Iff you could have one thing in the next update it would be. (Archive)
-
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. -
What if they are literally flying on top of each other? Would the scope ‘adjust’ one of the icons to offset it?
ATC radar has some code to spread labels off a contact for readability. That’s trivial compared to the ability to keep tracks distinct. At some point it’s not just an inconvenience of eyes and monitor pixels for your eyeballs to see but the radar itself can’t tell two objects apart.
The radar in non-tracking mode in the F-16 displays contacts in a digital format with minimal filtering and analysis. The white squares are contacts for that radar frame. Any persistent idea of the contact being the same one between frames is only in the brain of the operator. It’s not analog like a MiG-21bis or WWII submarine so there is some interpretation by a computer for threshold and filtering out “flash in the pan” false contacts but it’s otherwise very direct. You get “presence” with only radial velocity expressed as a trend line either up or down from the white box. Either something is detected in that radar cell or not.
With TWS the radar attempts to build track files out of the contact data. Subsequent frames are compared to see if presence data from one frame correlates to the next. When a certain mathematical correlation threshold is achieved a track file is displayed. The track file is a mathematical model abstracted from the contact data over several frames. Velocity and direction are estimated from a series of contacts assumed to belong to the same track. Because it’s a bit of a guess it can absolutely be fooled and mix up identities.
Two objects flying in the same cells with the same velocity are next to impossible for a radar to conclude are two different objects. There’s a reason one of the formations that AI can do is called “res cell.” The APG-68 has a trick called raid cluster resolution (RCR) which is able to tell the number of contacts in a clustered contact. It’s still a single contact but it has a number over it to show the quantity. AIM-120s can also be fired against the “cluster ID” of a member of such a cluster so it’s possible (in theory) to shoot 2 missiles into a cluster contact and the missiles subdivide the cluster intelligently.
-
I didn’t get your point, could you please explain more?!!
the radars resolution at 120 miles away is too small to be able to make out multiple contacts - the return from a group would be processed as a single contact.
-
the radars resolution at 120 miles away is too small to be able to make out multiple contacts - the return from a group would be processed as a single contact.
Specifically, the angular resolution. The radar shoot a pulse at every XX° degrees. If you are far away, multiple A/C in close formation will be hit by only one pulse - thus returning only one contact. Although the contact will appear as a big A/C.
-
I noticed that when a missile hits an air target only its target gets damaged.
There appears to be no proximity damage at all for missiles hitting air targets (Apart from their target, of course). There is proximity damage for missiles hitting ground targets though. Some SAMs such as SA-2 have a large enough warhead as to knock out more than an airplane in a formation if they are silly enough to be flying that close. Hopefully something to add to the rear-end of the TODO list
-
I noticed that when a missile hits an air target only its target gets damaged.
There appears to be no proximity damage at all for missiles hitting air targets (Apart from their target, of course). There is proximity damage for missiles hitting ground targets though. Some SAMs such as SA-2 have a large enough warhead as to knock out more than an airplane in a formation if they are silly enough to be flying that close. Hopefully something to add to the rear-end of the TODO list
Don’t know if this is a big difference in situation, but I flew through the explosion smoke of the guy in front of me and I got severe damage for being so kewl.
-
Is possible in near feature to have this detail in terrain?
the images is from program called ERDAS and render Greece and especially Crete
The so far limit in falcon if am not mistaken is @ Falcon maximum, 250m resolution.
Could we have better resolution than that, for better mountain and terrain detail , better look and feel !!!
like :
-
That could be dangerous…IMHO, it could be the cause for many divorces throughout the community members and respective wives…One can dream