Finding Bogeys and Bandits in the Simulated Unfriendly Skies

Back from the days when I was really into combat flight simulators, I remember the realism-Taliban group explaining to the infidels how the only way fly 100% realistic was to not to allow external views and turn aircraft labels off. The infidels in the more relaxed camp had counter-argued  that so much sensory feedback was missing in the simulation that external views could help to compensate. Also, they said, a computer display could never deliver a picture so clear as real life and . I never saw that debate settled, but I see merit in both views. Simulators can be played in so many ways ... it all depends what you want to simulate.

How far can you see an aircraft in real life anyway?

Below is a graph from data generated by the US Navy. Getting a visual on another aircraft depends on its aspect towards your position, off course. If the other aircraft is flying towards you, the more difficult will be to detect it. It's kind of terrifying that a small aircraft such as the MIG-21 flying towards you can be detected at 2 miles! Anyway, the point of this chart is that if you are flying a combat flight simulator with labels, you may want to ask if the labels' appearance on the virtual skies depends on the aspect of the aircraft.

Using labels in simulated air combat negates the use of an important skill: visual search (link opens a pdf document). Pretty much like the ground warriors are trained to scan systematically the terrain ahead, pilots train to scan the skies.  Alas, our brains and eyes have evolved to hunt preys and evade predators in the plains ... Not aircraft in the skies. It takes training to find something in the vastness of the airspace around you, even when it is located within the ranges specified in the chart above. If labels are activated, a deliberate and systematic visual scanning is not needed.

I found the use of the visual scanning technique described in the paper above mildly useful in LockOn Modern Air Combat. At least is useful to develop some discipline on where to look and how long to look at each field of view. Just for fun, I edited a quick mission where I flew a MIG-29 against a computer-controlled F-14. The reason I chose the MIG-29 is because is a sleek fighter and very forgiving to my piloting skills. The F-14 ... Well is a damn big aircraft and I just wanted to maximize my chances of seeing something.

MIG-29A

As everything I do lately, the exercise didn't go as planned. I used a mission template and I forgot to unload the fierce AIM-54C radar-guided missiles from the F-14 before flying the mission.

AIM-54C, the radar-guided air to air missile from hell.

The AIM-54C gives the F-14 a tremendous edge. This missile can be fired from distances bigger than 150 km and the virtual guys in the F-14 used this missile accordingly. I could locate the F-14 with my radar, and I knew it was painting me. I scanned the space in front of me and I was almost shocked how long it took me to see the huge smoke trail of the incoming missile. I really needed to fixate my eyes for a good three seconds on a particular portion of the sky ahead to find the smoke trail.

Hint: draw an imaginary line in the HUD between the radar box and the "ILU" symbol.

Using the zoom feature helps a lot, but the portion of the sky being watched at is very small and a very slight motion with TrackIR will move the view towards other scan area.

Engaged defensive! The AIM-54C has started its dive towards me.

Now the trick is to combine the normal and zoomed views into a systematic visual scan technique.

Cheers,

ArmA 2 Operation Arrowhead British Armed Forces - On Being Section and Fireteam Leader at the Same Time - Part 1

The British Army's small-units tactical doctrine is secret. No field manual for you, civilian! There are a few books out there from which you can make up some pieces of the puzzle. But ... oh boy ... these accounts show you only shadows.

I will be out on a limb with these series of posts about the use of British Sections in ArmA 2. So take them with a big grain shovel of salt. Non-educated guesses coming.

The composition of a generic British rifle section is one of the few things we know for sure :

• Section Commander
• Rifleman
• Grenadier
• Automatic Rifleman
• Fireteam Leader Section's 2nd in Command (2IC)
• Rifleman
• Grenadier
• Automatic Rifleman

This section has two fireteams (labelled red and blue above) that are quite symmetrical in terms of firepower. Symmetry we can cope with (we have already been fighting with symmetrical US Army and Marines squads), but as you may have realized the British section commander has to keep an eye on his fireteam (red) and the whole section at the same time. The ratio between section and fireteam commanders (movers) over the amount of fireteams (moving parts) is 2/2=1 in the British infantry section. The same ratio is 3/2=1.5 in an US Army infantry squad and 4/3=1.33 in the US Marines rifle squad. 

