Friday 2010-09-03 Dev. update and Discussions

[luthier]

Evening gentlemen.

Two part update this week. We're showing continuing improvements to our terrain, as well as the brutality of war.

EVERYTHING IS WIP and subject to change!

[philip.ed]

Awesome

will the grass move in the prop-wash?
Those trees look awesome. For the one with the 'rounder' foliage, I may suggest making the trunk smaller. It's completely anal of me to say this and I only say it because it can make a difference, but when flying over areas of wood/forest in the UK, the trunks of the trees can barely be seen and then same is true when driving. i could probably get some pictures to show this if it's of interest...? Otherwise the best looking trees I've seen in a sim. I don't even think some modern dar FPS games have trees that look that good.

Will hedges be modelled? These almost look like dense borders when flying; a bit like flying over a solid cuboid that is long and thin :P

The pilot is not wearing his helmet in the second pic; please don't tell me he puts it on...:P that would just be so (excuse my childish excitement) cool.

[luthier]

Part two.

Edit: a little explanation

Screen 1 - pilot dead, bombardier dying. Top and waist gunners alive.
Screen 2 - same moment from another angle
Screen 3 - another short burst kills the rest of the crew
Screens 4 & 5 - Heinkel slowly keels over

[Gnasher]

Pass the tissues vicar!

Looking very good!

[Bloblast]

Luthier thanks!

[Dano]

Slumped bodies and dappled sunshine, looks great if a little morbid... :)

[JG27_PapaFly]

:-P Marvellous, and brutal at the same time! I love that grass...

[kestrel79]

Great pics!

You can see a train in that first shot, cool! The hangers are lookin really good, you can see the structures and beams on the inside. Very detailed.

I love that picture of the plane on the ground. I am just picturing that grass waving in the wind and hopefully propwash!

Those trees are looking very good too! Again I'm just picturing them in my mind whirling in the wind like that one apc video we saw a while back.

Great update cannot wait to fly this!

[AndyJWest]

Excellent!

The damage on the Heinkel is very impressive. I'd say the slumped-over crew gets the balance between 'realism'/gore and what is likely to be acceptable to the market about right - not that in-game you are going to see much from outside in most circumstances.

[Dano]

Do I see trees all the way out on the hills in the horizon on that first shot?

[Tree_UK]

Getting better all the time, thank you. :grin:

[choctaw111]

This stuff is just awesome!

[PeterPanPan]

Thanks Luthier,

Lovely screen shots. The variety of textures/patterns in the fields is looking excellent. The grass is perhaps a little too green and I think too long in the airfield shots - but I know this is WIP.

The aircraft/crew shots look superb. Given that crew are to be modelled in various states of "aliveness", can you comment on my other thread about tracer arcs from AI gunners being affected when the gunner it killed/wounded? See, http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=16153

Thanks :grin:

PPanPan

[badfinger]

Who is the grammar school boy sitting in the Hurricane? Seriously, does the pilot look too small for the plane?

binky9

[easytarget3]

amazing, thanks a lot.what a beautiful day to die.rip

[PeterPanPan]

Who is the grammar school boy sitting in the Hurricane? Seriously, does the pilot look too small for the plane?

binky9

I see what you mean! Maybe it's one of those perspective tricks, and the pilot isn't in the plane at all, but instead standing on a crate over by the hangar?!

[ECV56_LeChuck]

Amazing work!! The terrain is looking better and better, cant wait to see a little video. I guess that in movement this will look 10x times better

[T}{OR]

Excellent! Thanks for the update.

Is there a chance we will see a video (with sound) any time soon? :) :P

[kristorf]

Loverly stuff, cheers gents

[philip.ed]

I see what people mean about the pilot...he is far too small.

http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/2667077.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=45B0EB3381F7834DD47EFD3F3F8300401D84B9CDE5682680 5223CE6E4BAF89B1

[zapatista]

good looking update ! love the damage modeling on the german bomber, great detail there !

i like the look of the short grass on the airfield to (until now we have mainly seen the long grass, and wheat fields etc), also good to see how the train stands out in the scenery (as it should in real life), hopefully other ground objects like cars trucks and tanks will be similarly visible from the correct distances and altitudes now (compared to the 30% distance visibility we have for those in il2 right now)

looks like we are getting close :)

[philip.ed]

Luthier, will the trees and other objects blend into the distance better? Of course it's WIP but I was just wondering.

Maybe a seperate topic to put any questions in would be an idea?

[Abbeville-Boy]

i miss oleg is he tired from the whiners each week :grin:

[ChrisDNT]

Here is a good pic on how the British countryside should look, especially for the fields and trees implantantion :

http://i51.tinypic.com/ih1e3d.jpg

So, still lot of work to do to look right !


P.S: it's a Spit Mk.21, so the pic is probably around 1945-46.

[philip.ed]

RAVE...:D somehow it fits.

[Viking]

Thanks for the update.
Propwash would be just awsome!
Pilot does look a bit to small but Im sure Oleg and team are 100% on the spot.
The rest is promising to say the least.


Hope Oleg is better.

Viking

[Zappatime]

Here is a good pic on how the British countryside should look, especially for the fields and trees implantantion :

http://i51.tinypic.com/ih1e3d.jpg

So, still lot of work to do to look right !


P.S: it's a Spit Mk.21, so the pic is probably around 1945-46.

That real life shot shows his head must almost be brushed by the front edge of the canopy when it closes/opens. Anybody got a real life shot of a Hurricane with pilot in like the SOW shot posted today, as a matter of comparison?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d8/Hawker_Hurricane03.jpg/800px-Hawker_Hurricane03.jpg

http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/2667077.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=45B0EB3381F7834DD47EFD3F3F8300401D84B9CDE5682680 5223CE6E4BAF89B1

[Insuber]

Beautiful pictures, I am impressed, a couple of them look almost photorealistic! Keep up the good work guys.

One (constructive) critique: the trees in the first pic do not blend enough into the landscape, they stick up like candles on a birthday pie ... maybe some more blur of the 3D objects would help blending them with the 2D textures ... just my 2 c.

Cheers,
Insuber

[NSU]

it look better and better

[Tree_UK]

I see what people mean about the pilot...he is far too small.

http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/2667077.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=45B0EB3381F7834DD47EFD3F3F8300401D84B9CDE5682680 5223CE6E4BAF89B1

His dad is just out of shot after lifting him in the cockpit :grin:

[ChrisDNT]

And for the right shade of green for the place, have a look here...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9ScVZ437xA&feature=player_embedded

... at around 3.10, not much but enough to grasp how "green" should look there.

[ChrisDNT]

"That real life shot shows his head must almost be brushed by the front edge of the canopy when it closes/opens."

This real life pic shows also how much too small the virtual Hurricane pilot is.

[pupaxx]

One (constructive) critique: the trees in the first pic do not blend enough into the landscape, they stick up like candles on a birthday pie ... maybe some more blur of the 3D objects would help blending them with the 2D textures ... just my 2 c.

Cheers,
Insuber[/QUOTE]

+1 the trees should be better blended with landscape, in partucular trees in far background. However great work,

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Bah I guess those pilots in the planes are not adjusted yet -- they may not even be of the right nationality in the right plane yet (heinkel),...but anyway, Hurricane cockpit photo here:

http://www.airplane-pictures.net/images/uploaded-images/2008-3/15/11828.jpg

[Splitter]

Beautiful pictures, I am impressed, a couple of them look almost photorealistic! Keep up the good work guys.

One (constructive) critique: the trees in the first pic do not blend enough into the landscape, they stick up like candles on a birthday pie ... maybe some more blur of the 3D objects would help blending them with the 2D textures ... just my 2 c.

Cheers,
Insuber

+1. The pics look awesome! After hundreds of sorties, I don't think I have seen an enemy aircrew but when SoW comes out I will have to take a peak lol. Those screen shot are impressive to say the least.

Something about the landscape and trees is a bit off to my eye and since I can't put my finger on it, I'm going with the comment I quoted. The trees look a little too well defined at distance maybe. But what do I know?

Thank you for the update. I would love to see video or maybe hear about the development progress but I'm thinking those are super double secret right now.

Splitter

[PeterPanPan]

... Anybody got a real life shot of a Hurricane with pilot in like the SOW shot posted today, as a matter of comparison?


This shows the size of the pilot pretty well.

http://vintagewings.ca/rsrc/vwc/img/news_10242007_3.jpg

PPanPan

[ATAG_Dutch]

So, still lot of work to do to look right !


.

The Blenheim is about 500 ft high in a computer sim, the Spit is about 3000ft at a guess, in an old photo with the background misty and out of focus.
Comparing the two looks spot on to me.

As to pilot size, the Hurri is big for a fighter and maybe that bloke was only 5' 2''! Mind you, he doesn't look the quoted 175cm. Not that I'm complaining, we won't really see 'em too much.

Looking superb.

[philip.ed]

I think the landscape will only look 'odd' because the Planes and objects are almost photo-realistic.

[ChrisDNT]

On the first pic, it looks like the country road is about 7 or 8 times larger than the locomotive !!! Strange.
Frankly, the screen is good, but I don't understand how you can find it "awesome", when the trees are not ok, the colors not right and the texture resolution not there ? A good WIP, ok, good but still very WIP.

[ChrisDNT]

The Blenheim is about 500 ft high in a computer sim, the Spit is about 3000ft at a guess, in an old photo with the background misty and out of focus.
Comparing the two looks spot on to me.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

On "Flight" archives pics site, you have plenty of period pics, taken at low altitude over this part of Britain showing quite well that this screen is still..... very WIP and far from being "spot on".

[Old_Canuck]

The pilot in the first Hurricane screenshot is not wearing a flight helmet which makes him appear smaller.

[airmalik]

Great update!

Love the shot of the Hurricane in front of the hangars. Is it my imagination or is the lettering and roundels on the hurri sharper than earlier updates? The white bird 'logo' on the Heinkel is quite blurry in contrast.

Damage effects are looking great too esp the torn, deformed skin of the Heinkel. Flak hit?

BTW I'm not impressed that the midget pilot's hair isn't blowing in the prop wash :P

[airmalik]

the trees should be better blended with landscape, in partucular trees in far background. However great work,

One contributing factor is that the distant trees aren't casting shadows.

[brando]

Great update!

BTW I'm not impressed that the midget pilot's hair isn't blowing in the prop wash :P

They weren't called "the Brylcreem boys" for nothing ;)

[ATAG_Dutch]

On "Flight" archives pics site, you have plenty of period pics, taken at low altitude over this part of Britain showing quite well that this screen is still..... very WIP and far from being "spot on".

Well I suppose it depends on the level of your expectations.
I'd be more than happy if the final product looked like this.
If every aspect of the sim was 'photo-realistic', I doubt many people would ever see it due to hardware restrictions.
Just my opinion.

[PeterPanPan]

Am curious to know how/why this particular Hurricane (the one with the small pilot) was chosen. The real Hurricane s/n L1833 came to a sad end on 3 October 1940 when it collided with another Hurricane on a training flight. Both pilots were killed. See, http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=16274

The detail in design, right down to historically accurate serial nos. is impressive.

PPanPan

[johnnypfft]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yqIsQQFSUic

video :)

[luthier]

I see what people mean about the pilot...he is far too small.

http://cache4.asset-cache.net/xc/2667077.jpg?v=1&c=IWSAsset&k=2&d=45B0EB3381F7834DD47EFD3F3F8300401D84B9CDE5682680 5223CE6E4BAF89B1

Good luck trying to aim being that high in the cockpit. See the gunsight?

The pilot in the photo is sitting up. He's not strapped in.

Our pilot has his eyes aligned with the gunsight.

[McHilt]

Very nice update here... those gorgeous looking trees, grass, well actually everything looks real fine and it's only getting better.:grin:

THX a lot

[chiefrr73]

Thank s for the update.
I think that the pilots are a bit to small, but i know this is WiP.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Thanks for the update. Nice things to be seen there.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Here is a good pic on how the British countryside should look, especially for the fields and trees implantantion :

http://i51.tinypic.com/ih1e3d.jpg

So, still lot of work to do to look right !


P.S: it's a Spit Mk.21, so the pic is probably around 1945-46.

One of the differences between this shot and the screen shots is that the screen shot is taken is perfectly clear atmosphere, the photo has quite a lot of haze. Also the depth of field in the photograph, tend s to blur distant objects, theat isn't shown in the screenshot!

Cheers!

[luthier]

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.

[EvilMonkee]

AFAIK - didn't pilots drop their seats when in combat? I think I remember a reference to this in First Light by Geoff Wellum....this could account for the low appearance of the Hurricane pilot. Still, matters not the shots get me wet with anticipation anyway!

[ChrisDNT]

"One of the differences between this shot and the screen shots is that the screen shot is taken is perfectly clear atmosphere, the photo has quite a lot of haze. Also the depth of field in the photograph, tend s to blur distant objects, theat isn't shown in the screenshot!"


Except that the haze doesn't change the way the fields are drawn or the trees are placed. Frankly :rolleyes:

[PeterPanPan]

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.

Lovely additional shot Luthier - point taken on pilot height too! I particularly love how the sea and sky blend into a non existent horizon. Very, very realistic and something we'll have to watch out for.

Thanks for the update

PPanPan

[Skoshi Tiger]

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.

Don't release it too soon, I'm still saving up for a new computer! ;)

cheers!

