| Anonymous | Login | 2024-11-24 01:24 CET |  |
| My View | View Issues | Change Log | Roadmap | My Account |
| View Issue Details [ Jump to Notes ] | [ Issue History ] [ Print ] | ||||||||
| ID | Project | Category | View Status | Date Submitted | Last Update | ||||
| 0004719 | USAF | [All Projects] General | public | 2018-11-04 02:37 | 2018-11-04 19:07 | ||||
| Reporter | ricnunes | ||||||||
| Assigned To | reyhard | ||||||||
| Priority | none | Severity | minor | Reproducibility | always | ||||
| Status | closed | Resolution | no change required | ||||||
| Platform | OS | OS Version | |||||||
| Product Version | |||||||||
| Target Version | Fixed in Version | ||||||||
| Summary | 0004719: It's not possible to use the FGM-148 Javelin missile against static targets | ||||||||
| Description | It's not possible to use the FGM-148 Javelin missile against static targets like building or vehicles which have their engine turned off or are otherwise stopped. This is not realistic since the missile in real life can target any part of the termal image such as for example a building but greatly limits the usefulness of this very advanced and also quite heavy missile. Resuming, in real life and regarding the Javelin, if you can see it on the termal camera than you can lock it and hit it. As an evidence of this, the FGM-148 Javelin missile as been used successfully against buildings sheltering enemy soldiers/snipers and has even been used against individual soldiers/snipers. This can be read here: http://www.americanspecialops.com/special-ops-weapons/javelin.php [^] Where it can be read the following: "US Marines engage a Taliban position near the town of Marjah, Afghanistan, Feb. 10, 2010. Despite being designed primarily as an anti-armor weapon, coalition forces in Afghanistan have regularly used the missile against fixed positions such as occupied buildings as well as taking out individual snipers." I'm aware that there could be some ArmA engine issues that prevents the missile from locking objects such as buildings or even stopped/"engine off" vehicles so I would propose the following which I believe it shouldn't be a hard implementation (I guess?) while at the same time address this issue: - If the missile doesn't have a lock on a moving or "engine on" vehicle and when fired than the missile will hit the spot where the crosshair is aimed at - basically like an unguided rocket - this instead of flying skywards as it happens now. BIS has a bit more complex solution (I guess?) with its Titan AT missile (which if I'm not mistaken tries to mimic the Rafael Spike missile) but this missile when not locked into a moving or "engine on" vehicle it will have SACLOS guidance like for example the TOW missile. But since the Javelin only works as a Fire an Forget missile than I guess that the solution advanced by me above (missile flying against the point where the crosshair was aimed at when not locked) is perhaps more realistic regarding the Javelin missile. | ||||||||
| Steps To Reproduce | Try to hit a building or a stopped vehicle with its engine off with the Javelin missile. | ||||||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||||||
| Is it a wish/request? | No | ||||||||
| RHS version | |||||||||
| Arma 3 version | 1.84 | ||||||||
| Did you used any other mod when the error occurred? | No | ||||||||
| Which mods? | |||||||||
| Attached Files | |||||||||
 Relationships |
|
 Relationships |
|
Notes |
|
|
(0008749) reyhard (administrator) 2018-11-04 10:58 |
It's possible to target vehicle with turned off engines if they had time to warm up before. As for buildings I don't think such work around improve situation and it seems like bad band aid |
|
(0008751) ricnunes (reporter) 2018-11-04 14:21 |
Sorry for insisting on this issue but how having the possibility of aiming and hitting a building or a part of the building - even if it's a "band aid" as you said - it's always better than having none at all (as currently is). Regarding vehicles, yes what I was taking about was about vehicles that aren't warmed up. The REAL Javelin missile can target any of the two types of targets above so with all due respect the missile as currently is anything but realistic. Or resuming, the band aid would only give a bit more realism to the missile (and not take it). |
|
