Hello to all readers in the new year! I hope that it started positively for you and will be calmer for all of us than the passing one. So, to have some fun, we're going to play games today. Not just any games, certainly well-known to fans of both military and civil aviation. They will be the Digital Combat Series created by Eagle Dynamics and Microsoft Flight Simulator 2020 by, of course, Microsoft. Both are very realistic flight simulators in which we can find detailed models of various aircraft. In the context of OSINT, both productions will be valuable to us for two reasons. First, the creators of MFS2020 have set a very ambitious goal, giving players the opportunity to fly around the world. This means that, like Google Earth, we can use the mapping of topography and buildings in the real world to geolocate photos or other tasks that require access to photos from all corners of the world. Colleagues from Bellingcat have already written about such a function of the MFS, however, I will try to extend this thread a bit. Secondly, and in my opinion more important, DCS and MFS allow us to see planes up close and in various configurations of flaps, air brakes or hanging weapons. In one of the posts on counterintelligence.pl, we dealt with the geolocation of the photo of the plane during take-off. One of the things we had to figure out was whether the plane was taking off or landing - for this we looked for photos and videos showing the different control surface settings. Using DCS or MFS, we can freely control the plane and view the model from different angles.
So let's look at two ways to use these productions. Let's start by using the MFS2020 as an alternative to satellite imagery services. To create a world shared with players, MFS uses a combination of satellite and aerial imagery, manual modeling of key places and procedural world generation (using Blackshark.ai). The effects are truly amazing, let's at least take a look at this post on Reddit where one user compared pictures with landscape in MFS. The question that arises, of course, is whether the flight simulator will have any advantages over viewing the world in Google Earth. In my opinion, there are definitely situations where MFS can be helpful - so let's take a closer look at them. First of all, the creators should show the detail with which the world has been rendered - the combination of photos and objects generated in 3D gives very good results, often the image will be more detailed and clearer than what we see in Google Earth. What's more, the ability to view from the plane gives you greater possibilities of controlling the angle of view and position in relation to the ground. So let's move on to specific examples.
We'll start with this New York Times article describing cyber attacks against systems such asemyslowe in Saudi Arabia, it has the following photo:
As we can see, the photo was taken from an airplane (or a helicopter - recognizing the machine is an OSINT task in itself 🙂) so it is perfect for our needs. The location of the object itself will not be a problem, as you can see in the caption, the installation is Sadara Chemical, so let's find it on Google Earth and see what it looks like. Here is a view of the terrain along with the nearby airport from which the plane potentially took off. Thanks to the characteristic access road to the entrance to the complex, it was also easy to locate the side of the photographed area. Unfortunately, however, Google does not show any 3D models for these buildings:
Now let's move on to the MFS and try to make an air reconnaissance over the area. Using the placemark tool, note the exact coordinates of your facility:
And in MFS, set the route from the nearby airport to our point of interest using the search box:
After a few moments in the air, we can already be directly above the target:
Compared to Google Earth, we see 3D models of buildings here, but it should also be assessed how the MFS technology reproduced the real development of industrial infrastructure. In my opinion, the results are mixed: on the one hand, we actually see models of warehouses, tanks and even the entrance gate that seem to be very correctly rendered, on the other, unfortunately, characteristic elements, such as chimneys, are not presented. So let's try to recreate the photo from the NYT:
As we can see, it is better than in Google Earth, but there are no elements that were clearly visible in the original photo - such as the aforementioned rows of chimneys. However, given the complete lack of representation of Google Earth buildings, we can concede a dot to the MFS here. While all kinds of planes regularly fly over Saudi Arabia, some areas are much less accessible to aviation - such as North Korea, which we will move to now. Using the map again, we indicate where we would like to take to the air, and after a while we are over Pyongyang:
In the foreground, you can see the First May Stadium, and then the municipal buildings. So let's see what Google Earth offers in a similar view:
Here the difference is quite significant - Google Earth also shows a 3D model of the stadium, but it is much less detailed, and when it comes to urban buildings, in Earth we will only see flat satellite images. In addition, in the dense, forest-city landscape, much more than in the desert Saudi Arabia, we see the technological advantage of the advanced MFS graphics engine. The landscape is simply much more detailed. However, North Korea also showed how sometimes the MFS can have problems generating models from photos. Let's take a look at one of Pyongyang's most famous buildings - Hotel Ryugyong, Google Earth:
As in the case of the stadium, we see a 3D model surrounded by flat photos, meanwhile MFS:
We can see a very interesting phenomenon here - the MFS technology correctly generated the polygon of the base of the hotel, but its shape itself remained visible only as a flat satellite image. Probably due to its unusual shape, the algorithm simply failed to recreate it.
After our visits to different parts of the world, let's move on to the second use of simulators, namely the ability to view planes from different angles and in different configurations. In the post about traffic tracking and the use of aeronautical data, we tried to assess whether the plane's flap settings indicate takeoff or landings. For this purpose, we had to look for external photos and videos showing the plane in various situations - where we could not be sure about its configuration, which, after all, may differ due to weather conditions. With the help of simulators, we can freely experiment with the setting of control surfaces. So let's move to the cockpit of the Boeing 747, where we can set the flaps (red) and the air brake (blue):
Then we can see what the plane looks like from the outside, the MFS helps here with the flaps by showing their position on the virtual cockpit:
MFS is a simulator focused on civil aviation and although we will find the F / A-18E Super Hornet here, and soon also the F-35, we will still not have access to weapons systems. This is where DCS or Digital Combat Series comes in handy. The program is much older than the MFS, and although it is still being developed, unfortunately we will not be able to admire such detailed graphics. However, as I mentioned, we will be able to take a closer look at the combat function.
As an example, let's use the F-18C, which is my favorite fighter. In DCS, aircraft models are available as a module, so if we want to look at a specific machine, we have to buy the appropriate module. Unfortunately, they are not cheap (a standard high-quality aircraft module costs $80), but the manufacturer provides a free two-week test period, which can be very useful when analyzing specific cases. So let's take a look at the airport where our F-18 is standing and we can equip it with selected weapons using the ground service:
DCS offers a wide range of weapons. For example here, F-18 with Sidewinder, Sparrow, AMRAAM missiles, targeting pods, fuel tank, Harpoon missile and Mk-84 bomb. To put it mildly, this is not a realistic set of equipment, but if we try to determine the type of equipment on the basis of photos, the possibility of comparing different types of shells on one plane becomes very valuable:
And similarly to the MFS, in DCS we can experiment with different settings of the control surfaces by operating the flaps or the air brake:
As we can see, flight simulators can also be an extremely useful tool in the work of an OSINT analyst. In the case of MFS, it is an interesting supplement to the capabilities of services such as Google Earth, and both MFS and DCS allow for accurate viewing of aircraft from various angles and in various configurations.
English 
Polish