Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

[Logged] Low, realy low flying

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> [Logged] Low, realy low flying Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
[Logged] Low, realy low flying - 1/16/2021 2:02:10 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
Goodafternoon,

When aircraft try to fly very low to remain undetected for as long as possible they fly down to 150'AGL or 100' AGL en the Britts even lower than that

When I try to replicate this in CMO the aircraft stay high. And there is a big difference between flying above sea and land.
Another interesting thing is that planes fly lower above France than Saudi Arabia.. ?!?

An AH-64 Apache flies 50' AGL above sea and goes automatically to 100'above land @ 140kts.
In Saudi Arabia it flies 100' AGL above sea and goes to 500'above land.
When the speed is reduced to loiter 55 kts the helo will go as low as 50'AGL. (still too high for a attack helo..)

An F-16 will fly 80'AGL above sea and goes automatically up to 400' AGL above land. (Above France) @ 480kts. Speeds don't matter for the altitudes.
In Saudi Arabia the F-16 will fly 300' AGL above sea as a minimum and 1000'AGL above land as a minimum.
I Tried other aircraft and it was about the same. Except the Tornado with its Terrain Followin Radar can fly as low as 200' AGL as a minimum. But, in real life, I saw Tornados flying much lower than 200 feet

Question 1: Is it possible to get aircraft to fly to at least 100' AGL?
Question 2: What is the reason that aircraft in different regions fly higher than others?
Question 3: Can helicopters be programmed to fly at helicopter attack altitudes 10-20' or something like that at slow speeds like for example 30 kts. And certainly in hover.

Option to consider: you may couple altitudes with experience levels of the pilot? But this is a bit stretching..




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Rory Noonan -- 1/31/2021 11:41:57 PM >
Post #: 1
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/16/2021 2:12:15 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
Attached is a .sav to see how low the aircraft go per region and type.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 2
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/16/2021 2:56:25 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 1461
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline
Good thing to bring up. Altitude was one-way Azerbaijani drones were able to have their way with Armenian air defense systems (along with jamming, seeker and optic effectiveness against very small low heat targets).

Mike

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 3
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/16/2021 3:31:44 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6245
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
Not sure how relevant it is, but gives some background on the devs' thoughts on what is low level.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4092439&mpage=1&key=low%2Clevel�



(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 4
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/16/2021 4:12:24 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6245
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
Just playing around with my own scenario I was puzzled by the different altitudes in different regions. Then I realized the difference between night and day. Not philosophically, but min. altitude is different for night and day. I was moving my f-22 all over the place before I realized I was crossing the day/night boundary.

I going to play around with things like aircraft type, speed, terrain, time, and proficiency to see what impact they have.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 5
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/16/2021 4:52:43 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6245
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
Using an F-22 over the eastern US and over the Atlantic. The parameters that impact lowest operational altitude are proficiency, wind/sea state, precipitation, and time of day. They all impact whether low level is 300 ft or 500 ft, and in one case it was 1000 ft in high winds, at night, heavy rain and over land.

I tried a Tornado GR and no matter what, the low altitude is 200 ft. That is the advantage of TFR. So if you are going to run a test on low level altitude issues, make sure you take into account the above. I haven't tested speed yet, but all fighter-like AC seem to have similar behavior.

edit: Sorry...similar behavior over sea as well, except in perfect conditions, its 80 ft. as low level.

Edit 2: Type of aircraft makes a difference. Large cargo planes have a limitation in daylight of 500ft regardless of proficiency. I did note that TFR parameters in the db for each plane vary. The TFR in the Tornado has different limitations for altitude than a B-52. Never noticed that before. I'm sure there are other factors that come into play, but it looks like region isn't one of them.

< Message edited by thewood1 -- 1/16/2021 5:24:09 PM >

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 6
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/16/2021 8:20:42 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Just playing around with my own scenario I was puzzled by the different altitudes in different regions. Then I realized the difference between night and day. Not philosophically, but min. altitude is different for night and day. I was moving my f-22 all over the place before I realized I was crossing the day/night boundary.

I going to play around with things like aircraft type, speed, terrain, time, and proficiency to see what impact they have.

This could very well be the reason for the difference in region, good thinking!

< Message edited by Blast33 -- 1/16/2021 8:21:07 PM >

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 7
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/16/2021 8:29:34 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Using an F-22 over the eastern US and over the Atlantic. The parameters that impact lowest operational altitude are proficiency, wind/sea state, precipitation, and time of day. They all impact whether low level is 300 ft or 500 ft, and in one case it was 1000 ft in high winds, at night, heavy rain and over land.