[ECV56_LeChuck]

How many hours of discussion take the FW point of aim? too high... too low... Now you have a perfect aligned eyes on the crosshair and still whining?

[T}{OR]

AFAIK didn't pilots drop their seats when in combat - swear I remember a reference to this in First Light by Geoff Wellum....could account for the low appearance of the Hurricane pilot. Still, matters not the shots get me wet with anticipation anyway!

That makes a lot of sense!

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.

:D

[swiss]

video :)

Why you guys always have to use techno?


BTT: Great pics, thanks.

[Insuber]

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.

Yes but only the copies sold to the people complaining :D I'm keeping the list.

[Space Communist]

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.


ahahaha game, set, match.

[Splitter]

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.

ROFL, that reminds me of my Dad. "Don't make me stop this car!". Awesome post!

BTW, I wouldn't put much stock in photos taken of aircraft in the foreground and scenery in the background. If the plane is in focus, the background will not be. The screenies posted actually show the power of the software and making distant objects less distinct would seem to be easy when the time comes (but I am not a programmer).

Splitter

[airmalik]

I thought I recognised that pilot!

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4109/4954549710_672d5b3b16_z.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IolXtL5piIM

[airmalik]

BTW, I wouldn't put much stock in photos taken of aircraft in the foreground and scenery in the background. If the plane is in focus, the background will not be. The screenies posted actually show the power of the software and making distant objects less distinct would seem to be easy when the time comes (but I am not a programmer).

Actually simulating shallow depth of field in software is computationally very expensive. Combine the infinite DOF with low detail in distant models and you get the effect we're seeing. Some games cheat by adding a lot of fog which has a blending effect but I'd rather have the great visibility shown in these pics than flying in pea soup with limited vis.

[rakinroll]

Thank you.

[philip.ed]

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.

Hahah :D

No, but seriously, his position looks correct (I can see what you mean) but his size looks off...Maybe it's the angle? I'm not sure.

How about this:

http://www.adamsplanes.com/images/Tuck/Tuck_in_cockpit.jpg
I would imagine the seat is lowered and the pilot leans forward in combat. I doubt the pilot would be lowered down for take-off, Luthier, so maybe a small change may be needed? It's no biggy for me though.

[Dozer_EAF19]

Who'd have thought that the relative size of the pilot figure could be so controversial??

I have a more serious question. That Blenheim in the first pic, evidently flying over Britain because that's a British train in the background - so why are the bomb-bay doors open? :-P :-P :-P

[Tanimbar]

Some have wondered what is odd about the scenery but couldn't put their finger on it - it's the lack of hedges.

English field boundaries, roads and rail lines are nearly always delimited by hedges, unless you are flying over limestone or upland regions.

Yes, I know, this is WIP. I'm not complaining, just pointing out. It's still brilliant work.

[airmalik]

I would imagine the seat is lowered and the pilot leans forward in combat. I doubt the pilot would be lowered down for take-off, Luthier, so maybe a small change may be needed? It's no biggy for me though.

I wonder if it's something to do with how the hurricane pilot (screenshot) is modeled or scaled. Maybe his head's too small :) That could happen if the model originally was say 6' tall and was shrunk uniformly to his new height of 5'6". I can't find any pics from the same angle looking down slightly so it's hard to compare. Doesn't bother me too much. Just seems a bit off.

I have no idea how tall the pilots in the following pics are or whether they are sitting on cushions. Personally, if I didn't have to look through the gunsight to shoot other planes, I'd rather be sitting higher in a taildragger for better visibility especially on the ground. Perhaps thats why the pilots in non war pics appear to be sitting higher in the cockpit.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Hawker_Hurricane03.jpg

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Hurricane_IV_KZ321.jpg/800px-Hurricane_IV_KZ321.jpg

[BigC208]

Maybe the Hurricane pilot looks short because he's not modeled sitting on his parachute pack yet. Making things blend in at a distance should not be that hard I think. Less individual detail at a distance should be easier on the computer. The dammage modeling on the 111 is looking great and although the plane is being shot from underneath their behinds, the crew snoozes on;)
Not too violent but gunners and crew are clearly incapcitated enough that you can base you next move on it. Close in and set the thing on fire or go on to the next target. Stil a WIP but I'm enjoying the showings more and more.

[philip.ed]

Some have wondered what is odd about the scenery but couldn't put their finger on it - it's the lack of hedges.

English field boundaries, roads and rail lines are nearly always delimited by hedges, unless you are flying over limestone or upland regions.

Yes, I know, this is WIP. I'm not complaining, just pointing out. It's still brilliant work.

+1

i said this a while ago. But don't fret! I think this could still appear in the sim ;)

http://www.churchtimes.co.uk/uploads/images/ariel%20view_P22%231%23.jpg

too green for summer, but a good example IMHO.

And per the pilot discussion: +1 Dozer :D Luthier; whatever you do, we'll still be happy. But the thought of the pilots seat-position that I raised does make me want to ask whether we'll be able to change the seat position that way...

[Redwan]

The trees are perfect !!! The grass looks OK but it should be affected by the propeller’s wash and the transition between the close view where grass is visible and the distance view where the grass is no more visible is too rough.

The ground on which the second hurri is standing where the grass is no longer visible seems to be as flat as my ex. And the shape of the grass should be visible on the bottom of the hangar, something like this maybe (I’m not a photoshop pro):

http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/2580/45742872.jpg



And the ‘brutality of war’ would be more realistic like this:

http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/2997/82699757.jpg

[kalimba]

Some have wondered what is odd about the scenery but couldn't put their finger on it - it's the lack of hedges.

English field boundaries, roads and rail lines are nearly always delimited by hedges, unless you are flying over limestone or upland regions.

Yes, I know, this is WIP. I'm not complaining, just pointing out. It's still brilliant work.

Well, if we look closely at the screenshot , we see that the "terrain" is blurred and seems to lack definition, like roads edges and so. The trees, the train and other objects are very defined...So the contrast between those two "levels" of images give the impression that the terrain is a bit out of focus , while the objects are not...And it is more obvious with distant trees...:cool:
So it looks imcompatible...for the moment...WIP...We know...:rolleyes:

But nice work !

[Splitter]

I thought I recognised that pilot!

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4109/4954549710_672d5b3b16_z.jpg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IolXtL5piIM

Now that is interesting, I hadn't thought of those scenes even though I have seen the movie dozens of times (John Wayne fan). My pure guess would be that they used a real P-40 for those cheesy looking close ups, sitting in a studio of course. It would just be a financial decision.

John Wayne was something like 6'-4" which would be VERY tall for a pilot of the era. One would think he would be sitting up much higher. Maybe they modified the seat to make it sit lower? I know they tended to put him on smaller horses to make him look even taller lol. It's not like they were above altering reality :).

Personally....I could not care less about the size of the pilots lol. That' just me, I know others feel much more strongly on the matter.

Splitter

[philip.ed]

I wonder if it's something to do with how the hurricane pilot (screenshot) is modeled or scaled. Maybe his head's too small :) That could happen if the model originally was say 6' tall and was shrunk uniformly to his new height of 5'6". I can't find any pics from the same angle looking down slightly so it's hard to compare. Doesn't bother me too much. Just seems a bit off.

I have no idea how tall the pilots in the following pics are or whether they are sitting on cushions. Personally, if I didn't have to look through the gunsight to shoot other planes, I'd rather be sitting higher in a taildragger for better visibility especially on the ground. Perhaps thats why the pilots in non war pics appear to be sitting higher in the cockpit.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d8/Hawker_Hurricane03.jpg


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Hurricane_IV_KZ321.jpg/800px-Hurricane_IV_KZ321.jpg

Well, I know that spits had rubbish visibilty for take-off, and I think the Hurribus did too. The pilots here are probably sitting up to get a better view, but I'd imagine they'd remain that way as they won't be using the gunsight. In combat, I know that the pilot would probably lower his seat; both for a better gunsight view and also for safety :)

[philip.ed]

AFAIK - didn't pilots drop their seats when in combat? I think I remember a reference to this in First Light by Geoff Wellum....this could account for the low appearance of the Hurricane pilot. Still, matters not the shots get me wet with anticipation anyway!


Yep; I have read this mentioned in near on every account on the BoB or any part of the air-war in WW2 for that matter ;)

[Kyrios]

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.

Cm'on, now he's standing up in the cockpit :mrgreen:
As previously said, the pilot looks too small rather than too low.
But most of the pics posted make me think the pilots will bang their heads on the canopy whenever negative Gs are involved :o

As for the rest, it's looking good, hopefully quality will not kill FPS... ^^

[philip.ed]

Luthier will have his revenge....

[MD_Titus]

excellent update, lovely to see it coming along like it is. the reflections from the blenheims nose are spectacular.

How many hours of discussion take the FW point of aim? too high... too low... Now you have a perfect aligned eyes on the crosshair and still whining?
oh but of course. after 7-8 years of reading il2 forums i would expect no less. our trolls>>>>>> any other internet trolls.

armchair game developers must be worse than armchair generals.

the patience of oleg, luthier and co is saintly. lesser men would've stopped interacting with the community long ago.

[MD_Titus]

And the ‘brutality of war’ would be more realistic like this:

http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/2997/82699757.jpg

well... how can you say it would be more realistic? that looks more hollywood tbh.

i'm guessing to get blood splatter like that you'd be talking either arterial spray or explosive shells removing both tissue and clothing. don't forget pilots wore a lot of clothing and, at least in bob, were usually subject to death by rifle calibre bullets. combine these two factors and bleeding out would be limited to soaking pilot suits, not decorating the inside of the plane like someone has been overly enthusiastic with the ketchup bottle. unless you it's a very specific bullet strike area then there wouldn't be large amounts of blood splatter. and certainly not in such patterns as you've added.

[smink1701]

Amazing.

BRING IT!

[Birdflu]

WoW!!!!!

Excelent

[Wutz]

The trees are perfect !!! The grass looks OK but it

And the ‘brutality of war’ would be more realistic like this:

http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/2997/82699757.jpg

yeah and if the sim looked like that, it would be rated 18+ in most European countries, that would mean a lot of die hard tots that are here and living in Europe would not get the game! ;) Maybe think before asking for Hollywood, although thinking of Hollywoods version of "Pearlharbour" I think I have to look for a paper bag.

[philip.ed]

I don't want gore...but Il-2 did have a gore setting which, in many ways, was quite bloody.

[Stiboo]

Yes the Hurri pilot is too small...but the He111 crew look ok for size ?!

It's my birthday today ( don't all cheer at once..!) I was hoping Oleg would give me a SoW video as a birthday treat!

I only use the HUD view in IL2 so not worried about Luther's threat!!!

Cheers

Simon

aka Stiboo

[Bloblast]

So this is what you guys are asking for?

I'll ship it that way you know. Try and stop me.


This makes things clearer:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/Naamloos5.png

[Redwan]

Maybe it's just a small guy like Master Yoda :)

http://www.collectorsquest.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/mayer-boypilot11.jpg

[BadAim]

Fantastic screenies, the progress that has been made in such a short time is nothing less than phenomenal. It just goes to show you how much effect taking your time and laying a good foundation has later on in the project.

[Zappatime]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v212/ZappaTime/Hurri_head.jpg

Clearly the guy in the cockpit is sat very high - the canopy would chop the top of his head off if closed!. So maybe as mentioned in prevoius posts it was adjustable for taxing, especially. Size of his (uncovered) head relative to cockpit/canopy can be gauged here as well though.

[Dafunkfire]

Here is a good pic on how the British countryside should look, especially for the fields and trees implantantion :

http://i51.tinypic.com/ih1e3d.jpg

So, still lot of work to do to look right !


P.S: it's a Spit Mk.21, so the pic is probably around 1945-46.

I hate to be repetitive.

I think the terrain would look excellent if the blueish veil caused by our atmosphere was implemented and visually prominent. This haziness would detract the small imperfections of distant textures. Refer to the photograph. Hell, Look across a field. It's there.

[OldFrenchy]

People tended to be a little smaller in those days, the average height of a man being 5' 8".
John Wayne towers above those people in any case.

[LukeFF]

Some people's propensity on this forum to bitch and moan about anything never ceases to amaze me. :rolleyes:

[Avimimus]

well... how can you say it would be more realistic? that looks more hollywood tbh.

i'm guessing to get blood splatter like that you'd be talking either arterial spray or explosive shells removing both tissue and clothing. don't forget pilots wore a lot of clothing and, at least in bob, were usually subject to death by rifle calibre bullets. combine these two factors and bleeding out would be limited to soaking pilot suits, not decorating the inside of the plane like someone has been overly enthusiastic with the ketchup bottle. unless you it's a very specific bullet strike area then there wouldn't be large amounts of blood splatter. and certainly not in such patterns as you've added.

I agree. We are much to influenced by the ketchup scene in the "Battle of Britain" movie.

Later in the war 30mm explosive shells might do a lot more damage to a human body, but the colour would be different and most of the displaced remains would likely be on other places than the windshield.

We should all be really impressed by the gunner moving around btw.

[McHilt]

I hate to be repetitive.

I think the terrain would look excellent if the blueish veil caused by our atmosphere was implemented and visually prominent. This haziness would detract the small imperfections of distant textures. Refer to the photograph. Hell, Look across a field. It's there.

