The book is almost done at my end apart from reviewing the second drafts and peer review. If you're not aware its called "GROME 3.1 Terrain Modelling for Ogre3D, UDK and Unity". Despite the title it's more of a short guide on using GROME with notes on how to export terrains to Unity and other game engines. Squashing it down to 150 pages is challenging. Ideally 200 pages would cover all functions and allow for more in-depth exporting processes, but it's a fixed number of pages. Time moves on, one project is winding down and now we're into September, as promised it's time to take a look at the Combat-Helo project and give everyone who's still following this blog some news on what's going to happen....probably.
Because I'm working full time for a medical software company, combat-helo will only see after-hours work when I resume development. As a result the road-map has to be adjusted accordingly, there simply isn't the man-hours required to complete the existing one, to this end I've broken it down into more reasonable phased releases. This was always the intention however I've reduced the scope of the releases.
One of the ideas David and I toyed with is a spin-off helicopter game for the action market featuring Maximum-Overkill'esq game-play but retaining some of the avionic toys we have in our Apache implementation. The advantage of doing this was getting some credibility, to say we've released something (even if it is not much more than a fancy demo with 'splosions). Some people just want to see some of the stuff we've been doing first hand. Frankly it's not the game I want to make but it's one we could build on. Once that is in the wild we would continue development on the full-spec game in stages. The action-game would have been targeted for Steam and Origin stores with some brain dead title and trailer. However someone already beat us to the brain dead trailer part.
Valve's Greenlight project has deflated my enthusiasm for this plan, regardless I'm committed to seeing it through. But then I'm less than thrilled with how long Combat-Helo has taken; going from a full-time project to part-time, to no-time, now hedging back to part-time. My will focus will be on getting it ready as a cockpit demo with basic game-play and releasing it as a re-branded game. Once this has escaped I will work on finishing the rest of the features. To make it formal here's an announcement.
Work on Combat-Helo resumes on Sept 29th.
The road-map for game releases is looking like this...
- Phase 1 - Cockpit demo and shooter
- Phase 2 - Multi-player update and fixes
- Phase 3 - Editor
- Phase 4 - Gunnery Trainer
- Phase 5 - Overseas campaigns
- Phase 6 - Addon aircraft (CH-47)
Yay resumes on my birthday, anyway keep up the good work Flex, how are the are the new settees :D
ReplyDeleteIs phase one planned for 2012 release?
ReplyDeleteVery good! I actually had a question about the Apache itself, I never got how the "Overlay"/"Underlay" system on the MPD's worked. Could you explain it? Is it going to be modeled in Combat Helo?
ReplyDeleteGreat to read news about CH. Thank You Flex.
ReplyDeleteSounds great Flex, thanks for the update and best of luck. Can't wait for release.
ReplyDeleteCheers
Many of us have lonnnng waited for this and hope it doesnt turn into the action game and stay that way.. We are hoping this turns out to be the falcon bms of helo sims... Praying that it will be. Great work so far!
ReplyDeleteCool, thx for this lifesign of the CH project!
ReplyDeleteKeep it on Rich, let me know if you need any help!
ReplyDeleteGreat news Flex. I truly look forward to seeing the demo and finished product. I know it will be truly great having seen your early stuff while working with you at Game Tool Technologies.
ReplyDeleteBest regards,
Terry "Big Thumper" Goldman
I was wondering that have thought about getting funding for the project through crowd funding? To me this project looks perfect for Kickstarter for example.
ReplyDeleteI believe there is a sizeable number of people following CH and even more old Longbow fans who are yet not familiar with CH, but would be interested in buying it if would become available.
This really made my day! So glad to see this project still has a heartbeat.
ReplyDeleteI think is better Idea move that work in a DCS World Add-on. The Apache will have much more future there, everyone would like have the Apache there. You have there full SAMs and vehicle implementation and you have there the Ka-50 flyable. Sound much more interesant that. ED is open for the community now. You should have a good AFM... go on
ReplyDeleteI agree with pelon
ReplyDeleteDCS World by ED is a great platform and open for third parties.
i think you should do what beczl did with he's Mig21, he started a Kickstar style campaign for money for the development. a lot wishing for ah-64 and more heli's in DCS.
