They can’t do it alone, that’s why they’re connected together. The utaas(fcs) can provide the ballistics and gun laying but needs a module with video tracking and a rangefinder, the janus system provides video tracking and rangefinding to the connected (utaas) systems.
If a graphics card can’t play sounds and the motherboard can’t play sounds how do they suddenly produce sounds when connected together?
You’re only reading half of what i say it seems like. If neither system has the ability to lay the gun to a tracked target how would it suddenly gain that functionality by connecting the systems together?
That is the part you’re making assumptions about. It’s imo a reasonable assumption to make that the FCS can be re-programmed to gained that function relatively easily, but it is still an assumption and no hard proof of this exists. Hard proof is needed for something to be added to the game.
If neither system has the ability to lay the gun then where’s your bug report on the commander override/rangefinding? It’s the janus system laying the gun.
What even is the game’s target tracking then?
In my experience it’s the sight being stabilized to the target and a lead angle being provided. The dude very explicitly states that the the cv90 does the exact same thing.
You mean the independent commander controls?
The commander has his own set of controls for the gun and can lay it on his own. The JANUS just acts like a sight.
Optical tracking.
Biggest difference is that if the target turns the optical tracking can follow,
The cruise control can’t follow if the target turns, the laser misses the target so no more adjustments can be made automatically, the gunner will have to manually adjust to follow the new path of the target until the gunner can re-lase and re-engage the cruise control.
When I asked what the game’s tracking is I was asking what features it has that a vehicle needs to match in order for tracking to be added in game.
Optical tracking with automatic gun laying.
The janus system has optical tracking built in, if the target moves it just follows and continues ranging. (the gunner has a separate rangefinder).
Yes, like a radar, doesn’t mean it can lay the gun to that. Same way SPAA has one search radar and one track radar. One shows you contacts, the other lays the gun. JANUS being able to track target effectively just describes a search radar function.
Compare it to the Ozelot:
The janus sight is explicitly stated as having “Automatic video tracker”, and the utaas(fcs) automatically lays the gun on targets being tracked by connected sights.
The utaas(fcs) does the automatic gun laying when a target is being tracked, the janus system can track maneuvering targets through 3d space without any effort from the gunner beyond the initial decision to lase the target and where around the target he wants the gun to fire. (this is explicitly stated in the interview segment)
So an accurate intreptation of the cv90mkiv would be one where the janus system functions like the irst of the ozelot and only displays the range of targets that are being tracked.
1 Like
Show your source for this.
YOU ALREADY CLAIMED IT. (as did Tarkan Turkcan)
Tarkan Turkcan explicitly states that only one manual pulse is needed and then the system automatically goes from there.
The janus system is able to lock on to a target and continuously range it, so the utaas(fcs) would have a vector to work with even without any subsequent input.
The lvkv needed the additional control module because the turret controls were analog and attached to the gunner, later cv90’s have a digital system that allows the gun to be controlled by the fcs directly, with the commander’s console attaching to the fcs.
This meant that implementing tracking on the lvkv required them to add a system put control inputs into the fcs in the same manner the gunner’s station did. Whereas in later digital modules the gunner and commander stations are just modules plugged into the fcs that additions plug into the fcs alongside.
VTM > CU > gunner station > fcs vs VTM > FCS < Crew consoles
They switched over to using a digital system that doesn’t actually require the dedicated video tracker module and the lvkv remained a prototype.
Modern (mkiv) examples use external optics mounted on the roof that perform all the same tasks and made the lvkv obsolete.
1 Like
At this point, email BAE and/or the Swedes. Easiest approach to resolving the argument.
It should be noted that the UTAAS refers to two entirely different systems, an early analog system found on the strf9040, a later digital system found on the mkIII and mkIV, and the hybrids in between.
Early cv90’s use a purely optical system and require an additional module for an optical track whereas the mkiii and mkiv use digital systems with software defined capabilities.
Ex. Early cv90’s do their lead computation by requiring the gunner to lase the target twice and then draw a single vector between the two points whereas the modern ones track automatically after the first lase.
Bet
The Swedish Security & Defence Industry Association(of which saab is a member) released a publication about it: “UTAAS (Universal Tank and Anti-Aircraft Sight) for Combat Vehicle 90. The products share common technology and sub-systems such as the Fire Control Computer, Video Tracking Module, Recoil Buffer and Stabilisation Technology.” SOFF release
No. The functions are different and works differently, they are not the same. The source you provided does not ever claim that the gun is automatically laid to an optical track.
It’s a big difference to press one button and have the gun automatically aim towards and follow an optical track no matter where the gun was aiming when the button was pressed. An optical track also follows the target even if it turns and goes outside of the laser and re-aims the gun to the target automatically so that the laser can hit it again.
The described function of trig tracking (or cruise control) requires the gunner to manually aim the gun all the way to the target and manually follow the target before pressing the lase button. It’s not until then that the FCS takes over and is put into cruise control. If the target then changes direction so that the laser no longer hits the target the FCS no longer gets any updates on changes and continues to move in the original direction until the gunner manually aims and find the target again and lase again.
Is it?
Find proof that the information received from JANUS by the UTAAS is able to be used for tracking. This is the part you have no actual proof of and just assume.
“doesn’t actually require the dedicated video tracker module”
Source? Proof?
Proof?
(Not for the trig tracking, no one is disputing that functionality, it’s just that it is still different from optical tracking and not a mechanic that exists in the game yet)
Yes? That’s not proof of those modules being installed in the CV90’s just that the trackfire and UTAAS share common tech and optional sub systems. Not that those subsystems are installed anywhere.
We already agreed the mk4 can do this, you were arguing that it wouldn’t integrate the lead while doing so. The commander sight has optical tracking, and the fcs drives the gun to where the commander sight is aiming.
Arguing about this is also pointless as track only aa such as the m163 and ifv’s with optical tracking don’t get it in game.