Raven Optics Functioning Properly?

[Nerdwing]

The Raven is a neat lil' UAV that you throw like a football player, and it buzzes around peeping at things.

 

To quote: http://www.army-technology.com/projects/rq11-raven/

 

 

It delivers real-time colour or infra-red imagery to the ground control and remote viewing stations via three different cameras attached to the nose of the plane.

One of these is an electro optical camera that is placed either on the nose or side, the second is an infra-red camera in the nose and the third is an IR camera located on the side.

 

Now, this is its real one.  In the CM:BS demo however, I've been disturbed to see just how blind the darn thing is.  Namely, in spotting enemy entrenched positions.  Not the enemy themselves, mind you; just the positions.

 

http://i.imgur.com/yEjY9DU.jpg

 

I've tasked this Raven with (through reloading/cease fire to test if it was able to achieve my goal at all) observe a position DIRECTLY above an entrenched ATGM team.  AT-14 Kornet to be precise.

 

To confirm I was in the right spot, I initiated a cease-fire and confirmed it:

 

http://i.imgur.com/Zpjg2dN.jpg

 

As you can see, the Raven was in the absolute ideal position to detect the trench-works at least, much less ta least SOME infantry contact.  Yet it was unable to do so  Shouldnt it be able to see there are some form of entrenched positions there at least?

 

I've a save game, but its for the demo so not entirely sure if its worth anything  My difficulty was oN Basic Training, because I'm very bad.  That, and I was under the impression it gave a spotting bonus, which if true, is even more unfortunate for our fine free-arm thrown friend the Raven!  Was this changed by chance in a later patch in the actual game, or is it working as designed?

 

In a best case scenario, I imagine a UAV perfectly assigned should be able to see the infantry and trenches  But ingame, due to abstractions etc I'd really have thought they could see the trenches and pre-prepared positions given the Raven's optical suite.  I was very disappointed (as were my M1A2's) they they were not locate-able until they'd fired 2-3 times.

 

Please forgive the errors in displayed time, those are my fault as in the original picture I'd unselected the Raven's controller.

[sburke]

The problem is you didn't place the Raven there.  You told it to look there.   I am still struggling with understanding what to expect in code, but while playing poking the bear it was clear my UAV was always in the corner of the map.  You'll notice that when they get shot down

 

How that impacts what they can see and where I honestly don't know, but I do know it affects spotting and targeting them.

 

Quick test. (you'll need to buy it to do this...)  Create a map with a big spine running down the middle.  Put a Tunguska on the enemy side then send your UAV over it.  The TG will never spot your UAV.  Now put a Tunguska on your side of the map.  Your UAV is likely toast while it is observing the TG on the opposite side.

 

The model as I understand it is the UAV is observing from a standoff distance. It does not position itself directly overhead where you tell it to observe.  That may be impacting how well it observes.  That would require a lot more testing than I have time for to prove/disprove

Edited June 10, 2015 by sburke

[Nerdwing]

That makes perfect sense, if true actually

 

What can I do then to localize/determine an enemy ATGM position that I KNOW is in a field over there but invisible to my vehicles optics?  Would Apaches with tight area-targeting be enough to locate and engage the positions, and then follow up on what they hit with artillery to be extra-sure?

 

The impression I was under was the drone buzzed over at an altitude where it remained out of small-arms range, while remaining within MANPADS/AA range to circle and feed that data back to the spotter while maintaining a safe altitude so dude with an AK doesnt shoot it down.  If they are indeed hanging way back, then the behavior Im seeing makes perfect sense.

Edited June 10, 2015 by Nerdwing

[sburke]

yeah that would be a decent assumption.  However the actual mechanics of aircraft are very much fudged.  The average CM battlefield size is such it would be pretty rare even for an aircraft to enter it particularly in the modern era.  The advent of UAVs is putting a wrinkle in that.

 

For sure I do not think the viewing location is equal to the UAV game physics location for AA fire.  If it were in the Tunguska test from above the UAV would never spot the 1st TG.  Where and how that viewing location works is something I really haven't had the time to try and test though.

 

How long did you have the UAV looking for that team?  There are a few things that can affect it, the first is time.  When you assign the UAV to a location, the folks running it need to time to view the area you have noted for observation, which brings up the second point of how large an area for observation.  The larger the area the longer it may take to spot stuff.

 

The best option may simply be to target the area with artillery fire and while it is falling get someone up to get eyes on the enemy location if that is an option, or just move up a tank and area fire with a brief target command and retreat.  The artillery will hopefully keep the enemies heads down while you pound the area with direct fire.

 

As to aircraft. hard to say how well they will spot on their own.  Against vehicles my experience is pretty good.  Against unspotted infantry, I would expect not so good but possible.

Edited June 10, 2015 by sburke

[Nerdwing]

Just beat the scenario, and believe it or not the real hero's in shutting down the ATGM nests were AH-64D's!

 

Given a reasonably sized area attack order, they'll do their thing and engage suspicious areas with cannon and rocket fire.  Then I'd follow suit with a good bit of airburst 155, and they'd be shut down nicely.

 

The two surviving nests though proved to be a huge pain in the ass, as in CM:BS you dont see the start/smoke from a firing enemy missile like you do in Shock Force.  That, and apparently the Kornet's launch signature is pretty miniscule meant alot of it was luck that let my M1A2's survive the missiles.  That, and using the two APS tanks as the tip of the spear.  They were just Regular veterancy though, maybe that was part of the problem

  I guess the Abrams all being Regular skill (sans the one leader who sadly isnt in an APS-equipped one ) also helps make the ATGM hill-tops difficult!

 

Either way, thanks for answering the question!

Edited June 10, 2015 by Nerdwing

[Muzzleflash1990]

Are we talking Rolling Thunder? I had the same problem.

 

Tried UAVs several times during that scenario, both with large observe circles, but also small right on top. Then AH-64s. Then futile attempts with infantry getting to within ~350-400m I recall. Nothing would give me the spot. I've also tried bradleys and abrams in concealed hull down positions, but those that didn't get the laser warning from that team, didn't see anything either. Finally, late in the scenario I had set the necessary conditions elsewhere, such that I could pound this position with artillery, and advance in direct confrontation.

[Nerdwing]

^^ Yes, this is the scenario.  I'm really not sure how to handle that kind of enemy defense since I'm unable to see the entrenchments themselves.  Best way was just giving the Apache's a likely area for CAS, adjusted each time, and they'd generally open fire on something I didnt see.  That area they fired upon then made some 15mm Airburst friends, and that managed to take out the positions.