Smoke vs. IR optics

[AslakH]

I thought western IR optics could see through smoke?

Seems like my tanks and IFVs never use what they have available.

Like night battles - tanks can't see ****. What happened to the optics!?

I'll play PR and get my optics fill, then play some CMx2

[MikeyD]

There's three - make that four different types of smoke available. Some smoke IR optics can easily see through, some smoke is specially-made to degrade IR. I used to know the different types in the game but that memory's faded. The simple white smoke grenade seem to be the least useful against IR optics. Syrian 'black cloud' seems to be in the middle of the pack.

[MeatEtr]

I'll play PR and get my optics fill, then play some CMx2

What the hells PR?

[Wengart]

I think its Project Reality shares a name with a BF2 mod and an Arma 2 mod.

[MeatEtr]

I think its Project Reality shares a name with a BF2 mod and an Arma 2 mod.

Ahh ok, I remember that mod for BF2. The big realism mod for Arma 2 is ACE. I think that PR mod is still WIP.

[AslakH]

Project Reality (BF2), yep.

Love it when the infantry pop smoke, and your APC/tank/helicopter has IR optics and a good position.

Whole squads go down.

Which brings me to my initial question:

Where's the optics in CMSF?

[Guest]

Project Reality (BF2), yep.

Love it when the infantry pop smoke, and your APC/tank/helicopter has IR optics and a good position.

Whole squads go down.

Which brings me to my initial question:

Where's the optics in CMSF?

PR is a great mod. My guess, though, is that Battlefront has quite a bit more pertinent real-world data than the PR team, and more detailed modeling to boot, when it comes to optics capabilities. Probably in quite a few other areas too. BF2's engine just wasn't that detail-oriented, and there's only so much lipstick you can put on a pig, unless the PR guys have gotten their hands on the engine source since I last tried it. And BFC make it a point to find the best sources they possibly can - they're not just pulling down Jane's and plugging the numbers in.

The answer to your question about smoke was provided in part by MikeyD above - some smoke is designed to degrade IR abilities. You may be running into that. Not only that, but there's a lot going on in Combat Mission that isn't necessarily laid bare for the player to see - there are a fairly large number of reasons why an AFV wouldn't / couldn't / might not spot something at night. Just like in the real world, sometimes things don't go ideally.

[AslakH]

Phillip,

good points.

But I wasn't talking about CM vs. PR.

I was talking from what experience I have.

And the tests I've made with CMSF tells me that they don't have IR or thermal.

Unable to spot enemies in the open at night, flat ground. Blue vs. UNCON.

But heck, it doesn't bother me that much, it's just a game. It's not like I'm actually inside the M1 or Leo.

Just curious.

[hoolaman]

I have also been surprised at the short ranges at which you can spot infantry running in the open with FLIR and recon optics. Uncons might be a bad choice for a test though, they get some stealth bonuses based on their ability to blend into the population.

Blue units certainly have functioning night vision, and they can certainly fire at vehicle units through smoke, and I assume they can fire at infantry though I haven't observe this. Brown smoke is the multi spectral blocking smoke grenade in game, which is not given to all units but it will block IR optics.

If you want a better answer you'll have to post some more specifics or a save game. What ranges? What units? What population density? What terrain?

[AslakH]

hoolaman,

to give a more specific test answer:

Range approx. 100m out.

Population density: None.

Terrain: Open Ground.

Units:

Various Bluefor APCs and Tanks

Either combatant or fighter as enemy, can't remember.

And no smoke involved.

I still think the contact should be marked, as it is rather suspect having random civilians in the open during an engagement.

But as I said, I'm just curious. As far as I know, western powers have the upper hand by far, even in the fictional 2008 setting.

Oh, and I can't wait till I get some WWII night battling!

No fancy doohickeys to help the yanks out when my MG42s churn them up.

[Guest]

Phillip,

good points.

But I wasn't talking about CM vs. PR.

You read the second half of my answer, yes? I covered the "can't spot at night so they don't have IR or thermal" angle, I thought. Nothing to do with PR there.

I was talking from what experience I have.