(0008752) reyhard (administrator) 2018-11-04 14:36 edited on: 2018-11-04 14:36 |
The real Javelin needs really good contrast between background & building to aim at it. What you suggest is really far away from realism. |
|
(0008754) ricnunes (reporter) 2018-11-04 14:40 |
reyhard, And when you look thru the Javelin's camera you can perfectly see buildings and not warmed up vehicles, right? So in this case a Javelin lock would always be successful, no? |
|
(0008755) ricnunes (reporter) 2018-11-04 14:45 edited on: 2018-11-04 14:46 |
What I mean is the Javelin can lock anything you see on the camera. I really mean anything visible on the termal camera. For instance another role where the Javelin is intended to be used against (besides against tanks/vehicles) is also against bunkers (which again are buildings). The "solution" above although "crude" I admit, would at least give the player this chance. Far better IMO than having the missile flying skywards when what all the player wants is to hit a building or a vehicles which isn't "warmed up" but otherwise perfectly visible on the termal camera. |
|
(0008756) reyhard (administrator) 2018-11-04 14:46 |
Real life Javelin sensor is different than 2035 ultra auto contrast TI camera that Arma 3 offers. Furthermore, Arma 3 buildings don't have separate TI textures & their TI signature is generated from texture colors where white is equal to cold & black as hot surface. That of course creates quite huge impact on how you perceive environment & leads to i.e. non sense like TI camouflage canvas cover had worse TI blending than IDAP white tent. That particularly thing had to be fixed later by making duplicated mesh with white color & lower z fighting, where visible mesh had noTIwrite property making it invisible in thermals. |
|
(0008758) ricnunes (reporter) 2018-11-04 14:58 edited on: 2018-11-04 14:59 |
Yes, but the lower/different resolution or contrast of the Javelin compared to what might appear in the future/modeled in ArmA3 doesn't prevent it from being used against building or parts of buildings. Please look again at the following website: http://www.americanspecialops.com/special-ops-weapons/javelin.php [^] and namely at the paragraph that I mentioned earlier. Yes, I also imagine all sorts of problems regarding ArmA and the modeling of a proper Javelin due to issues like the TI textures that you mentioned. That's why I gave you the idea above (The missile would fly towards the point where the crosshair was aimed at at the time of the missile's launch). Is this idea, ideal? No of course not. But again and at least it would be better than (and more realistic in terms of the real weapon capabilities) than what we currently have. The (expensive and heavy) Javelin missile would be a "stupid weapon" if in real life it could only be used against vehicles with their engines turned on or recently turned off (still "warmed up"), don't you agree? |
|
(0008759) reyhard (administrator) 2018-11-04 15:08 edited on: 2018-11-04 15:16 |
"recently turned off " - vehicle cooldown in arma is approximately 1 hour, in real life it might be even a little bit more depending on weather conditions so it's rather safe to assume that in most user cases Javelin can be used as designed. After all technology has it's limitations and weapon designers have to make some compromises. Anyway, with that argument about cost I feel like further discussion is pointless since you can make statements like "AH-64 is so expensive, it would be pity if single missile could destroy it!". Also one more thing speaking in terms of Arma realms - having SACLOS mode in Arma would basically mean that you can fire missile instantly without locking which would be super unrealistic thing. |
|
(0008763) ricnunes (reporter) 2018-11-04 17:44 |