I tried a Tornado GR and no matter what, the low altitude is 200 ft. That is the advantage of TFR. So if you are going to run a test on low level altitude issues, make sure you take into account the above. I haven't tested speed yet, but all fighter-like AC seem to have similar behavior.

edit: Sorry...similar behavior over sea as well, except in perfect conditions, its 80 ft. as low level.

Edit 2: Type of aircraft makes a difference. Large cargo planes have a limitation in daylight of 500ft regardless of proficiency. I did note that TFR parameters in the db for each plane vary. The TFR in the Tornado has different limitations for altitude than a B-52. Never noticed that before. I'm sure there are other factors that come into play, but it looks like region isn't one of them.


With an C-130 without TFR, 250' AGL with pilots hands, and NVG must be possible.
Also an F-16 with NVG must be possible to be lower than 1.000' what it is now. This is different for an F-4 from 1975 for example..

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 8
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/16/2021 10:02:02 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6245
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
Not just because they have NVGs. Maybe a FLIR pod. NVGs tend to kill depth perception. Not something for low-level flying.

btw, I think the low ceiling for an F-16 at night over land for a regular pilot at cruise is 500 ft.

Just checked. Loadout makes no diff.

F-16C novice at night is 500 ft. Same with Ace.

C-130E novice at night 1000 ft. Same with Ace.

F-16C novice day over land 300 ft. Ace is 200 ft.

C-130E novice day over land 500ft. Same for Ace.

The only conclusion I draw is that the floor is typically by aircraft class with modifiers for speed, day/night, land/water, proficiency, and maybe a few others.

< Message edited by thewood1 -- 1/16/2021 10:27:36 PM >

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 9
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/17/2021 5:19:31 AM   
KnightHawk75

 

Posts: 1244
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
quote:

Question 1: Is it possible to get aircraft to fly to at least 100' AGL?
Question 2: What is the reason that aircraft in different regions fly higher than others?
Question 3: Can helicopters be programmed to fly at helicopter attack altitudes 10-20' or something like that at slow speeds like for example 30 kts. And certainly in hover.

Option to consider: you may couple altitudes with experience levels of the pilot? But this is a bit stretching..

Q.1: Yes. The aircraft will either one of, or a combo of the following
a. be of a certain type (multi-role|fighter|attack| probably couple others)
b. need to be over sea
c. need to have a 6001|6002 terrain avoidance flag. (~520 aircraft in the database have one of these)
d. weather state well generally need to on the clear side (cloud state does not matter, seastate\rainstate do).
e. be of at least cadet level (depending on other factors involved) (novice are capped higher than 100ft)

Q.1a - over land (or anywhere elevation is > 0) NO, unless heli or tilt-rotor where you are capped at 50ft and above loitering it's 100.

Q.2. None. This is LOCAL time of day based. Over land the general baseline is 500 at day, and 1000 at night; at sea it depends more but generally becomes 300 at night unless otherwise flagged.
Q.3. Nope.

Q.4. Proficiency matters though proficiency takes a back seat to nighttime, and TA-flagged aircraft (those with terrain avoidance).
For instance a A multi-role TA-unflagged aircraft (f-22) at sea during daytime as a Novice is capped at 150, at Cadet 100, above that 80. Over land the same results would be 500,500,400,vet=300,ace=200. At tagged F-15EX|CX for example at sea during daytime at any proficiency is capped at 100 (loses 20ft by-product of being tagged).
Category can matter - A generic bomber or fixed-wing like say a KC-10A however unlike above would make no difference, over land they are either 500 or 1000 depending on time of day, at sea 300ft regardless of day\night and proficiency or weather. Helicopers and tilt-rotors are min alt are not affected by proficiency or weather or night time, but are by speed (above loiter = 100ft).

As already mentioned yes sea state and rain-state can matter too (clouds and temp do not). Also as one might expect with non-flagged aircraft night will generally trump weather+proficiency, weather will trump proficiency, flagged aircraft generally by-pass proficiency and nighttime, and get +100 during extreme weather.

A general rule of thumb for weather:
rainstate > 4 =300ft cap sea, 500ft cap land, TA-flagged whatever it was +100ft land or sea.
seastate > 5 =300ft cap sea, 500ft cap land, TA-flagged whatever it was +100ft land or sea.
* exception to rule TA flagged require seastate > 7 to get their +100.

