Jump to content


Photo

10km aircraft render range and why it is unacceptable.


  • Please log in to reply
117 replies to this topic

#1 Ace_Pilto

Ace_Pilto
  • Founder
  • Posts: 601
  • Location:Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Posted 08 October 2015 - 07:52

I'm sorry to belabour this point, I know this is my this is my second thread on the subject in a short period but I believe that it is an important one.

 

First I'd like to say that I love BoS, it's my go to sim at the moment because there is just nothing better on the market in my opinion. So, disclaimer:

 

This is not an indictment of the game or an attempt to deride it, I'm attempting to express a genuine concern that I have over the way that the engine currently handles contact rendering and how I see it as adversely effecting its' credibility and enjoyability online (and maybe offline too)

 

I'll start by stating that I'm fortunate enough to have better than 20/20 eyesight but, despite that abnormality, I can still definitively say that the 10km contact render range is vastly too close for tactical effectiveness in a combat flight simulation.

 

My experiences tell me that I can spot a contact the size of a weather balloon on a clear day at 40km. Granted I was 17 at the time and I did manage this with the assistance of a sighting vane mounted atop a tracking radar to point my eyes in the right direction but I could still see the balloon at that range with my naked eye at 40km. I don't need to explain to anyone that the dimensions of a weather balloon are smaller than that of say, a Bf-109 or a LaGG-3. Understandably the game engine needs to make some kind of compromise for performance but 10 km is ridiculously short ranged, especially when you consider the closure speed to two aircraft approaching each other at roughly 400kph. 800kph closure speeds mean that contacts merging from a maximum render range of 10km encounter each other after only 45 seconds. 

 

That is a 45 second minimum from spotting a contact at maximum range to the merge. 

 

This makes any kind of tactical planning basically impossible in any situation where the enemy contact is not already engaged with other aircraft. I can't climb above him without being spotted, I can't stalk him, I can't position myself in the sun to make a surprise attack and, at high altitudes, sometimes it is all I can do at times to put an attacker on my 3-9 line to go defensive in time for the first merge due to the wider radius I need at high altitude. The result of this 10km range is that I have to rely on luck to put myself in an advantageous position rather than relying on good situational awareness and tactical foresight. My only recourse to ensure that I always have good chance of starting with an advantage is to fly at absurd altitudes with my fingers crossed and in doing that I can hardly be said to be contributing to the team objectives since achieving sub-orbital flight is not a valid contribution to the team effort in an Easter Front scenario. 

 

Contact visibility is an area where I see what was once an acceptable aspect of the game optimisiation for Rise of Flight (Where closure speeds were often less than 200mph) needing urgent revision. 

A 40km contact rendering distance would be a game changer, one that I know would generate greater participation in the serious simmer crowd, many of whom are still on the fence about BoS.


  • 16

My RIG: - Same old mediocre box of snot, I shaved off the beard. Powered by boredom, sarcasm and existential apathy.


#2 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 09:00

I'd love to be able to spot at greater distances, but how exactly is that gonna be achieved with current limitations in screen resolution?

 

At 40 km distance the wingspan of a fighter sized aircraft (10m) spans less than 0.015o (around 50 arcseconds) of your view. In the most zoomed-in view we have in BoS I think we have around 40o FoV. This means that even in fully zoomed-in view you'd need a screen 3000 pixels wide for the plane to even appear as one single pixel - and even that is a huge stretch since we're only looking at the broadest part of the aircraft. In reality you'd propably need twice the resolution to realistically spot a fighter 40km away as 1 or 2 pixels on your screen. So even in the best scenario, you would absolutely need a screen and PC capable of rendering 4K graphics to be able to spot anything at 40km distance, and even then you'd have the problem of the plane 'popping' in and out of view as you zoom in/out. 

 

A 20 km spotting distance might be achievable, but it would create loads of balance problems, because people with systems and screens capable of running 4K resolutions would have tremendous advantage over people playing at lower resolutions, because they'd be able to spot planes at much greater distances, than people playing at lower resolutions. The 10km spotting distance means, that even on fairly low resolution, you can spot an aircraft without using zoomed-in view at about the same time as someone using 4K resolution.

