Tacview – Understand what happened during your last flight! (alternative ACMI viewer)
-
Actually we can see about 120 Km away with reduced fog. Compared to Falcon 4 “bubble” that’s not so bad
Now, I’m working on a new 3D renderer to display the whole earth at once, that should fix your problem…
-
Hi Vyrtuoz,
i see Tacview 1.2.3 is out! Whats new in this version?
Any ideas when the online debrief will be available?many thanks for your great work!
-
1.2.3 is primarily just a fix to allow recording of DCS:World following 1.2.3 update.
-
What happened to TACView? Any chance of making it compatible with warthunder replays?
-
Now I wish to report an issue: have a problem running tacview on my laptop. It’s not new to 1.2.1 and was present also in older versions. On most ACMI files the program hangs for a few seconds and then I get the windows error message (check for solution / close the program). It can happen some time into the recording or instantly upon opening up a file. It seems to be worse when there are many units in the recording or if I play with the camera view.
Laptop specs: HP pavilion G6-1040sj - core i3 2310m, 3 GB DDR3, integrated graphics 4500mhd, windows 7, directx 11.Been having this issue on my laptop as well (click here for specs) for some time now (at least 1.2.3 and .4). An eventless training flight (e.g. NAV or formation) can be viewed without problems, but as soon as ground troops are entering the bubble, TacView CTD’s. As was the case for Echo7, these are caused by ig4icd64.dll, and I tried upgrading my graphic drivers to the latest available (like he did) just an hour ago but the issue persists.
Anyone able to come up with another idea?
-
Hello Eagle-Eye,
It looks like an OpenGL driver bug. I saw some with ATI and Intel graphic cards. In that case, please try to launch Tacview with the following command line parameter:
tacview.exe /VBO:off
This will disable an OpenGL optimization which is not well supported by some graphic card manufacturers. Let me know if this fix your problem.
By the way, can you share me your original VHS file and tell me how to reproduce the crash? That may help me to narrow down the issue and avoid this crash in future releases.
Vyrtuoz
Been having this issue on my laptop as well (click here for specs) for some time now (at least 1.2.3 and .4). An eventless training flight (e.g. NAV or formation) can be viewed without problems, but as soon as ground troops are entering the bubble, TacView CTD’s. As was the case for Echo7, these are caused by ig4icd64.dll, and I tried upgrading my graphic drivers to the latest available (like he did) just an hour ago but the issue persists.
Anyone able to come up with another idea?
-
tacview.exe /VBO:off
This will disable an OpenGL optimization which is not well supported by some graphic card manufacturers. Let me know if this fix your problem.
Thanks for replying.
Did so, and now I get a red warning text in the lower right corner that I should update my graphics card drivers. At first glance (only tested a few .acmi-files, don’t have any VHS here) it does solve the problem, to some extent, though.
I say to some extent because it only works when I start TacView by the exe-shortcut on my desktop. If I double click an .acmi-file or try to open the exe directly from within the folder, it will still CTD.
By the way, can you share me your original VHS file and tell me how to reproduce the crash? That may help me to narrow down the issue and avoid this crash in future releases.
I’ll send you an .acmi in PM later today, if that’s alright as well, adding a screenshot with the time stamp where and expected reason why it CTD’s on me.
Cheers.
-
TacView 1.2.5 is released.
Added support for DCS Steam edition, improved advanced telemetry, double trail size.
-
Cool, on it, thanks.
-
I even purchased the professional version, but to be honest other than just a visiual representation, tacview is completly useless as the most important feature (the telemetry data) for falcon is completly messed up and wrong (big time).
Vyrtuous, its a great tool and i believe in it, but it really needs improvement. If you need help (feedback or testings) let me know.
I know even the telemetry in falcon itself is not the best at the moment as the sampling rate is way off-sync (thus the bouncing numbers in replay).I had an interesting discussion with Mav-Jp about this, that it would be probably prossible to improve the sampling rate AND add additional data such as, G-forces, Angle of Attack and dynamic current Grossweight into the .vhs file in BMS itself.
Once that happens, i think tacview can convert better aswell. All that telemetry data (additional to the ones already displaced) can be read out from the BMS memory already, so it should not be a biggy to sophisticate the ingame ACMI replay data. Maybe (to save volume) data could be averaged aswell (divsion by seconds or less).
Mav-JP, if you read this… this is a big wish of mine…(you probably understand why) and i even remember mentioning to someone else, that i would send you a good bottle of german vine if you accomplish that .PS: Mav-JP, your pm box is full.
-
@A.S:
(the telemetry data) for falcon is completly messed up and wrong.
Could you please elaborate a little bit?
If there are some Tacview given data not to be trusted, I would really like to know which ones and why.
@A.S:
other than just a visiol representation tacview completly useless as the most important feature (the telemetry data)
I completely disagree. Telemetry is one part, important but just a tiny picture of the overall tactical picture.
IMHO the capability to evaluate tactics by reviewing “globally” engagements is far more important.
I think it is a quite good an user friendly ACMI viewer.
Not perfect, but dev listens to his customers base even though in the last year our so, the development has slowed down a lot.
It is not perfect, but I have seen many RL debrief systems way worse than it.
