More realistic machine gun tracers?

[ChrisDNT]

Same experience when looking at Oe35 :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ml7Ie...eature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xUaS...eature=related

No lasers !

Perhaps some kind of "ray of light" near the tube, but extremely rapide and very transparent, certainly not solid "Star Wars" lasers. And in the distance, tracers looks like some kind of irregular dots.

[t4trouble]

Some good colour footage and 2 lucky fishermen 4mins in

[Bryan21cag]

Originally Posted by t4trouble

Some good colour footage and 2 lucky fishermen 4mins in

[Prop~Strike]

Most of you would have seen this - DBW. The tracers look good when he attacks the train...too much smoke perhaps? I wish the Spit's tracers in Clod looked more like this - thin and smoky.

Also, check out the cockpit view when Karel is crash landing.... head bob looks like clod and the oil on the windscreen looks like my CEM efforts....lol

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0stVlJXAsbQ

[Strike]

Originally Posted by ChrisDNT

Same experience when looking at Oe35

No lasers !

Perhaps some kind of "ray of light" near the tube, but extremely rapide and very transparent, certainly not solid "Star Wars" lasers. And in the distance, tracers looks like some kind of irregular dots.

Would it be safe to consider that radar-guided AA guns don't have the same requirement for visual aiming aid as a manually aimed gun? I mean honestly, tracers are seriously un-tactical considering that they are a very visible give-away to any aircraft looking for action.

What I am saying is that tracers are a means of helping you aim, and if a gun is radar-guided there's not really a need for tracers unless you have to use the gun in "back-up" mode.

Also one can only assume that different manufacturers make different tracers with different burnlengths, colours and strength. So why is this Oerlikon footage "evidence" ?

And isn't this the same Oerlikon 35 millimeter gun you so kindly provided us footage of?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=La9pk...800DADC3BB4E03

And then you have the allmighty Bofors (hats off for the swedes, though they are pacifists :p )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5h_zgA7-sQg

These tracer rounds seem to produce more light than conventional lightbulbs :p

I'm just saying the tracers in IL-2 CoD seem fine. And yes I've unloaded mag upon mag with only tracer rounds and I know what they look like. Night and day.

[Daniël]

Originally Posted by Strike

Would it be safe to consider that radar-guided AA guns don't have the same requirement for visual aiming aid as a manually aimed gun? I mean honestly, tracers are seriously un-tactical considering that they are a very visible give-away to any aircraft looking for action.

What I am saying is that tracers are a means of helping you aim, and if a gun is radar-guided there's not really a need for tracers unless you have to use the gun in "back-up" mode.

Also one can only assume that different manufacturers make different tracers with different burnlengths, colours and strength. So why is this Oerlikon footage "evidence" ?

And isn't this the same Oerlikon 35 millimeter gun you so kindly provided us footage of?

And then you have the allmighty Bofors (hats off for the swedes, though they are pacifists :p )

These tracer rounds seem to produce more light than conventional lightbulbs :p

I'm just saying the tracers in IL-2 CoD seem fine. And yes I've unloaded mag upon mag with only tracer rounds and I know what they look like. Night and day.

Second video: It's clearly visible that when the camera shakes the tracer appears wobbly. When the camera isn't shaking it's a laser. Most clear video to show this.

Originally Posted by ChrisDNT

Same experience when looking at Oe35 :

No lasers !

Perhaps some kind of "ray of light" near the tube, but extremely rapide and very transparent, certainly not solid "Star Wars" lasers. And in the distance, tracers looks like some kind of irregular dots.

Chris I served in the Army and shot with both M2 50cal and MG42 (although in 7,62 NATO ammo). We used tracers regularly and the ones in CoD are by far the most realistic I've ever seen in a game. You're posting videos of cannons that are not using tracers or whose ammunition muzzle speed is way too fast.

As that is not enough, there's been an extensive research on the subject, the conclusion is that 1) you're wrong 2) we're right. Have a look at the fantastic video on the Wellington posted on the main page to have an idea of how realistic it all looks.

Now you can either accept this and go back to your closet or put your head in a pan, smack it with a spoon and go NANANANANANANANANANA!!!

...whichever your option, don't forget you're wrong.

Originally Posted by Sternjaeger

Chris I served in the Army and shot with both M2 50cal and MG42 (although in 7,62 NATO ammo). We used tracers regularly and the ones in CoD are by far the most realistic I've ever seen in a game. You're posting videos of cannons that are not using tracers or whose ammunition muzzle speed is way too fast.

As that is not enough, there's been an extensive research on the subject, the conclusion is that 1) you're wrong 2) we're right. Have a look at the fantastic video on the Wellington posted on the main page to have an idea of how realistic it all looks.

Now you can either accept this and go back to your closet or put your head in a pan, smack it with a spoon and go NANANANANANANANANANA!!!

...whichever your option, don't forget you're wrong.

If I may, since I took part in the few previous threads regarding tracers, I would like to remind you this:
In conclusion, what experienced military have said on this forum is that COD's
tracers are pretty good BUT, they are a bit to bright for daytime, a bit too long and "fat" . They should be more sting-like.
And about COD's tracers being to "steady and equal" ( and I am not talking about the camera squiggle effect), the best thing would be to find in the hundreds of WW2 guncam movies available on the web, just 1 that shows a spit or a Hurri, or any kind of plane with those kind of tracers...

Salute !