 

Honestly, I'm not ready to make the sim so grossly unbalanced in favor of people with better screens and systems. So how do you propose we achieve the goal of greater rendering distances? The only other methods I can think of involve either differential scaling, so that planes are rendered bigger at longer distances (which will make it next to imposible to accurately estimate distances) or use some kind of 'black dot' or marker at longer distances (which has looked really ugly in all sims that have used it)

 

I understand why you'd want spotting at greater distances to be posible, I would too. But I just don't see how it's posible without making the sim hugely unbalanced or really ugly.


Edited by Finkeren, 08 October 2015 - 09:01.

  • 5

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#3 jcomm

jcomm
  • Member
  • Posts: 1193

Posted 08 October 2015 - 09:17

The problem is not the spotting distance, but rather the way terrain and other factor interfere.

 

As a pilot, I often struggle to identify small aircraft flying bellow me or at the same level, when the horizon is close, and I am not over water ... or snow...


Edited by jcomm, 08 October 2015 - 09:18.

  • 0

               |
\-----------O-----------/
​           0/   \0


#4 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 09:21

The problem is not the spotting distance, but rather the way terrain and other factor interfere.

 

As a pilot, I often struggle to identify small aircraft flying bellow me or at the same level, when the horizon is close, and I am not over water ... or snow...

 

That's an entirely different matter, and one that will no doubt come into play once the summer maps are released. Good luck spotting a plane below the horizon at 10km, let alone 40km, distance then.

 

On a good day spotting at 10 km is definately posible in this sim. In reality it propably should be at at least twice that distance, but the resolutions we play the game at just doesn't allow for it.


Edited by Finkeren, 08 October 2015 - 09:24.

  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#5 Wulf

Wulf
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1139
  • Location:New Zealand

Posted 08 October 2015 - 09:33

One of the things I remember about the old IL-2 is the way distant aircraft were rendered as black dots.  At the time I didn't think that much about it but in retrospect I now believe it's probably preferable to the pale grey smudges we seen in BoS.  Neither is particularly realistic but given the limitations of the technology, I think black dots are to be preferred.  

 

And while we're on the subject, I tend to find that aircraft, even ones at very close range (3-4 hundred meters) almost disappear against the sky when viewed from below.  This isn't realistic and it certainly isn't an attractive feature of the game play.


  • 6

#6 6./ZG26_Emil

6./ZG26_Emil
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3069
  • Location:Northern Monkey

Posted 08 October 2015 - 09:47

I don't have any issue with it nor spotting or identifying planes at long range. I think 10KM is fine personally. I think they do need to increase the range at which you can see ground objects though, level bombing from 5KM is pretty hard when the targets don't render early enough for you to line up.


  • 4

#7 Ace_Pilto

Ace_Pilto
  • Founder
  • Posts: 601
  • Location:Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Posted 08 October 2015 - 10:32

Some interesting points.

 

People with 4k resolutions already have an advantage, purchasing better systems and peripherals is always going give you an edge that can't be controlled by software but making contacts visible at greater range would improve the experience for people who don't have 4k resolution. Ok so he sees me easier but I still have longer than the current 45 second minimum to spot him and make some decisions.

 

As for how hard it is to spot aircraft in GA, that's true. I had a hard time spotting an Antonov biplane painted bright yellow outside 5nm IRL but that is because of my inexperience and not because the Antonov was flown by Romulans who decloaked at 10km. The paradigm is completely in general aviation through controlled airspace, your life doesn't depend on spotting contacts at extreme ranges so you don't cultivate the skill since you are best served keeping your situational awareness relatively localised.

 

We just need some dots for entities (ground and air). I can't see that being a huge performance overhead or game breaker for anyone.

 

For now I have found that setting my Anti Aliasing transparency to 8x through nVidia inspector helps make the most of what we have.


  • 1

My RIG: - Same old mediocre box of snot, I shaved off the beard. Powered by boredom, sarcasm and existential apathy.


#8 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 10:46

We just need some dots for entities (ground and air). I can't see that being a huge performance overhead or game breaker for anyone.

 

 

I don't think it's gonna be a performance hog either, but it's not as simple a matter as you make it. There are issues to consider:

 

For one thing, there's aesthetics: Black dots look ugly and fake, especially at lower resolutions where they'd be most needed. 

