Iff you could have one thing in the next update it would be. (Archive)
-
Agree.
It would be “perfect” (much better) if we have separated freq for the:
- Tower (Taxi, takeoff, landing clearance)
and for the:
- “Approach” (GCA vectors at arrival, departures)
… same story for AWACS: would be good to have a:
- “Check In” freq (sort of limited broadcast for all packages, only limited to comm’s related to check in and check out procedures)
and the:
- “Tactical” freq filtering only your package and where only the tactical comm’s should takes place (without hearing the Intra Flight comm’s of others flight of the your package concerning only the flight internal management: fuel check, formation … etc …)
Seems from the Kunsan Rules pdf off the epublishing website that tower at kunsan has a separate frequency for clearance delivery.
As long as we are on the wishlist, Id love some way to be able to specify aircraft movements as an air traffic controller. pie in the sky type dreams, but it would be pretty cool if the ATO listed aircraft to spawn for flights, and a ground controller could control what aircraft spawned where, assign them ground movement clearances, etc… hand that off to another human acting as tower controller (and presumably approaches/departures, SOF, etc)… probably never happen though.
We can dream
.
-
was hoping it would come out this december or jan!!
-
Dedicated Linux- or WINE compatible server where entering the 3d world is not a requirement in order to host MP games.
Uwe
-
Does new bms support 64bit win?
I mean 64bit exe file.
And are we able to track 4 ship ACs from far than 60 mile?
You know, if I track 4 ship flight from far than about 60 mile , all of them will be shown as one and after 60 mile I will realize that how many they are, this problem prevent me from shooting phonix from high altitue to about 80 Thousands feet or more to achive goal from very far beyond enemy dreams.
I wish , given the meaning right…… . -
Posted two time by fault. Sorry.
-
Dedicated Linux- or WINE compatible server where entering the 3d world is not a requirement in order to host MP games.
Uwe
Dedicated Windows server, where entering in 3D world in not required anymore for MP games ……
-
@A.S:
Dedicated Windows server, where entering in 3D world in not required anymore for MP games ……
That would indeed be helpful, even more so if this dedicated server would run under WINE (like I said above as this would not require a windows license).
Cheers, Uwe
-
Does new bms support 64bit win?
I mean 64bit exe file.
And are we able to track 4 ship ACs from far than 60 mile?
You know, if I track 4 ship flight from far than about 60 mile , all of them will be shown as one and after 60 mile I will realize that how many they are, this problem prevent me from shooting phonix from high altitue to about 80 Thousands feet or more to achive goal from very far beyond enemy dreams.
I wish , given the meaning right…… .I think this is the famous bubble, over 60nm it’s the “2d” flight you see, and as it enters the bubble and go “3d” you can see each ac.
So increasing the bubble would get you were you want, how? I don’t know though. -
I think this is the famous bubble, over 60nm it’s the “2d” flight you see, and as it enters the bubble and go “3d” you can see each ac.
So increasing the bubble would get you were you want, how? I don’t know though.yeah, this is the bubble… although, IRL good luck getting individual radar contacts from a group over 60 miles away. If the group are flying inside one radar resolution cell, they will appear as one contact.
AWACS for instance, will get one contact… and fighters much closer may be able to tell the group as 2 aircraft… then when they get very close, they might spot that its 4 aircraft, with each element flying very close formation to confuse radar…
-
So I pray ( ) this bubble get expanded to about 120 mile in close future and request BMS Developer team to do this favor :???:
-
So I pray ( ) this bubble get expanded to about 120 mile in close future and request BMS Developer team to do this favor :???:
well, the point Im making is that you shouldnt be ABLE to tell apart multiple contacts at 120 miles away.
-
yeah, this is the bubble… although, IRL good luck getting individual radar contacts from a group over 60 miles away. If the group are flying inside one radar resolution cell, they will appear as one contact.
AWACS for instance, will get one contact… and fighters much closer may be able to tell the group as 2 aircraft… then when they get very close, they might spot that its 4 aircraft, with each element flying very close formation to confuse radar…
This makes me wonder how the (actual) radar software works. I mean if it’s doing a bar-scan and it gets two results from two different bars at exactly the same heading, does it assume that it’s one contact ‘splitting’ the bar?
-
a very good question, and one which I am not really equipped to answer :S
-
a very good question, and one which I am not really equipped to answer :S
It’s an interesting conundrum, because even if it registers them as two different targets, how would it render that on the B-scope?
-
It’s been 3 years since I had the course, but the main parameters to get one or multiple RPS I can think of are RADAR signal wavelength, pulse repetition frequency (PRF), time difference between responses and/or RADAR monitor resolution.
- The RADAR signal wavelength needs to be smaller than the object in order to produce a response. A wavelength of 20m might not properly show a 15m object, though it depends on a bit on refraction properties. Aviation RADARs generally operate in wavelengths between 2.5 - 30cm, so this is never an issue, AFAIK.
- A higher PRF will produce more responses, creating a stronger and more precise image. A higher PRF will generally result in shorter ranges.
- Time difference between responses is measured to find slant range. IIRC, response Y needs to come at least so many microseconds after response X in order for it to be considered a new response.
- The RADAR monitor resolution will be important to actually see a difference between 2 displayed results. On a 500500 resolution, it will be harder to spot two different signals close to each other than on a 20002000 ATC monitor. (I don’t know what the F16 MFD resolution is?)
-
- The RADAR monitor resolution will be important to actually see a difference between 2 displayed results. On a 500500 resolution, it will be harder to spot two different signals close to each other than on a 20002000 ATC monitor. (I don’t know what the F16 MFD resolution is?)
What if they are literally flying on top of each other? Would the scope ‘adjust’ one of the icons to offset it?
-
well, the point Im making is that you shouldnt be ABLE to tell apart multiple contacts at 120 miles away.
I didn’t get your point, could you please explain more?!!
-
What if they are literally flying on top of each other? Would the scope ‘adjust’ one of the icons to offset it?
AFAIK, no, but as said, it’s been 3 year for me so a lot may have changed already. (EDIT: also, I should note I had civil training, not military)
To my knowledge, the two RPS will appear exactly on top of each other, and only separate when both aircraft split. In real life, I’ve seen this produce some problems when a UAV (no transponder, tracked with PSR) crossed tracks with a military helicopter (transponder equipped, tracked with both PSR and SSR) that was operating in the same area. At some point, the RADAR was unable to distinguish both repsonses, and the heli RADAR label had jumped to the UAV. We only knew because the helicopter transponder was picked up by the SSR after a few updates, which resulted in two RPS with the same label. -
You can have the same kind of problem with military radars too. On ground, ship, or AWACS radars, usually, an operator or an automatic system will identify the “valid” radar spots and put a “track” on it. The radar then automatically associate the radar spot and track, and update the position of the track at every sweep. You can label the track with “friendly/hostile/unknown”, obtain velocity info, etc…
But if two tracked spots overlap each other then split, radar has no way to tell which is which - except with velocities and/or IFF, maybe.
This can be important, because a lot of targeting systems will use the “track” and not the spot as reference to handoff the target to the FCR of SAMs / gun turrets. So better to have it correctly updated.
-
->FLIR on HUD and implemented FLIR ICP buttons
-> PGCAS-
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_versions_article8.html
->A-G HMCS capabilities.