Also don't let "night navigation xyz" feature flags fool you, they have nothing to do with altitude, in fact I've struggled to figure out how they're actually used since only 59 aircraft lack one or the other flag types. If I had to guess they were used to indicate if a unit could take off at all or maybe to use their particular weapons after dark, but in testing it seems you can do both even with aircraft lacking either or both flags. I'm thinking due to complaints maybe they were just tossed for that purpose and maybe they're just used to hurt effectiveness of munitions fired at night (extra pok penalty without the flags?), or are dormant flags. Be curious if anyone actually knows.

A thought on why we're hard capped at 50ft and 80ft respective beyond just keeping it 'generally realistic for majority of cases' factor.
When it comes to your point about attack helicopters I do find it unfortunate we can't fly them < 50ft loiter and <100 at cruise, even though MOST of the time that seems a reasonable limitation and realistic. On the flip side however this limitation beyond realism may be a welcome game-balance issue in that the lowest SAM engagement altitudes cap out on the low end at 30ft. So allowing anything to go below that...while it certainly may happen in real-life (where as the missiles in real life ain't gonna stop cause they're at 30ft idt anyway ..or maybe some do as safety feature idk), would make the AI "engage defensive - go min alt" too good at avoidance, and too exploitable on the player side, even though in a limited\very specific situation it might be a valid tactic.

For example, you have a ah-64 parked 12 miles out from sa-21 site who has some elevation on you such that he can paint you. You pop up from 20ft to 31ft, you get fired on, you pop down to 29ft...missile goes away. Rinse and repeat till site has exhausted it's missiles, or just fly in and attack directly with only small arms or lasers to worry about. The same would be true if you allowed aircraft to go < 30ft, too easy to just avoid incoming missiles or them being fired at all. Now sure you could allow it and then have to re-balance other things but I'm not sure there is enough bang for the buck there.

As for aircraft though I might be supportive of a change to generic baseline over land to be 300ft day 500ft night |sea 200ft day|300ft night(unchanged), probably get realism complaints though, and one probably has to think though all the possible areas of impact, something I'm not doing while flippantly typing that I might support it. ;)




< Message edited by KnightHawk75 -- 1/17/2021 5:23:55 AM >

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 10
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/17/2021 11:54:47 PM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline
OP has your question been answered?

_____________________________


(in reply to KnightHawk75)
Post #: 11
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/18/2021 8:47:59 AM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
Thank you very much for your answer and deep research!
quote:

ORIGINAL: KnightHawk75

quote:

Question 1: Is it possible to get aircraft to fly to at least 100' AGL?
Question 2: What is the reason that aircraft in different regions fly higher than others?
Question 3: Can helicopters be programmed to fly at helicopter attack altitudes 10-20' or something like that at slow speeds like for example 30 kts. And certainly in hover.

Option to consider: you may couple altitudes with experience levels of the pilot? But this is a bit stretching..

Q.1: Yes. The aircraft will either one of, or a combo of the following
a. be of a certain type (multi-role|fighter|attack| probably couple others) C-130's are flying at 250 feet, so does it really has to be a high-end- fighter A/C?
b. need to be over sea (This is done also over land, see Goose Bay training area in Canada, my personal experience as a kid ;-) and for example the Mach Loop in Whales to name a few where they are allowed to fly, in peace time..,to 100')
c. need to have a 6001|6002 terrain avoidance flag. (~520 aircraft in the database have one of these)
During the Cold War F-16A/B of the RNLAF where for years stationed at Goose Bay Canady to practice low flying @100'AGL. These A/C had no terrain avoidance avionics, it was eyes and hand coordination. Same for the F-104 and NF-5 aircraft, before the F-16. In the eighties they standard flew 500 and also 250'in certain low flying routes in Germany. If you read a book about Harrier pilots in the RAF or even Hawker Hunter pilots their terrain avoidance was only mental
Evidence:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4092439&mpage=1&key=low%2Clevel%26%2365533%3B
https://www.picuki.com/tag/306sqn
http://www.yvin.mijnwebserver.nl/paramotor/viewtopic.php?f=177&t=4845 (=dutch..)
https://books.google.nl/books?id=f_dsBQAAQBAJ&pg=PA192&lpg=PA192&dq=low+flying+100ft+goose+bay&source=bl&ots=WGIAqHhYon&sig=ACfU3U2bj2LqsFj4SBMNTzFkZ7Sa3ZvxXg&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwj4np7cgqXuAhXK5KQKHekLAoAQ6AEwEXoECD0QAg#v=onepage&q=low%20flying%20100ft%20goose%20bay&f=false (=Tornado in this book is flying at 100'AGL and the TFR cannot go lower as 200'. So this was eyes and hand work also).
https://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/how-low-should-you-go/
http://peacemagazine.org/archive/v05n4p13.htm