Short in men and decision-makers, it looks like as if the British infantry section is conceived as a tactical entity that never operates independently from its parent platoon. If this is true, I wonder how challenging is to go into combat with a British section in the ever fragmented battlefields of today where every section or squad mostly fight different fights.

In ArmA2, the British rifle section is composed of (each soldier picture has a short description of his weapon too):

1st Fireteam

2nd Fireteam

Nice surprise in ArmA 2 is to have the so-called "marksman" with the L86A2 light support weapon. This awesome piece of hardware was originally conceived as a support weapon, but since it has a relatively high range (can deliver accurate fire up to 600 meters or so) it is used almost like a sniper role. Almost, because the caliber of the L86A2 is the same as the L86A2.

In the next installment, I will get into a fight along with these men.

Cheers,

9th Company - Great Movie About the Soviet-Afghan War

Saw this one during the weekend. If you don't already know about the real event that inspired this movie, take a look here.

9th Company is a great movie, but the narrative is a bit strange and leaves you wanting for more. In particular, I wished that the boot camp portions of the movie would have been a bit shorter, allowing more time for the patrols and combat in Afghanistan.

The amount of Soviet hardware shown in the movie is mind-blowing. Please take a look at the images below.

Favorite scene: an evening (or dawn?) exchange of taunts and shots between paratroopers in an outpost and Mujahideen in the surrounding hills.

Not so favorite scene: last stand scene felt a bit like taken from a Call of Duty game. Movies will be movies, I guess.

Besides explicit war violence, the movie has a sex scene. This scene has a message to it and it's not that explicit. But don't watch this movie with your kids. Or your mother in law.

Cheers,

Falcon 4 Allied Force - Learning from the computer pilots

Word association game ... I throw you a word and you tell me what words come to your mind!

Falcon 4?

My words for Falcon 4 are: "staying power".

This game, in its original or modified form, has been in the hard drive of all the computers I had since 1998. Falcon 4 never ceases to amaze me. The fact that nobody yet could come even close to create something like the fantastic virtual battlefield built around the simulation will likely be the topic of another blog entry, but let me vent some right now. We live in a world where the quality of a simulation is measured in number of polygons and textures. Yet, we still come back to Falcon 4, Close Combat, Combat Mission (the original three) or [insert your oldie here] ... We play them, mod them, resuscitate them from an old operating system. Anything to keep the lights on within some niches that mainstream game development wants filled with dirt. The other day I was talking about this very issue with a reader of this blog: where did creativity go?

Enough digression. Let me share something about a dogfight I had yesterday.

My office has a window to the Balkans.

The "3" key opens a virtual, non clickable cockpit that can be viewed with TrackIR. Great for dogfighting.

No amount of TrackIR goodness is enough to replace bad aerial tactics. In this screenshot I'm looking at my six, keeping an eye on a Mig-29 that is saddling up on me.

This one you will need to click in order to see something. It's an ACMI tape that shows my plane (Viper1) slowly climbing at 197 knots (surely I will get no prizes for energy management) and ready to get some lead from a Mirage 2000. The camera is positioned to my plan'es left and looking down towards the action. Blue lines are altitude poles and the red-green lines are wingtip trails. Note that the Mirage's airspeed (239 knots), a tad higher than mine (197 knots), can result in an overshoot.

The computer controlled Mirage does not overshoot. He pulls up and rolls into my slowly climbing Falcon. This maneuver is similar to the so-called a "high yo-yo", or maybe to a lag pursuit roll. The wing trails in the background show my turn as tighter than the Mirage's one. That explains my lack of airspeed egressing from the turn fight.

Cheers,

Combat Mission Afghanistan - Surprise! We are not dead ... we are just suppressed!

Although I'm not Battlefront's biggest fan, I am having a great time with Combat Mission Afghanistan.

This week I had a rude tactical awakening while storming a trench line with my Soviet paratroopers.

Men from the 2nd Squad, 1st Platoon, A Company move towards an enemy trench. No enemy has been seen in this trench after sustained suppression from the rest of the platoon.