It might already be implemented as in IL2 you can also opt to set weather to hazy and beyond which generates the same effect as you show in the photograph. I guess SOW will have similar options if not better, I guess

[AndyJWest]

I'm fairly sure that both Spitfires and Hurricanes had a lever on the right side of the cockpit next to the seat which was used to adjust its height in flight. I'm tempted to suggest this is added to the sim, for realism (assuming it hasn't been done already). On the other hand, I'll be happy to do without, if we get to see SoW:BoB sooner. :grin:

[Igo kyu]

There are a lot of details lacking in the Blenheim picture.

There are "level crossings" on all current railroad crossings of roads in Britain, and I think there were back then too, though more often there were bridges taking the railways across the roads (often with a dip or cutting in the roads to take them under the railway, sometimes with an embankment to take the railway above the level of the road).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_crossing

The railway is now usually fenced off from fields, in the old days of the 1940s that would have been hedges, but almost nobody grows/lays hedges now, it's a dying folk craft, but in WW2 it would have been the main way of keeping one farmer's livestock out of another farmer's field, in a capitalist system, that matters.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedge_laying

I do hope this helps, I was really quite shocked to see this. Most of the time, where unused old railway lines crossed roads there were bridges, now sometimes taken down, sometimes where it was the road that went up over the railway, still in use even though there is no railway under them.

[Sutts]

Thanks Luthier, looking great.:grin:

Love the peeled back skin on the bomber. The crew look very incapacitated...very well done....no need for blood at all.

The leaves on the trees look great too.

The hurri pilot's head does look a bit on the small side but it may just be the lack of the helmet. I do think a lot of the real pictures we see feature a raised seat for taxying purposes. Your point regarding the gun sight was very well put I thought.

I hate to say this but I think the country roads are way too wide (when compared to the train carriage). You're hard pushed to fit two modern UK spec. cars side by side on many UK country lanes. I guess that would make a road of about 16-18ft wide. The main line rail carriages of the day were 60-70ft long and the carriage appears to easily fit within the width of the road. No biggie though.

Cheers

[Icewolf]

this is my nephew at a farmers shed in saskatchewan ,canada. this hurricane is fully operational and the farmer flew it himself 3 times before parking it .
my nephew is 6 feet tall.he has no idea what model this is but I told him about this debate and he mentioned that he is not sitting on a parachute which I believe the pilots would be, thus the difference of clearance of the head.

the farmer has since sold the plane

[T}{OR]

this is my nephew at a farmers shed in saskatchewan ,canada. this hurricane is fully operational and the farmer flew it himself 3 times before parking it .
my nephew is 6 feet tall.he has no idea what model this is but I told him about this debate and he mentioned that he is not sitting on a parachute which I believe the pilots would be, thus the difference of clearance of the head.

the farmer has since sold the plane

Can't beat that. :)

[Ekar]

Trees and all of the details look really great.

I've mentioned before but it mostly comes down to resolution now (not that you really need to hear this), the terrain textures are very washed out in the first shot atleast. I think SOW will have the best cockpit graphics and aircraft models seen in a flight sim yet- I'm hoping the terrain will match these other elements in quality. The trees and grass are really looking quite stunning now. :o

I'm sure you guys are working hard on it- wonderfully textured terrains are quite rare in flightsims,.. you have the ORBX stuff for FSX, and WOP does a pretty decent job of things as well. The terrain has always been a bit of a weak spot for the average flight sim, I guess because most time is spent up in the air- but we also have the computing power and gfx memory now to bring in much crisper terrain graphics. Low flying can be exhilarating, but only if the detail holds up at these low altitudes. Blocky terrains ruin the immersion.

Great job!

[David603]

http://a.imageshack.us/img826/3782/shot20100901112504.jpg (http://img826.imageshack.us/i/shot20100901112504.jpg/)
First off, let me say I love the rest of the update, and I'm fully aware this is WIP.

However there are some problems here. The roads are much too wide, at least 2-3 times as wide as they should be, judging by the scale of the train. In general, trains dwarf crossings, not the other way round. Period roads in the countryside would be narrow, usually around 12-15 feet wide, designed so it is possible for two oncoming cars to pass each other with care. Try placing a car on one of the roads and having a look at the width. If it isn't possible to place at least 4 cars side by side on those roads, I will eat my metaphorical hat.

Hedges are also a problem, you clearly need a hedge type of vegetation that can be placed along the sides of the road, because achieving a satisfactory look with individual bushes is going to become prohibitively expensive in terms of numbers needed, and at the moment the hedges look like individual shrubs placed at intervals along the side of the road.

To end my comments on a positive note, the way the trees and landscape work together at a distance (on the hills in the background) is fantastic and bodes well for the way the SOW will look from altitude

[OldFrenchy]

Compared to what we have been used to, this is a quantum leap forward in appearance, despite being a WIP. Well done!
What would be nice would to see a lot of ground activity. Yes, yes- framerates. Oh well.

[philip.ed]

This makes things clearer:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/Naamloos5.png

Actually, zoomed in like that, i think the team have done a good job on the pilot model. The angle of the picture, with the reflection on the back of the canopy, can create the illusion the canopy is a lot bigger than it really is.


And regarding landscape; guys, this is soooo WIP :D Oleg said that the terrain would be almost photorealistic, and I just think this shows the team messing with textures before increasing their resolution...In any case, the terrain in WoP can look very good (debateable?) but I am sure that the textures from WoP could be placed into SoW in some form. I don't say this to say that this should happen, but to show that these txctures are far from final as the SoW has a lot more to offer. ;) I'm confusing myself here; but I think I have made my point credible in one form or other...

[kendo65]

...
However there are some problems here. The roads are much too wide, at least 2-3 times as wide as they should be, judging by the scale of the train. In general, trains dwarf crossings, not the other way round. Period roads in the countryside would be narrow, usually around 12-15 feet wide, designed so it is possible for two oncoming cars to pass each other with care. Try placing a car on one of the roads and having a look at the width. If it isn't possible to place at least 4 cars side by side on those roads, I will eat my
metaphorical hat.

Hedges are also a problem, you clearly need a hedge type of vegetation that can be placed along the sides of the road, because achieving a satisfactory look with individual bushes is going to become prohibitively expensive in terms of numbers needed, and at the moment the hedges look like individual shrubs placed at intervals along the side of the road.
...


I was wondering if this shot was using a 'low detail' setting with only sparse trees/hedgerow details - like in Il2 which has a config.ini setting for trees. At the lowest level you get next to nothing - maybe this fits in with Luthier using a low-powered PC for testing purposes? It looks to me as if it may just be giving an 'indication' of tree and hedgerow density - the wooded areas look very 'thinned out' too compared to some shots we've seen before.

Tend to agree with your comments about the road / train though.

edit: the more I look at that picture the more I think that it is actually the train that is the problem. It's too small compared to the road AND the trees - maybe a lod issue ? - surely the passenger carriage should be much longer than the width of a country road!?

But I'm just going to remind myself of what is said on Page 1 - EVERYTHING IS WIP!!- and apologise for whinging :)

[philip.ed]

Compare Il-2 on first release to now...that, for me, is a thought that makes me know that SoW will be awesome.

[Bloblast]

Actually, zoomed in like that, i think the team have done a good job on the pilot model. The angle of the picture, with the reflection on the back of the canopy, can create the illusion the canopy is a lot bigger than it really is.


And regarding landscape; guys, this is soooo WIP :D Oleg said that the terrain would be almost photorealistic, and I just think this shows the team messing with textures before increasing their resolution...In any case, the terrain in WoP can look very good (debateable?) but I am sure that the textures from WoP could be placed into SoW in some form. I don't say this to say that this should happen, but to show that these txctures are far from final as the SoW has a lot more to offer. ;) I'm confusing myself here; but I think I have made my point credible in one form or other...


The top part of the canopy, between the 2 lines, seems to be too large in comparison.
The difference is clear: it's the pilot and the canopy imho.

[Asheshouse]

David603 makes some valid comments. If its possible to have hedges or small tree lines along roads and railways it will significantly enhance the appearance of the landscape.

I notice that the railway is single track. Although many branch lines were single track the majority might be better represented by twin tracks. Also if this allowed trains to be routed in both directions that would be great. Are cuttings, embankments, tunnels and level bridges being modelled. In IL2 railways never look quite right with steep bridge approaches and extreme track gradients in hilly country. --- Ok, I know its not a railway sim, but it would be good if it was possible.

With roads if convoys are routed in two directions will they pass each other on the left, as is correct for England, and on the right in France?

Overall I am hugely impressed by what is being achieved. Looking forward to its release.

[philip.ed]

David603 makes some valid comments. If its possible to have hedges or small tree lines along roads and railways it will significantly enhance the appearance of the landscape.

I notice that the railway is single track. Although many branch lines were single track the majority might be better represented by twin tracks. Also if this allowed trains to be routed in both directions that would be great. Are cuttings, embankments, tunnels and level bridges being modelled. In IL2 railways never look quite right with steep bridge approaches and extreme track gradients in hilly country. --- Ok, I know its not a railway sim, but it would be good if it was possible.

With roads if convoys are routed in two directions will they pass each other on the left, as is correct for England, and on the right in France?

Overall I am hugely impressed by what is being achieved. Looking forward to its release.

+1

[ChrisDNT]

Ok, look at this...

http://i51.tinypic.com/2f04sk6.jpg

... don't you see the differences ?


P.S: of course, I'm not speaking here of the über-ugly filtering of WOP, just of the geometry of the landscape and the implantation of the trees, fields, roads and rivers.

[Tree_UK]

Some people's propensity on this forum to bitch and moan about anything never ceases to amaze me. :rolleyes:

luKe, we are trying to make the game better for you me old duck, I bet your one of those guys who would never go on strike for more pay, but take the same payrise as those that did make the effort. :grin: No offence of course.

[BG-09]

One (constructive) critique: the trees in the first pic do not blend enough into the landscape, they stick up like candles on a birthday pie ... maybe some more blur of the 3D objects would help blending them with the 2D textures ... just my 2 c.

Cheers,
Insuber

+1 the trees should be better blended with landscape, in partucular trees in far background. However great work,

Yes this is really so! I have to say the same...and that kid in to the cockpit...it destroys everything...very, very small! Oleg, make the pilot higher, with smaller shoulders in order to fit the cockpit. The other things just surpass my expectations. Really!

Cheers!

[peterwoods@supanet.com]

Forget how tall the pilot is. It is the headsize (with or without helmet) that is so wrong.

Compare this upscaled version with the original. This is far from perfect but should serve to illustrate what many are saying. And, for Luthier, the pilot's eyeline is pretty well centred on the the reflector sight.

http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu181/2_Puff_Pete/SoWBoBHurricanePilotupscaled.jpg

[BG-09]

Am curious to know how/why this particular Hurricane (the one with the small pilot) was chosen. The real Hurricane s/n L1833 came to a sad end on 3 October 1940 when it collided with another Hurricane on a training flight. Both pilots were killed. See, http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=16274

The detail in design, right down to historically accurate serial nos. is impressive.

PPanPan

You really astonish me with this discovery!

[Abbeville-Boy]

luKe, we are trying to make the game better for you me old duck, I bet your one of those guys who would never go on strike for more pay, but take the same payrise as those that did make the effort. :grin: No offence of course.




you and philip.ed have not worked a day in your life's your both here 24/7 :grin::grin::-P:-P:grin::grin:---:-P no offence of course

[furbs]

The only way to check the size of the pilot is to see a pic with him standing next to the hurri...luthier?? :grin:

landscape looking better but..and i know its WIP before anyone chips in...but the colours still off for the fields...looks more like france than southern England.

Everything else looks great to me.

cheers.

[peterwoods@supanet.com]

Agree with comment elsewhere that:
1. The train is out of scale with road(s) which are at best B class but probably C.

Compare this rather crude edit with original.

http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu181/2_Puff_Pete/SoWBoBTrainSize.jpg

2. Train tracks crossing roads always have what is known in UK as "Level Crossings" if not bridged.

[GOA_Potenz]

lovely update, ground is looking great
still not sure about the smokes and fire
let's see a small video of it, damage planes
looks great too, just bullet holes looks quite
wrong, but i asume that are still wip, human
figures looks exelente same as RoF.

But as many says here don't pay me atention
I'm a modder ;)

[David603]

Agree with comment elsewhere that:
1. The train is out of scale with road(s) which are at best B class but probably C.

Compare this rather crude edit with original.

http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu181/2_Puff_Pete/SoWBoBTrainSize.jpg

Now the rest of the landscape is out of scale with the train and the roads. Look at the trees, and there are two crossings with the length of the train. I am still convinced the problem is that the roads are too wide, the train was almost certainly to scale.

[SlipBall]

this is my nephew at a farmers shed in saskatchewan ,canada. this hurricane is fully operational and the farmer flew it himself 3 times before parking it .
my nephew is 6 feet tall.he has no idea what model this is but I told him about this debate and he mentioned that he is not sitting on a parachute which I believe the pilots would be, thus the difference of clearance of the head.

the farmer has since sold the plane




Well these photo's vindicate luthier, for all we know, it could be a ground crew member in the pit, thanks for clearing that up:grin:...

---------------------------------------------

Great up-date, thanks!

[Ekar]

Ok, look at this...

http://i51.tinypic.com/2f04sk6.jpg

... don't you see the differences ?


P.S: of course, I'm not speaking here of the über-ugly filtering of WOP, just of the geometry of the landscape and the implantation of the trees, fields, roads and rivers.

