Hi,

I really enjoyed the indepth explainations of the padlock systems we deal with in flying jet combat simulations. Thanks!

A couple of comments regarding the Flanker 2.0 padlock system...

1. In Flanker 2, contrary to Andy's findings, you don't require any sensors active in order to padlock. You can padlock while in Nav mode as long as the aircraft is in visual range.

2. The cockpit reflections provide a suitable lift line as they are and IMO a drawn in lift line isn't required but is a nice option for some.

It has been requested as well that visual aides such as wingtips be visible from the cockpit for a possible addition in the future.

Thanks again Andy!

------------------
Cheers,

Stinger

Owner of the Flanker FBO
http://www.escape.ca/~shepski

Stinger

Thanks for the thanks!!

I'm still only about 50% up to speed on this view...practice, practice...

I gotta go back and try that no-lock padlock lockon again...I must have been trying too far out.

Andy

Yea, I second that. Nice work.

Speaking from experience, the USAF padlock horizon was really confusing me. I'm glad to know its not ALL my fault.

It was almost as bad as the F4 padlock turning upside down. I kept trying to turn my head upside down to match...no go on that.

Shotgun

Andy,

I found your padlock article to be extremely helpful in regards to Flanker 2! I've been floundering with it for quite some time and your article helped me to understand it.

Just to second what Stinger said, I am able to obtain a padlock without any other sensors locked on target as well.

Thank you for your invaluable contribution to our hobby!

--
Chris

Shotgun

Yep...the USAF padlock is a piece of work!!

I'm not really satisfied with my description of the 'pointing arrow' and its behavior. Every time I thought I understood it, it would do something weird, and I'd be back at square one. Without having a Pixel programmer tell us, I'm not sure we'll ever know all the specifics.

We'll just have to do our best!!

csevers

Thanks!! Glad to help!!

Andy

[This message has been edited by Andy Bush (edited December 20, 1999).]

Hi Andy, nice article!

But something alarms me. You express confusion about what I believe is a perfectly expected and natural behaviour: The reversal effect from the forward hemisphere to the aft hemisphere. When observed in opposite directions, left becomes right, left tilt becomes right tilt. Perfectly normal and expected.

But you express this as a weird fenomenon (Fig 25-27), and later advise the reader to ignore the horizon because of this "confusing" effect --- despite stressing the importance of understanding the horizon in the start of the article.

I can only contribute these comments to lack of spatial awareness in these views (I say that in the nicest way possible, of course :-). With such awareness the 3D world should happen in your head, and the images (Fig 25-27) should perfectly harmonize with the understanding of the 3D spatial situation. On the other hand --- without that awareness everything becomes just mechanically interpreted (underlined by the fact that the article focusses more on explicit aids, than implicit understanding).

Let me illustrate this by taking an example: If you lie on your side on your bed watching your favourite soap characters on TV, you still have a full understanding of up and down in the scene depicted. Despite the fact the images are projected 90 degrees on your retina, your brain resolves it pretty quickly. You can probably even read the sub-titles without problem. Hang like a bat in front of your TV long enough, and your brain will still resolve it.

[I heard about a experiment with someone wearing goggles that turned vision upsidedown. The subject kept them on for weeks, and after a while the brain adapted and it became the norm. When the subject took them off, everything became upsidedown again. It's brain magic. As a curiosity, normal vision is in fact projected upsidedown on the retina, isn't it?]

Similar things happen when you get immersed to the extent of spatial awareness whilst flying sims (observing a picture from a rotating camera in a virtual cockpit of a vehicle travelling through a virtual 3D world :-). I guess a good indication is when the simmer is seen to tilt his head in front of the screen... :-)

Maybe some more depth about spatial awareness would be in order? Many topics on the CombatSim forums has touched on this subject --- with concepts and ideas that could improve our spatial awareness: stereo sound, rendering of interior/exterior and canopy markings for positional reference, smooth viewing (clarifies LOS), understanding head attitude and importance of tilt, the 3rd person marionette view, etc.

But on the other side, perhaps the article then would become too academic and target developers more than the casual user struggling to use his sim... :-)

BTW. A few minor comments about terminology:

I think "padlock view" is misleading and anachronistic. Today we should only talk about in-cockpit (virtual cockpit) and external views (thus assosiating 'view' with camera positions). Padlock is just a automatic mode for controlling line-of-sight (LOS). The article thus applies just as much to manual panning as well.