d. weather state well generally need to on the clear side (cloud state does not matter, seastate\rainstate do). Understandable.
e. be of at least cadet level (depending on other factors involved) (novice are capped higher than 100ft) Logical, or give a novice pilot a % chance to fly into the ground ;-)

Q.1a - over land (or anywhere elevation is > 0) NO, unless heli or tilt-rotor where you are capped at 50ft and above loitering it's 100.
I do not understand the logic of this. Helicopters that fly in their own, safe area, fine. But when you approach an enemy they go as low als they can. That is their survival, go slow and into the weeds!
The speed will drop but the altitude wil go as low as they dare. Ask any AH-64/ Kiowa pilot. If they hover a helicopter can go as low as 1 feet AGL, this is their quality.. A SR-71 can go very fast and high and is programmed like this in CMO. A helicopter is low and slow, but is not programmed like this?


Q.2. None. This is LOCAL time of day based. Over land the general baseline is 500 at day, and 1000 at night; at sea it depends more but generally becomes 300 at night unless otherwise flagged. The time of day explains more but the numbers are still way too high.
Q.3. Nope. This is a very short answer, which does not adress the real life tactical operations of helicopters.

Q.4. Proficiency matters though proficiency takes a back seat to nighttime, and TA-flagged aircraft (those with terrain avoidance).
For instance a A multi-role TA-unflagged aircraft (f-22) at sea during daytime as a Novice is capped at 150, at Cadet 100, above that 80. Over land the same results would be 500,500,400,vet=300,ace=200. At tagged F-15EX|CX for example at sea during daytime at any proficiency is capped at 100 (loses 20ft by-product of being tagged).
Category can matter - A generic bomber or fixed-wing like say a KC-10A however unlike above would make no difference, over land they are either 500 or 1000 depending on time of day, at sea 300ft regardless of day\night and proficiency or weather. Helicopers and tilt-rotors are min alt are not affected by proficiency or weather or night time, but are by speed (above loiter = 100ft). Good that proficiency is in the loop!

As already mentioned yes sea state and rain-state can matter too (clouds and temp do not). Also as one might expect with non-flagged aircraft night will generally trump weather+proficiency, weather will trump proficiency, flagged aircraft generally by-pass proficiency and nighttime, and get +100 during extreme weather.

A general rule of thumb for weather:
rainstate > 4 =300ft cap sea, 500ft cap land, TA-flagged whatever it was +100ft land or sea.
seastate > 5 =300ft cap sea, 500ft cap land, TA-flagged whatever it was +100ft land or sea.
* exception to rule TA flagged require seastate > 7 to get their +100. I am no pilot, but this is much deeper than I expected, compliments.

Also don't let "night navigation xyz" feature flags fool you, they have nothing to do with altitude, in fact I've struggled to figure out how they're actually used since only 59 aircraft lack one or the other flag types. If I had to guess they were used to indicate if a unit could take off at all or maybe to use their particular weapons after dark, but in testing it seems you can do both even with aircraft lacking either or both flags. I'm thinking due to complaints maybe they were just tossed for that purpose and maybe they're just used to hurt effectiveness of munitions fired at night (extra pok penalty without the flags?), or are dormant flags. Be curious if anyone actually knows.
Hmmm.

A thought on why we're hard capped at 50ft and 80ft respective beyond just keeping it 'generally realistic for majority of cases' factor.
When it comes to your point about attack helicopters I do find it unfortunate we can't fly them < 50ft loiter and <100 at cruise, even though MOST of the time that seems a reasonable limitation and realistic. On the flip side however this limitation beyond realism may be a welcome game-balance issue in that the lowest SAM engagement altitudes cap out on the low end at 30ft. So allowing anything to go below that...while it certainly may happen in real-life (where as the missiles in real life ain't gonna stop cause they're at 30ft idt anyway ..or maybe some do as safety feature idk), would make the AI "engage defensive - go min alt" too good at avoidance, and too exploitable on the player side, even though in a limited\very specific situation it might be a valid tactic.