 

Second, there's tactical problems: Having black dots makes it downright imposible to judge distance. At a low resolution, you won't know whether the aircraft you're spotting is at a distance of 10 or 20km, and you'll have no way of telling, whether he's moving towards you or away from you, putting you at a severe disadvantage against a guy with a 4K monitor and beefy GPU. For ground targets, this might be more acceptable (in fact, I think it sould be implemented ASAP) but for AC I think it's a no-go.


People with 4k resolutions already have an advantage, purchasing better systems and peripherals is always going give you an edge that can't be controlled by software but making contacts visible at greater range would improve the experience for people who don't have 4k resolution. Ok so he sees me easier but I still have longer than the current 45 second minimum to spot him and make some decisions.

 

I think it's a poor argument to say, that 'people with low-end systems will get something out of it too'. The advantage over the current system will be at best be dubious to a guy playing on 1280x1024 resolution and not in any way comparable to the huge benefits a guy playing on 4K graphics will get. It'll be a huge balancing issue on expert servers, even with 'dots'.


Edited by Finkeren, 08 October 2015 - 10:47.

  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#9 Ace_Pilto

Ace_Pilto
  • Founder
  • Posts: 601
  • Location:Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Posted 08 October 2015 - 10:47

The motion of the dots gives a person with a trained eye some idea of their position and speed in my experience and if you think the devs are incapable of making pretty dots then I think you're selling them short.


  • 0

My RIG: - Same old mediocre box of snot, I shaved off the beard. Powered by boredom, sarcasm and existential apathy.


#10 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 10:54

The motion of the dots gives a person with a trained eye some idea of their position and speed in my experience and if you think the devs are incapable of making pretty dots then I think you're selling them short.

 

I think you're mistaken. With a dot of uniform size at all distances from 10-20km you really cannot discern either position, course nor speed, not even altitude (except if he's drawing contrails or is precisely at level altitude with you)

 

You might think, that you can do that, but it will be based on earlier experience watching other aircraft at similar distances and speeds, and you will get fooled by this when you encounter a plane moving faster or slower or at an odd angle.

 

As for the devs ability to make 'pretty dots', I admit that they might surprise me, but I'm not holding my breath. There's a limit to what you can achieve graphics-wise with a single pixel.


Edited by Finkeren, 08 October 2015 - 10:57.

  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#11 Ace_Pilto

Ace_Pilto
  • Founder
  • Posts: 601
  • Location:Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Posted 08 October 2015 - 10:54

Assuming the dot is uniform size... You would be correct.


  • 0

My RIG: - Same old mediocre box of snot, I shaved off the beard. Powered by boredom, sarcasm and existential apathy.


#12 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 10:58

Assuming the dot is uniform size... You would be correct.

 

But it would have to be. We're talking about distances, where the aircraft rendered would be less than one pixel in size for people playing on lower resolutions. On a computer screen you can't make a dot smaller than one pixel.


  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#13 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 11:03

Just to be clear Jimmy: I'm not at all against increasing rendering distance. I think it would be wonderful if we could have spotting be posible (but also realistic) from 20 or even 40km distance (In the last case I think only larger formations or very big aircraft should be posible. I just don't think spotting a fighter-sized object would be posible at 40km distance, but I might be wrong) 

 

I just can't see a way to implement it properly in a situation, where a most players can't use 4K graphics and many even play on lower than 1080 resolutions.


  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#14 Ace_Pilto

Ace_Pilto
  • Founder
  • Posts: 601
  • Location:Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Posted 08 October 2015 - 11:35

I think you're mistaken. 

No, I'm not. Think about it.

 

Dot is travelling away from me, it takes longer to resolve into a 3D model, towards me it resolves sooner. If the dot is crossing my path, I have to change heading to track it. etc etc etc. With experience these things are very obvious. Only when the dot is maneuvering hard is life difficult but I can surmise that he is already engaged by that fact. You don't need contrails, just a capacity for basic deduction, I've spent hundreds of hours doing it in old Il-2.

 

I don't know where this assumption that a render at 10km+ range comes from. The planes I see vanishing at 10km have more than one pixel at 1080p. You're just making obstacles from your opinions, not facts.


