V4.35/KTO, Flights names and VHF Radio frequencies usage… shared for all countries?
-
Hi,
I’m trying to progress on my KTO campaign, but I’m having a very annoying issue…
In my last 2 or 3 mission I flew, I realized that there’s an other flight(other callsign was called) on the same frequency I’m being set on, and once I counted 2 other callsigns(intra-flight comm) on the VHF(red radio subtitles), while I was prep’n for my ground attack… Got quite confusing and annoying… Bad luck?
I got curious, so I opened my last save with Mission Commander and checked the flights list and FLT Radio table… I tried to find a flight ID that wasn’t on an alreaddy used VHF freq, couldn’t find one in 5 or 6 attempts…
Working in VHF/UHF Radio-Comms myself, I know very well that in North America, Military UHF&VHF frequencies are encoded/encrypted, so non-NATO countries can’t access them, but also to prevent cross-talk.
One more thing encoding/encrypting comms does in R-L: it filters basic EM interferences(natural and other sources).Even if it’s a question of functionnality, why does the Intra-Flights comms don’t have some kind of encryption, so flights are isolated from each-other?
An other way to avoid having human player(s) being dropped on the same freq as an AI flight, would be to set an ID group (“name” “# 1-9”) dedicated to us…Best regards.
-
Can be encrypted. That would be the KY-58 for us which isn’t available or used in Falcon. Probably in a Falcon-esque war both HQ and encryption would be used together.
My understanding is that while encryption prevents understanding someone on the frequency which you don’t have key for it still blocks use of that frequency. So if someone is blabbing on your freq on another crypto then that frequency is not available for your use. This would make using crypto for overloading a freq really troublesome.
As for why HQ/KY-58 hasn’t been implemented, because someone hasn’t coded it! That’s a lot of work and since the modern BMS radio traffic is an adaptation on a very old Falcon simplistic system it might be even harder than from a blank sheet of compiler.
-
Frequencies are corresponded to Callsigns, check:
Campaign/radiomap.dat -
The problem that I see in that list (radiomap.dat) is that some VHF frecuencies are repeated. I dont know if it is the cause of that error.
-
The problem that I see in that list (radiomap.dat) is that some VHF frecuencies are repeated. I dont know if it is the cause of that error.
In fact, frequencies are repeated(or shared by multiple callsigns) 2-5 times, and few onces, like 137.825MHz & 143.975MHz are are shared between almost 20(didn’t count exactly) callsings…
I’ve been thinking about a simple solution, and there might be a simple one:
As it’s basically a game, the solution would be to simply virtually isolate(faking encryption) the player’s intra-flight VHF radio frequency from the other flights, so if there other AI flights on the frequency, we won’t be bothered and confused…
Tho, as I don’t play in Multi-Player, I honestly don’t know if, and how it would be affected by this solution.Best regards.
-
I have a lot of experience in online multiplayer and one of the problems we always find ourselves is that, flights that go to the same area of operation (FAOR), carry completely different AWACS frequencies and yes, of course I understand it, I know that in In real life, this is the case, but the problem is that, in real life, the different controllers operating in AWACS coordinate with each other and coordinate their assigned flights, depending on the circumstances (SA). The problem is that taking it to a simulator would be somewhat more complex.
A possible solution, which in its day I gave to the developers, I don’t know if they listened to me, is to assign a unique AWACS frequency for each FAOR (and not as it happens now for flight packages) like this, if there is no coordination between the IA AWACS controllers (as now happens), there will be it between humans in multiplayer as long as they are within the same FAOR (since we all share the same AWACS frequency). I think that the current situation, in which the simulator is, of a radio bubble is NOT the solution (also, for those of us who know the subject, it is unrealistic). And returning to the subject, the frequency plan, if it is assigned by callsigns, which is not a bad idea, should be assigned without repetition of frequencies. Doing a false encoding is not very realistic either, since if two flights are on the same frequency, in reality we would step on each other and it is about doing something realistic. It’s what I think.Regards my friend
-
I have a lot of experience in online multiplayer and one of the problems we always find ourselves is that, flights that go to the same area of operation (FAOR), carry completely different AWACS frequencies and yes, of course I understand it, I know that in In real life, this is the case, but the problem is that, in real life, the different controllers operating in AWACS coordinate with each other and coordinate their assigned flights, depending on the circumstances (SA). The problem is that taking it to a simulator would be somewhat more complex.