For example, you have a ah-64 parked 12 miles out from sa-21 site who has some elevation on you such that he can paint you. You pop up from 20ft to 31ft, you get fired on, you pop down to 29ft...missile goes away. Rinse and repeat till site has exhausted it's missiles, or just fly in and attack directly with only small arms or lasers to worry about. The same would be true if you allowed aircraft to go < 30ft, too easy to just avoid incoming missiles or them being fired at all. Now sure you could allow it and then have to re-balance other things but I'm not sure there is enough bang for the buck there.


This is a game and you can fool it. I can also fly with an F-4 into the bubble of a SAM and everytime the SAM shoots a missile, I retreat until his lauchers are empty. Is this realistic? No. Is it possible in CMO? Yes!

But this is not the reason behind this game. Also, this is the reason why a Russian S-300/400 has SA-22 Pantsirs and MANPADS or others around. This is why helicopters can pose a threat to SAMs. This is what they do. And to cap these helos just because this is a reason a John nobody could take out that SAM does not make the game more interesting or better but rather worse IMHO. It is how you play the game. How you tactically place the weapons. It is in the details. CMO does not cap a JASSM missile because it has some capabilities. No, it is programmed as much as you can. You do'nt cap a SR-71 because it overflies an SA-2 and this is not fair. It is not fair that a AH-64D is constantly shot down because it is flying too high and cannot get lower or hover at 10'. And frustrating too, because helicopters constantly do strange things, and you have to micromanage every single helo; see post https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4936307

In my country Apaches, Chinhooks fly under powelines, between trees to avoid getting shot, at 10 feet altitude and around 30 kts in danger areas. Possibly a Syrian Mi-24 HIND has different tactics but why not give the opportunity to the user? I do not understand this and find it really opposite against the attitude of the game. I really would like to ask to reconsider this decision. This hurts the game.


As for aircraft though I might be supportive of a change to generic baseline over land to be 300ft day 500ft night |sea 200ft day|300ft night(unchanged), probably get realism complaints though, and one probably has to think though all the possible areas of impact, something I'm not doing while flippantly typing that I might support it. ;)
About flying at night. NVG's have their drawbacks but do you agree that an F-16 with goggles will fly lower than a MiG-23 without at night?
As I pointed out above in the post with data from the Cold War and currently at low flying training areas, a trained fixed wing pilot can easily go down to 250'and really proficiat pilots go down to 100'. So you already have a realism complaint ha ha


If you have data otherwise, I would be glad to hear. My goal is to make CMO better and certainly not to complain, I like it a lot, that is why I contribute!
Are there others forum readers with imput?





< Message edited by Blast33 -- 1/18/2021 9:00:31 AM >

(in reply to KnightHawk75)
Post #: 12
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/18/2021 6:28:31 PM   
KnightHawk75

 

Posts: 1244
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
@Blast33 - Appreciate the comments just keep in mind I was trying to answer questions asked in the first post about how things are in the game as is, not necessarily get involved with defending every aspect of how each and every situation is handled or why exactly they work that way. ;) The 30ft thing happen to come to mind while answering - and you're absolutely right you can and should design around exploitable areas like that already, be it manpads or simply 'spotters' calling in they see a chopper flying up the highway at 20ft and taking pot shots, or whatever, though it does add to the AU count to design for it, in limited scenes that's no biggy, in a larger ones it can be hundreds of units. ;) I mentioned it as what might have been some sort of consideration at some point.

Perhaps it wasn't that evident but I generally more supportive of less restrictions. It's just at the same time I reserve for the fact I don't know everything,that I don't know all the fall-out\changes that might have to happen all over the code base and for existing WS published scenarios to account for such a change, don't know how large\small the lift it might be. Only knew enough to try to answer the specific questions asked. :) Yeah I'm interested in more input too, more around the gamey aspects, like what stuff could then be done that either can't today or would be simulated even better by lowering the limits.

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 13
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/18/2021 9:58:17 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
Thanx for your reply, good to have you here!
The year 2021 is young

(in reply to KnightHawk75)
Post #: 14
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/23/2021 12:43:05 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
@Moderaters is this something you want to pick-up? If you want more evidence than provided pls let me know.

