | Combined Arms | NS-430 Navigation System | NEVADA | Persian Gulf | Normandy1944 | World war II assets pack | Black Shark 2 | F-5E Agressors ACM campaign |F-5E Agressors BFM Campaign | L-39 Albatros Kursant Campaign | DCS:Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And years of silence from DEVs on bugs and missing features, is the difference.

 

Exactly. ED or Heatblur has a product in Early Access and they communicate, they perform fixes, implement new systems... They do a lot of things that will eventually result that product that moves out of Early Access is really a "feature completed" that it can be recommended to be bought by those who does not want to go for Open Beta and suffer from severe bugs and all.

 

In this thread, 10 days ago, I asked:

Trying to stay within the bounds of the OP, will the Harrier accurately model the interaction with JTAC? It's not specifically mentioned on the store page list of features, but I would assume that it would be. How is this to be answered based on the features listed?

 

I would think that an easy question to answer.

 

I can try to light up that thing for others if they don't know what is being asked.

 

A one soldier came up with an idea to build a capability for their team to tap in the video feed from various drones and targeting pods. It took four hours from the developer team to design the device, write the documentation for the requirements and purpose. Three weeks later the device was ready to be tested, and it went to combat trials with that one soldier. The device is called "ROVER" (Remote Operated Video Enhanced Receiver).

 

The ROVER is currently (AFAIK) in the Generation 5.

The gen 1 was a few kilogram box with antenna, video decoder and battery, and it was connected to military specs Toshiba laptop with cable and used a customized Irfanview image viewer that has capability as well to show video data from LITENING II. A soldier on the ground could quickly pull laptop and ROVER out from backpack, select a source and get a video feed on their laptop screen showing that what a source targeting pod was feeding to pilot. The video quality was much better than what the pilot got.

 

The gen 2 was to shrink the box smaller and lighter. Still a same principle with the laptop and all.

 

The Gen 3 added new sources, for drones and other pods got compatibility for decoding. There came a features to send freetext to pilots and digital CAS transmissions, so soldier on ground built a CAS mission and set it to the pilot that simply accepted or reclined from it. This is the system that is at least our Harrier is using, that radio is just backup use while JTAC communicates with the Harrier pilot directly with the ROVER terminal and filling automatically CAS page. There came ways to draw on the video or send pictures with drawings and text on it to the pilot screen. This fastened the situation awareness as pilot knows exactly where strike is needed. No talking, no coordinates, just "There" and it is clear.

 

MIL_JTAC_w_Rover_Al-Udeid_AB_Qatar_lg.jpg

 

The Gen 4 made laptop go away. The antenna, display, battery and all were built as one unit.

 

The Gen 5 made everything far smaller. It is not much bigger than a handheld console like a Sony PSP. The new addition is a radio communication capability with the pilot. So the soldier on the ground and pilot up in the air can talk to each others without soldier requiring a separate radio.

 

060801-F-0000D-003.JPG

ROVER 5G (2006)

 

130425-F-GK203-121.JPG

Firestorm system: https://manualzz.com/doc/22532141/firestorm%E2%84%A2-integrated-targeting-system

 

For the Razbam defense, they can't do these things unless they can add a own new ground units to Combined Arms.

Meaning, ED needs to come up with a new infantry foot soldier on the ground (they need to come with many, from ATGM teams to mortar teams and such) that would have that kind small lightweight terminal in their hands.

That soldier would then be used in various vehicles as well, and it would offer a "MFCD" where player can see the linked video feed (with all the overlaid data like coordinates etc) that is available ("scan the air" and get a list of available sources) and then operate that kind device to communicate with the pilot and generate the digital CAS tasks.

 

This would allow any player who owns a Combined Arms module, to choose to mount on vehicle to be transported (again great reason to have helicopter pilots available) on location from where to move on foot to observation location to create a task on sight. Have a another soldier model that would have a laser designator and you have powerful team in hands to be played by players. A player could be commanding a ground vehicle unit and have access to ROVER and have an instant easy accessibility to communicate with the player flying in Harrier up in the skies and generate the CAS tasks for the pilot.

 

Razbam can't do that alone, it should be the ED job to really create that possibility. ED is working with the infantry soldiers models and animations, they are making new terrain engine so likely would fit better for infantry and vehicles. They are getting new FLIR system and weather engine and all.

 

But if all would go nicely, we should get a proper JTAC teams, ROVER terminals for ground troops and so on.

 

It would very seriously enhance the Harrier capability to support ground forces.

I don't know does the Hornet or Viper has anything like the CAS page, but they can as well transmit the video feed and receive the data from the ground as that technology is built-in the targeting pods, not to aircraft itself.


Edited by Fri13

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 said Open Beta, not Early Access.

 

Yes you did, but I corrected you to understand what Early Access was used previously as excuse that things shouldn't be expected to be ready as "Harrier is still in Early Access".

 

Now it is "It is in Open Beta", while it is released already to Stable one....

 

Fact is, Harrier is not anywhere, at any moment, by any means ready to be called "Feature Completed" for getting out of Early Access (Razbam wanted to get Harrier out of Early Access in 2008, that was 1 year after release, and 2 years ago from now).

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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