Yeah, WOP seems to have a much more natural/organic/diverse clumping arrangement of trees than SOW currently. This might be a low settings thing again, but I also think WOP still looks pretty good on low settings from memory.

SOW definitely has the better colour palette here. Most of the other WOP maps fare better in terms of the colours, but the English one is quite bad, imo. Of course, it all depends on the weather. Natural lighting is incredibly changeable.

[JtD]

Second time I can only say very nice pics!

[vanderstok]

Nice update! (and testing my new Avatar ;) )

[Tbag]

Hey Vanderstok, red 13 is my number :D

[Sutts]

Well these photo's vindicate luthier, for all we know, it could be a ground crew member in the pit, thanks for clearing that up:grin:...

---------------------------------------------

Great up-date, thanks!

I see things a little differently. I'm now convinced the pilot is the correct height but his head is too small. Perhaps this was the result of scaling the pilot's entire body down instead of just shortening his legs? One person might have shorter legs and narrower shoulders than another but their head will usually be about the same size.

Try this.....open the following images side by side and fully zoomed. Take a ruler and measure the depth of the real guy's head and compare this measurement with the depth of the real hurris lower perspex panel in the front windscreen and the initial lower perspex panel in the sliding canopy. The guy's head is approx. the same depth as both these clear panels.

Now do the same with the sim pilot and sim hurri. You must allow for the portion of the chin hidden by the collar though. You'll find you need to add at least 2mm to the guys head to match the scale found in the real picture. This makes the head at least 20% too small.

I have no doubt the sim hurri dimensions are spot on. It's the pilot's head that is out of proportion. Try it for yourselves.

I hope this can be seen as constructive rather than just wining. I'm just trying to explain the gut reaction of several observers on this forum including myself. I'm extremely impressed with what I've seen so far and I can live with little issues like this.

[Igo kyu]

The pictures do look good, the planes to my not particularly knowledgeable eyes look good, but the lack of proper railways is terrible.

If we'd seen railways sooner, it could have been said sooner.

This is not in my view fixable before release, unless release is already set to be in the third quarter of 2011, and there is already someone working full time on nothing but railways.

Most places where rails crossed roads, there were bridges. Often railways were raised above the level of the land (called embankments), often railways were below the level of the land (called cuttings), sometimes if there was a long hill in the way there was a tunnel cut through the hill. This made it possible to keep the levels of the railways fairly flat, which in a hilly country, which Britain is, meant that the trains could travel faster and more efficiently. Railways were not new in Britain in 1940, the locomotives and rolling stock were fairly modern, but the railways were mostly laid out before 1900.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rail_transport_in_Great_Britain

It was a lot of work, but workers were cheap in those days.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navvy

I used to think Tree was a pessimist, but if this is going to be fixed before release he's now looking very optimistic indeed. :cry: :shock:

[Dafunkfire]

P.S: of course, I'm not speaking here of the über-ugly filtering of WOP, just of the geometry of the landscape and the implantation of the trees, fields, roads and rivers.

The atmosphere causes substantial filtering. It's not ugly, it's just the way it is. Light waves pass through a profusion of gas molecules and other terrestrial particles. Yeah, I understand WOP's excessive sepia hue doesn't agree with everyone. But you can't deny that it looks effective. It seems the mob's foremost qualm with the visuals is the terrain, and it is obvious that filtering occurs in reality much more so than what we have seen. I believe this would vastly improve the current visuals. And it seems that it would be simple to pull off. Also, it would mask low res textures. Good for FPS perhaps.

But what do I know.

[AdMan]

Forget how tall the pilot is. It is the headsize (with or without helmet) that is so wrong.

Compare this upscaled version with the original. This is far from perfect but should serve to illustrate what many are saying. And, for Luthier, the pilot's eyeline is pretty well centred on the the reflector sight.

http://i646.photobucket.com/albums/uu181/2_Puff_Pete/SoWBoBHurricanePilotupscaled.jpg

very nice, looks much better

[The Kraken]

The atmosphere causes substantial filtering. It's not ugly, it's just the way it is. Light waves pass through a profusion of gas molecules and other terrestrial particles. Yeah, I understand WOP's excessive sepia hue doesn't agree with everyone. But you can't deny that it looks effective. It seems the mob's foremost qualm with the visuals is the terrain, and it is obvious that filtering occurs in reality much more so than what we have seen. I believe this would vastly improve the current visuals. And it seems that it would be simple to pull off. Also, it would mask low res textures. Good for FPS perhaps.

But what do I know.

WoP's use of sepia and other image filters doesn't have much to do with atmospheric filtering. All SoW screens we've seen have pretty much the same atmospheric conditions which are pretty clear and allow for extremely far view range, but that doesn't mean the game won't have different conditions modelled in the end.

Also you can't hide low res textures behind haze. Low resolution is an issue close to the camera, so you'd need a thick fog layer to hide that... so if you want high-res textures, ask for high-res textures - not a way to hide low-res ones ;)

I agree that colour/filter and scene complexity issues aside, WoP does a lot of things very well when it comes to artwork. The ground textures are great and the whole scenery looks consistent; nothing looks out of place. I hope SoW's landscape moves a bit more in that direction while the team is working on it. Not that I can't live with what's being shown so far.

Great update again, thanks for taking the time to keep us in the loop.

[Jumo211]

well... how can you say it would be more realistic? that looks more hollywood tbh.

i'm guessing to get blood splatter like that you'd be talking either arterial spray or explosive shells removing both tissue and clothing. don't forget pilots wore a lot of clothing and, at least in bob, were usually subject to death by rifle calibre bullets. combine these two factors and bleeding out would be limited to soaking pilot suits, not decorating the inside of the plane like someone has been overly enthusiastic with the ketchup bottle. unless you it's a very specific bullet strike area then there wouldn't be large amounts of blood splatter. and certainly not in such patterns as you've added.

No , no , that picture looks almost funny comparing to reality .
Have you watched " The Fighting Lady " documentary ? , there you can see badly injured WWII U.S. pilot returning and landing on the aircraft carrier deck and look at his canopy , you won't see anything through the blood splatter everywhere all over the glass , how he managed to land that bloody crate is beyond me , they even tell you how that happened .
I will make HD DVD quality video of it tomorrow .
It's the only color footage I know of which shows such devastated blood canopy and pilot is not only alive but also managed to land his plane .
One of the well know Japanese Zero pilot hero in another documentary " Wings of Defeat " is talking about flak exploding close to his cockpit ripping off the whole bottom of his leg , I am sure that must have been wonderful inside cockpit yet he managed to tighting up and choke temporarily leg blood artery and returned for a landing .
Human being is capable of an amazing things in order to survive .

Thank you luthier for nice update , once there is BoB:SoW video available , we will all talk more in detail .

S! HG :cool:

[SlipBall]

The pictures do look good, the planes to my not particularly knowledgeable eyes look good, but the lack of proper railways is terrible.

If we'd seen railways sooner, it could have been said sooner.

This is not in my view fixable before release, unless release is already set to be in the third quarter of 2011, and there is already someone working full time on nothing but railways.

Most places where rails crossed roads, there were bridges. Often railways were raised above the level of the land (called embankments), often railways were below the level of the land (called cuttings), sometimes if there was a long hill in the way there was a tunnel cut through the hill. This made it possible to keep the levels of the railways fairly flat, which in a hilly country, which Britain is, meant that the trains could travel faster and more efficiently. Railways were not new in Britain in 1940, the locomotives and rolling stock were fairly modern, but the railways were mostly laid out before 1900. :cry: :shock:





The various rail system's, were built that way here in the State's as well...I'm not sure that any thing could be done at this point, or should I say I doubt.

Let me add that we have not seen what rails lie in other portions of the map

[Jimko]

First, great update pictures! Thanks Luthier!

Next…Does the pilot look a bit small to me in Luthier’s picture? Yes…

Is this a great issue for me? No…but I would prefer him to be a bit larger or higher.

I have seen many pictures and photos of pilots in Spits and Hurriys, and with no offense to Luthier, many of them had their eyes above the gunsight and they would stoop forward and down when using the sight.

I have read many biographies of BoB pilots and some of them were 6’ 4” tall, so even with lowered seats, their heads could be almost touching the canopy. Others flew with raised or lowered seats, depending on their preferences.

Here are a couple of pics, the first is Stanford Tuck in his Hurry, and the second is from the war. They give some good idea of pilot scale. Notice that their line-of-sight is just above the gunsight, but leaning foreward a bit would put their eyes a bit lower and in line with the sight. I have better pictures, but I would have to dig them out and scan them and no time for that project right now.

Is this an issue that is life-changing for me?

I hardly think so, but I think that it’s fair to present ideas and different opinions in a courteous and tactful manner.

[brando]

Now the rest of the landscape is out of scale with the train and the roads. Look at the trees, and there are two crossings with the length of the train. I am still convinced the problem is that the roads are too wide, the train was almost certainly to scale.

This is unfortunate in that no English railway would have road crossings with no gates or signals, whatever class the roads were. This kind of arrangement was in place by the late nineteenth century, keeping roads and rails entirely separate for safety reasons. As mentioned, trains ran on embankments or in cuttings and the bridge was the most common form of crossing, rail over road or vice versa. Most of the railway system was fenced, to keep the public and farm stock off the lines - in fact this separation was enforced by laws laid down in the 19th century - and are still in place in modern times.

Maybe it's expecting too much from a game that is really devoted to flight and aerial combat for the railway system to look authentic. It's not going to put me off buying or flying SoW-BoB, because so much of the rest is looking so good.

[_RAAF_Stupot]

On the first pic, it looks like the country road is about 7 or 8 times larger than the locomotive !!! Strange.
Frankly, the screen is good, but I don't understand how you can find it "awesome", when the trees are not ok, the colors not right and the texture resolution not there ? A good WIP, ok, good but still very WIP.

That's what I was thinking. Those windy country lanes in the UK are often only about 4 or 5 m wide between the hedges (sometimes cars can't pass) - that means that last carriage in the pic is pretty small! Alternatively, if the road is meant to be a main trunk road say 15 m wide, then probably it shouldn't be quite so twisty.

Another thing regarding the railway track that I think would be an improvement. I think there should be hedges, trees, perhaps even sheds, signal boxes etc etc along the railway easement. Often you can't see the actual railway track itself from high altitude, but you know it's there from the linear patterns of vegetation it forms in contrast to the more random pattern of fields.

I don't know how the landscape is put together. Maybe this is difficult because the track route is 'laid over' the background landscape, but perhaps it would be possible for the 'railway trees' to be part of the track route, rather than the background landscape so they would the follow the railway wherever it goes.

Anyway, it's all nitpicking really for a flight-sim, the pictures in general are great!

EDIT: well what you see above is the result of me reply to a post before reading the whole thread through, I see that others are raising the same questions!

[bf-110]

Definitely,SoW won't run in my poor machine...

[tourmaline]

Part two.

Edit: a little explanation

Screen 1 - pilot dead, bombardier dying. Top and waist gunners alive.
Screen 2 - same moment from another angle
Screen 3 - another short burst kills the rest of the crew
Screens 4 & 5 - Heinkel slowly keels over

First pic, exactly what i was expecting of strapped in die-ing pilots...

pics are looking awesome.

[Friendly_flyer]

This makes things clearer:

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/Naamloos5.png

Ah, that is a more relevant picture! The pilots in the two modern Hurricanes look larger because they are wearing modern flying helmets, which almost double the size of the head.

[Friendly_flyer]

Thank you for the pictures, Luthier! The flames in that Heinkel looks downright scary!

I have a small comment on the British markings:

The colour of the squadron code is too bright. It was in a grey shade, not white. The below picture is a comparison with a modern interpretation and may be affected by ambient light, but I think it shows quite clearly that the codes ought to be a bid darker.

The font for the serial looks very strange. Please compare the numbers 3 in the two picture below. In earlier screenshots, the font for the serials looked right.

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a37/Friendly_flyer/Skinning/Comparison-1.jpg

[Tree_UK]

you and philip.ed have not worked a day in your life's your both here 24/7 :grin::grin::-P:-P:grin::grin:---:-P no offence of course

lol good one mate, that made me laugh :grin::grin:

[BadAim]

I agree. We are much to influenced by the ketchup scene in the "Battle of Britain" movie.

Later in the war 30mm explosive shells might do a lot more damage to a human body, but the colour would be different and most of the displaced remains would likely be on other places than the windshield.

We should all be really impressed by the gunner moving around btw.

LOL! My first reaction to those shots (entirely tongue in cheek of course) was "where's the ketchup?" No matter the Gore/No Gore controversy, It's 100% better than IL2.

[dflion]

All pics looking great. As you mentioned this is still a WIP and their will be many more tweaks before the first release.
I am just grateful we have the basis for a very worthy successor to IL-2 Sturmovik and as SOW develops over the years ahead we will see many graphic improvements which will eventually stop all the 'whining' (I hope?).
Keep up the good work, hope Oleg is back on deck soon. I would be interested in seeing some more FMB tools in future updates and of course a video.
DFLion

[jameson]

Is this map 1:1? Does anyone know? I hope it's not one of reduced ones "for playability". It might explain a few things though.