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 15
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/23/2021 1:26:26 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6245
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
Maybe if you answered his question directly, he might give a reply.

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 16
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/24/2021 7:49:22 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
Will do, tnx

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 17
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/24/2021 10:24:45 PM   
Rory Noonan

 

Posts: 2816
Joined: 12/18/2014
From: Brooklyn, NY
Status: offline
Happy to make changes, just need to know what they are.

If it's more of a 'this is something I'd like reviewed in the future' thread then we'll review it in the future. From the quick reading I've done here I can't see any specific changes requested, just that some defaults don't match individual expectations. That's fine and we'll review, there's always room for improvement

_____________________________


(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 18
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/29/2021 3:04:57 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
Thank you, I will present my update proposal

Fixed wing aircraft and helicopters can fly lower than is now possible in CMO. To modify this, will create more realism in the game, especially in Cold War scenario's and the days before that.

Currently aircraft equipped with a Terrain Following Radar are programmed to be able to fly to as low as 200' in day and night. Compared to the Tornado IDS stories this is fine.

Fighters without TFR are now programmed as follows:

ACE Daytime 200' and I request to change this to 100'
Veteran Daytime 300' and I request to change this to 100'
Regular Daytime 400' and I request to change this to 150'
Cadet Daytime 500' and I request to change this to 250'
Novice Daytime 500' and I request to change this to 300'

Evidence: Not only NATO, even Iraqi F-1 pilots planned an attack mission in the first Gulf War, at an altitude of 90-150'! Planned even to do buddy air-to-air refueling at 300'AGL.. Source IPP Desert Storm doc page 252, pdf page 272.
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a484530.pdf

Also done in not perfect weather conditions (remember the Cold War )
I don't know nighttime parameters has to change, I do not have any data on these situations. But I can imagine that NVG equiped aircraft or helicopters will do better than without.

Cargo aircraft, such as C-130 request to get as low as 250' for Veteran and ACE pilots
Evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SEhcyvQic2s

Helicopters fly low and can get as low as 1 feet in a hover. This is at the moment not possible.

Request: ACE, Veteran, Regular, Cadet;
Loiter speed 45kts 50' feet to 30'
Cruise speed of 145kts 100' feet to 50'

Novice Loiter speed 50' remain the same.
Cruise speed 200'to 150'
(Remember how regular pilots flew with their UH-1 in Vietnam..)
BTW many helicopters don't ever reach a cruise speed of 145 kts..

Attack mode
Request to add (next to loiter- and cruise speed) an attack speed or flight regime. This of about 10-25 kts where the helicopter flies nap-of-the earth between the trees at 5-30 feet altitude.
Evidence:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pyZ_nTSGia0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuO3x7wdC00

Hover; every helicopter must be able to hover to 3 feet above the ground, and not be capped at 50 or 30 feet AGL.

Hope this helps in addition to the posts above.
Greetings and thank you.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Rory Noonan)
Post #: 19
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/29/2021 4:31:39 PM   
BDukes

 

Posts: 1461
Joined: 12/27/2017
Status: offline
The smaller low altitude drones should be considered too.

M

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 20
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/29/2021 6:16:12 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6245
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
Drones and helicopters I agree with. But the pictures and videos that get posted around this topic aren't convincing to me. I am all for more flexibility, but if you are going to allow players to force aircraft to extremely low altitudes, there better be real consequences for doing it. Like airframe damage, crashes, etc.

Also, as to NVGs, there are restrictions on the use of NVGs for low altitude flying, or there used to be. There were a spate of night exercise helicopter crashes several years ago due to the loss of depth perception at low altitude at night.

(in reply to BDukes)
Post #: 21
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/29/2021 7:49:21 PM   
c3k

 

Posts: 355
Joined: 4/25/2017
Status: offline
As someone who used to fly cargo aircraft, 250' low levels were normal...in daytime on routes we'd had time to check for new structures before flying.

Night time was higher...1,000' or (rarely) 500'.

That was in a C-141. ~ 160foot wingspan. We'd touch 200' (and sometimes lower) as we topped ridges, sometimes in a 60^ bank. You can do the triangle math to figure the wingtip clearance on that one.


If there is ANY structural damage on a low level, you'd likely have lost several critical systems. 6' of wingtip isn't the big problem (but it is a problem): the problem was a torn aileron would usually mean losing at least 2 of your hydraulic systems.