Thanks
-
For example:
- Vertical turnrate is off
- Angle of attack is waaay off in certain regimes. Tacview displays numbers way outside of the possible CAT I limitation of the FLCS.
- compare turnradius and -rate with ingame replay (acmi).
- CAS is missing
- etc etc etc
Study the performance capabilites of the F-16 and compare with the data read in tacview (or just compare your instrumental read-outs with the tacview data).
I am confident, that you can find those flaws easily yourself with a little bit of investigation.Graphically its a great tool to visualize tactics…i dont disagree there. I would not have bought it, if i would not believe in it, but it needs work.
-
For me this is great,but i almost never look at telemetery data. I just like to see what hapens around me after mission etc… and what killed me
But yes, there is room to improve
-
For me this is great,but i almost never look at telemetery data. I just like to see what hapens around me after mission etc… and what killed me
But yes, there is room to improve
I understand. Knowing your jet (performance envolopes or telemetry) in different regimes is the foundation of good flying.
-
@A.S:
For example:
- Vertical turnrate is off
- Angle of attack is waaay off in certain regimes. Tacview displays numbers way outside of the possible CAT I limitation of the FLCS.
- compare turnradius and -rate with ingame replay (acmi).
- etc etc etc
Study the performance capabilites of the F-16 and compare with the data read in tacview (or just compare your instrumental read-outs with the tacview data).
I am confident, that you can find those flaws easily yourself with a little bit of investigation.Graphically its a great tool to visualize tactics…i dont disagree there.
Thanks
Are those parameter good in native BMS acmi viewer? If so maybe TACVIEW could be inproved in the telemetry aspects.
I am going to play devil’s advocate so don’t kill the messenger here…
When you say study the performances of the F- 16 and compare: Are you talking about real performances with real EM charts?
Because if what you are comparing is real data vs tacview data, the problem could be in the “TRANSLATOR” aka as flight model.
So is TACVIEW to be blamed of those discrepancies or is the fligt model? Or both?
To assert that Tacview data is not good, it has to be compared with actual SIM performance, not with real data.
Just my 2c
I seldom use TACVIEW to analize individual performance of a jet. Instead as I told before it is more of a “big picture” analysis tool. Thats why my overall opinion of it is so different from yours.
-
No.
Ok one try more with AoA example.
The F-16 has a CAT-1 limiter, meaning that for each G pulled a certain amount of AoA can be achieved (HFFM manual).
If you fly with your jet ingame in BMS and look at your Gs and your current AoA …(HUD or instruments) … compare that data (Gs and AoA) with what you see in tacview replay.
Tacview will give your AoA reading waay above the ability of the F-16 (real or ingame). -
Knowing your jet (performance envolopes or telemetry) in different regimes is the foundation of good flying.
Man, we never agree…:):):):):):)
Being able to process a lot of simultaneous information and decision taking capabilities are the foundation of good tactical flying.
Good hands are desirable, but give me a pilot with a good brain to build SA, even if he’s not able to fly the jet that slick, and I will always choose him (eyes closed) for my sqn over the perfect hands but brainless pilot (believe me, they exsist).
Who cares if my F-16 can’t pull 46AOA if my AIM9X can?
Sad, but true. good old finesse flying has become less and less important.
After all, name of the program is TACVIEW, and not PERFVIEW…;);););););)
And, in the end, tactical flying is what tactical fighters are for.
-
I agree, If you want to analyse numbers, then tacview is probably not the best Tools
but if you want to analyse tactical flying, tacview is perfect iMHObeen using it for training TE’s, and the possibility to load the DTC on it is supergreat and tactically interesting
Granted tacview could use some better handling in the numbers, but to me it’s by far Superior to the ingame acmi viewerPersonnaly I never quite bothered the numbers
-
I think we really get distracted here in different likes and tastes.
It is simple the FACT that the telemetry data in tacview for BMS is WRONG and everyone able to compare simple data can confirm this.
It might be not important for many, but accurate telemetry IS FUNDAMENTALLY IMPORTANT for real pilots or advanced vpilots and ACMI IS about telemetry mostly, not only the “wingtip trails” in order to visualize flight geometries afterwards.
INFACT one pays eta 50 euros JUST for visualized TELEMETRY (as graphs) in the pro version of tacview (among other minor details between the standard and the pro version).
There is another attribute to accurate telemetry (onboard or external). It reflects, honors and appreciates the accuracy of the flight model (planes or weapons) in numbers.
Not only do numbers not lie (well, in tacview case they do lie), but they are crucial for the understanding and the improvement in flying and developement.I can only emphasise post #79
-
After all, name of the program is TACVIEW, and not PERFVIEW…;)
I do agree also.
TACREF is something needed for flight and mission management analysis like IRL but has nothing to do with a telemetry system used by flight engineers during prototype development and flight tests.
AFAIK, RL ACMI instruments are not able to give you your airspeed nor your AOA etc … mainly “only” your position vs time and basic flight info … and there is also the AVTR tapes.
but for others accurate telemetry IS FUNDAMENTALLY IMPORTANT and ACMI IS about telemetry
Only available on simulation. No such tool IRL.