Im simply amazed how you guys find this in the deepest parts of the internet. I lack this ability.
5 Likes
- Discussed here…under the spoiler…Video Evidence of Russian Bias. Experiment video for my other post. Please watch - #483 by ZVO_12_INCH
- Французская “Катрина”: как в России импортозаместили тепловизоры для бронетехники (xn–b1aga5aadd.xn–p1ai)
Spoiler
Moreover, the old French photodetector had far from the best NETD (Noise equivalent temperature difference – the temperature difference equivalent to noise; in Russian scientific publications there is both the abbreviation ESHRT and RTESH). This is an indicator of how well a thermal imaging detector is able to distinguish minor differences in thermal radiation.
In conditions when the temperature differences of the observed objects are minimal (cold weather, rain, fog), a thermal imager with a lower NETD value will show a better and more informative image. In other words, in a device with a lower NETD value, the details of objects with even small differences in temperature will be more contrasting and more noticeable.
The Pluto LW has a NETD score of <70 mK, and the Russian device has <25 mK.
3.What evidence do you have on KLW-1… KLW-1 ASTERIA thermal camera - PCO S.A. (pcosa.com.pl)
So what standard does Gaijin use to judge which generation one thermal imager belongs to? Detection unit number or display pixels?
Up until now, they would round to the closest ingame thermal generation based on the specific displayed pixel resolution, unless they had no specified resolution, in which case theyd go with the specified thermal generation.
The sticking point is that we’ve now found out they did that for western thermal imagers, but NOT for russian ones. Russian thermal imagers got to be whatever generation they were defined as regardless of their resolution, or in worse cases, might be complete and total guesses, seeing as the 2S6M has better thermals than the Pantsir S1 despite the Pantsir S1 being ~18 years newer than than 2S6M.
It also doesnt line up with the visual evidence we see from the war, such as video footage of the Ka-52’s thermal imager, which looks freaking terrible…
5 Likes
Video recorded on data tape, or poor quality cameras looking at screens cannot reliably show how well thermals are.
Referencing your Ka-52 claim.
2 Likes
I am low-key expecting them to make this a second generation camera when 2A6MA3 is added:
https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/553364431636004885/1157406457713660044/381600078_6820905427971877_2301825246167901536_n.png?ex=653c16c3&is=6529a1c3&hm=c8a8518d603268e189584cce763ed6a42ae58b5489bc8d62f3ce80189bf14ee7&=&width=1212&height=909
This is ATTICA 3rd generation btw. Photo made with a phone, but quality is exceptional (for those who believe taking photos of the thermal view with a phone significantly lowers the image quality).
1 Like
That photo does not prove what generation the Ka-52’s thermal system is. When using digital zoom for long range, image quality deteriorates significantly.
Also, all helicopters have Gen 3 thermal.
1 Like
Theres a good chance the Ka-52 uses 3rd gen thermals irl, but by game definition up until now, where thermals generation was dictated by resolution, theres a good chance no russian vehicles should get anything above 2nd gen. Arguing this point is disengenuous seeing as until recently, Russia was still using Catherine Fc/Xp, which we know the resolution of and is just below ingame gen 2 thermals. When they started producing their own as a replacement (PNM-T) the resolution dropped further, to near gen 1 levels in-game.
Its disingenuous to pretend this isn’t true, and the fact combine harvesters were mistaken for western tanks just proves the fact their resolution isn’t particularly fantastic.
We’ve already argued over the fact that by current in-game standards, all russian tanks should have their thermal gen dropped to Gen 2, and you’ve already said you’d instead try to get the 2PL buffed to gen 3 instead. There’s no point in you arguing here, as I’m just comparing in-game footage vs irl footage.