  • 0

My RIG: - Same old mediocre box of snot, I shaved off the beard. Powered by boredom, sarcasm and existential apathy.


#15 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 11:44

No, I'm not. Think about it.

 

Dot is travelling away from me, it takes longer to resolve into a 3D model, towards me it resolves sooner.

 

Yes, but if the dot resolves into a 3d model at a set distance, let's say 10km, but is visible and uniform out to 20km, you have no way of telling the actual distance. Is it a Bf 109 going 500km/h at a distance of 20km or is it a He 111 going 350km/h at 13km distance? You won't be able to tell, because they will look the same.


  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#16 TP_Jacko

TP_Jacko
  • Founder
  • Posts: 607
  • Location:Netherlands then UK most weekends

Posted 08 October 2015 - 11:44

Is there a flight sim that can render 40Km distance?

I honestly don't know how an experience  in optimum conditions with 20/20 vision can be used to suggest an area for improvement. Put some light haze in the sky or a low flying target on a summer map you would be lucky to spot anything past 10Km. Looking upwards 40 Km is not likely to help.

 

Maybe a sunlight reflection would be a way to spot targets further out.


  • 0

#17 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 11:46

I don't know where this assumption that a render at 10km+ range comes from. The planes I see vanishing at 10km have more than one pixel at 1080p. You're just making obstacles from your opinions, not facts.

 

There are people playing this game at lower resolutions than that. I was one of them myself until two months ago, when I finally bought a screen that brought me up to 1080.

 

On my screen currently, when I see planes disappear from view, they're down to 2 or 3 pixels in a horisontal line.


  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#18 150GCT_Pan

150GCT_Pan
  • Founder
  • Posts: 402
  • Location:Milan, Italy

Posted 08 October 2015 - 11:47

you can see a plane 40 km away?

 

lol byonic eyes, I think in fact already seeing a plane 15 / 20km is an exceptional event


  • 1

#19 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 11:50

Maybe a sunlight reflection would be a way to spot targets further out.

 

This has been tried in ClOD, and it looked awful. If the devs could come up with a way to realisticly model glinting from larger distances that also looked good, I'd be all for it.

 

Judging by the way BoS portrays things like navigation lights at a distance, I'm not optimistic though.


you can see a plane 40 km away?

 

lol byonic eyes, I think in fact already seeing a plane 15 / 20km is an exceptional event

 

Spotting an individual fighter would be nothing short of imposible at 40km, maybe a brightly colored modern airliner, but not a WW2 era AC.

 

Spotting larger formations of aircraft is a different story though.


  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#20 SharpeXB

SharpeXB
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2754
  • Location:Dallas, TX

Posted 08 October 2015 - 11:58

I have a 4K monitor. Does it help actually "spotting" a distant object? Well it doesn't make anything larger, just sharper. I suppose it's possible to make out some distant plane better than 1080p if it was smaller than a 1080 x 1920 pixel but that's really really small and in the actual game with color and haze etc it actually seems about the same. Now identifying things, yes. I can read the tail numbers on the other planes and see their insignia etc. But the ability to see something sooner at a great distance, in theory, mathematically I suppose so but in reality that would be something smaller than a single 1920x1080 pixel. I can probably identity what it is sooner though. I always thought RoF and BoS are quite superb with the ability to see and indentify other objects. I'm surprised the distance is only 6 miles, I feel like I can see stuff farther away than that.
  • 1
Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K o.c.@4.7GHz | Corsair H80iGT Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | 2x EVGA GTX TITAN X SC ACX 2.0 12GB SLI | 240gb Intel 520 Series SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | Samsung U28D590D UHD 28” Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

#21 Ace_Pilto

Ace_Pilto
  • Founder
  • Posts: 601
  • Location:Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Posted 08 October 2015 - 12:00

Yes, but if the dot resolves into a 3d model at a set distance, let's say 10km, but is visible and uniform out to 20km, you have no way of telling the actual distance. Is it a Bf 109 going 500km/h at a distance of 20km or is it a He 111 going 350km/h at 13km distance? You won't be able to tell, because they will look the same.

 

True but beside the point.

 

The point is that I should be able to see something outside 10km, how I go about identifying it is my problem. I'm not asking for a detailed 3D model at that range, just an indication that an aircraft is there so that I can make a logical and tactical analysis of it. 