It's not like you dented your car fender in a parking lot.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 22
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/29/2021 7:58:12 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Drones and helicopters I agree with. But the pictures and videos that get posted around this topic aren't convincing to me. I am all for more flexibility, but if you are going to allow players to force aircraft to extremely low altitudes, there better be real consequences for doing it. Like airframe damage, crashes, etc.

Also, as to NVGs, there are restrictions on the use of NVGs for low altitude flying, or there used to be. There were a spate of night exercise helicopter crashes several years ago due to the loss of depth perception at low altitude at night.


I presented plenty of other evidence that those vids, our RNLAF pilots flew regularly at 100' and the RAF was famous for flying even lower.
No not at night, but there where areas in Europe where they where allowed to fly in peacetime and above own civilians at 250'and in special areas down to 100' and these where not the hotshot, but all Sq pilots.
You may Google about how low the RAF Buccaneers where flying above the water. Or read stories about A4 Skyhawks or F-105s in Vietnam.

If you read a flying related book about the Cold War and often you will read about stories about lowww flying all the time from the, 50's till the '90's and even beyond. Man I grew up with fighterplanes buzzing illegal altitudes..

Yes, it all changed during Desert Storm to medium altitude for fighter ops, but it does not mean it is not possible although the learning curve will need some time.
Or chose to pick a time-line until 1991 and only Veteran and Ace pilots after 1991?
Or differentiate a bit between Air-to-air fighters like the F-14/15 and fighter bombers?

Have you ever seen how a A-10 or Jaguar or F16s did close Air Support? Often came even lower than 100 feet! Popped up in a 3D manoeuvre to spoof AAA and got to the deck again.

The vids of the BO-105 and the Apache are no more than examples but have you really seen the altitudes? For them this was the way to go. Every recon and attack helo did this. Why had the OH-58 the observation tools above the rotors?
Why is the Longbow radar mast on top?

And if you fire your Hellfire at your popup position in your Battle Position you will hide again as low as possible behind the trees,you can ask a attack helo pilot or even someone in Vietnam, man I was a passenger myself during multiple flights between the trees..

That's Why I requested an attack speed and altitude regime. Have you seen for example.. only example.. how the Little Birds flew through Mogadishu in Blackhawk Down? That was topsport and top of the bill. But if you go slow you have time to see and react and move through hiding spots.

And yes not every helo will do this, a Russian Hip or Hind or Chinook. probably have other tactics.

Maybe differentiate between attack and transport helos? But they can still hide & hover behind trees, and other terrain features if needed.


We have a training area nearby and they do it day and night. Yes with NVG! Both transport and attack.

Of course there are accidents somewhere, but that also happens on my mountainbike without goggles.. 😉

I am really amazed that this is unknown and still discussed like this.
And it is the last time I typed this on my phone📱😉

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 23
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/29/2021 8:24:09 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6245
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
"The vids of the BO-105 and the Apache are no more than examples but have you really seen the altitudes? For them this was the way to go. Every recon and attack helo did this. Why had the OH-58 the observation tools above the rotors?
Why is the Longbow radar mast on top?"

I'm not sure what you are on about. I agree with you on helicopters. What's the issue?

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 24
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/29/2021 8:25:31 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6245
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
A couple of links on NVGs and crashes with 2 minutes of searching...

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9819158/

https://flightsafety.org/asw-article/disorientation-after-dark/



(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 25
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/30/2021 2:13:04 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

A couple of links on NVGs and crashes with 2 minutes of searching...

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9819158/

https://flightsafety.org/asw-article/disorientation-after-dark/




It is not my presumption that A/C fly as low in night as in day. I said I had no data on this.

Night Flying comes with more risk than daytime. That is for sure. But as player mentioned,c3k (the C-141 Starlifter story above) it is often not catastrophic for the airframe. A C-141 sometimes.. got a bit shorter..he said Is this once a year or once in a career?
Yes sometimes a (tail) rotor of a helicopter will hit some trees and get damaged. But is does not directly mean you will lose your aircraft.
We had F-16 scrape trees and got damaged but it was one in a lot of flights. One in how many, I really don't know. And some will indeed lose their aircraft.

One of the links you provided says this: Conclusions: The more than fivefold increase in risk associated with NVD flight is of serious concern. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/9819158/
Maybe we have to find a source what the normal accident rate level is to be able to program night flying??

