Tracers or not?

[revi]

I read that some American pilots stopped using tracer bullets. The advantage being that their hit perctage increased and likewise their kills. I wondered if in IL2 the tracers were actually modelled as a bullet that can make a hit or not? If not, is it possible to chose a loadout that does not have tracers?

[virre89]

Originally Posted by revi

I read that some American pilots stopped using tracer bullets. The advantage being that their hit perctage increased and likewise their kills. I wondered if in IL2 the tracers were actually modelled as a bullet that can make a hit or not? If not, is it possible to chose a loadout that does not have tracers?

Maybe some stopped using it but why would you? I mean seeing as there were hundreds of thousands of pilots i am sure there are cases of just about anything , but from a logical standpoint why stop using tracers.. only reason i can see is to avoid detection easier or just playing dumb hero.

Seeing as tracers are as deadly as any thing else it would be weird if they didn't make an impact/damage.

[Igo kyu]

Originally Posted by virre89

Maybe some stopped using it but why would you? I mean seeing as there were hundreds of thousands of pilots i am sure there are cases of just about anything , but from a logical standpoint why stop using tracers.. only reason i can see is to avoid detection easier or just playing dumb hero.

The reason for stopping would be that the enemy tends to notice tracer going past, but might not notice non-tracer that didn't score a hit, which is your non-detection. Most shot down pilots didn't know the shooter was there until they were shot down, which implies that pilots who knew where their enemy was were generally not shot down, so not alerting enemy pilots was a big deal.

Seeing as tracers are as deadly as any thing else it would be weird if they didn't make an impact/damage.

Sometimes, in IL*2 when offline and at reduced speed, it has seemed to me that the non-tracer rounds don't hit as often as the tracer rounds, indeed, it's not always clear that there are any non-tracer rounds (I'm pretty sure there are some, actually). Which might actually be sensible, if the muzzle flashes synch with the sound, and the sound is at full speed while the time is slowed, it could be that most of the sounds and flashes you percieve are actually not fired due to the time dilation.

[revi]

I've tried to find the article I read, but no luck. I'm sure there was mention about the velocity of the tracer bullets at impact range had something to do with decreased damage.
I am refering to the .50 browning.
No doubt the inability of enemy pilots to see the tracers would've helped keep the all important factor of surprise.
One more thing that I remember reading was that at the end of the loadout they used to have 5 tracer bullets in a row, this was to indicate to the pilot he had run out of ammo.
But also let the enemy know that too.
I think it would be interesting if we could disable tracer bullets in game, and have the upper hand on the AI.

[flyingbullseye]

Originally Posted by revi

I think it would be interesting if we could disable tracer bullets in game, and have the upper hand on the AI.

If the AI can see you through clouds and on the other side of a hill not having tracers won't make a difference.

Flyingbullseye

[revi]

Originally Posted by flyingbullseye

If the AI can see you through clouds and on the other side of a hill not having tracers won't make a difference.

Flyingbullseye

OK...yep thats a bummer too.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

The reason for stopping would be that the enemy tends to notice tracer going past, but might not notice non-tracer that didn't score a hit, which is your non-detection. Most shot down pilots didn't know the shooter was there until they were shot down, which implies that pilots who knew where their enemy was were generally not shot down, so not alerting enemy pilots was a big deal.


Sometimes, in IL*2 when offline and at reduced speed, it has seemed to me that the non-tracer rounds don't hit as often as the tracer rounds, indeed, it's not always clear that there are any non-tracer rounds (I'm pretty sure there are some, actually). Which might actually be sensible, if the muzzle flashes synch with the sound, and the sound is at full speed while the time is slowed, it could be that most of the sounds and flashes you percieve are actually not fired due to the time dilation.

A simple way to check this out is to fly along the water and spray a few seconds worth of shots into the water. You'll clearly see all of the bullets hit the water...tracers and other types of bullets alike.

Also you can enable Arcade=1 in the config.ini file and examine up close each impact and where it hit with what sorts of effects (explosive or AP) each bullet had.

Something else you can try is fly a Yak or La-5/7 equipped with the ShVAK 20mm cannon. There is only one or two tracers per several bullets. It takes a while before another tracer comes out.

[334th_Rakkasan]

Speaking as a former Infantryman for five and a half years, the most realistic tracer effects come from the Russian MG's. Allthough they are too bright in the daytime. They also look to "bloby", the rounds phosphorus trail should look longer, more like a streak than a blob.

Some of the "modded" tracer effects I have seen are laughable. Looking like old captures from WWII gun cam footage. For the reasons many others have mentioned, camera shake etc.. Tracers do not look like white corcksrews sailing through the air.
Sorry to go off topic, I agree that the primary reason not to use tracers is to keep the enemy from knowing you are shooting at him. I can't quote anything I have read regarding the topic, yet I have read (or heard on documentaries) many American Aces prefering not to use tracers.

[Thunderbolt56]

If a tracer round struck its target it had the kinetic energy to still do damage, but it was NOT an AP or API round and because of the burning phosphorous was known to be slightly less accurate.

In addition to the stealth factor as already mentioned and the fact that air combat was still in its formative stages in the 1940's there was still considerable experimentation going on. There have been many accounts of pilots directing their armourors to load strictly AP/API in something similar to a 4:1 ratio (Gabreski specifically) and doing away with tracer completely.

There's also the overriding factor of "perception" which has proven many times to be inaccurate.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Thunderbolt56

If a tracer round struck its target it had the kinetic energy to still do damage, but it was NOT an AP or API round and because of the burning phosphorous was known to be slightly less accurate.

In addition to the stealth factor as already mentioned and the fact that air combat was still in its formative stages in the 1940's there was still considerable experimentation going on. There have been many accounts of pilots directing their armourors to load strictly AP/API in something similar to a 4:1 ratio (Gabreski specifically) and doing away with tracer completely.

There's also the overriding factor of "perception" which has proven many times to be inaccurate.

Aren't most WWII tracer rounds combined with something else? For instance the tracer round in the IL-2 belting is APIT. So its everything except explosive. Is there a finer detail that I'm missing?