and this is why we really need a total overhaul of how IR signatures are handled.
7 Likes
Don’t know about a total overhaul, but an adjustment of a couple of coefficients alongside a bounded or case-by-case relation of horsepower/thrust/temperature and IR signature will solve most of it.
At least as a starting point, but I do think there are too many issues, including the flare resistance of missiles, caused by the lack of reheat plume modeling.
Like we have the reports for Aim-9Ls being totally immune to flares if they can see a reheat plume that isnt modeled.
Also edge cases like the Harriers being able to hide their exhaust by VIFFing and placing their wing between the nozzle and a seeker. Certainly enough to prevent a rear-aspect missile lock and maybe even enough to prevent an all-aspect seeker lock.
A total ground up rework to properly model both the temperature of the exhaust and the location of the exhaust I think would do the game a world of good in the long run (the start of that might be in the works. I think helis got a new heat sig system in Firebirds that does model both)
3 Likes
I think a modeling of geometric properties’ effects on IR signature might be a bit of a far ask for this game. Reheat plumes are supposed to be modeled, alongside IR signatures being separated by sources (engine exposed parts and skin temperature). We also have coefficients that determine their scale by aspect.
Just changing these two would fix a lot of stuff:
- What goes into calculating the base value for each source
- How those values are scaled by aspect
Yeah, proper modeling might be beyond them, but I would at least want them to try
Don’t think it would be beyond them, just look at the level of modeling we already have. A really high level for what is essentially an arcade simulator (though, the standards for individual models leave a lot to be desired). It simply will not be a priority, as it will take a lot of time and resources, which they seem to not have, and give marginal results (not much will change, especially for casual players).
Nice to dream though, lol
1 Like
Yeah, it would be, the day where not having flares on the Harrier Gr1 isnt such a big deal would be lovely :D
Report it?
They’re gonna buff the F-117 instead of nerfing the F-5 series
…I mean, they don’t trust the NATOPS over tertiary Russian magazines for the flight model so I don’t know what you expect.
5 Likes
I would, but I have like a dozen or more other bug reports that I want to file. Having the last 4 of the responses to my bug reports being a clear case of reading comprehension skill issue does not help my motivation either, especially when the replies are closed off immideately and everyone insists on just filing a new report.
Also, I just wanted to do a large bug report on IR signatures and their scaling with aspect angles, but that will take a lot more reading and researching. Reporting the F-5 (in this comparative manner) will just lead them to buffing the F-117, unless anyone here has docs that use the F-5/T-38 for IR missile tests.
PS: If I interpreted the figues correctly (I know, I know, don’t rely on datamines), it seems like the only difference between the F-117 and all other jets is that the rear aspect IR multiplier is 0.5 instead of 1, which seems very pessimistic.
1 Like