Also, the 'forward view' as a distinct view is becoming anachronistic (although many sims still has it as a distinctive feature, I guess). Personally, I don't spend more than a few seconds looking straight forward anymore --- except perhaps on landing approach. The way I see it, the 'forward view' is better looked upon as a preprogrammed LOS direction (would be cool if the user could configure those!).

And 'situational awareness' (SA) is a bit inconcise and overused term. SA encompasses the understanding of the larger picture, including position, movement and intent of threats and friendlies, doesn't it? It's more of a combat term. Spatial awareness is a more concise term in the context of the subject the article discusses.

[This message has been edited by Attila (edited December 21, 1999).]

Sorry, a lot of words but no clear summary in my previous post. What I meant to say is that the article is a good in-depth description of the padlock mode/in-cockpit view in the sims, but it fails to properly discuss the very difficulty in these views: spatial awareness. A introduction to the latter (in relation to horizon reversal effects, head tilt, shoulder-to-shoulder flip, etc.) would be helpful for understanding.

In addition, some training tips would be helpful. For Flanker I propose the airfield padlock training tips. Lock onto the airfield and fly past. Fly straight. Then maneuver. Observe how the view (horizon in particular) looks as the camera/pilot head turns to keep the airfield in view. Turn off padlock and use manual panning to achieve the same effect. Now do the same thing against a straight flying friendly aircraft, acrobatic low-flying around structures/buildings etc, practice attack profiles against targets (rockets/strafing), etc.

Viewing in the virtual cockpit must be trained, no question about it.

I understand you point and it's a good one. I usually equate a "padlock" view to backing a car. After practicing awhile, we realize that left is right and vice versa. Usually we can maintain SA and hit where we're going. But there are major clues here. We can see parts of the car that tell us it's the back window, not the front. We can feel our head and body twisted around. Our brain says "Ah Ha...I'm going backwards."

In a flight sim we add a third dimension, take away all the visual and physical clues, or nearly all. The brain has no frame of reference to resolve the view and the reaction needed...or at least my brain doesn't

Yes, I can watch an upright TV laying on my side, but can I watch the TV while I'm sitting upright with the TV on it's side? Well, maybe, but it's gonna' take me some time to get used to it.

Shotgun

[This message has been edited by Shotgun (edited December 21, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by Shotgun (edited December 21, 1999).]

[This message has been edited by Shotgun (edited December 21, 1999).]

Hey, where can I get a set of those goggles that turn everything upside down? Those would be great for parties.

Attila

Well, you've done it now!!. I've taken your comments to heart. I took a piece of cardboard, cut out a rectangle hole in it, and have been walking about looking at the world thru it.

I scared the dog, the cats hissed and got twice as big, and my wife no longer doubts my sanity...now she's convinced I've gone over the edge. Lord only knows what the neighbors think.

But I did manage to get the horizon to 'flip-flop' as you said. I was surprised...I don't ever remember noticing that before in real world BFM. Maybe, as you say, the brain unconsciously knows that is how things should be, so the conscious part ignores it.

Could it be that the padlock view is technically correct with regard to the portrayal of the horizon line? Perhaps so, but then why does it bother me so much? ('bother' as in that it doesn't look right). Maybe it's because the 2D monitor presents all of the parts of the padlock 'big picture' (the horizon, the mini-HUD, and the target) with the same level of 'importance'. (sorry, but I'm having a hard time putting this into words!!) In real life, we see the world with objects in the foreground that we are interested in, and objects in the background that we are less interested in. Maybe our consciousness automatically filters out the background items to some extent. Maybe this is what is wrong with our monitors...the inability to screen out the things we dont 'want' to see. Does the 2D monitor force things into our consciousness that would normally not be there?

This is getting too deep for me!!

Yours and KP's ideas did make me think of one thing. Microsoft's combat sim has an 'expanded padlock' feature that I liked quite a bit. Sort of a 'zoom out' look at the padlock view. In zooming out, the view then took in more of the aircraft structure...this gave me an increased sense of where I was looking.

You have made me think that such an idea is practical for our discussion. I see this 'zoom out' idea as being the same as your idea about having the padlock camera step back from the cockpit to give a wider perspective on the view. Neat concept.

