AG radar in BMS
-
ED did a good job on that one.
Let them finish first. We have no idea what is the FPS drop linked to this feature … And this is I could be afraid in BMS either if we try one day to do the same. But I am not specialist of the question and I am just guessing.
-
Let them finish first. We have no idea what is the FPS drop linked to this feature … And this is I could be afraid in BMS either if we try one day to do the same. But I am not specialist of the question and I am just guessing.
High fidelity radar + TGP on the right side = madness! We will have to see to find out, thanks Dee-Jay!
-
Here is a preview of what DCS is preparing:
http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=117059&d=1430413118
Looking good.
Wow. Nice!
-
Let them finish first. We have no idea what is the FPS drop linked to this feature … And this is I could be afraid in BMS either if we try one day to do the same. But I am not specialist of the question and I am just guessing.
Since it is a completely new module, it could be possible that they manage to run it asynchronous in its own thread like the sound engine does. If this is the case, that could help with performance.
-
Since it is a completely new module, it could be possible that they…
… ask for money?
Come one, was just kidding LOL …
oky, troll mode OFF. Sorry.
-
After reading this, along with the other improvement wish list threads, I think it is time we accept that the only way we will be able to meet future BMS user desired features is to infiltrate the US Military with our own people in real time to obtain the necessary data the devs need to model. No more short term solutions, we need a long range plan. May I suggest that we recruit from within:
1. Have all members identify military age family members
2. Dev’s choose best candidates and assign them to enlist in the specific service where information is desired, and volunteer for the specific job with that branch (in this case, radar technician for F-16’s, etc) where the information is needed by devs.This means updates could take a longer, 5-6 years possibly (if we start now), but man, will it be accurate! Ok, my moment of jesting is complete.
Would this not attract property right infringement considering that they are classified
-
Here is a preview of what DCS is preparing:
http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=117059&d=1430413118
Looking good.
Just wondering, is the picture on the left the radar display of the picture on the right. Cannot make out the aircraft carrier and the airbase.
-
Just wondering, is the picture on the left the radar display of the picture on the right. Cannot make out the aircraft carrier and the airbase.
Oh yeah I see it the aircraft carrier. Had to zoom in to see it and bridge across the river on the far right.
Looking good. I guess this without the doppler sharpening effect. -
all of this. and they still cant fix. missiles
jeeez
-
all of this. and they still cant fix. missiles
You have any data that proves their FM wrong?
-
You have any data that proves their FM wrong?
Just for the 120, this is already a very good estimation that does show their FM in DCS is grossly underpowered :
http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=104165&d=1410108839 -
Well the bone of contempt is not the motor power but the drag. Be that as it may, ED are very hesitant to spin on a dime because of a CFD analysis. Chizh is an aeronautical engineer himself with a background in CFD and he says that CFD simulation alone has too much uncertainty.
-
Well the bone of contempt is not the motor power but the drag. Be that as it may, ED are very hesitant to spin on a dime because of a CFD analysis. Chizh is an aeronautical engineer himself with a background in CFD and he says that CFD simulation alone has too much uncertainty.
Exactly. CFD can do a decent job calculating normal forces (i.e. lift) but it’s pretty bad with tangencial forces (i.e. drag), unless extremely dense meshes and DNS methods are used (computer clusters only). The fact they use just CFD for calculating drag is pretty evident how amateur the document is.
Regards
-
I think they are not asking for light source (sun) shading, rather for signal (radar) shading.
Yep, but it’s basically the same
If you have a terrain that is shaded from light source, you can simply draw the same terrain with a light source positioned at the radar position and get “Radar shading” for that render.
-
Exactly. CFD can do a decent job calculating normal forces (i.e. lift) but it’s pretty bad with tangencial forces (i.e. drag), unless extremely dense meshes and DNS methods are used (computer clusters only). The fact they use just CFD for calculating drag is pretty evident how amateur the document is.
Regards
1/ When you have a good enough mesh and when you know what is the surface state of the object, tangencial forces can be know just fine. What you said was true 15 years ago….
2/ It is perfectly possible to correlate wind tunnel results with actual wind tunnel experiment -which are prone to experimental errors too, BTW…
3/ If you deem “amateur” people that uses CFD, what would one would need to be “pro” ? Buil his own model and rent a wind tunnel ?
-
We are talking about AG mode right? … AFAIR, there is no mountain/hill shadows on the radar mapping picture (?)
BMS vs Real Life
http://i.imgur.com/b0YmnTL.jpg http://i.imgur.com/dWhgBvh.jpg
A2G radar in most f-16 I have been flying in the campaign is gray scale background which I understand is for the f16 that got the mid-life update.
In BMS 4.32, one was able to change display from gray to green display in configuration setup, this option is no longer being offered in BMS 4.33.
IMO, green A2G radar scale seems more realistic. How may I get my A2G radar green or do I need to fly version that are not MLU version to get the green scale A2G radar?
An insight into this would be appreciated. -
Avionics Configurator from the BMS splash screen probably
Select the Block and go to FCR
Although clearly not more realistic for certain blocks! -
Yep, but it’s basically the same
If you have a terrain that is shaded from light source, you can simply draw the same terrain with a light source positioned at the radar position and get “Radar shading” for that render.
This would actually be a very good approach…then you can simply weight the contrast of the shadows, and filter the entire scene to green. The radar itself would be the “light/look source”…projected from it’s positional POV onto the OTW terrain - like a scene camera.
-
Hi,
Any news regarding this? An update to A-G radar graphics is something warmly welcomed.
Regards!
-
No changes to expect (at least for the moment)