Great to hear that you're back on the job, Flex. "Full Speed Ahead" ...er... "After Hours Speed Ahead" I mean. Looking forward to the coming updates!
ReplyDeleteHi!
ReplyDeleteThis is the first time that I write in this blog, but I follow it since last year.
I know that building a good flight sim is very hard but I wanna make a question to you. Have you ever considered also the possibility to create a AH-64 module 3rd party for DCS?
I've seen your 3D models and they are fantastic, and in DCS missing a good Apache!
This sounds great, I want to see what this simulator looks like on the leadwerks engine that the developer is making it on because it looks great and the setting in afghan will be just the thing. An add on for DCS would be cool but lets just take it one step at a time and see this simulator released!
ReplyDeleteSure! :)
DeleteI'm looking forward!
Wow. I dreading making that post and the replies that followed, I avoided reading them till now.
ReplyDeleteWorking hard on the AI right now; implementing core behaviors such as formation cohesion, evade and attack movement. Finally going to be having some fun with all the wonderful vehicles David built.
I keep thinking about the DCS add-on thing but there's a bunch of issues surrounding that idea which is not appropriate to discuss here. Would be awesome though, especially if the co-op could be sorted out.
We need to get this shipped and the CH-47 completed. It won't perhaps be the best looking but the goal is to give you something cool to do as well as just fly. Although I seem to be failing at that goal atm.
Needs more cowbell.
Thanks everyone for being so awesome.
Hi Richard,
Deletesorry if I reply here, but I'm writing from my mobile phone, and I can't to sign up to the forum.
About the Co-op, it will be implemented with the new module, the Huey! :)
If you have time, read this news: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1573846#post1573846
see you soon! ;)
The only thing I'm angry about is you not reading the posts until now :). did you get my question? It's confused my slow mind since Longbow. It's OK if you don't. "I actually had a question about the Apache itself, I never got how the "Overlay"/"Underlay" system on the MPD's worked. Could you explain it? Is it going to be modeled in Combat Helo?" From an earlier post.
DeleteWell I do read posts as a general rule, I meant not since this blog post :)
DeleteI do offer apologies if you asked a question and missed it. To answer the query; the underlay as I implemented it is a "video" feed from the active source (PNVS or MTADS) although as I write this I remember there's a bug with switching sources. You hit the vid button and the buffer used for the active optical sensor drawn as the background of the MPD. There's some contrast/brightness control to adjust the video levels.
If any of the sensors are not active then no video source is displayed.
It is as simple as that. The overlay is whatever the MPD is currently showing (engine page, flight etc.)
Flexman, glad to see this project going "on tracks" again!
ReplyDeleteI for one I'm glad that this project won't be turned into a DCS module. What we need is a combat flight sim that competes (or as an alternative) to the very dull and unimmersive DCS sims and it's campaign system (one of the worse that I even seen so far).
Also what I don't get with DCS is why the hell ED decide to make stuff such as an UH-1 or worse even a P-51?? Hell, DCS is suposed to be a sim which models an hypothetical present day (or near future) war on Crimea and therefore the UH-1 is a bit misplaced, unless ED wants to model Georgian UH-1s which doesn't seem to be the case since so far the screenshots that I've seen were from Vietnam-era US Army UH-1s - Really, Vietnam-era US Army UH-1s and US P-51s in modern day Crimea??? It would make much more sense to model a UH-60 Blackhawk or even a CH-47 Chinook as DCS first transport helicopter! I would say that ED completly lots their "sense of direction" regarding having plausible an realistic looking war-scenarios (and therefore campaigns as well) in their sims. Glad to see that Combat-Helo doesn't "participate" of stuff like this!
And I take the chance to "personaly" ask (or better yet, "to beg") Flexman to never turn this project (Combat-Helo) into a DCS module!
I hope too that combat helo will be a dedicated and indipendent sim, but with my comment I mean that the develop under DCS could be good to finance the main Combat Helo project, and I'm sure that a good Apache like this could be very appreciated from the entire DCS community.
DeleteMoreover, in DCS you will fight against the Ka-50 Black Shark (the russian helicopter), and you will have support of A-10s. Soon will be released the Mig-21, and now there are under develop the F-14, F-15, F-104 (not officially announced), and many other aircrafts, all piloted by human players.