[Hunden]

The third picture in the first set is simply amazing, Thank you for the update.:grin:

[kalimba]

If I remember correctly, Oleg stated in an interview or in few threads that he was building a new engine (SoW) that would be so good it could be used as a tool for movie production, and that he was aiming at nothing less than photorealistic results in BoB:SoW...
I do believe he will succeed. My feeling is that he is showing us wip that is few weeks or even few months old.
Remember the "leaked" cockpit video ? That was pretty amazing....And then only one cockpit screen with instruments with glass and reflections... ANd what we've got since few updates ? Only few screen shots of the same thing with only very small improvements...
He is pulling our legs guys !!!! :rolleyes:
Sow will be fabulous !!! :-)
Can't wait !

[Ctrl E]

My two cents - it looks bloody brilliant.

Any chance of having a squadron dog? A collie I think :-)

[Chivas]

I believe the pilot is being modeled in combat mode. I know while flying combat I would shrink the size of a walnut behind any piece of armor plating . ;)

[Chivas]

Is this map 1:1? Does anyone know? I hope it's not one of reduced ones "for playability". It might explain a few things though.

Yes, I believe the map is 1:1.

[mungee]

I believe the pilot is being modeled in combat mode. I know while flying combat I would shrink the size of a walnut behind any piece of armor plating . ;)

Hehe! Good one Chivas ... I would shrink behind the armourplate too!

I'm "taking the bait" by commenting on the pilot size issue - Luthier's got it right no doubt, and I therefore think that it must therefore be the size of the head etc that should be looked at.

Anyway, brilliant screenshots as usual.
Oleg and team, I think that you've got the fire/flame effects looking 100% - fantastic!

My only slightly negative comment would relate to the scenery which clearly is still WIP - more scrubby bush and toned down greens - but I'm sure that's all still to be addressed.

The waiting is "killing me" - hehe!

[luthier]

I just want to say that you guys are INSANE.

[Skoshi Tiger]

I just want to say that you guys are INSANE.

After deep thought and contemplation I have come to the same conclusion. It gets worse as each day goes by.

I am, however, completely lucid and sane. Unfortunately I cannot comment on any of my other personalities! ;)

Cheers!

[AndyJWest]

I just want to say that you guys are INSANE.
Yup, total fruitcakes. Utterly nuts...

All we want to do is fly our imaginary aeroplanes over imaginary Kent fields, while admiring the imaginary scenery and hoping the imaginary bandits don't bounce us from the imaginary sun. As long as we can't do this, we'll carry on finding imaginary faults in whatever morsels we get to see. The only solution is to make our imagination real, so come on Oleg and company, let's see what we can expect: “What is now proved was once only imagined.” – William Blake

[csThor]

I just want to say that you guys are INSANE.

After ten years you're still surprised? ;) :mrgreen:

[porto72]

Some posted comparison pics of WOP landscape to SOW. I also like the WOP-Terrain, it is very convencing, but do not forget that those maps were very small (to small in my view) and that is the problem: Quality costs frame rates: Priority should be the feel of flight (FM), damage model and a good campaign system. I doupt that you can have fun with SOW during an aircombat with 9 fps!!!

[Foo'bar]

Will buildings cast drop shadows inside? I was looking at picture two and was wondering why I can't see any drop shadows at the left inside walls/floor of the hangar building.

In picture 1 there's a train crossing a road. Given that the last coach is about 20 meters long then the road's width seem far to wide. Such road should be about 5 meters wide imho.

[Hecke]

Hopefully on better pcs you can adjust the grass to higher distances.

I think the terrain would look much better if there would be "little forests" not only single trees.

[McHilt]

The atmosphere causes substantial filtering. It's not ugly, it's just the way it is. Light waves pass through a profusion of gas molecules and other terrestrial particles. Yeah, I understand WOP's excessive sepia hue doesn't agree with everyone. But you can't deny that it looks effective. It seems the mob's foremost qualm with the visuals is the terrain, and it is obvious that filtering occurs in reality much more so than what we have seen. I believe this would vastly improve the current visuals. And it seems that it would be simple to pull off. Also, it would mask low res textures. Good for FPS perhaps.

But what do I know.

You know just as much as we all do Dafunkfire,
I agree with this post... WOP might have undersaturated landscape palets but it sure looks fantastic...

[Romanator21]

Luthier, the problem is that you designed your pilots to look like this:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/213330-1/Finnish++Hurricane

http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acimages/hurricane_stephenfox.jpg

http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedkingdom/aircraft/fighter/hawker-hurricane-fighter/hawker-hurricane-mk-ii-fighter-01.png

http://ww2today.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Hawker-hurricane.jpg

However, these are elite midget pilots. Their tiny size makes them more tenacious, and hardy.

You should model your figures on people with more normal skeletons.

Like this:

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/bigpilot.jpg

[robtek]

The people in this forum just demand the impossible!!

And i'm afraid that OM will deliver. :-D

Another new rig, for shure.

[Rodolphe]

...


Leading Aircraftman: ' Come on Chaps, Hurry up ! Get those Ladies warm and ready for the next scramble. '







http://users.teledisnet.be/web/mfe39146/FitterRigger.jpg





http://users.teledisnet.be/web/mfe39146/FitterRigger1.jpg



...

[drewpee]

It's looking great especially as a WIP. It must be remembered that its rendered not real life. The photo of the spitfire looks washed out (is it an old photo?). Most of the people in this forums baby photos would look like that as the image breaks down with age. Also the lenses used is not of the same quality as a good quality lens camera and film of today.
Personally I'm more interested in game play and user interface. I find I have very little time to enjoy the scenery when flying on line as if I do I usually end up as a burning wreak.

[Romanator21]

Here's a "reminder" of a long forgotten update:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj7nEL1ekzM&feature=player_embedded

and a comparison showing midget pilot and ground crew:

http://www.history.navy.mil/photos/images/g300000/g302108.jpg

[Baron]

I just want to say that you guys are INSANE.


LoL.


"Problem" with screenshot updates is that people dont see the whole picture (game running) so they nitpick at what they actually see. Doing that nothing will ever look perfect.

When the game do get here im sure everything will be forgotten and replaced with a whole new set of threadhs. (good luck with that btw;))

P.S. Not saying u should stop the updates, just keep posting and ignore the incomming s**tstorm.


Thx for the update. :)


Edit: I dare anyone to go to a Crysis Warhead forum (or the like) and find a threadh where people complaine about the sice of foliage. LoL

[Tanimbar]

I just want to say that you guys are INSANE.

We are insane? Who created, runs and updates this asylum? Who is in charge, the inmates or carers?

And, who has dedicated a large part of his adult life to producing a product that he knows, before the conception is even announced, will be ridiculed, slandered and rerided before its birth? And still, in your self-inflicted torment, you still show us the grimy, poor resolution ultrasound images of your yet to be born infant.

Sir, it is you who is clearly, certifiably insane.

And yet, we, the imploring inmates (or should that be ingrates?), will bill and coo, oooh and aah, say what a lovely baby, once it is born.

We are all insane and don't we love it?

Long live the asylum.

PS. for those that are unsure, all of the above is meant to be humurous and is written by someone who downloaded the first IL2 demo far too long ago and fully expects SoW to play a part in his life for at least a decade to come. You see, I'm also certifiably insane.

Me: "Nurse! Can I have my medication now please?"
Nurse Luthier: "No! You know you have to wait until Friday"

[philip.ed]

you and philip.ed have not worked a day in your life's your both here 24/7 :grin::grin::-P:-P:grin::grin:---:-P no offence of course

All we can say is this; we were sent from a future and this future did not have SoW.

[Tree_UK]

All we can say is this; we were sent from a future and this future did not have SoW.

lol :grin::grin:

[BadAim]

I just want to say that you guys are INSANE.

If I recall correctly, you were once one of "us", weren't you? ;) Now wipe that drool off your chin and get back to work!

[The Kraken]

Will buildings cast drop shadows inside? I was looking at picture two and was wondering why I can't see any drop shadows at the left inside walls/floor of the hangar building.

The Hurricane on that image seems to lack self-shadowing as well. Maybe still Luthier's low-end system at work as mentioned some months ago.

[philip.ed]

I still can't get over how good those trees look close up :o If you can nail how that look from a distance, luthier, then you're sim will be futureproofed for years to come. I mean, those planes look photo-realistic. I think the only aspects of the sim which may need more work are the terrain and the smoke-effects, and I know that you will be able to nail these two aspects anyway.

So Luthier; will smoke change and move in the wind? I was watching a scene from Piece of Cake (not a cooking program BTW) and also Apocalypse Now where one can see the smoke swirling when the planes/helicopters fly through. I know there is a word for this, which I think begins with a 'V', but my memory fails me at this point. Seeing as this sim will be able to have the features of DX-11, I wondered if an effect like this would be possible? I'm sure it could be.

But Luthier; please, don't trouble yourself trying to nail every bit of detail. Stuff like this can appear in patches for the game in the future. I'm sure SoW will have a long future and so these things can come later.
Look at Il-2 or BoB2. Both those games have come leaps and bounds from the initial release.

[Hecke]

I wonder if the buildings windows behave the same way the canopy windows of the planes do when you shoot at them? Will the windows of buildings burst?

Would love to have an answer on philip.ed's question, too.

And also on the question sombody else already asked:
Will the grass be effected by the prop wash?

[Foo'bar]

I wonder if the buildings windows behave the same way the canopy windows of the planes do when you shoot at them? Will the windows of buildings burst?

There are two types of windows: "real" glass ones and painted. Please see the hangar in picture #2: the big transparent windows of the main hall "could" burst, in technical matters. The lower side buildings only have painted widows wich couldn't burst.

[Jimko]

I just want to say that you guys are INSANE.

“In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane.” ~ Oscar Wilde

"I became insane, with long intervals of horrible sanity." ~ Edgar Allan Poe

“Insanity is my only means of relaxation” ~ Author Unknown

[Hecke]

There are two types of windows: "real" glass ones and painted. Please see the hangar in picture #2: the big transparent windows of the main hall "could" burst, in technical matters. The lower side buildings only have painted widows wich couldn't burst.


I meant the real windows not the painted ones for sure.

[Kyrios]

[...] where one can see the smoke swirling when the planes/helicopters fly through. I know there is a word for this, which I think begins with a 'V', but my memory fails me at this point
Is that word you're looking for "vortex"? As in this vid from 1:25?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fA2FUWKVQi0&feature=related
It sure would look really good :)

[Bloblast]

I just want to say that you guys are INSANE.

Insane?

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/bert.jpg

[Alien]

well... how can you say it would be more realistic? that looks more hollywood tbh.

i'm guessing to get blood splatter like that you'd be talking either arterial spray or explosive shells removing both tissue and clothing. don't forget pilots wore a lot of clothing and, at least in bob, were usually subject to death by rifle calibre bullets. combine these two factors and bleeding out would be limited to soaking pilot suits, not decorating the inside of the plane like someone has been overly enthusiastic with the ketchup bottle. unless you it's a very specific bullet strike area then there wouldn't be large amounts of blood splatter. and certainly not in such patterns as you've added.

Sorry I'm a bit late, but this effect would be pretty realistic in RAF's planes which were shot by cannons, or bombers attacked by 19th squadron. Or flak, of course

[philip.ed]

Yes, Vortex is the word I was looking for :D

Annoyingly, I can't find the videos on youtube that I wanted to post. :-x But a youtube search of Vortex (or smoke vortex, aircraft vortex etc ) will show the effect quite well too ;)

[Insuber]

Boblast, nice one ... LOL!

[Fergal69]

This reminds me of my childhood......

Me: I want, I want, I want
Parents: You'll have to wait & see what Father Christmas bring you.

Unfortunately, they didn't say which Christmas......

[Foo'bar]

I meant the real windows not the painted ones for sure.

I think that's what the real windows have been made for ;)

[Tempest123]

Dunno if it has been mentioned before but many of the photos show ground personnel or pilots sitting in aircraft without parachutes on (as they where used as a seat cushion), so they are a lot lower in the cockpit than a pilot suited up to fly the aircraft. When you sit in the metal bucket designed for the parachute you're gonna sit pretty low.

[kedrednael]

However there are some problems here. The roads are much too wide, at least 2-3 times as wide as they should be, judging by the scale of the train. In general, trains dwarf crossings, not the

Hedges are also a problem, you clearly need a hedge type of vegetation that can be placed along the sides of the road, because achieving a satisfactory look with individual bushes is going to become prohibitively expensive in terms of numbers needed, and at the moment the hedges look like individual shrubs placed at intervals along the side of the road.

To end my comments on a positive note, the way the trees and landscape work together at a distance (on the hills in the background) is fantastic and bodes well for the way the SOW will look from altitude

I don't think the roads do not look too wide, I flew an ask-23 today at around 350 metres altitude right above a 2 roads :) I was circling there so I had a lot of time to look at it :P .I didn't see any hedges, only tree lines on both sides of the road. although I don't see them on both sides quite often.
maybe I could post some pictures of roads seen from the air?

[Flutter]

Philip.ed:
The word you are looking for is wingtip vortices.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8VChNRT4eQk&feature=related

A wing creates lift by pushing air downwards. Behind the wing tip there is an interface between air that has been pushed down, and "untouched" air. This shear results in a vortex flow trailing behind the aircraft.

It should be possible for Oleg and friends to let each aicraft flying trail such a vortex field, which would then affect other game physics. Smoketrails and clouds would curl, Aircraft in formation would "feel" the other aircraft, V1s could be tipped over etc. The strength and dissapation of wingtip vortices is a very well understood science (if the aim is only for a reasonable degree of realism)

I would NOT be surprised if we will see vortex effects in SOW.

