Yea, from my impression that is our same old FLIR view for now.
I do think ATFLIR may be superior both now and with the new IR rendering because as Wags showed the ATFLIR has a manual GAIN and LEVEL adjustment, while the LITENING only has GAIN.
Although if the automatic modes work well most of the time, then they’d be roughly equal unless they code in real world differences in the IR camera systems - but we don’t know if and what those are anyway.
As well, ATFLIR seems easier to use as an unassisted IR sensor in A/A mode, but it doesn’t have the automatic slave-to-radar the LITENING does.
Then there is more FOV’s but less zoom levels.
It will need some testing to compare, but I hope maybe we could get some comparison details from ED based on what they modeled each as.
Both taken via in in-air spawn, so they are the same location.
LITENING: Wide 0-9, Narrow 0-9.
ATFLIR: Wide 1, Medium 1-2, Narrow 1-2. Note: The above numbers represent “zoom level” not optical magnifications, so they are relative measures rather than absolute, if anything.
When talking with @Franze the conclusion discovered was that the ATFLIR and LITENING irl have the same optical zoom capability but the LITENING includes digital zoom for the higher levels meaning that it should get more pixelated as you get down that far. Currently, that is not modeled so the LITENING carries an advantage.