Yes, Crimea is ridiculous like scenery, but is the secondary problem. I don't know if you have flown with DCS A-10 or Ka-50, but if you try them, you realize that modules form an high level simulation.
Yes, I did fly (and own) BlackShark 1 and I played A-10 at a friend's home (I don't own A-10).
DeleteTechnically these DCS sims (A-10 and Blackshark) are very good within the cockpit perspective with very realistic avionics and instruments and very good flight models (but still don't get why the Ka-50 torques since it has a coaxial rotor system, but that's an "another story") but everything outside the cockpit is just lame and unimmersive with campaigns where you must acomplish all mission objectives or else you won't pass for the next one and thus doesn't track what you did from previous missions, very small object viewdistance (specially regarding other aircraft), missions that are completly dull, uninteresting and unrealistic such as attacking insurgents with large dozens of MBTs, IFVs, SPAAGs, etc... or in the case of A-10, missions which objectives are tactical (and sometimes even strategical) strikes a thing that the real A-10 would never do (that's why the USAF have F-15E Strike Eagles and F-16s!), etc... and because of these reasons I didn't even bother to buy BlackShark 2 or A-10.
And since I have an played BlackShark 1 I know which kind of scenario is modeled within DCS sims (which is present day or near future NATO versus Russian conflict on the Crimea region) and all I have to say is that a Mig-21, F-14, F-104, P-51 and US Army UH-1 looks plain RIDICULOUS within that scenario!
IMO, it's not the scenario (Crimea) that is ridiculous (for example Georgia region gives IMO lots of interesting what-if conflict/war possibilities) but it's the assets used there (for example doesn't make sense to use a F-14 in a present day Crimea scenario since all US Navy F-14s where already retired!). And of course the static and dull nature of the campaign also doesn't help!
Sorry, my bad... I mean Geogia, and I confused with an IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 map :D lol.
DeleteI repeat, you're right when you talk about the RIDICULOUS scenario, but the coordinations between the aircrafts is related at mission editing. So, is the man who create the mission that has to put the right counterparts (e.g. F-104 vs Mig-21 is ok, apache vs Ka-50 is ok, ecc).
The campaign is very ridiculous, it's true, but online you can use the "Combined Arms", a strategic module in wich you can conduce the entire battle or a single vehicle, and thanks this module, you can bypass the campaign limitations, having a dynamic mission or campaign in MP gameplay .
These are my points of view :)
IF (big IF) Tricubic was engaged to produce a DCS module Combat-Helo would be safe. One is a hard-core sim, the other is (intended as) a hard-core game.
ReplyDeleteIt would give the awesome talents of Dave an opportunity to extend his portfolio in an engine that is more demanding.
Sorry, I in no way meant any offense when I said that I was angry, I inteneded it as a joke. Thanks for answering my question though, that's boggled me since Longbow, as I said, and you just provided me a way better answer than the manual did.
ReplyDeleteGotta say the M230 30mm Chain gun slaved to the IHADSS through Track IR is gonna be the dogs bollocks! can't wait for this sim!
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty weird to use it like that with any accuracy as everything is moving. Imagine it for a sec.
DeleteWhen moving your head the cockpit moves too when the gun is slaved to your helmet sight (HS). You turn your head to track the gun and the scene moves. What I had meant to do is add a user set option to to turn off cockpit movement when using the gun in this mode (but forgot).
