Proximity Fuse/VT Fuse

[X32Wright]

Keep in mind that radio wave detection and ranging or RADAR was used by the RAF early in the war specially for knowing the fleets of bombers and fighters that Goering sent over Channel to Britain.

Thanks for that link Codex surely that is a more simplier way of tackling the problem. I was however hoping for raycasting's accuracy because of our bad experience with Flak in Il-2.

[Codex]

Originally Posted by X32Wright

Keep in mind that radio wave detection and ranging or RADAR was used by the RAF early in the war specially for knowing the fleets of bombers and fighters that Goering sent over Channel to Britain.

Thanks for that link Codex surely that is a more simplier way of tackling the problem. I was however hoping for raycasting's accuracy because of our bad experience with Flak in Il-2.

Sorry I thought you were referring to image quality. In terms detonation modelling, a form of Raycasting would work but I'd say particle physics would more realistic.

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=uwUBkE...eature=related

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=bMiNPU...eature=related

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb943954(VS.85).aspx

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb205329(VS.85).aspx

Sort of related by could be adapted to simulate flak:

http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=Pjk4_n...eature=related

[X32Wright]

Agreed VOXEL technology surely would be better BUT VT principles were done in real life using high frequency radiowaves so it works more like raycasting than voxel.

No I am talking about how the 'collision detection' is handled as well as occlusion. The visual aspect of the detonation surely can be done with particle physics models.

Anyway no matter what kind of technology is used I am hoping that they would be better than what we have now. Maybe I am just spoiled of playing DCS:Black Shark.