Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: Krusty on July 10, 2007, 01:25:56 PM
-
This has no practical MA use but would be a great scenario/event tool, similar to allowing CV hardness changes and whatnot.
In the dar flags, add a new mode "Bomber only?" -- so that any dar, be it range, dar, dot, whatever, only shows up if the target is a formation-capable plane (defined as: Boston III, Ju88, Lancaster, B17, B24, B26, B25 (if formations enabled), Ki67, Ar234). Let's throw in C-47 just in case the scenario/event calls for it.
If toggled it does not display fighters, only the above craft.
Like I said, NO ma use at all, but it would give CMs a lot of choices with how they want to do things.
-
Do away with in flight radar. If you want to know where the enemy is at, do it from the tower, or better yet have a friend play ground control to vector you to the fight. Furballers would get what they want, more 1 vs 1 fights. Bomber pilots would get what they want, and land grabbers would get what they want. Unless someone either flies patrols, or is in the tower, your not going to know what, where, or when things will happen.
-
Nobody benefits from "no radar". In fact that hurts gameplay (and subscription base) more than anything else.
Historically you knew anybody "East" of you was enemy, anybody "West" most likely friends. In here it's too jumbled up to know who's coming from where.
Ever.
So "no radar" is not something I will ever recommend. I don't even recommend it in special events or scenarios, because historically you knew certain things and/or there was radar on hand.
My request isn't about removing radar, just giving the radar options more depth. I was just reading something where somebody was trying to find a way to enable dar bar for buffs only, or some dar for buffs only, but it wouldn't work.
Just a suggestions/request.
-
This would be perfect for the upcoming scenario!
-
Originally posted by Krusty
My request isn't about removing radar, just giving the radar options more depth.
There are a good many options regarding how radar is set up in the settings. Its just a matter of how the admin sets up the event.
-
You can only change the range, blink range, and any of the flags in the arena settings.
None of those allow ONLY formation-enabled planes to show up. It's all-or-nothing.
-
I would like formations to show as three dots overlayed to make a slightly bigger dot.
Even the most basic WWII radar with a competent operator could deduce if they were bombers or fighters
One trick that may help a little (not a lot) would be to set the base bomber flash range to the radar extreme and the fighter flash range to half the radar range.
This would help identify milkrunners bombing bases other wise devoid of attackers.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
Even the most basic WWII radar with a competent operator could deduce if they were bombers or fighters
We can't do this now, so how did they do it back then?
-
I'm fairly sure our radar can tell the difference between a B-52 and an F-16, man.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
I'm fairly sure our radar can tell the difference between a B-52 and an F-16, man.
If all its getting is a primary radar return then no. If you are picking up some sort of electronics emissions as well as a primary return, they can be correlated to a type aircraft. IFF is a good example, as it was developed to shake out the good guys from the bad guys and provide definition to the "blob" that would show up on radar. The Pearl Harbor raid is a good example. The Army radar operators saw a big "blob" on radar, and thought it was a group of B-17's that were expected to arrive. Instead of a large return created by a small group of large planes, it turned out to be a large return created by a large group of small planes.
-
Originally posted by Stoney74
We can't do this now, so how did they do it back then?
The how I must admit ignorance to............
However when visiting the RAF BoB radar museum in Norfolk I was advised this was so.............
Albeit that the range was circa 50 miles or 20 miles depending upon the type of radar (high or low)...........apparently radar operatives were trained to read the return signal as a wave form on a Ossiciloscope type screen............practiced operatives could recognise "signatures"...........
It surprised me at that time and so I have always remembered it whenever we have a BoB scenario.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
The how I must admit ignorance to............
However when visiting the RAF BoB radar museum in Norfolk I was advised this was so.............
Albeit that the range was circa 50 miles or 20 miles depending upon the type of radar (high or low)...........apparently radar operatives were trained to read the return signal as a wave form on a Ossiciloscope type screen............practiced operatives could recognise "signatures"...........
It surprised me at that time and so I have always remembered it whenever we have a BoB scenario.