Something else that would be interesting is fire and damage control. Will each aircraft have a "surface material map" that defines which materials are in use (fabric, fabric with stringers, aluminum, aluminum with stringers, etc etc) that would determine type of bullet holes, fire propagation etc...
Or does SOW have a much smarter solution?

Flutter

[Viking]

Dunno if it has been mentioned before but many of the photos show ground personnel or pilots sitting in aircraft without parachutes on (as they where used as a seat cushion), so they are a lot lower in the cockpit than a pilot suited up to fly the aircraft. When you sit in the metal bucket designed for the parachute you're gonna sit pretty low.

I just started a new thread on this subject, welcome or not.
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=16233

Hopefully we will have some wellinformed member to sort it out.

Viking

[Richie]

I'm going to be bursting into tears everytime I see my enemy slouching over in a fire burning to a crisp like that LOL.

[philip.ed]

Flutter; that is excellent! Thanks so much :grin:

[major_setback]

Will buildings cast drop shadows inside? I was looking at picture two and was wondering why I can't see any drop shadows at the left inside walls/floor of the hangar building.

In picture 1 there's a train crossing a road. Given that the last coach is about 20 meters long then the road's width seem far to wide. Such road should be about 5 meters wide imho.

Thank you for your informed opinion, it is much appreciated. It's good to hear from someone who knows about such things.

[*Buzzsaw*]

http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/2997/82699757.jpg

This is obviously a little cartoonish, but in fact WWII aerial combat could be pretty gruesome.

'Buzz' Beurling described shooting down an Italian pilot in a Macchi.

"I came right up underneath his tail. I was going faster than he was; about fifty yards behind. I was tending to overshoot. I weaved off to the right, and he looked out to his left. I weaved to the left and he looked out to his right. So, he still didn't know I was there. About this time I closed up to about thirty yards, and I was on his portside coming in at about a fifteen-degree angle. Well, twenty-five to thirty yards in the air looks as if you're right on top of him because there is no background, no perspective there and it looks pretty close. I could see all the details in his face because he turned and looked at me just as I had a bead on him. One of my can shells caught him in the face and blew his head right off. The body slumped and the slipstream caught the neck, the stub of the neck, and the blood streamed down the side of the cockpit. It was a great sight anyway. The red blood down the white fuselage. I must say it gives you a feeling of satisfaction when you actually blow their brains out."

Although he seems to be laughing it off in this quote, in fact Beurling had nightmares about this incident for the remainder of his life, his girlfriends described him waking up screaming in a cold sweat.

[Osprey]

Although i'm very much looking forward to SOW I am in agreement with some of the other chaps here about the landscape, and I hope it'll get updated, i'm sure it's a long way from complete. Those screenshots from WOP look far more realistic to me. British country roads are mostly single lane with passing places and lined with hedgerows, or hedgerows and trees. Spots of bushes from time to time just don't look realistic at all.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the fire effects, at present they look poor (check the aircraft on fire @ 2:11 in the video) - but I think it's too early though and will get fixed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbUYaYjx2Xk

Check out the way trains explode - the power of .50cal rounds - fuel tanks going up on static and flying aircraft - the 'sparkle' as rounds hit the target - deflected tracer from the ground - the dust and smoke thrown up on the ground from the rounds that missed - the bits falling off the aircraft in flight as it is torn apart. All of this is done pretty well in IL2 now with the effects pack mod, but we want more ;).

[MD_Titus]

Sorry I'm a bit late, but this effect would be pretty realistic in RAF's planes which were shot by cannons, or bombers attacked by 19th squadron. Or flak, of course

so, basically, pretty much what i said. that he-11 looked to have been attacked by a hurri - rifle calibre bullets. not cannons, not flak. so therefore that blood splatter effect is ott. maybe it would be more similar in a fighter hit by cannons, but then the canopy is a lot closer to the source of splatter. and buzzsaw - yeah, if you took someone's head off it'd make a bit of a mess. apparently the blood vessels in the neck can produce enough pressure to spray 20 odd feet.

19th squadron barely used their cannon spits, due to the unreliability of the early cannons. modelling the blood spatter effect on that would hardly be representative. maybe have different kinds depending on what caused it, but then it seems rather a redundant option if it would prohibit sales by pushing the certification up. the slumped crew works fine for determining if you've hit crew or not.

[MD_Titus]

Although i'm very much looking forward to SOW I am in agreement with some of the other chaps here about the landscape, and I hope it'll get updated, i'm sure it's a long way from complete. Those screenshots from WOP look far more realistic to me. British country roads are mostly single lane with passing places and lined with hedgerows, or hedgerows and trees. Spots of bushes from time to time just don't look realistic at all.

I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the fire effects, at present they look poor (check the aircraft on fire @ 2:11 in the video) - but I think it's too early though and will get fixed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbUYaYjx2Xk

Check out the way trains explode - the power of .50cal rounds - fuel tanks going up on static and flying aircraft - the 'sparkle' as rounds hit the target - deflected tracer from the ground - the dust and smoke thrown up on the ground from the rounds that missed - the bits falling off the aircraft in flight as it is torn apart. All of this is done pretty well in IL2 now with the effects pack mod, but we want more ;).

interesting aircraft in 4.02. not a clue what it is though.

[Blackdog_kt]

Luthier, the problem is that you designed your pilots to look like this:

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/213330-1/Finnish++Hurricane

http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acimages/hurricane_stephenfox.jpg

http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedkingdom/aircraft/fighter/hawker-hurricane-fighter/hawker-hurricane-mk-ii-fighter-01.png

http://ww2today.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Hawker-hurricane.jpg

However, these are elite midget pilots. Their tiny size makes them more tenacious, and hardy.

You should model your figures on people with more normal skeletons.

Like this:

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/bigpilot.jpg



Hahaha, excellent :grin:

I think pilots are modelled with their seats lowered, in "combat mode" as Chivas said. A lot of modern and wartime photos show them sitting higher in the cockpit and that's probably accurate as well, but i think it has to do with personal preference of the pilot and what's happening during that time.

Remember, these planes are taildraggers with long cowlings. My guess goes like this:
Taxi, take off, landing, maybe even cruise to assist in situational awareness and formation flying--->seat adjusted to the high position for extra visibility
Combat, in order to align your head with the gunsight and put as much of the body inside the "hard" parts of the airframe--->seat adjusted to the low position.

That being said, the guy's head looks a bit small but Romanator's pics look no different. I mean, how come they never appear out of scale in bombers but they only look small in fighters? We know for a fact it's the same size model.

Aircrew animations in the He111 are just right and damage modelling seems superb, especially the dented and deformed metal plating. Planes look awesome as usual too.

The only issue i have is with the 1st picture. Lot's of people have commented on it and they said it better than me, as i couldn't initially pinpoint what it was that i found strange.
In short, the planes looks so damn perfect that the terrain seems somewhat out of place and that comes down to two things. First, maybe it just needs higher resolution textures, i don't know. Second, the trees also look like they are made to a higher spec than the rest of the terrain, so they somewhat "stick out" of it. If the trees were not so highly detailed or the rest of the terrain was upgraded a notch or two, they would probably blend in just fine. Maybe the tree detail level in the graphics options could be tied to the terrain texture detail level? Just an idea.

The funny thing is that i have seen screenshots in previous updates where the terrain textures seemed absolutely fine, so maybe it's just a case of tinkering with different settings and resolutions.

However, there's a silver lining in every cloud and in this case, the first screenshot shows its biggest redeeming quality. That draw distance is huuuuuuuge and the way the details fade into the distance is very gradual and well done :grin:

All in all, another promising and very appetizing update and yes, i stand by my assertion that as far as graphics are concerned i'd buy it this instant. They are good enough for me, if the rest of the title (FM/DM, campaign engine, sound, etc) is up to the job i can wait for the details (like pilot head size, road size, etc) to get fixed in the patches following the release.

P.S. The 1c guys may not answer much, but they sure are listening. All this talk about death animations and what did we get in this update? Animations of dead and injured crewmen. It's not even the first time it happened, a member with a good eye for details and knowledge of airframes talked about the size of trim tabs on the 110, guess what? They were corrected too.
The team sure do keep an eye on things and react to what gets discussed around here, just ask nicely about things and it might pop up in the next update ;)

[dali]

Philip.ed:
The word you are looking for is wingtip vortices.

A wing creates lift by pushing air downwards. Behind the wing tip there is an interface between air that has been pushed down, and "untouched" air. This shear results in a vortex flow trailing behind the aircraft.
Flutter

actualy lift is created by air being forced to flow over two different distances. since all things in nature which were disturbed in their original flow try to restore order and harmony, this is also valid for air > thus air from lower part of the wing, which has higher pressure wants to balance with air on the upper surface which has lower pressure > and so creating lift force. since the wing is not indefinite, but very finite plane, air from bellow and above do meet in one point, and this point is of course the wingtip. The drag produced is called induced drag, and there are some vortices, but their force depends on weight. In airplane of such relatively small size the vortice is so weak, that it is almost non existant. On the pilot size debate > I would agree that the a) head is too small (we would need to see the whole body i.e. the 3d model of the pilot) or b) the team has used the lowest position of the seat (this happens when you have original drawings of the plane and some information are missing). I tend to go with the small head...here is the example. Please note, that the seat was adjustable for height, so we were always looking through the centre of the gunsight, which was actualy good old K-14 from the P-47 also used in Yugoslav air force.

http://avijacija.net/airplanes/big/galeb13.jpg

on the scale debate - I would suspect that the roads have only one LOD, and that this is the problem (they seem to have same size regardless of the distance). I will stand corrected by Oleg or Luthier if I'm wrong.

EDIT - I did some quick check in the Corel Draw. I compared two known sizes, i.e. the head and the wheel. It seems that the head in SOW as it stands now is aprox 1/2 too small.

http://avijacija.net/slike/heads.jpg

or closer

http://avijacija.net/slike/head1.jpg

http://avijacija.net/slike/head3.jpg

note> the lenght of the line is same on the head of the pilot and wheel on each individual shot.

[David603]

I don't think the roads do not look too wide, I flew an ask-23 today at around 350 metres altitude right above a 2 roads :) I was circling there so I had a lot of time to look at it :P .I didn't see any hedges, only tree lines on both sides of the road. although I don't see them on both sides quite often.
maybe I could post some pictures of roads seen from the air?
Its hard to estimate out the size of objects seen from the air or a distance unless you have an object of known size to compare them to. If it wasn't for the train in that picture I would not really notice how wide the roads are.

1940s British roads in the countryside tended to be single lane, but wide enough that two vehicles could squeeze past each other. Hedges were used on most fields, with drystone walls and post and wire fences being less common. Today most roads are double lane and fences are the most common borders for fields, but there are still areas such as near the English-Welsh border where countryside such as you would see in the 40s still exists.

It is a little frustrating, because this effect would be quite possible to achieve, but I do not know if the team would be willing or able to rework the textures at this point, and since a third party tree and vegetation engine is being used it may not be possible to obtain a convincing hedge effect.

Still at least the next instalment in the series will look very convincing on the ground, British countryside may be hard to recreate accurately but the deserts and towns of the Mediterranean should be right up this game engines alley, and hopefully there will be drivable vehicles by that point. Fighting as or against Rommel's Afrika Korps could be as much fun as flying :grin:

[Romanator21]

I did some quick check in the Corel Draw. I compared two known sizes, i.e. the head and the wheel. It seems that the head in SOW as it stands now is aprox 1/2 too small.

Maybe you shouldn't compare to a guy who has a hat on with padding underneath. Just look at the back of the helmet and see how there is a 2-3 inch step from the back of his neck. I don't think his skull is jutting out like that. Also consider that the photo was shot with a telephoto lense (narrow FOV) while the screenshot is taken at closer to normal FOV. This will affect relative sizes of things.

I don't think our pilot encountered voo-doo head-shrinkers, he looks well proportioned in every other shot.

[Ekar]

http://avijacija.net/slike/heads.jpg


After seeing this, I reckon we need a black and white gfx option, preferably with nice film grain, for that extra historical 'realism'. ;)

[AdMan]

if the scale in this:
http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acimages/hurricane_stephenfox.jpg

and this:
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedkingdom/aircraft/fighter/hawker-hurricane-fighter/hawker-hurricane-mk-ii-fighter-01.png


look the same as this:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=3165&d=1283522572

you need your eyes checked

[McHilt]

Image

This is obviously a little cartoonish, but in fact WWII aerial combat could be pretty gruesome.

'Buzz' Beurling described shooting down an Italian pilot in a Macchi.

Although he seems to be laughing it off in this quote, in fact Beurling had nightmares about this incident for the remainder of his life, his girlfriends described him waking up screaming in a cold sweat.

Why still coming up with the gore thing?????
This thread is about: grass, trees, pilotsize, and scale issues, for your information.

[philip.ed]

so, basically, pretty much what i said. that he-11 looked to have been attacked by a hurri - rifle calibre bullets. not cannons, not flak. so therefore that blood splatter effect is ott. maybe it would be more similar in a fighter hit by cannons, but then the canopy is a lot closer to the source of splatter. and buzzsaw - yeah, if you took someone's head off it'd make a bit of a mess. apparently the blood vessels in the neck can produce enough pressure to spray 20 odd feet.