 

 

Is there a flight sim that can render 40Km distance?

I honestly don't know how an experience  in optimum conditions with 20/20 vision can be used to suggest an area for improvement. Put some light haze in the sky or a low flying target on a summer map you would be lucky to spot anything past 10Km. Looking upwards 40 Km is not likely to help.

 

Maybe a sunlight reflection would be a way to spot targets further out.

 

I should think that CloD manages it but I can't say that for a fact as I have never measured it. I have measured BoS and at precisely 10km, cloaks go up. Even the icons vanish.

 

Light haze doesn't reduce visibility to <10km (Unless you're over Los Angeles) and haze usually has a ceiling depending on the meteorogical conditions (inversion layer I think). How lucky you are improves with practice.


  • 1

My RIG: - Same old mediocre box of snot, I shaved off the beard. Powered by boredom, sarcasm and existential apathy.


#22 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 12:24

True but beside the point.

 

The point is that I should be able to see something outside 10km, how I go about identifying it is my problem. I'm not asking for a detailed 3D model at that range, just an indication that an aircraft is there so that I can make a logical and tactical analysis of it. 

 

And as I said, I actually agree, but it has to be done right. A uniform dot at +10km distance just doesn't cut it IMHO. Maybe if they could make the 3d model change to a dot (or preferably 2-3 pixels in a line) at 10 - 12km and then have the 'dot' becoming less opague with distance to finally vanish completely at 20km? Yeah, I think that could work, but the distances would have to be the same regardless of screen resoltuion. 


Edited by Finkeren, 08 October 2015 - 12:25.

  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#23 6./ZG26_Gielow

6./ZG26_Gielow
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1083

Posted 08 October 2015 - 12:43

My experience flying the big commercial jets equipped with TCAS system is that you can spot a B737 or A320 around 12.5 nautical miles flying in the same airway.

So we are talking about spotting a 34m wingspan plane usually painted white, coming in our out in the same route what gives you the lowest visible cross section possible around 24 km in blue sky day light.

WW2 fighters wingspan is around 10-12m. Does anyone have ww2 pilots books saying how far they usually spotted enemies with no contrails??
  • 1

#24 DD_Arthur

DD_Arthur
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1768

Posted 08 October 2015 - 12:50

 

I should think that CloD manages it 

 

Nope.  If you fiddle your resolution to make the rest of the game look horrible and you know where to look then you can see Oleg's dot out to around 15-16km.  Otherwise it's much the same as BoS but with a dot, not a plane.

 

In CoD higher resolutions, down sampling, etc. make spotting contacts more difficult.


  • 0

#25 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 12:50

My experience flying the big commercial jets equipped with TCAS system is that you can spot a B737 or A320 around 12.5 nautical miles flying in the same airway.

So we are talking about spotting a 34m wingspan plane usually painted white, coming in our out in the same route what gives you the lowest visible cross section possible around 24 km in blue sky day light.

WW2 fighters wingspan is around 10-12m. Does anyone have ww2 pilots books saying how far they usually spotted enemies with no contrails??

 

As I sorta touched upon earlier, there is one very big difference from WW2 to spotting modern airliners in the sky today: You're not just looking for a single aircraft.

 

Except for the odd 'lone wolf', intruders and recon aircraft, aircraft in WW2 flew in formations that were seldom smaller than 4 aircraft and mostly quite a bit larger. My guess is, that you'd be able to spot a tight formation of 10 - 20 B737s at quite a longer distance than you could spot a single one.

 

In BoS graphics I find it much easier to spot a formation of planes than a single one, so that's covered nicely. But I wonder if that effect would translate into a 'dot' system?


  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#26 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 13:40

I found these slides from a lecture on astronomical lenses, and I think it's kinda relevant to the discussion about at what distances planes can bes spotted:

 

http://www.astro.umd...ture6-notes.pdf

 

Basically, the human eye is completely incapable of detecting (or rather 'seperating from the background') objects with an angular resolution of less than 0.0128o under optimal light and atmospheric conditions. That number is pretty close to the 0.014o which was the angular resolution of a 10m wingspan viewed at 40km distance.