"Fighter Boys" by Patrick Bishop has one of the best descriptions of the total RAF system during the Battle of Brittain as I have read. I didn't make time to retype it all here, but in sum, the radar picked up the aircraft and classified them as airborne, at a certain altitude, and range from the antenna. Observers on the ground would check out the aircraft with binos, altitude estimating equipment, and aircraft recognition charts. The two sets of information would be "fused" (in current parlance) to provide the intel used to sortie interceptors. I can't profess to know if you can actually create a signature from an ociliscope waveform, but I know that todays U.S. radar systems cannot classify a track by primary radar return only. If a certain radar bandwidth can be associated as being emitted by that track, you can corelate the two to estimate what a track is, but even then there is some room for error as the software does not always match the two 100% of the time...that would be one potential technique. Krusty, to specifically address your last post--if we could do that, we would not have shot down a U.S. Navy F-18 with a Patriot missile during OIF. I think we also bagged a British Harrier or Tornado as well. Not to mention the Blackhawk helo bagged over N. Iraq back in the '90's by the F-15's using AWACS guidance and AMRAAM missiles. I watched a large portion of the Kosovo air operation from a ship beside an Aegis trained Navy OS1 (1st Class Petty Officer) and he and I would sit there and exercise the equipment onboard while we watched the fireworks. Needless to say, the gear is capable of some fairly amazing things, but positively identifying targets is something that we still have a hard time with. Another associated topic is sonar. While you can match a passive sonar signature with a type of submarine, they do this from a catalogue of known signatures. Perhaps the RAF and others were able to catalogue German aircraft waveform signatures in a similar fashion, but I doubt it...otherwise we would have a similar capability today. Finally, civilian ATC. The FAA can't tell you what type of airliner or other aircraft is flying close to you from merely a primary return. Most non-aviation types don't know it, but air traffic controllers can only perform their advertised capability with aircraft equipped with transponders. If the plane doesn't squawk a code, they will tell you they see a primary, but type unknown.
I wasn't a scope-dope by trade, but I spent enough time around it to gain this much understanding. I may be wrong though if there is a scope dope we could tap into.
-
Clearly, the only reason for singling out bombers for radar, while disabling fighter tracks. is to turn the bombers into bigger targets then they already are, and provide cover for interceptors to spring sneak attacks. Bombers are often the bait in our events, but bomber only radar isn't a setting I would ever consider using in any event I host.
-
Nobody benefits from "no radar". In fact that hurts gameplay (and subscription base) more than anything else.
Nobody said anything about getting rid of radar altogether, just removing it during flight. You still would have radar but only while in the tower.
-
I know. And nobody benefits from that in any way. If you do that you shuold make the game so that you have to spend 30 minutes idling your engine on the runway to warm it up, and so that you have to do 27 things IN ORDER to start your engine to begin with.
In games you have to make certain concesssions. We press 1 key and the engine starts. That's the same end result. We want it to start, it starts. We don't need to fiddle with every knob and dial in the plane.
We want radar, we don't have to contact a dedicated 24/7 ground controller, the game does that for us. We bring up our radar, and by zooming in and moving around it's taking the place of us asking the radar controllers what they see in different areas.
Adding such insignificant minutae would kill this game overnight.
-
Originally posted by Tilt
T............practiced operatives could recognise "signatures"...........
It is possible that return signal strength, speed and altitude were clues, but otherwise Stoney74 summed it up, it seems to me. The airborne radar I supported could show strong target blips or weak blips or swaths of cloud. There was no way to determine what aircraft type was detected or tracked. In fact in Vietnam aircrew were ordered to stop firing Sparrows at targets out of visual range after friendlies were downed. I read that in WWII a US fighter group tried a ruse against the Germans, flying to simulate a bomber formation without escort, in order to draw up German interceptors to a fight. Apparently that worked. The British, I believe, soon after developing radar came up with IFF to identify what appeared on the radar scope, but by a separate signal generated in the aircraft, not from the returned radar signal. [edit] Just read that the IFF signal was triggered by radar pulses, but was nevertheless a different signal [/edit] I do seem to recall reading that the US Navy had already implemented IFF into their radar detection systems by 1944 or 1945. So that may also be part of the explanation.
Best regards
Radar (http://www.vectorsite.net/ttwiz.html)
-
Oh, come ON!
That's rich!
(a Sparrow actually downing anything outside visual range? :rofl )
:t
-
:-) Yeah, sparrows weren't known for their high reliability, but they occasionally actually worked.
Ritchie (http://www.acepilots.com/vietnam/ritchie.html)
-
n the dar flags, add a new mode "Bomber only?" -- so that any dar, be it range, dar, dot, whatever, only shows up if the target is a formation-capable plane (defined as: Boston III, Ju88, Lancaster, B17, B24, B26, B25 (if formations enabled), Ki67, Ar234). Let's throw in C-47 just in case the scenario/event calls for it.