Yea, Ive seen your combat - helo prologue video and at 3:42 there is footage of what im guessing is the monocle displaying flight symbology using night vision looking through the floor of the Apache at the ground to navigate in the dark. This looks quite authentic and would be useful on night missions. After reading your comment about the bad accuracy of the gun with Track IR and watching that video again I can get an idea of what you mean especially if you had Track IR on high sensitivity. Ive watched countless hours of footage of real apache attacks and have sometimes noticed the crosshairs jump around for a bit and then become steady and trained on the target. maybe thats them slaving it to the IHADSS to find target quickly and then steadying it with another button. If you know what this is please enlighten me! Thanks
DeleteSounds right to me! What you are probably seeing is the CPG using the his HDU as the sight with the TADS slaved, scanning for targets. When he found what he was looking for he simply de-slaved (slave button on the Right Hand Grip) and then used the thumbstick on the RHG (sight manual tracker) to line up the shot
DeleteSo how does the IHADSS in the CPG's station work? I've read up a little on some of the sight modes, like TADS, FCR, HMD, and LINK and I'm pretty sure of how they work, but from the rather limited manual I'm reading ( It's from the FAS website, I can post it if you like ) I am having a difficult time understanding what symbology and video is displayed on the IHADSS when the TADS is selected. I know there is a "Weapons symbology" on the IHADSS that is different from the flight symbology, but is it underlaid with TADS symbology on the IHADSS? Or does the HMD just become a backup display that just gives indications and a pointing cross? Or am I just overthinking it all as usual? :( Sorry if my question was worded poorly, I'm in a bit of a rush.
ReplyDeleteFrom what I read the CPG (co-pilot gunner) "IHADSS" is linked to the TADS while the pilot IHADSS is linked to the PNVS turret. This means that the CPG "IHADSS" is much more limited than the pilot's one specially in terms of night vision imagery since the TADS have a lower night vision image quality and the TADS turret turns quite slower than the PNVS turret which means that sometimes the night vision image can't be properly projected on the CPG "IHADSS" specially if the CPG moves/turns his head too fast. Due to this, I also read that sometimes the CPG doesn't use his "IHADSS" device but instead uses Night Vision Googles (NVGs) - Afterall the CPG only controls the TADS and/or FCR which are controlled thru TEDAC and/or MPDs (multi-purpose displays).
ReplyDeleteThe cannon "aimed by IHADSS" is only done by the pilot.
Resuming all the info on the CPG "IHADSS" comes directly from the TADS.
Can't seem to find that doc, may not be looking in the right place... Anyways, l thought that the CPG didn't use NVG's, but instead used the TADS as a sort of night sight, but then again, maybe not.
ReplyDeleteBoth Pilot and CPG can operate the PNVS or TADS as a sensor to fly with (really only switched as a back up if one sensor fails) but only the CPG can use the TADS as a sight to deploy munitions. When used as a sensor the TADS displays flight symbology, when selected as the sight it displays weapon symbology. You are correct about the PNVS being a better quality image and having a faster slew rate (120 degrees per second vs the 60 of the TADS). So if you move your head to fast with the TADS the video will Lag behind from where you are currently looking (kinda makes you dizzy). The comment about the gun only moving with Pilot's head is incorrect. It can be controlled via IHADSS from either station. You are correct about the use of NVGs, both pilot and CPG will usually have a pair with them at night. Its good to uses especially if you are searching for tracer fire (no visible light seen under FLIR). The CPG can rotate his HDU away from his face and use the TEDAC. With the HDU away the IHADSS still tracks head movement.
ReplyDeleteThis game looks absolutely amazing and I hope to be able to play it in the near future. The amount of detail and accuracy that is put into it so far blows my mind.
I definitely am going to show this some of my Apache buddies!!
@Kevin,
DeleteYes I understand that the CPG can also use the PVS as well as he can also be able to fly the Apache taking over from the pilot the flying duties but as far as I know this would only happen operationaly in an emergency situation (for example the pilot gets injured and therefore cannot fly the Apache).
This being said, the pilot and CPG cannot operate the PNVS at the same time or simultaneously (the PNVS can only be used by one crew member only at one given time)! Because of this and since the PNVS is normally (or almost always) operated by the pilot the gun usually is either aimed by the pilot's helmet (which usually controls the PNVS as well) or aimed by the TADS which like you said is exclusivelly operated by the CPG when operated in "weapon's aiming mode".
Well, my previous post was a bit on the simplistic side so sorry for that and thanks for posting a more detailed explanation on how the PNVS/TADS/gun works on the Apache.
I know there is a "Weapons symbology" on the IHADSS that is different from the flight symbology, but is it underlaid with TADS symbology on the IHADSS? Or does the HMD just become a backup display that just gives indications and a pointing cross? Or am I just overthinking it all as usual? :( Sorry if my question was worded poorly, I'm in a bit of a rush.gedung tertinggi di dunia
ReplyDelete