** UPDATE: Ground Radar 2.0 & Multiplayer Flight Planning **

[Holton181]

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.

 

All settings default, radar gain not on axis assignment.

 

All settings default except gain, on max with keys, radar gain not on axis assignment.

 

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

 

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):

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.

Interdiction radar test.miz

Interdiction radar test summer CAVOK.miz

AJS-37 Rocket attack radar test.miz

AJS-37 Rocket attack radar test 10km.miz

Edited December 11, 2018 by Holton181

[Super Grover]

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

Edited December 12, 2018 by Super Grover

[Holton181]

...

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... ;-)

[amalahama]

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.

[Holton181]

...

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.

[corvinus]

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.

[Cobra847]

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! :)

[Bobby]

Thank you for supporting this excellent module ! :thumbup:

[Niki75]

Dis awesome!

[rainyday]

That new radar is a thing of beauty!

[rainyday]

Thanks for the update, awesome stuff. Couple things I picked up when reading the patch notes:

 

Interior engine sounds now loop properly

 

It seems better - but there is still a noticeable 'pause' when the throttle is at just below stage 1 afterburner.

 

Fixed RAT projecting through intake on left side of fuselage

 

I dunno what it is but there's still something poking thru in my left intake.

 

Small things - but I'd thought I'd point them out anyways. Keep up the good work :thumbup:

[JokerMan]

I will add a Thank You also ...

The continued improvements and developments to the Viggen are simply fantastic and reinforce why you guys are leading the way in terms of aircraft development.

S!

[DAN]

As a real life Airborne sensor operator I am really impressed with wath you have done with the radar. Bought the Tomcat and I am honestly really close to buy the Viggen now.

 

 

Great work guys. If you need help for anything let me know. Qualified on AN/APS and MX sensors.

[Leadnap]

Bought the Tomcat and I am honestly really close to buy the Viggen now.

 

You won't regret it....

[toilet2000]

I was just wondering if I'm the only one with this problem with the radar picture:

 

In VR, it feels like the lower contrast compared to the DCS 1.5 makes it much harder to see details. Everything looks more washed out than in 2D. Am I the only one with this problem? Could it be because of my gamma settings?

[Leadnap]

I was just wondering if I'm the only one with this problem with the radar picture:

 

In VR, it feels like the lower contrast compared to the DCS 1.5 makes it much harder to see details. Everything looks more washed out than in 2D. Am I the only one with this problem? Could it be because of my gamma settings?

 

I don't have VR (yet) but I swap between 2D and T-IR which I certainly notice differences in the views (which is very weird) but I haven't noticed a difference in radar image quality.

[corvinus]

The version that shipped today has poor performance in the 120km mode per our benchmarks.

Please report if you also see reduced performance in the lower range modes however.

 

We've fixed the 120km issue and that fix should be available on the next patch.

 

 

Works like a charm now!

[Leadnap]

Works like a charm now!

 

Same here - was doing some flying earlier today and the system didn't even seem to notice the change between 15 and 120. Bravo!

[Worrazen]

Radar 2.0 making drama already I guess, hehe , I want to see that myself and for my support of the rendering tech going forward with modules and/or DCS core.

 

I couldn't let the blunder steal the viggen's glory like this, so I had to do it.

 

Merry XMAS HEATBLUR SIMULATIONS !

[owenjones]

Is the new radar in beta only? I just purchased the Viggen during the holiday sale. Get around 70+ FPS normally but tanks to 20 (or even single digits) when the radar is set to 120 km.

 

 

Thanks!

[rainyday]

Is the new radar in beta only? I just purchased the Viggen during the holiday sale. Get around 70+ FPS normally but tanks to 20 (or even single digits) when the radar is set to 120 km.

 

New radar is in stable - but a fix for long range performance is still at beta. Its smooth as a butter now - I used to have performance issues too :smilewink:

 

It takes atleast two weeks for the next update (ED is taking a little break due to the holidays) - so I'd stay way from 120km mode until then; or even better, go Beta :thumbup:

[owenjones]

New radar is in stable - but a fix for long range performance is still at beta. Its smooth as a butter now - I used to have performance issues too :smilewink:

 

It takes atleast two weeks for the next update (ED is taking a little break due to the holidays) - so I'd stay way from 120km mode until then; or even better, go Beta :thumbup:

 

 

Thanks! I've only ever had stable installed, I'm happy to wait in 60km mode :)

[Wilbus]

Awesome!

 

Late to the party as I've just started using the forums but thanks for the updates of this lovely module and plane.

 

As has been said before, it's a dream come true for those of us born and raised in Sweden and seeing the Viggens in the skies.

 

Most fun module to fly for me, easily beating out some other more modern planes with newer systems.

 

/Wilbuz