Ok let me get this straight, my idea which wouldn't kill the game and is less dweebish is a bad idea, but your idea which is makes this game more dweebish is the better idea. Sorry Krusty but this game has gone from a great combat flight simulator to one that almost ranks up there with Dweebish High. Best idea would be to leave the game alone and fly the game. In any case you don't like my idea and I don't like yours. It's our given right to disagree. My only disagreement with your idea is that we have more then enough information as it stands. Because of this IMHO creates the problems we currently have in the game. One look at the radar tells you where the hordes are at. That is my problem with current radar.
Scenarios don't use in flight radar (except for friendlies), and it's one of the things that really makes them fun to fly. Never heard anyone ever complain about the lack of radar there. Guess that is all I have to say, won't say another word about the subject.
-
Originally posted by TheCage
Scenarios don't use in flight radar (except for friendlies), and it's one of the things that really makes them fun to fly. Never heard anyone ever complain about the lack of radar there. Guess that is all I have to say, won't say another word about the subject.
Maybe you should fly more of them, and listen to more folks.
Many have problems with the way radar is used in scenarios. Regardless, it can and does change depending on the designer of the setup. We are currently limited in what we can do.
Think of it this way: We couldn't change CV hardness until a couple of months ago. For a LOOOOONG time this was a limiting factor in any scenario/event that included CVs. Now we CAN change the hardness, and it's been used already (OpHusky) and it will be an amazing tool to use for years to come.
But it doesn't have to be used. If you want default hardness you just leave it as-is.
The same goes for radar. You can't do a lot of things with it, and many different setups/events could have totally different dynamics (allowing re-running of past events with a new feel and new dynamic).
But it doesn't have to be used. It would be an amazing tool, nothing else.
P.S. You think any command structure anywhere wouldn't know "where the fight was"? Pilots would radio in, coordinate with their superiors, etc. Even ground observers couldn't miss 75+ planes in a massive furball. I think it's foolish beyond belief to hate dar because it points out.... what would be known anyways. Also, I never said MA, ever. Not once. I requested a tool for scenario/event use, not a new MA setting. Although with the way bomers work in AH it wouldn't be asking too much to know where bombers are BEFORE it's too late to stop them.
-
P.S. You think any command structure anywhere wouldn't know "where the fight was"? Pilots would radio in, coordinate with their superiors, etc. Even ground observers couldn't miss 75+ planes in a massive furball. I think it's foolish beyond belief to hate dar because it points out.... what would be known anyways.
Hence ground controllers, recon, and scouts :D
-
Identification of aircraft types using primary radar alone can still only be done by "flight profile" today and this is as it ever has been. Skilled people known as "trackers" tag returns and attempt to keep them identified on displays. You can do this job for yourself using the returns you have available now. Increasing the update rate makes it easier. Running at about 13 seconds it would be quite realistic.
There are other modern innovations which are used to identify aircraft type. Many of these can be fooled or denied information. They weren't available in WW2 or were so primitive as to be ineffective.
For scenarios, or anything else, I cannot conceive of a single circumstance where displaying bombers or even formations only would add to immersion and realism. I wouldn't entertain the idea for a moment.
The flexibility desirable for radar settings is of the form where range can be increased as height is increased. For example 0-2000ft range 20 miles, 2000-1000ft 80 miles, 10000 - 30000 ft 120 miles. A simple 3 part setting would provide wonderful flexibility, greater realism and more immersion for players.
Further flexibility in allowing for shipboard or land based only radar could be useful too.
"Aircraft type only" settings would not add anything beyond something to argue bitterly about.
-
The radar return from a B-52 is probably the same as a F105, right?
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
The size of the return itself tells you a lot. Sometimes bunching smaller planes together can mimic larger signatures, but it isn't exactly the same thing.
You can bet your bonnet that a 1000+ plane bomber raid of B-17s and B-24s is sure as sh** going to be instantly decipherable amidst the 20-40 escorts fighters (which would be pinsalamanders in comparison).
-
Krusty I am talking from real life experience. Your point of view is just that.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
The radar return from a B-52 is probably the same as a F105, right?
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
The size of the return itself tells you a lot. Sometimes bunching smaller planes together can mimic larger signatures, but it isn't exactly the same thing.
You can bet your bonnet that a 1000+ plane bomber raid of B-17s and B-24s is sure as sh** going to be instantly decipherable amidst the 20-40 escorts fighters (which would be pinsalamanders in comparison).
For 1000+ plane bomber missions, 8th AF typically sortied 700+ fighter escorts. I'd say that would be a tough soup to pick the noodles out of. I'd say the best fidelity received from the German radar would be "there's a butt load of Allied planes coming". Beyond that, they'd probably just rely on what happened the day before--"there were a butt load of Allied planes on that raid" and put two and two together.
Read some of Old Sports link. Good stuff in there.