reyhard, Before everything sorry to insist on this point but regarding your last paragraph I guess you're misunderstanding what I was proposing. No, I wasn't proposing that you could/should add SACLOS to the Javelin. The Javelin is a pure Fire-and-Forget missile so modeling SACLOS for the Javelin would indeed be unrealistic. What I'm proposing here is that when you don't have a lock on a "warmed up" vehicle that the missile would fly (technically unguided) to the point where the crosshair was aimed at, thus simulating a fire-and-forget shot/missile (since you won't be able to manually guide it). The second point that you seem to be misunderstanding here is about the concept of the Javelin missile and its IR seeker. When you say that: "The real Javelin needs really good contrast between background & building to aim at it." The statement above is not accurate I'm afraid. Basically in terms of currently available IR guidance technology there is the older IR (InfraRed) guidance and the newer more advanced IIR (Imaging InfraRed) guidance. What you described in the sentence above which I quoted was the older IR technology which indeed requires a good contrast between the background and the desired object. This technology is used on older weapons such as for example older gen IR-guided Air-to-Air missiles such as for example, the AIM-9M. But the Javelin uses the newer IIR (Imaging InfraRed) technology. With this technology you can aim at any part of the IR image independently of its contrast (basically with IIR you aim at pixels and not at heat blobs like happens with IR technology). This allows the Javelin missile to lock/shoot at for example a certain window or a certain section of a building. Resuming when the Javelin is fired against a building you won't lock the entire building (as an independent "heat blob") but instead you lock the part/spot (or more precisely the set of pixels) of the building where you want the missile to hit at. The ability to point with the crosshair at a spot of the building and fire the missile against it would somehow model (this again) realistic behavior of the Javelin. Sorry for my somehow "big note". |
|
(0008764) reyhard (administrator) 2018-11-04 18:35 |
Ehh, seems like you didn't understood my point. Seems like you really want to have last word in every discussion (vide ah64) so it's really pointless to continue that discussion. |
|
(0008765) ricnunes (reporter) 2018-11-04 19:07 |
No reyhard I don't want to have the "last word" in every discussion. I have NO problems at all in admitting when I'm wrong as you can see in my last AH-64 ticket (which for some odd reason you claim as an evidence of me wanting to have the last word) and as well as in a few other tickets that I opened in the past. Honestly I can be accused of many things but not that. BTW, if you had the RHS AH-64 functionalities better documented I probably wouldn't have posted that AH-64 ticket. But and with all due respect it seems that it's you that wants to (always) have the "last word" as it can be clearly seen here where evidence was provided to you that the Javelin can lock basically anything within its imagery but yet you insist that it works like some older IR technology where it can only lock heat blobs or hotter sources yet for some odd/strange reason you don't seem to want to admit this real fact. Well it's your mod anyway so you do what you feel. But I don't think that your last note/post of yours is a good way to encourage people to give you feedback. For my part, this is likely the last time I provide any feedback regarding anything related to RHS. So have a nice day. |
|
Notes |
|
Issue History |
|||
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
| 2018-11-04 02:37 | ricnunes | New Issue | |
| 2018-11-04 10:58 | reyhard | Note Added: 0008749 | |
| 2018-11-04 10:58 | reyhard | Status | new => closed |
| 2018-11-04 10:58 | reyhard | Assigned To | => reyhard |
| 2018-11-04 10:58 | reyhard | Resolution | open => no change required |
| 2018-11-04 14:21 | ricnunes | Note Added: 0008751 | |
| 2018-11-04 14:36 | reyhard | Note Added: 0008752 | |
| 2018-11-04 14:36 | reyhard | Note Edited: 0008752 | View Revisions |
| 2018-11-04 14:40 | ricnunes | Note Added: 0008754 | |
| 2018-11-04 14:45 | ricnunes | Note Added: 0008755 | |
| 2018-11-04 14:46 | ricnunes | Note Edited: 0008755 | View Revisions |
| 2018-11-04 14:46 | reyhard | Note Added: 0008756 | |
| 2018-11-04 14:58 | ricnunes | Note Added: 0008758 | |
| 2018-11-04 14:59 | ricnunes | Note Edited: 0008758 | View Revisions |
| 2018-11-04 15:08 | reyhard | Note Added: 0008759 | |
| 2018-11-04 15:16 | reyhard | Note Edited: 0008759 | View Revisions |
| 2018-11-04 17:44 | ricnunes | Note Added: 0008763 | |
| 2018-11-04 18:35 | reyhard | Note Added: 0008764 | |
| 2018-11-04 19:07 | ricnunes | Note Added: 0008765 | |
|
Issue History |
| Copyright © 2000 - 2024 MantisBT Team |
 |