And the tests I've made with CMSF tells me that they don't have IR or thermal.

I blew out PR because you made a point of mentioning that your perception of optics modeling was affected by it. In sum: it's folly to base your experience on PR, because PR is probably wrong. That's like saying I fired an M4A1 in Far Cry so I know how it should behave. Maybe so, but I'm not going to go toe-to-toe with an Iraq vet over how the weapon performs in combat.

I'm not saying that your concerns are baseless, but a) I can tell you that vehicles in CMSF do in fact have optics of all kinds modeled, and if you're basing your assessment on Project Reality or similar FPSs there's a good chance your experience with those games is doing you a disservice.

Unable to spot enemies in the open at night, flat ground. Blue vs. UNCON.

Now that sounds like a problem. But like I said before, there are a ton of reasons an AFV might not spot infantry at night, especially since flat ground usually has lots of tiny folds in it, and infantry are very good at finding them, especially when they've got an enemy tank within shooting range. I'm sure there are tankers here on the boards that could attest to infantry being sneaky buggers that don't appear on scopes all that much at night.

[AslakH]

Phillip,

what's up with the attitude, man?

I'm not saying it is a problem for me, and it still won't be a problem in CM:N (for obvious reasons).

But I'm not talking from PR experience, I'm talking about real world experience.

PR is something I play with some friends once in a while. It is a mere FPS game.

And I know CMSF vehicles have all kinds of stuff "under the hood". It just baffled me how close you'd have to be to see enemies in the open.

IR optics isn't a mastubatory fantasy for me.

BUT, on a side note: I wouldn't move in the armour first, so the infantry can get the "?s" for me.

[Guest]

Phillip,

what's up with the attitude, man?

What attitude? I've been nothing but friendly and polite. Telling you you're mistaken doesn't mean I'm copping an attitude.

CMSF models optics, contrary to your assertions, regardless of precisely what type of experience those assertions might be based on. Unless you meant something different when you said "And the tests I've made with CMSF tells me that they don't have IR or thermal", of course, in which case I would suggest turning down the hyperbole so that I can tell what you're actually saying.

I'm happy it's not a problem for you. If there is a bug, though, I would ask that you submit a saved game or more details so that we can track it down. Bugs are bugs, and whether or not they'll matter for Normandy I would prefer to have them documented.

[Ryujin]

Personally, the only thermal I've seen up close was a demo of the CROWs on a stryker at an auto show (that thing has a low ceiling in back, I'm short and I was cramped). Just putting that out there.

Anyway, here's what I've got in terms of gen2 thermal reference I could dig up. Don't know the times of day. M41 TOW improved target acquisition system (ITAS). Bit low quality.

Are you testing during the day or night? I wouldn't be surprised if ground temperature matters. In the desert it can obviously get close to body temperature during the day. I wouldn't be surprised if the thermal worked better at night.

The contrast probably isn't as high as you think, especially during the day. Unless it's pretty cold out, it won't just be glowing targets on a dark background (if white hot). Stuff like bushes, trees, rocks, etc will still show up as having different temperatures than the ground. Some guy's head poking up over a rock could still be missed.

There's also two other issues, abstracted cover/concealment and narrow field of view.

I don't know if/how the gunner "scans" in CMSF.

[Rayak47]

If it helps, when I was in Albania in the 90's,the Marines I was working with took a few rounds from about 100 m away in farily open terrain but they couldn't pinpoint the shooter with their IR optics. They saw plenty of people walking around as white bloches but they couldn't spot the weapon. That's pretty close to the game simulation you describe. They had no clue where the bad guys were until the shots came, then they only knew the general direction.

[dan/california]

I am not a vet, but there is a lot of tape out there, especially from helicopters, where things like heavy machine gun barrels glow like beacons after they have fired a few bursts. This is not exactly the same issue, but I am very curious to know if the game models it.

[dan/california]

On the issue of spotting dismounts, how much does the sensors field of view matter? To what extent do some of these systems have you looking through a soda straw?

[Lethaface]

Since a helo looks everything from above it can usually see targets more easily since they stick out better. If you crawl on the ground in non-flat terrain how a tank mounted FLIR is going to spot you?

