Would this not fall under " Authored works (secondary source) : Reference books on collections of vehicles/aircraft/ships (‘coffee table books’)"? It’s a reference book in this case, not an article.
Or has Jane’s just simply been “banned” by the devs as a source. Shame, I suppose the SPIE source only ever counts as secondary as well right?
Yeah due to the number of things Jane’s has gotten wrong it’s not accepted as a source anymore apologies that section isn’t clear on that.
Does anyone else have the problem where the generation of thermal is worse in test drive or custom battles? I have this problem on F-16D Barak. Litening II becomes gen 1 and I can’t switch to thermal view while using GBU-15(V)2/B. In normal battles it works, just in test drive and in custom battles they are glithced.
I suspect on the F-16C and F-16D, you either don’t have the NVD modification unlocked or just uninstalled. The higher pod resolution is fixed to the NVD mod on those. Not sure if that’s intentional but I actually think it isn’t now anymore (even though one of my bug reports got closed, confirming it’s intentional). Because they tried fixing it by explicitly adding the 500x300 TGP resolution to the NVD mod (which didn’t work, luckily… lol). In test flights using reference, it will load you in with a fully spaded plane so that’s why it works there.
Another way of seeing it is that the NVD mod “upgrades” the Litening II pods on the F-16C, D and AV-8B+ to Litening AT and III standard (which have higher resolution). But it’s probalby not intended. But then again, why are the F-16C and D running around with obsolete pods for their variants anyway, at the very least the F-16C with its JHMCS is post 2003+ when Litening AT was standard.
I don’t have problems with the locking that much, sometimes it flies off when trying to lock, which is annoying, but otherwise I can still use the targeting mode when locking, for a lack of a better word. I suspect you might have too many functions bound to the same button which makes it act weirdly, but I am not sure.
I never even thought that the night vision mod would affect the thermal resolution, that is really odd, I had it researched, but I never bothered to buy it as it seemed pretty useless.
Also about the locking, I’ve asked around more and I figured out the cause. I was checking controls up with someone else and they were using Activate Target Point to lock onto vehicles, which meant that it wouldn’t destabilize the sight. It worked perfectly fine for a while but it started giving me troubles with locking and unlocking targets. I used to run Sight Stabilization before and after switching back my keybinds to that it works completely fine.
Thanks for the help tho, I guess my rant about it was for no reason xd.
It’s only useful in this case on the F-16C, F-16D and AV-8B+ due to the way their NVD mods are set up. Also on the A-6E btw, though it’s a premium so usually you will run all mods on it. On all other planes however, you can leave them off to save you some repair costs.
Glad to hear your problems have been fixed. Have fun with the targeting pods, gotta be one of my favorite systems.
I’ve updated my report with new sources, that hopefully do count. Could you take a look at it?
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/Arrx2Sm0fVIv
If it’s not too much of a bother, I also have another report. It’s off topic but as it’s about a modelling error on the SEP. But it would be great if the devs would be made aware of it.
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/rbbcnukD31yu
just a question, do u know how much the atlis zoom in by? i just have been trying to compare it to other targeting pods but cant find a good source. my guess is a max of 35x but idk
Which one do you want to know, in real life or in-game?
It has FoVs of 6°-0.5° (last time I checked these were the real life values too), which is about a 12x-150x zoom in game, I think it’s the highest zoom pod we have in game.
Here, I made a spreadsheet even:
Unfortunately the ATLIS one will need to be nerfed from 0.5 to 1.0, might make a report on it soon. The CLDP should be buffed to what the nerfed ATLIS will be at 1.0.
One of these days TIALD might actually be modeled as Gen 2 (sad noises)
Also you missed the Jaguar Gr1A off the list that uses TIALD.
Change to TIALD 400 pod instead TIALD A on Harrier GR.7, and TIALD 200 pod for Tornado GR.1
Now Jaguar GR.1A equipped TIALD A or TIALD 100 pod ?
As far as I am aware. all 3 equipped the exact same TIALD tpod
Looking at it yeah, ATLIS II is overperforming, it seems the devs have understood the 0.5° fov wrong.
underscanning would essentially be just digital zoom if anything, which is not what Gaijin models in any other pod.
CLDP buff would be nice, as it currently seems to just use gaijin’s standard settings for unknown fovs.
At least ASELPOD FOVs are correct, the brochure was at least very easy to find, but the thermal resolution is currently also overperforming. It is modelled as gen 2+ but it should only be gen 2 (800x600), as the real life resolution seems to be only 640x512 (though it exist exactly in the SOLT-25 pod for some reason), which seems to be standardized to gen 2 (as can be seen with Litening II).
Litening FOVs are still a bit of a mystery to me, idk what source they used here. From what I know it should be 24° in NAV mode and 1° in NFOV, so idk where the 18 and 1,5° come from exactly, though I think the NAV mode might have been referred to as 24x18° maybe somewhere. NFOV is just incorrect tho.
SOLT-25 pod seems to be mostly correct too, give or take like 1-5% of the FOV values, it’s very minor anyways.
For a lot of other ones I have no idea, would really like to know some of the sources used for some pods. And for some I kinda just can guess they are just wrong due to messy implementation, why does Lantirn for instance have different FOVs for the F-16AM and why does the ADC03 pod differ in FOV too.
Also if anyone knows the more technical names for the NAVFLIR modules in the harriers, that would be great, because I have no idea.
Also, is that still a thing that when overflying a target locked by TGP, the view actually goes back instead of over the target and away?
Illogical behavior of targeting pod camera // Gaijin.net // Issues
The CLDP also shouldn’t be able to switch between TV and Thermal imagery in flight. In real life the pod had to be configured for one or the other on the ground before flight.
Doesn’t seem to be the case, at least anymore? Just tested it and works like expected. The video in that report also looks fine (if you pay attention to the tower on the ship), though maybe hard to see due to bad thermal resolution.
Nav mode is not modeled, any pod using nav mode should be reported. It should only be wide and narrow fov without underscan.
As for Litening, it is understood that sources stating the zoom values is preferable more than the FoV values. If only the FoV values is available then that is used.
Because devs have to configure the targeting pod values for every single aircraft one by one. So each time an aircraft gets a targeting pod, Gaijin has to go into each aircraft file and edit it, rather than having a universal file for each targeting pod like missiles, radar, or rwr.