 

So that solves it, right? A fighter is just barely visible under absolute perfect conditions out to 40 km. Well... no.

 

The thing is, regardless of which angle you view it from, a WW2 fighter aircraft only presents a 10m wide sillhouette, the sillhoutte is not 10 meters high. To properly assess, what could actually be seen at extreme distances, we have to look at the 'thicker' parts of the aircraft, AKA the fuselage. At an optimal angle, a WW2 fighter can propably present an opague sillhouette some 4x4 meters, wherein theres only 'plane' and not 'sky'. At 40km the angular resolution of an object 4m in diameter is only 0.0057o far below what the human eye can detect. In fact, to spot an object 4x4m in size, it would have to be within a distance of less than 18km, so very likely a WW2 fighter won't even be visible from 20km, even if viewed from an optimal angle under perfect light conditions.

 

With this in mind, I think that a reasonable maximum spotting distance for a WW2 fighter aircraft should be around 15km, maybe 20km for a medium bomber and perhaps even 25km for a heavy bomber (keep in mind: this is under absolutely perfect conditions), but beyond that it would be completely imposible to spot individual aircraft. A large formation of aircraft might ofc still be visible as a faint dark 'cloud' on the horizon at much greater distances, depending on the size and 'density' of the formation.


If you guys are interested, you can do your own calculations with this nifty tool:

 

http://www.1728.org/angsize.htm

 

Just remember: An angular resolution smaller than 0.0128o is invisible to the naked eye.


  • 2

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#27 SharpeXB

SharpeXB
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2754
  • Location:Dallas, TX

Posted 08 October 2015 - 13:50

DCS renders the 3D models at about 60km (40 miles) I think. I didn't test the difference between 1080p and 4K too much in BoS but I did in DCS
With either screen I still couldn't visually make out another plane until it was within about 10 miles, looking at it fully zoomed in. There might be a small benefit to 4K in this regard but it's not very great.
That's in version 1.2 without the new MV setting. I haven't tried that yet.

Edited by SharpeXB, 08 October 2015 - 13:58.

  • 0
Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K o.c.@4.7GHz | Corsair H80iGT Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | 2x EVGA GTX TITAN X SC ACX 2.0 12GB SLI | 240gb Intel 520 Series SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | Samsung U28D590D UHD 28” Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

#28 Brano

Brano
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2574
  • Location:Slovakia

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:00

Can a dot be pretty? Dot is just a dot :biggrin: ..and a standard workaround...and only another word for...icon.


  • 1

#29 Czar66

Czar66
  • Founder
  • Posts: 110

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:07

It only takes an adventure at single player on intercept bombers mission to see targets popping up instead of fading in (already spawned before pop in) or turn from a pixel to a greater size element. (also in multiplayer in a handful amount of times)

 

I got used to it, not in a good way, and I have a 900p screen. This 10km is too close, and I'm not talking about it with 4k monitors...


Edited by FeliusCzar, 08 October 2015 - 14:09.

  • 0

#30 unreasonable

unreasonable
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2210
  • Location:Bangkok

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:14

If dots were used as the "fair solution", there is still the question of colour - no need for them all to be black throughout the dot viewing range. They could start out as close to background colour, then progressively change to grey (or dominant skin colour) of increasing darkness as they neared the "decloaking" point.


  • 2

Nullius in verba


#31 Ace_Pilto

Ace_Pilto
  • Founder
  • Posts: 601
  • Location:Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:20

I found these slides from a lecture on astronomical lenses, and I think it's kinda relevant to the discussion about at what distances planes can bes spotted:

 

http://www.astro.umd...ture6-notes.pdf

 

Basically, the human eye is completely incapable of detecting (or rather 'seperating from the background') objects with an angular resolution of less than 0.0128o under optimal light and atmospheric conditions. That number is pretty close to the 0.014o which was the angular resolution of a 10m wingspan viewed at 40km distance.

 

So that solves it, right? A fighter is just barely visible under absolute perfect conditions out to 40 km. Well... no.