Privates Sukhodolets and Nudler are the first ones to arrive to the edge of the trench and everything looks like the enemy fled. Note the facing of these two comrades. 

Two seconds later, the Mujahideen pop out and shoot our brave paratroopers.

Suppression is a must-do tactical task. But keep in mind that our mission is to kill the enemy, not just annoy him.

My tactical mistakes were multiple. Just to mention one, the 80's Soviet tactical atom was the platoon and I (kinda) tried to keep this in mind. The trench was technically being assaulted by the entire 1st Platoon, but the problem was that at the moment of truth (one squad arriving at the edge of the trench), the two other squads were providing over watch to something they couldn't see (the guts of the trench). Battlespaces, folks, is a concept that is hard to learn for the tactically challenged like me.

Other crucial mistake I made was not properly using the wide range of orders available to the player.When Sukhodolets and Nudler arrived to the edge of the trench, they were facing in the direction of the last movement order, not in the direction of the trench. In Combat Mission, it is sometimes advisable to issue a firing arc (or "target light" if you are in deep caca) order at every movement node. These "watch there" type of orders provide a tactical movement menu that is incredibly satisfying.

Cheers,

DCS A-10 Warthog - Is really this close to release?

Yesterday and today I watched some fantastic videos in Giller's blog (Hogs of War, it's in the blogroll, don't miss it) about the upcoming DCS A-10 Warthog.

Latest video from Glowing Amraam is fantastic and I'm embedding it below. But also watch the videos in Giller's blog about the start up of the A-10. Yeah, guys! We are in for some serious button pushing.



Thanks Giller for the heads up. This flight simulator has me all pumped now.

Cheers,

ArmA 2 Operation Arrowhead - Poking the Mosquitoes from Hell

That was their word for us: 'Mosquitoes'. Ed Macy about the nickname the Taliban fighters gave to the British AH-64 attack helicopters. Quoted from Apache.

I am a bit obsessed with helicopter operations lately.

While messing around with ArmA2 (heliborne assaults and such), I wondered about the troops fighting the air assault. More in particular, insurgents.

What's like to deal with an attack helicopter by using an RPG-7?

In real life, not easy.

But real life is over-rated :), I think the virtual world of ArmA2 will do for the time being. :)

Off course ArmA2 has its limits but so does my question. For starters the computer controlled units do behave in certain ways that expose them to fire. Computer controlled attack helicopters overfly their targets, fly straight patterns, hover in questionable places, don't take advantage of their weapons range, etc. Only thing nice about computer-controlled attack helicopters is how they do running attacks instead of attacks from the hover. Having killed myself one millions times in DCS Black Shark because I got trapped in my rotors' downwash while hovering and trying to evade enemy fire at the same time, I'm now a big fan of running attacks. So is the US Army.

That's enough digression. Here's the deal: a flight of two computer-controlled US AH-64Ds against an RGP-7 team (me and my ammo man). Semi-urban setting, great visibility. Mano a mano.

The RPG-7 is a very simple weapon to use. Useful mostly at relatively short ranges (200 meters and below), it was designed for fire support and ambushing armored vehicles. Yeah, helicopters are not in the list. But it has been used against them: Mogadishu, Afghanistan, Chechnya, etc.

Here are a few notes from this scenario.

I tried to stay out of sight, close with the attack helicopters and fire while they were looking elsewhere. Easy to say, not so easy to do. I got killed more than I killed them. My ammo man, computer-controlled guy, would always give up our position by walking right in the middle of an intersection. When the Apaches see you, it's hard to shake them from above you.

The AI in ArmA2 doesn't cheat. Here is the fire from an Apache, impacting right where we were a few seconds ago. For the record, Jalil's corner shop will need some serious repair.

Avoid standing in the clear, off course, and keep moving. Cross streets quickly and using the shortest distance at a perpendicular angle. Zig-zagging is useless, the target acquisition of the Apache can take care of a car moving at 60 mph so your fancy running is a piece of cake for them. Once across the street, move away from the spot you just reached: the computer-controlled Apache may have seen you crossing the street and it will fire right at your destination spot even when there is no direct line of sight to you (don't forget these helicopters fire high caliber rounds that will go through walls).