19th squadron barely used their cannon spits, due to the unreliability of the early cannons. modelling the blood spatter effect on that would hardly be representative. maybe have different kinds depending on what caused it, but then it seems rather a redundant option if it would prohibit sales by pushing the certification up. the slumped crew works fine for determining if you've hit crew or not.

Hmm, .303's at the rate the brownings spat them could still do some messy damage.

But Oleg said, no gore, so maybe we shouldn't talk about it?

[Freycinet]

interesting aircraft in 4.02. not a clue what it is though.

Looks to me like a Siebel Si 204.

http://www.aviastar.org/air/germany/siebel-204a.php

[Skoshi Tiger]

Hi Osprey, congratulations on your first post!


Originally Posted by Osprey
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned the fire effects, at present they look poor (check the aircraft on fire @ 2:11 in the video) - but I think it's too early though and will get fixed.


Maybe you should read some of the older update thread. You may actually be surprised how often it has been mentioned. But it is nearly impossible to make a judgement of something that is so dynamic as fire from a static screen shot.

To be honest I'm not sure if grainy over exposed gun camera footage would be a good thing to use as a comparison. I found it hard to see much detail of the fire in the video you linked to. (unless you are trying to promote a grainy over exposed atmosphere in the sim?)

Cheers!

[Flutter]

dali wrote: actualy lift is created by air being forced to flow over two different distances. since all things in nature which were disturbed in their original flow try to restore order and harmony, this is also valid for air > thus air from lower part of the wing, which has higher pressure wants to balance with air on the upper surface which has lower pressure > and so creating lift force. since the wing is not indefinite, but very finite plane, air from bellow and above do meet in one point, and this point is of course the wingtip. The drag produced is called induced drag, and there are some vortices, but their force depends on weight. In airplane of such relatively small size the vortice is so weak, that it is almost non existant.

Yep.
I know how this works. My daytime job is designing these damned things. The end result of the process you describe is air being pushed down.
Where I disagree with you is with regards to Vortice strength. Vortice strength is dependent on airspeed, wing loading (weight per area), aspect ratio (wingspan squared over wing area) and the shape of your span-wise lift distribution (preferred to be elliptical). A WW2 fighter has small and stubby wings, is relatively heavy (especially the german designs), and would pull substantial g loads. The vortex trail could be substantial.
on the other hand, a spit with no more ammo and empty tanks flying at full speed in a parabola (zero g) heading for terra firma would indeed have a "vortice is so weak, that it is almost non existent"

Flutter

PS: since Oleg and team are actually calculating the traces of single bullets, it would actually surprise me if every aircraft will NOT leave a mathematical wake containing wingtip vortices and propwash

[Osprey]

Hi Osprey, congratulations on your first post!



Maybe you should read some of the older update thread. You may actually be surprised how often it has been mentioned. But it is nearly impossible to make a judgement of something that is so dynamic as fire from a static screen shot.

To be honest I'm not sure if grainy over exposed gun camera footage would be a good thing to use as a comparison. I found it hard to see much detail of the fire in the video you linked to. (unless you are trying to promote a grainy over exposed atmosphere in the sim?)

Cheers!

I do read here, I just haven't posted before. I don't think you need HD footage to be able to see the effect of fire - you can see it's fire and you can see how big it is. In stock IL2 you will have a fat red 100ft of fireball coming out of the back of the aircraft and I have some small concern that this will be repeated according to the pictures i've seen so far. When you use the effects pack fires are radically different.

There's quite a few fires in this video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVoYVm1BlKQ

I have a lot of faith in the quality of Oleg and his team, I think it'll be a cracking product, but I want to see realistic visuals as well as the awesome flying realism they will give us. And of course I don't want porked .50cals this time, we can all see what fatal damage those APIT round do - I can't face another 7 years whining lol

[furbs]

very well done vid...thats the mod i use and its very very good...esp smoke, flame and tracers :)

[McHilt]

AWESOME video Osprey!

[Sturm_Williger]

... And of course I don't want porked .50cals this time, we can all see what fatal damage those APIT round do - I can't face another 7 years whining lol

Having been on the receiving end online of un-modded, but well-aimed .50 cals, I assure you that they have never been porked.

Perhaps the original dispersion didn't suit many, but on target they hurt ... just like the rl guncam footage we see. ( and most of the times I've had my FW190 sawn in half was from a high-speed bounce, not a several-seconds-of-firing effect. )

IMHO, the key is and always has been, the "well-aimed" aspect of firing .50 cals.

[Tree_UK]

Osprey that vid is superb, and those mods are wonderful I use these to. :grin:

[Avimimus]

All of the effects mods (that I've tried) have really over-the-top explosions. The fact is that most people have only seen slow motion scale model explosions in old movies, gasoline fires and CGI fireballs. Even with gun camera footage - the published/surviving examples tend to show ammunition explosions etc. (rather than the less dramatic strafing runs).

The appearance of explosions in real life is quite a bit different from movies (or even from real explosions captured by cameras instead of the human eye).

[334th_Gazoo]

When you people said you were going to bring us a new version of the game , I never expected any thing this detailed.

Thank you!

[Romanator21]

...you need your eyes checked

I appreciate your concern, but I already have a prescription.

You have to take into account that pilot helmets are not rubber swimming hats. In the first photo however, the proportions on the pilot's head are more apparent because his forehead is so exposed. The comparison is easier to make to the screenshot this way.

But let me show you what I am seeing and maybe we can come to terms in some way. Rather than compare the pilot to a random object like the plane's wheel, let's compare to the canopy frame which is much closer and thus less likely to be distorted due to FOV.

One thing to take into account is that while the canopy is fixed in place, the camera is in a different position. In one photo it looks slanted, and longer, while in the other it looks straight and shorter because it is slanting away from the viewer rather than across. So, we have to assess the vertical height of the slanted frame.

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/hurricane_stephenfox.jpg

So, I've come to the conclusion that the virtual pilot is the correct size.

But maybe I just need a new pair of glasses. ;)

[peterwoods@supanet.com]

Sorry Romanator, but even to the naked eye the relative head sizes in the two pictures are vastly different. Your crude attempt at measurement comparison is totally flawed.
Without attempting to use measuring sticks, compare the lower panel of the sliding canopy in each picture with the head in that picture, (the angular error and FOV mismatches are then as good as eliminated), and it is obvious that the pilot's head in the lower picture is almost half the size of that in the upper.
In the BoB era most US fighter aircraft were bult with very large cockpits, the same was not the case with European and British fighters.
Perhaps you should sue your optician, lol.

[winny]

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/hurricane_stephenfox.jpg

So, I've come to the conclusion that the virtual pilot is the correct size.

But maybe I just need a new pair of glasses. ;)

Your pictures are wrong. The canopy lines you've put into the second pic should run parallel to the line of the canopy. You've put them in the same perspective as the top photograph so it's not at all accurate. The line should meet the frame work line of the open canopy, if you do that, the head is then smaller.

[nearmiss]

This is turning into the thread for "normalized human head and body sizes".

It would be nice to make everyone happy. So... normalized body and head sizes have got to be the way it's done in SOW.

That means we should start by researching human body and head sizes that were common during the time periods the war was fought. We have to ignore the men that were smaller or larger than the norm, because of the way the non-normalized humans will look in the SOW.

I sure don't want to be shooting down some AI enemy that is too short, or has a little head.

[Romanator21]

Is there anything other part of the plane you would like me to compare this to?

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/hurricane_stephenfox-1.jpg

[Hunger]

And of course I don't want porked .50cals this time, we can all see what fatal damage those APIT round do - I can't face another 7 years whining lol[/QUOTE]



Eh sorry pal, I dont know what guns you are using but if you set your convergence two 200 m and aim well you can shred a 109 in half in less than 2 seconds using any aircraft with 6 puny 50 cals.

Nice vid by the way.

Regards
Hunger

[peterwoods@supanet.com]

Suggest a good book on perspective and paralax would be a good place to start.

[Romanator21]

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/hurricane_stephenfox3.jpg

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/hurricane_stephenfox2.jpg

Suggest a good book on perspective and paralax would be a good place to start.

I hope you've read one yourself.

[Romanator21]

I can do this all day...

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/Bader-on-wingLG1.jpg

[Sutts]

Is there anything other part of the plane you would like me to compare this to?

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/hurricane_stephenfox-1.jpg

I think we won't know for sure until we see a clear side-on view where the pilot's head isn't obscured with the fur collar. For me, as long as the head is at least as big as the panels in the sliding canopy then we're OK. Here's a couple of ground crew shots where heads are close enough to the canopy for accurate comparison.

The last picture I include is a nice side shot from an earlier update and to me the helmeted head looks pretty darn good. As mentioned before, I'm sure seat position does play a factor in wartime shots where the head is up against the top of the canopy.

Poor Oleg and Luthier, we must drive them to drink:evil:. I do know Oleg will have the last laugh when the final product is delivered though. He's got stuff in store that will blow us away..I'm sure of it.:grin:

[Sutts]

I can do this all day...

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/Bader-on-wingLG1.jpg


With respect, you have some crazy ideas with regards to taking scale references. Your lines mean absolutely nothing.

[Romanator21]

http://www.spitfiresite.com/photos/historic/uploaded_images/611-squadron-spitfire-ix-715192.jpg

And just in case you missed this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj7nEL1ekzM

Tiny head? 1/2 as small as it should be? What anatomy course did you take?

http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/England_pilot_72_Front_minusobves.jpg

[Flying Pencil]

Looks fantastic!

But major factual errors(!!):
1. Nose gunner never sat like that. I have never seen a seat mounted there, plus physically there is no space to put the feet like that!

2. The Top Gunner, gun is not fixed on the bar but pivots on it, so it would be loose and point straight up (due to weight of back end).
*if* the bar position was to rear, then the barrel would be pushed aft by the wind.

3. The DG radio antenna, the reddish object just in front of top gunner, is completely wrong shape.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachment.php?attachmentid=3168&d=1283522637

[Romanator21]

With respect, you have some crazy ideas with regards to taking scale references.

Just to clarify, I'm taking a measurement of each head, and comparing it between two arbitrary points on the plane. Yellow and orange lines are to show what I am measuring from to show there are no tricks. I am not trying to show a comparison between yellow lines on the same plane.

I think it should be obvious no matter what I draw, that the pilot is perfectly scaled, and his proportions are correct.

[winny]

Just to clarify, I'm taking a measurement of each head, and comparing it between two arbitrary points on the plane. Yellow and orange lines are to show what I am measuring from to show there are no tricks. I am not trying to show a comparison between yellow lines on the same plane.

I think it should be obvious no matter what I draw, that the pilot is perfectly scaled, and his proportions are correct.

You should have done it like this. make your own mind up.

http://i822.photobucket.com/albums/zz147/winistrone/hurricanecomp-1.jpg

[Sutts]

http://www.spitfiresite.com/photos/historic/uploaded_images/611-squadron-spitfire-ix-715192.jpg

And just in case you missed this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nj7nEL1ekzM

Tiny head? 1/2 as small as it should be? What anatomy course did you take?

http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/England_pilot_72_Front_minusobves.jpg


That's a Spitfire by the way. Our references regard the Hurricane.

There is no doubt that the pilot figure is perfectly proportioned. That doesn't mean his head can't be too small in comparison to specific items on a Hurricane.

Imagine I took a full body picture of you in order to create a pilot figure. But once we create the model there's a problem....you're over 6ft and we want to create a smaller pilot that will cause fewer clipping problems when moving in the cockpit. Now instead of shortening your legs a bit and maybe squeezing your shoulders in a touch (leaving your head the same size) say we choose to shrink the entire model by 15%....

Hey, we still have a perfectly proportioned pilot model BUT everything including the head is now 15% smaller than it was. Now, when the head is compared to a Hurricane canopy panel it appears smaller than it should be because the head IS 15% smaller than the average adult head (assuming your head is normal that is).

Hope that makes sense!

I'm not saying this is what happened but it's a possibility.
We still need a clear unobstructed side-on shot without helmet to be sure though.

[Romanator21]

Oleg said that this was not the case and that the pilot figures are exactly 175 cm. That's close to 5'9''. There were NO reductions in scale.

You will notice I posted a pic of a spitfire, and the video of a spitfire. I shifted gears, but I'm still comparing apples to apples and pears to pears.

@ winny - I have, thanks. BTW, you should not have clipped the top of the SOW head by 3 inches while not doing the same for our other pilot.

This is a little more appropriate:

http://i822.photobucket.com/albums/zz147/winistrone/hurricanecomp-1.jpg

http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/213330-1/Finnish++Hurricane

[ATAG_Bliss]

woohoo!

Keeps looking better and better :)

I wonder how much they are sandbagging us :D

Keep up the great work Oleg and Team!

Cheers!

[Blackdog_kt]

Guys, look at the pictures posted by Sutts. Specifically the third picture, which is a SoW screenshot from a previous update. In that one it seems pretty accurate.

I find it hard to believe that pilot models are out of scale when

a) they appear correct in bombers and

b) they appear correct in hurricanes as well, when viewed from different cameras/FOV settings/angles.

I mean, what could possibly have happened? Are they growing and shrinking randomly in mid-flight?