 

The thing is, regardless of which angle you view it from, a WW2 fighter aircraft only presents a 10m wide sillhouette, the sillhoutte is not 10 meters high. To properly assess, what could actually be seen at extreme distances, we have to look at the 'thicker' parts of the aircraft, AKA the fuselage. At an optimal angle, a WW2 fighter can propably present an opague sillhouette some 4x4 meters, wherein theres only 'plane' and not 'sky'. At 40km the angular resolution of an object 4m in diameter is only 0.0057o far below what the human eye can detect. In fact, to spot an object 4x4m in size, it would have to be within a distance of less than 18km, so very likely a WW2 fighter won't even be visible from 20km, even if viewed from an optimal angle under perfect light conditions.

 

With this in mind, I think that a reasonable maximum spotting distance for a WW2 fighter aircraft should be around 15km, maybe 20km for a medium bomber and perhaps even 25km for a heavy bomber (keep in mind: this is under absolutely perfect conditions), but beyond that it would be completely imposible to spot individual aircraft. A large formation of aircraft might ofc still be visible as a faint dark 'cloud' on the horizon at much greater distances, depending on the size and 'density' of the formation.


If you guys are interested, you can do your own calculations with this nifty tool:

 

http://www.1728.org/angsize.htm

 

Just remember: An angular resolution smaller than 0.0128o is invisible to the naked eye.

 

Now you're talking. :)

 

But I think your estimates are too conservative. I can't prove it mathematically but I can assure you that even seeing a small aircraft at over 20km (out to 40km) is very possible provided you know where to look because I have done it with a friend to see who could keep an aircraft in sight the longest.

 

I can tell visibly discern if an airliner is QANTAS or not at 10km (By the red tail) 


Edited by JimmyBlonde, 08 October 2015 - 14:25.

  • 0

My RIG: - Same old mediocre box of snot, I shaved off the beard. Powered by boredom, sarcasm and existential apathy.


#32 SharpeXB

SharpeXB
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2754
  • Location:Dallas, TX

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:26

Not meaning to bring up DCS again but
What they just implemented isn't a dot or an icon. It's a 2D "Sprite" that looks just like the 3D model only it doesn't shrink below 3 or 5 pixels. So it matches the color and aspect shape of the plane. So apparently it's actually still difficult to see. Its only helping you see stuff that's 5 pixels in size. I haven't tried it myself yet and I'm not sure what I think about it but that's their solution. It's possible though that even 3 pixels is too large for a ground target when it's bigger than the surrounding roads and buildings etc.

A graphic black dot is like an icon. That's too visible.

For playing these sims "full real" it's necessary to preserve the concept that it's actually difficult to see other aircraft. Having icons or dots simply makes any realistic air action impossible.

The only real concern adding enhanced visibility features like this is how they'd be accepted in MP. We don't need more server settings to divide up an already small player population.
  • 1
Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K o.c.@4.7GHz | Corsair H80iGT Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | 2x EVGA GTX TITAN X SC ACX 2.0 12GB SLI | 240gb Intel 520 Series SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | Samsung U28D590D UHD 28” Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

#33 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:30

The issue is, that when we're talking spotting at extreme distances, it suddenly becomes extremely important, which way the plane you're trying to spot is facing.

For instance a small fighter like a Bf 109 flying straight towards or away from you will present an opaque silhouette of less than 2m diameter. In that case it shouldn't actually come within visual range before it was practically on top of you (we're talking less than 9km). Viewed from the side however, you might be able to spot it at maybe 12km and viewed from above with the large area of the wing presented perhaps out to 16-17km!

This would be extremely difficult to model right.
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#34 216th_Pinko

216th_Pinko
  • Member
  • Posts: 1494
  • Location:Europe

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:46

If dots were used as the "fair solution", there is still the question of colour - no need for them all to be black throughout the dot viewing range. They could start out as close to background colour, then progressively change to grey (or dominant skin colour) of increasing darkness as they neared the "decloaking" point.


Good call. S!
  • 0

"I started imagining a world in which we replaced the phrase 'politically correct' wherever we could with 'treating other people with respect', and it made me smile." — Neil Gaiman


Hangar22_zpsna5rvufs.png


#35 TP_Jacko

TP_Jacko
  • Founder
  • Posts: 607
  • Location:Netherlands then UK most weekends

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:50

Nope.  If you fiddle your resolution to make the rest of the game look horrible and you know where to look then you can see Oleg's dot out to around 15-16km.  Otherwise it's much the same as BoS but with a dot, not a plane.

