|
|
|||||||
| Technical threads All discussions about technical issues |
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
10-27-2011, 02:06 PM
|
|||
|
|||
BTW with the new settings, in ATAG the dots are now visible (sometimes) from far away, but they still tend to disappear suddenly.
Farther dots are grayish, a nice effect imho, and closer dots are darker. Maybe as a stopgap measure it's just enough to improve and debug the present dot system (contrast, visibility at all distances, LOD) as pupaxx was suggesting, and adding the radio vectoring system for historical and playability reasons. Then the long term solution could be further evaluated, but with a more playable (and sellable) game. Cheers! Last edited by Insuber; 10-27-2011 at 02:09 PM. 
|
|
#2
10-27-2011, 03:19 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
rHey guys, I work as an airline pilot and I read this post before I went to work this morning and thought that I will try this out today while on cruise altitude. We have a so called Multifunction display on the flight deck that shows all the traffic around you as you fly.
This is my conclusion (My eyesight is perfect... so far...) At 5nm (9.2km) I can usually easily spot an AC and i can even tell what type is it is. However at thi distance its very difficult to tell if is a 737 or an Airbus as the share similiar shapes. Smaller planes are very difficult to ID at this distance. You can usually tell, if its a Kingair (due to its T-tail) or smaller, but to know exactly is almost impossible. Remember that a 737 or Airbus are alot bigger than the planes we talk about in game!! Also these planes are white against a blue or green background and that makes them alot easier to spot! many times someone is passing you, according to your instruments, at say 15km and same altitude and both of us try hard to see him but in some light conditions u see noone even though u know he is there somewhere! Obviosuly at night its alot easier with the strobes and beacons flashing. Im not so sure i would be able to even see a 109 at 10km or maybe even 6-7km and I certainly would not be able to ID such as small plane untill ALOT closer!
|
|
#4
10-27-2011, 03:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hi Anders, thanks for your addition to the thread.
With your experience can you help us to better understand the result of the test on the document? Note that the ones on the graph are max distances, so they could only decrease. In the first post we have a test where pilots look for a DC3 and detect it (unassisted) in collision path at 5,5-8,7km (being in a collision path I assume that they are looking at front/side). According to the graph the DC3 should have a MAX distance of detection of 9km FV and 14,5km SV (FV = 226sf, SV = 592sf... measures taken with not so detailed blueprints). If they are not trained in spotting ACs I think it can be a truthful result and anyway it's probable that optimal conditions are not available. A 737 is bigger than a DC3 and in the same conditions it should be more visible. Can I ask if you are using a specific method to scan the sky? Is it like the one explained in the doc?
__________________
 A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria. Last edited by 6S.Manu; 10-27-2011 at 06:56 PM.
|
|
#5
10-27-2011, 04:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It's not an official document but I think the site's name is notable.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...raft-early.htm Quote:
Quote:
http://books.google.com/books?id=q06...bomber&f=false
__________________
A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria. Last edited by 6S.Manu; 10-27-2011 at 07:54 PM.
|
|
#6
10-27-2011, 05:26 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Another gem, really detailed: "The probabilty of visual detection of reconnaissance aircraft by ground observer".
http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_me...006/RM4562.pdf Sadly it is only for altitude from 500feet to 10k feet. But there are interesting data about effect of altitude, luminance ect...
__________________
A whole generation of pilots learned to treasure the Spitfire for its delightful response to aerobatic manoeuvres and its handiness as a dogfighter. Iit is odd that they had continued to esteem these qualities over those of other fighters in spite of the fact that they were of only secondary importance tactically.Thus it is doubly ironic that the Spitfire’s reputation would habitually be established by reference to archaic, non-tactical criteria.
|
|
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