Thats just false, they have Gen 2+ thermals which isnt quite gen 3, which actually leads into another funny point, the Russian tree, with its inconsistant and quite frankly hilarious implementation of thermals, has many inconsistencies, most notably;
- The 2S6 with the 2S6M (1990) modification gets gen 3 thermals, while the Pantsir S1 (2008) gets gen 2. This implies the soviets were ~20 years ahead of Russia in thermals technology, if not further, seeing as afaik, the Pantsir S1 thermals arent even russian made…
- The T-72B3 UBH gets Gen 2 thermals while the T-80BVM gets gen 3 despite both tanks using Sosna-U gunners sight.
- The 2S25M and 2S38 get gen 3, presumably because they’re “new” and so despite their being, afaik, no information on their optics, its been assumed they get gen 3 gunner/commanders
Not sure why but reply isn’t displaying properly, so here’s the rest of it:
-
Catherine XP is implemented in the game as the 3rd Gen. you can see in Crotale NG.
-
And, Ka-52, Mi-28N/NM, AH-64, AH-1Z, EC-665, and Lynx all have the same quality thermal. AH-1S/F is the only helicopter that has a 2+ Gen thermal, Problem is that the AH-64A, Lynx, and AH-1F should all have 1st Gen thermal.
-
Game has a 2S6M1 that was upgraded in 2003, not a 2S6M. But given that it’s a 2003 upgrade, it seems excessive that it’s 3rd gen. I’ll look into this.
-
T-72B3 in the game is a 2011 model, which used a 2nd Gen Catherine FC thermal. The T-80BVM is at least a 2018 model and uses the 3rd gen thermal, ФЭМ18М.
-
ФЭМ18М-03 thermal used by 2S38 is the 3rd generation, 2S25M needs investigation
2 Likes
Am I correct in reading that as the resolution being 256x320?
Photodetector format
I’ve double checked and you’re correct on this one, it must’ve changed since I last checked, sorry for the accusation.
The UBH modification on the T-72B3 is a 2016 modification as per its own devblog:
Spoiler
It does still seem to use Catherine FC though.
The ФЭМ18М sight has a stated resolution of 640x512 if Im reading this correctly, which still makes it lower than in-game gen 2 sights. If rounded to the closest generation in-game, it would be a gen 1 sight. If rounded up, itd be gen 2.
As an aside, from my understanding, the T-80BVM, the T-90M, and the T-72B3UBH all use the Sosna-U, which either uses Catherine-Fc or PNM-T, which are similar, but with Catherine-Fc being superior.
Although I have heard of russia acquiring Catherine-XP, I have never seen anything stating they use them in their tanks, only that they planned to use them, although I could be wrong. With even T-90M being confirmed to use the PNM-T analogous to an inferior Catherine-Fc
Spoiler
As previously stated, Catherine-XP is still inferior in resolution in-game to gen 2 thermals:
Spoiler
I can’t find the resolution regarding the ФЭМ18М-03 unfortunately.
For whatever reason, my quote function is broken
4/5 of those are data tape recordings.
The what looks like a photograph of the screen doesn’t prove anything.
Sniper pod data tape recordings are just as bad:
In game T-80BVM and Sprut-SDM1 are using sight with with 3rd gen 640x512 format FEM18M-03 photodetector matrix allegedly with µscanner that gives it output resolution of 1280x1024 (Same story as with Catherine MP).
For ATTICA
1 Like
PNM-T is name of sight same as Sosna-U. Catherine (and TPK-K also) is only name of thermal imager. Sosna-U/PNM-T are using Catherine FC (built pre ~2014) imager and imagers based on FEM10M (Belarus-Russian made copy of Sofradir 288х4 used in Catherine FC) and FEM18M-03 (Russian 3rd gen matrix photodetector).
Leopard 2’s ATTICA (as of now) is based solely around an LWIR camera with a 640x512 detector elements array, and is interlaced for a higher final pixel output.
Right now KMW is preparing an upgrade to ATTICA M-2 with a 1280x1024 detector array for the Leopard 2A7V and Leopard 2A8 (unknown what Leopard 2Ax will receive).
3 Likes
Which is only 30 pixels difference to the Leopard 2’s WBG X which is gen 1 in game.
1 Like