Your comments about what else I might have included in the article are appreciated. As it was, the length (6000+ words) was getting out of control, and I decided that a 'how to' accompanying article was the way to go. I'm looking at doing that early in the new year.

My purpose in spending time on the ADI/horizon issue was intended to (1) note the differences in the mechanization in the US and Russian designs, and (2) relate this to how to fly the mini-HUD in the padlock view. My emphasis on horizon behavior was meant to be somewhat negative...the idea was to stress use of the mini-HUD for aircraft control, ie force the horizon line into the background of the pilot's awareness.

As you have now made clear, even if the horizon behavior is 'realistic', I think the erratic flip-flopping' is so disconcerting that the issue is moot.

KP has sent me quite a bit of info...some interesting ideas. If you like I'll send it to you (but I need your e-mail address).

Good topic. I don't know that it will change things much, but I enjoy having other's opinions on these things.

Andy

Shotgun,

I like your 'backing a car' analogy and focus on 'frame of reference'. Right on the money, and very descriptive! BTW, hope you didn't brake your TV... :-)

Andy,

Hehe --- regarding your cardboard experiment: Don't worry, photographers and painters run around with those all the time. In your neighbors eyes, maybe it will just add/strengthen a perceived artistic flair to your persona... :-)

Regarding your article, my explosion of words above is more due to the interesting topic and the "I have something to add" effect. Writing an article is quite different to brain-storming. You have to decide and stick to a topic, choose approach angle, and target the audience. I think your article does that well. Your discussion of instruments and explicit aids was thorough (in particular the potentially confusing ADI), and surely helpful to many.

My only concern was the confusion you expressed about the 'reversal effect'. That said, confusion with padlock is the core of the subject, and we know from lengthy discussions here and elsewhere that delving deeper into the subject of 'spatial awareness' easily takes a lot of words and quickly gets academic and theoretical. You're right, it deserves an article on its own. Still, a few sentences on the fenomenon would clarify to the reader that this is not a feature due to bad sim design.

Regarding the reversal effect, I suspect you as a real pilot --- maybe more than a born and bread simmer like me --- suffer more from lack of the subconscious spatial awareness you have in the real cockpit. Getting that spatial awareness just by visual feedback in front of a sim (in effect, observing narrow images relayed from a camera in a virtual drone) is quite different. I don't think it is as much a question about filtering as having a frame of reference. If you understand the attitude of the camera the visuals will start to make sense (from own experience). It should in effect give you the spatial awareness that you implicitly have in the real cockpit.

And I think it's important that spatial awareness becomes subconscious, otherwise it can hardly be natural and effective. That's why I have commented on implicit vs explicit ways to enhance spatial awareness. The latter is provided by tools like mini-HUDs etc., but must be processed and can end up just as mechanical tools in certain circumstances (dogfights). Canopy markings, rendering of aircraft interior/exterior, wider field-of-view and a '3rd person marionette' view are implicit tools giving you a clear frame of reference from which you can implicitly (thus subconsciously) deduce both camera and aircraft attitude. With those 'viewing variables' solved the image on the monitor, including horizon reversal effects, should become as natural as nature.

Regarding flip-flopping, some of these effect can be due to bad sim design. For example, in Flanker the padlock mode instantly changes LOS from shoulder to shoulder (and the mini-HUD jumps from left corner to right corner of the screen) when the target moves around six o'clock. LOS changes should always be smooth, in my view. Flanker could also easily add a frame of reference in this situation by rendering parts of aircraft interior/exterior in the extreme over-the-shoulder LOS position.

I am also an advocate for a smooth forward glance --- I suspect that would implicitly tell us very much about the camera attitude just by observing the rotation.

And of course, add canopy markings, making it easier to get a sense of where the LOS is pointing. In particular, a 3-9 reference would help us understand the reversal effect from forward to aft hemisphere, and also be helpful in a combat (CAC) situation.

Vidar
Hasfjord@btinternet.com

PS. Having a look at KP's stuff would be interesting. If it is several MBs, could you post it at the week-end, as my net-connection is free then? (Having experience with KP's postings, it's probably wise to ask... :-)

Andy, disregard the previous PS regarding KP's stuff --- he will post it directly to me.