 

In CoD higher resolutions, down sampling, etc. make spotting contacts more difficult.

 

No CloD was grim thats why I like BoS. CloD had a black dot out to about 8 Km then change to a lighter shade beyond that. For me its much better in BoS.


  • 0

#36 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:52

But I think your estimates are too conservative. I can't prove it mathematically but I can assure you that even seeing a small aircraft at over 20km (out to 40km) is very possible provided you know where to look because I have done it with a friend to see who could keep an aircraft in sight the longest.


Well unless the figure of 0.0128degrees angular resolution as the limit of normal human eyesight is completely wrong, then I have to say that you must be mistaken about seeing small aircraft out to 40km.

I can't argue with your personal experience though :)

I can tell visibly discern if an airliner is QANTAS or not at 10km (By the red tail)


Well, that makes total sense actually :) The tailplane is at the very least a 3x3m object, so such a detail on an aircraft should definately be visible at 10km or even further.

I'd be more sceptical if you claimed you could read 'QANTAS' spelled out on the fuselage at that distance. ;)
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#37 Ace_Pilto

Ace_Pilto
  • Founder
  • Posts: 601
  • Location:Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha

Posted 08 October 2015 - 14:58

Just for fun,

 

Chuck Yeager (here we go) is quoted as saying he could spot aircraft from 50-75 miles. That seems like an exceptionally optimistic Yeager embellishment to me but other sources say that 15 miles (24km) is considered to be the outer limit for spotting a fighter for a person with perfect eyesight. (Source: An Israeli Airforce talking about Mirage III's which present a very small profile)

 

So 40 km is an overestimate on my part although Richard Hillary claims 20 miles, on a clear day over the channel (presumably to spot a formation).


  • 0

My RIG: - Same old mediocre box of snot, I shaved off the beard. Powered by boredom, sarcasm and existential apathy.


#38 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 15:13

Just for fun,

Chuck Yeager (here we go) is quoted as saying he could spot aircraft from 50-75 miles. That seems like an exceptionally optimistic Yeager embellishment to me but other sources say that 15 miles (24km) is considered to be the outer limit for spotting a fighter for a person with perfect eyesight. (Source: An Israeli Airforce talking about Mirage III's which present a very small profile)

So 40 km is an overestimate on my part although Richard Hillary claims 20 miles, on a clear day over the channel (presumably to spot a formation).

Well, the Mirage is a delta-winged fighter with dimensions closer to that of the He 111 in BoS than to any of the fighters and except when viewed directly from the front it presents a much larger and more dense silhouette than even a medium bomber from WW2, so I can believe 24km as a maximum spotting range for that aircraft.

Chuck Yaeger is... Well... Chuck Yaeger :biggrin:

As for spotting a formation at 20 miles: I can totally believe that. See one of my previous posts.

Edited by Finkeren, 08 October 2015 - 15:17.

  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.


#39 SharpeXB

SharpeXB
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2754
  • Location:Dallas, TX

Posted 08 October 2015 - 15:15

In the F-15C in DCS the visual range modes for the radar acquisition are effective at 10 miles. So it seems logical that this is about the range they expect the pilot to actually see a target. Beyond that range you're using a different radar scope, i.e. Looking down. Within 10 miles you're using the HUD looking up.
  • 0
Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K o.c.@4.7GHz | Corsair H80iGT Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | 2x EVGA GTX TITAN X SC ACX 2.0 12GB SLI | 240gb Intel 520 Series SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | Samsung U28D590D UHD 28” Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

#40 Finkeren

Finkeren
  • Founder
  • Posts: 6915
  • Location:Copenhagen, Denmark

Posted 08 October 2015 - 15:27

In the F-15C in DCS the visual range modes for the radar acquisition are effective at 10 miles. So it seems logical that this is about the range they expect the pilot to actually see a target. Beyond that range you're using a different radar scope, i.e. Looking down. Within 10 miles you're using the HUD looking up.


Makes sense with a 10 mile range for definately being able to spot modern military aircraft, which in size are closer to WW2 medium bombers or larger, than to WW2 fighters.
  • 0

MiG-3                

The P-51 won the war.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users