The sights of the RPG-7 are not designed for this. I never hit a moving helicopter.

The best chances to hit a helicopter is when it is hovering. In the picture above, I was trying to hit a moving Apache and the only thing I got out of this folly was to get their aiming reticles right onto me.

Hug the walls of buildings like dear life, but treat buildings like temporary shelters, not fighting fortresses. There is no building in ArmA2 that can't be demolished by the arsenal of an Apache.

The only thing that saved us here is the big angle between the ground, ours and the helicopter's position.

When you stop to observe or to fire, always have an escape route that can't be observed by the helicopter.

Mega! We are still too far from them. These alleys/corridors that go across blocks are great to take you from street to street without being spotted.

You will have to move not only in a defensive posture avoiding fire, but also while on the offense. In the few times that I could hit an helicopter it was after running a lot to get into a firing position.

One of those few seconds when you feel the hunter. The helicopter is flying away from our position. Make sure the wingman has also passed you.  Keep alert! The Apache can literally turn on a dime.

Patience, can't have too much of it. This is not Call of Duty!

Hovering at a medium range from us, this Apache is asking for trouble. I don't think the power lines would interfere with my shot here, but I wonder if they would in real life.

This Apache is forcing us out from the built up area. Extra careful now as buildings become more scarce.

Rule of thumb: fire at the helicopter only when its relative size is at least as big as the widht of the aiming reticle. At least for a man of poor marksmanship like me.

You can almost see the faces of the pilots at this range. Secondary effects include unhealthy doses of cannon rounds coming your way.

Have the discipline of firing and reloading instantly thereafter. Re-loading a real life RPG-7 takes 14 seconds at least.

A good hit like this one doesn't warrant a downed helicopter. Reload right away, the mosquito can still bite you!

And in case you haven't figured it out yet: shoot at the helicopter from the rear or flanks. I doubt you will ever get a chance of actually aiming at one from its front.

Steady, steady ... Please don't turn ...

Cheers,

Combat Mission Afghanistan -Landing Zone from Hell: Forming Up in the Middle of an Enemy Kill Zone

This Combat Mission Scenario has me a bit puzzled.

Briefing says that I am in command of an airborne battalion (-) conducting an air assault on a fortified complex in some remote mountain area. When I saw the tactical map below I thought that somebody put the wrong picture in the briefing.

We are the red forces, right in the middle of the enemy. Are you sure this is not a Muji ambush?

 When I hit the OK button, I realized that the tactical map was correct. Whoah!

Our fearless battalion commander has skillfully landed us into an enemy kill zone. Click the picture for a better view.

Boy, that's a tough spot to have our desants!

First things first, I order massive suppressive fires on each hill top.

Combat Mission tip of the day: even when you can't see the enemy, area fire impacting nearby an enemy unit will have them suppressed. Click the image for a better view.

What to do next? Attack each hill simultaneously? I thought of extracting my troops from the kill zone, so I can attack the hills sequentially.

Would this work? Extract the battalion from the landing zone, move it into assault possition 1 and take Hill 2131. The leave some fire support detachments and FOs in Hill 2131 to support the attack from position 2. The third hill would fall by itself. Click the image for a better view.

Now, the stunner: this is a mini-version of an air assault that happened during the real war. During the early hours of April 12, 1987, the 1st Air Assault Battalion conducted this assault as part of a bigger operation by the Separate Air Assault Brigade. In real life, the Soviets succeeded attacked each hill simultaneously with one company and took all the real estate after a short firefight.


So, I better stop whining and keep it simple.

BTW, it has been a long time since I don't command a whole battalion in Combat Mission.

Wish me luck.

Cheers,

Combat Mission Afghanistan Released

Battlefront has launched Combat Mission Afghanistan, a wargame based in the Combat Mission Shock Force engine  and developed in collaboration with a third party.

The setting is the Soviet-Afghan War and the game includes new 3D models, new weapon systems and new terrain tiles (snow and sorta-water).

There is a demo available. More impressions coming soon.

Cheers,