[AslakH]

What attitude? I've been nothing but friendly and polite. Telling you you're mistaken doesn't mean I'm copping an attitude.

CMSF models optics, contrary to your assertions, regardless of precisely what type of experience those assertions might be based on. Unless you meant something different when you said "And the tests I've made with CMSF tells me that they don't have IR or thermal", of course, in which case I would suggest turning down the hyperbole so that I can tell what you're actually saying.

I'm happy it's not a problem for you. If there is a bug, though, I would ask that you submit a saved game or more details so that we can track it down. Bugs are bugs, and whether or not they'll matter for Normandy I would prefer to have them documented.

The attitude thing was a joke. Don't get all pissy about it.

I'm not saying CMSF doesn't model IR optics, but to what degree and how much.

It crossed my mind while playing a series of night battles, and the infantry saw much more than the APCs, at the same range.

I do not think it's a bug.

Thanks for your help, Phillip. I am not sure I said it before.

[AslakH]

Personally, the only thermal I've seen up close was a demo of the CROWs on a stryker at an auto show (that thing has a low ceiling in back, I'm short and I was cramped). Just putting that out there.

Anyway, here's what I've got in terms of gen2 thermal reference I could dig up. Don't know the times of day. M41 TOW improved target acquisition system (ITAS). Bit low quality.

Are you testing during the day or night? I wouldn't be surprised if ground temperature matters. In the desert it can obviously get close to body temperature during the day. I wouldn't be surprised if the thermal worked better at night.

The contrast probably isn't as high as you think, especially during the day. Unless it's pretty cold out, it won't just be glowing targets on a dark background (if white hot). Stuff like bushes, trees, rocks, etc will still show up as having different temperatures than the ground. Some guy's head poking up over a rock could still be missed.

There's also two other issues, abstracted cover/concealment and narrow field of view.

I don't know if/how the gunner "scans" in CMSF.

First I played a series of night battles (5-6 maybe) where the APCs and tanks couldn't see anything. They were blind.

The infantry on the other hand saw random, stationary enemies at a range of 300-400m.

Then I did some tests at night and with smoke.

The heat shouldn't be a problem at night.

I also play with the european mod, so I never use the max heat options, always cool and hazy.

Abstracted cover? I thought it was 1:1 no matter what. Selective 1:1, then.

Well, I don't know and I don't care anymore. They have IR, somewhere, etc, etc.

[Rayak47]

The one's I've seen personnaly are TOW mounted and hand held/helmet mounted. Your resolution get's much better the more stuff you can pack into them, but that adds weight, That's why all your aircraft mounted stuff looks really amazing. I assume the vehicle mounted IR is as good as aircraft quality. Even with the one's I've used, (can't rattle off a model number) if you have a lone guy crawling up on you they tend to stand out like a beacon, but it's hard to tell if they are hostile. Gets much worse if they are mixed in with a bunch of civies. You also get eye fatigue, narrow field of vision, have to watch the screen, boredome etc. So its easy to miss someone taking a shot at you, when you try to lock they've melted back into the group. Starlight scopes are much better if you want detail on a person. I'd don't know if the military uses them much any more.

[Rayak47]

Hey, since we're having chat, have any of you guys seen anything new on Normandy since NATO came out. Some Forum addict always gripes me out for missing the thread whenever I create one to ask!

[akd]

I think if you look in the normandy thread Steve dropped a partial bone on PW handling.

[Damian90]

IR optics not always will help to see human being, even on flat terrain.

And Yes, CMSF realistically simulates IR optics, FLIR is not a magical thing that will always spot a man with gun in the middle of desert, especially in tanks, and other AFV's, but of course it depends on type of vehicle, for example M1A2SEP (and probably also M1A1SA and M1A1FEP because both use same type of new FCS and optics), have several different zoom setings for Gunners Primary Sight and Commander Independent Thermal Viewer, max is x50, but field of vew is so narrow that it is only used to shoot at targets that are very far, on the contrary, the observation zoom, will not always pick up something small like man, and even vehicle are hard to identify, then it is just a something over there.