I read that Apache pilots fly with both FLIR and NVG's and transport helos fly with NVG's only when not equipped with IR sensors. This is why Apache helicopters can do the same flying at night as in daytime, except it takes much more concentration and focus.

Another source of info is this one: What's It Like to Fly with NIGHT VISION GOGGLES (NVGs) in a Fighter Jet?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrBzGEnUitE

Pro:
-Aircraft lights can be seen 50 miles away.
-A cigarette can be seen from 5 miles away.
-AAA and SAMs are clearly visible.
-VID aircraft often better than in daytime

Cons:
The cockpit has to be NVG compatible but the HUD is still usable. (F-18A was not NVG compatible but from F-18C / F16C it was) and you look under the NVGs at the cockpit. Finger NVG lights where issued to look at notes etc.
-Field of View is 40X40 degrees
-Don't run into the terrain
-Extra weight is extra burden on the head when pulling G's



(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 26
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/30/2021 2:42:17 PM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: thewood1

Drones and helicopters I agree with. But the pictures and videos that get posted around this topic aren't convincing to me.


Maybe this helps:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JwqsTNLcuY
Video made in 2013 and posted in 2018.
This pilot flies the F-18 for just under a year and goes for this first(!) low level flight at 250' @500+kts (cadet level?)

The comments are interesting:


Dan Mcw
2 years ago
Fantastic video, Mover. Takes me back to flying the CF-18 in the 80s and early 90s. We were authorized to 100' AGL; I flew hundreds of hours doing ground attack. In Northern Quebec (near Bagotville), the hills made it really tough to maintain 100' AGL. When we went to Maple Flag in Cold Lake, or Red Flag at Nellis, there were times my Radar Altimeter would go off (I had set it at 60'), and I was feeling quite comfortable. Turns at 4 to 5 G at 100' and 510 kts groundspeed were exercises in looking straight ahead through the HUD, watching the velocity vector closely. When we deployed to Lahr and Baden, West Germany, the 500' limit that was the rule at the time seemed like nose-bleed territory. In a single-seat fighter, low level flying is VERY dangerous. Looks like you did a great job respecting your personal limits and ensuring you didn't become a statistic, like too many of my close friends.

jcheck6
2 years ago
Dan, agree about the difficulty flying @ 100' in hills. Flew recce Phantoms and we too were cleared to 100'...was a piece of cake at Maple Flag and some areas at Red Flag. Chuckled that at 500' you were getting nose bleeds...know the feeling. Did GCA's at Lahr and Soellingen back in the day and your controllers were the best in USAFE.

Another one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kT7qrYi8R_M
RAF Typhoons flying 480 kts @ 250'(not only above lakes but also maintaining 250'through the hills, making turns of 3-5 G.
These are air-to-air fighters going this low. These are peacetime altitudes.

Does this gives more to go on? Or need any specifics?




< Message edited by Blast33 -- 1/30/2021 2:43:34 PM >

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 27
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/30/2021 3:16:47 PM   
thewood1

 

Posts: 6245
Joined: 11/27/2005
Status: online
I don't know. I go back to my friend I mentioned in the linked thread. He flew F/A-18s and Harriers in the 90s. I asked him when the other thread discussion was going on. He said you never flew under 250 ft at night without emergency authorization in war or peace. Pilots caught doing it were reprimanded and scrubbed until more training. He did say people hotdogged all the time, but it was a severe no-no if caught.

(in reply to Blast33)
Post #: 28
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/30/2021 7:37:54 PM   
KnightHawk75

 

Posts: 1244
Joined: 11/15/2018
Status: offline
@Blast33

quote:

Fighters without TFR are now programmed as follows:
ACE Daytime 200' and I request to change this to 100'
Veteran Daytime 300' and I request to change this to 100'
Regular Daytime 400' and I request to change this to 150'
Cadet Daytime 500' and I request to change this to 250'
Novice Daytime 500' and I request to change this to 300'


This is over land right I'm assuming? Sea is left relatively unchanged in the proposal,yes? Sorry if was mentioned and I missed it.

(in reply to thewood1)
Post #: 29
RE: Low, realy low flying - 1/31/2021 7:55:55 AM   
Blast33


Posts: 338
Joined: 12/31/2018
From: Above and beyond
Status: offline
Agree 👍🏻

(in reply to KnightHawk75)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Command: Modern Operations series >> Tech Support >> [Logged] Low, realy low flying Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.281