Scale is always an issue in games with a 3d/action component, from FPS to simulators, but let's keep it in perspective too (no pun intended). The only way that the same pilots would appear different in different aircraft and from different viewpoints is if, well, they weren't really the same...say that the development team was playing a prank on everyone and using different sizes in each update to troll people...which i wouldn't blame them one bit if they did, now that i think of it. :-P

[IceFire]

Is this the new "cockpit bar in the FW190" argument or the new ".50cals are porked" argument? :)

[WTE_Galway]

http://www.spacekids.co.uk/images/uploads/pilot_suit2.jpg

[Flying Pencil]

http://www.spacekids.co.uk/images/uploads/pilot_suit2.jpg

lmao!

[AC_Black]

~S~

Thankyou for the updates. pics look great and damage model improvements are fantastic :P

[T}{OR]

Looks fantastic!

But major factual errors(!!):
1. Nose gunner never sat like that. I have never seen a seat mounted there, plus physically there is no space to put the feet like that!

2. The Top Gunner, gun is not fixed on the bar but pivots on it, so it would be loose and point straight up (due to weight of back end).
*if* the bar position was to rear, then the barrel would be pushed aft by the wind.

3. The DG radio antenna, the reddish object just in front of top gunner, is completely wrong shape.

1. I do recall seeing pictures with a gun mounted on that location.

2. Apart from the gun swinging back because of the wind I don't see a problem or an error there. The gunner might still be alive... Actually:

Screen 1 - pilot dead, bombardier dying. Top and waist gunners alive.

I suggest that you look at picture no. 3 where the gunner is dead. ;)

3. I'll leave that for someone else to reply. :)

[major_setback]

Incredibly nice grass - I like the unevenness. Plane shine is perfected.
Nice to see trains implemented at last, I'm sure this is what we are bieng shown, so great news.

Though I agree with others that the width of the road shouldn't equal the length of the train carriage, it does cross the road at an angel (so isn't as bad as I first thought), and there may be room left at the side of the road for a footpath..still, it does look odd.

Thanks for the update, its great news that the trains are running!!

[AdMan]

I appreciate your concern, but I already have a prescription.

You have to take into account that pilot helmets are not rubber swimming hats. In the first photo however, the proportions on the pilot's head are more apparent because his forehead is so exposed. The comparison is easier to make to the screenshot this way.

But let me show you what I am seeing and maybe we can come to terms in some way. Rather than compare the pilot to a random object like the plane's wheel, let's compare to the canopy frame which is much closer and thus less likely to be distorted due to FOV.

One thing to take into account is that while the canopy is fixed in place, the camera is in a different position. In one photo it looks slanted, and longer, while in the other it looks straight and shorter because it is slanting away from the viewer rather than across. So, we have to assess the vertical height of the slanted frame.

http://i984.photobucket.com/albums/ae325/rboiko1/IL-2%20Sturmovik/hurricane_stephenfox.jpg

So, I've come to the conclusion that the virtual pilot is the correct size.

But maybe I just need a new pair of glasses. ;)


lets use a time tested unit of measurement for the human body, which is the head and use perspective:

http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/pixelhunters/hurricane_stephenfox-1.jpg?t=1283761628
as you see there is a total of about 1 head of space from front and back of canopy edge, while barely a chin from top of head to canopy.

again:
http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/pixelhunters/hawker-hurricane-mk-ii-fighter-01-1.png?t=1283761749
^now you will notice in this photo (original full size too, ALL the pilots are slightly hunched over - not exactly sure what puts them in this position, chute, seat position, but it also seems their heads are hunched over a bit too , maybe for optimal view of panel/sight. Still you see there is only about a quarter head in front and a head and a half in the rear, the top of the canopy looks like it would nearly graze the helmet

now look at the screenies:
http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/pixelhunters/shot_20100902_182058-1.jpg?t=1283762002
2 1/2 heads front to back, 3/4 of a head to canopy top.

Yes helmets aren't swimcaps but the aren't so big the enlarge the pilots head by double or more

[Skoshi Tiger]

... In stock IL2 you will have a fat red 100ft of fireball coming out of the back of the aircraft and I have some small concern that this will be repeated according to the pictures i've seen so far. When you use the effects pack fires are radically different.

There's quite a few fires in this video
...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La3qJ4sptuE

Now there are many instances of fire in this video that match the effects shown in your clip, but it can be more spectacular. Check out 3:42, 3:59, 4:16 and 4:25.

All these locations in the video show 100+ foot plumes of flame that match up with the screenshots posted by Oleg and Co.

We need to remember that SOW is not IL2 (stock, modded or otherwise) and it would sad if we missed out on a historical portrail of air combat because they were labeled too 'Holywood'.

Cheers!

[sorak]

ahhhhh.. i cant wait.. i cant wait.. i cant wait

[Jumo211]

Hello Skoshi Tiger ,
the problem with this video is that those are very few aircrafts with more dramatic smokes that are in existence available on YouTube , zillion gun camera videos have these included , how many planes are going down like this with black thick smoke in available huge WWII archival footage ? maybe 10 , 20 ? plus you don't see the whole story , many of these black thick burst will run out in about 5 seconds which is not shown in the rest of the youtube footage and you won't find the whole footage on youtube to compare.
After few seconds black thick smoke is most of the time gone leaving very transparent grayish color and little smoke .
We're talking about hundreds of shut down planes you won't see on youtube , which shows 90% of the time little or no smoke regardless of planes which also caught fire .
Black thick smoke was not sustainable to continue for extended period of time with majority of planes shot down including Japanese aircrafts .
Available huge WWII air combat archive mostly U.S. and Italy's Luce is not always some poor grainy videos , it's almost like in HD quality and footage speaks for itself .

Back on topic , I believe that pilot head size must be correct , this is my picture I took just recently and it looks like I should be ready for Hurricane aircraft :lol:

http://i888.photobucket.com/albums/ac90/HolyGrail_photos/Copyof2010-06-0513-56-06404.jpg

[KOM.Nausicaa]

As for the Heinkel cockpit: he is sitting on a bench. (not a seat) -- here is the SoW BoB Heinkel from inside:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ny59blbRplA

[Skoshi Tiger]

Hello Skoshi Tiger ,
the problem with this video is that those are very few aircrafts with more dramatic smokes that are in existence available on YouTube , zillion gun camera videos have these included , how many planes are going down like this with black thick smoke in available huge WWII archival footage ? maybe 10 , 20 ? plus you don't see the whole story , many of these black thick burst will run out in about 5 seconds which is not shown in the rest of the youtube footage and you won't find the whole footage on youtube to compare.
After few seconds black thick smoke is most of the time gone leaving very transparent grayish color and little smoke .
We're talking about hundreds of shut down planes you won't see on youtube , which shows 90% of the time little or no smoke regardless of planes which also caught fire .
Black thick smoke was not sustainable to continue for extended period of time with majority of planes shot down including Japanese aircrafts .
Available huge WWII air combat archive mostly U.S. and Italy's Luce is not always some poor grainy videos , it's almost like in HD quality and footage speaks for itself .



I'm sure your right. What I'm looking forward to is a more detailed damage model and associated visual effects in SOW.

Untill we get a video of what SOW is actually going to provide in terms of fire effects I'm fairly happy with what has been shown to us.



Back on topic , I believe that pilot head size must be correct , this is my picture I took just recently and it looks like I should be ready for Hurricane aircraft :lol:

http://i888.photobucket.com/albums/ac90/HolyGrail_photos/Copyof2010-06-0513-56-06404.jpg


LoL! Of course, a smaller head would mean a smaller chance of being PK'ed! and that has to be good?

Cheers!

[airmalik]

I hope Oleg's getting a chuckle out of this thread.

Here's my contribution:

http://i53.tinypic.com/125neir.jpg

original:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/60/Bobmf_hurricane_iic_lf363_at_kemble_arp.jpg

[watts]

I'll have to get a new computer to play this, but god do I look forward to it.

[airmalik]

http://i55.tinypic.com/122jdzb.jpg

[Flanker35M]

S!

Airmalik..that pic! TOUCHÉ!!! :-P

[Blackdog_kt]

lets use a time tested unit of measurement for the human body, which is the head and use perspective:

http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/pixelhunters/hurricane_stephenfox-1.jpg?t=1283761628
as you see there is a total of about 1 head of space from front and back of canopy edge, while barely a chin from top of head to canopy.

again:
http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/pixelhunters/hawker-hurricane-mk-ii-fighter-01-1.png?t=1283761749
^now you will notice in this photo (original full size too, ALL the pilots are slightly hunched over - not exactly sure what puts them in this position, chute, seat position, but it also seems their heads are hunched over a bit too , maybe for optimal view of panel/sight. Still you see there is only about a quarter head in front and a head and a half in the rear, the top of the canopy looks like it would nearly graze the helmet

now look at the screenies:
http://i835.photobucket.com/albums/zz278/pixelhunters/shot_20100902_182058-1.jpg?t=1283762002
2 1/2 heads front to back, 3/4 of a head to canopy top.

Yes helmets aren't swimcaps but the aren't so big the enlarge the pilots head by double or more

That's a much better base unit of comparison, but the execution is inaccurate without having photos that show the aircraft from the exact same angle.

All of the comparisons done thus far have failed to account for view angle (or aspect angle if we want to put it in aviation terms).

The fact is that unless we view all the Hurricanes in the photos from the same angle (for example, with us sitting 90 degrees to the left of the plane), comparisons will be inaccurate because of the different angles skewing perspective.

For example, let's say we have a Hurricane with a non-moving pilot dummy in the cockpit. If i view the plane from 7 o'clock, the distance between the pilot's head and the windshield will appear bigger than the distance between the pilot's head and the headrest, but if i view it from 10 o'clock it will be the other way around. Add difference of perception due to distance and the fact that we totally discount the 3rd axis in this example and it's obvious we can't make an accurate comparison.

In your comparison, the real-life black Hurricane is viewed from 10 o'clock low, while the SoW Hurricane in the pictures is viewed from 8 o'clock level. So, even with a perfectly scaled pilot the SoW screenshot would exhibit more distance between pilot's head and windshield than the photo of the real one, simply due to perspective (part of the reason you measured 2,5 heads worth of space). Differences in perspective can be explained with trigonometry and such calculations have played a big part in observational astronomy before computers, when people had to measure the real dimensions of objects that are million of miles away based only on the characteristics of the telescopes and the angular data of the viewing. I'm not in the mood to bust out the crayons and start drawing in MSpaint, but a quick google search on stuff like parallax angles and apparent/angular distances will explain a lot.

I agree that in some screenshots the pilots in the fighters look somewhat small and this week's Hurricane is among them. What i can't explain is why the same pilots appear fine in bombers, or even in fighters shown in previous updates. Up till now, it seems that nobody else can explain this either, otherwise someone would have answered this question. Until someone can prove that different pilot models have been used in different screenshots, i'll just chalk it up to being used to the IL-2 oversized pilots and needing some time to get accustomed to the new ones.

In any case, your idea of using the head as a unit of measurement is solid. What would lay the debate to rest and give a positive verdict is if we could take a real photo and replicate its viewing angle and distance in SoW, then accurate comparisons could be made. However, this demands the use of an object viewer or track recording/playback, which i guess wont be available until the release of the simulator.

[McHilt]

[QUOTE=airmalik;179432]I hope Oleg's getting a chuckle out of this thread.

Here's my contribution:

http://i53.tinypic.com/125neir.jpg

You can tell just by eyeballing that the pilot's head is a bit small but on the other hand: what could ever make me think Oleg and crew can't figure the right proportions... they of course use decent reference materials as templates. Weird issue here. :rolleyes:

Anyway, they'll get it right, I'm sure.

Have a nice day all :mrgreen:


Real good contribution btw airmalik, it makes perfect sense

[Jumo211]

Excellent topic ! also a lot of fun going on because that's about all we have right now :cool:

@ Skoshi Tiger :)

here is what I meant by initial outburst footage with aircraft going all the way to the ground ( or water in this case ) .
These two aircrafts are about the biggest black thick outburst I have seen from tons of WWII archive footage ,
it's rare to find as there is not much of such outburst recorded by gun cameras or by the cameraman on the ground .
These are pretty violent blasts but then again each thick smoke is running out in few seconds .

Here beginning @ 3:24
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9txeXJE0zL0

[lbuchele]

[QUOTE=airmalik;179432]I hope Oleg's getting a chuckle out of this thread.

Here's my contribution:

http://i53.tinypic.com/125neir.jpg

You can tell just by eyeballing that the pilot's head is a bit small but on the other hand: what could ever make me think Oleg and crew can't figure the right proportions... they of course use decent reference materials as templates. Weird issue here. :rolleyes:

Anyway, they'll get it right, I'm sure.

Have a nice day all :mrgreen:
That pilot was made prisioner by some shrinking head african tribe,that's a possible explanation.
Makes perfect sense to me.


Real good contribution btw airmalik, it makes perfect sense

[Bloblast]

[QUOTE=airmalik;179432]I hope Oleg's getting a chuckle out of this thread.

Here's my contribution:


Head too small and canopy too big. I already concluded that.

[McHilt]

"..... That pilot was made prisioner by some shrinking head african tribe,that's a possible explanation......."


That wasn't me :?

[Space Communist]

Ok this is getting ridiculous. Clearly they are going to have to exhume the bones of the pilot of L1833, remodel his head with plasticene, then place him in a reconstructed Hurricane and do a full 3d scan.

Seriously guys this is such a pointless debate. I am confident that it is to scale, but even if it wasn't you'd have to be Rainman to see it in flight.