A possible solution, which in its day I gave to the developers, I don’t know if they listened to me, is to assign a unique AWACS frequency for each FAOR (and not as it happens now for flight packages) like this, if there is no coordination between the IA AWACS controllers (as now happens), there will be it between humans in multiplayer as long as they are within the same FAOR (since we all share the same AWACS frequency). I think that the current situation, in which the simulator is, of a radio bubble is NOT the solution (also, for those of us who know the subject, it is unrealistic). And returning to the subject, the frequency plan, if it is assigned by callsigns, which is not a bad idea, should be assigned without repetition of frequencies. Doing a false encoding is not very realistic either, since if two flights are on the same frequency, in reality we would step on each other and it is about doing something realistic. It’s what I think.Regards my friend
Well, your post is condensated, but you covered it…
When you say that if 2 Military flights are on the same frequency they step on each other, it’s in RL? Because as Mil-Comm uses Trunking(read below), so my guess is that it’s because they’re on the same channel.
With deeper thinking, I agree that isolating the player’s intra-flight radio-freq isn’t a realistic solution then…
The problem is due to the multi-callsigns sharing, this still needs to change…
One “almost-simplified-realistic” solution is in this case, to throw the OPFOR(non-NATO countries) on a different “callsigns group” than NATO and a different VHF frequency band.
Doing so it would free up frequencies and cut down the frequency sharing…
Or, maybe changing the frequency distribution from WideBand(25KHz separation between 2 channels) to NarrowBand(12.5 KHz chan. sep.) would be an other solution?
Doing so, this allows setting OPFOR callsign’s frequencies on the NB freqs and keeping NATO-Forces on WB.On an other side, I need to write a correction about my Original Post:
Radio-Comms Trunking
I’ve done some deeper research about IRL VHF military radio systems(as far as publicly available informations go) and I’ve learned that it’s using radio trunking system to secure communications, (in commercial R-C, an RSA key is used as additionnal security in some cases). Trunking is in fact digital radio-communication and uses, in simple words digital data insertion on the signal, to protect from unauthorized access(which is a form of encoding/encryption).
Some sources says that, someone having the right equipment and knowledge, it’s possible to listen to Military Comms in some locations, but not emitting(As emitting requires VERY specific radio programmation).So in a way, in my O.P I was right, but also miss-leading…
The real military radios are in fact using channels that are programmed in the radio system, not frequencies. I don’t know about exact channels identification, but they don’t use the frequency(as it appears to be in F-BMS as it is), which would kind-of mean that the comm are unprotected(except for the Military-reserved VHF band), similar to public(and basic/low-end commercial) air/marine navigation VHF radios.
So if we look at the(and for) realism, the present system isn’t realistic…Knowing a little bit about commercial(non-military) Radio Trunking specifications myself, I guess a realistic implementation might be pretty hard to implement in F-BMS…
Another solution would be a simplified trunking system if possible, as something like this:
- No changes to UHF system(didn’t research RL Mil UHF radio-comms)
- VHF Frequencies stay shared, BUT the radio-comms uses channels(next point)
- Callsigns-assotiated channel-ID(numeric I guess) are used as channels isolate flights from each-other, but it’s possible to share by using the same Chan-ID.
- Package-assotiated channel, for package co-ordination(in the case of am all-human multiplayer package) /// just an idea, IDK how MP radio works
I did my best to keep it clear…