Friday 2010-10-29 Dev. update and Discussion

[winny]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

Not sure on the Luftwaffe, but the RAF used tracer rounds; not tracers inside bullets. These were not bullets, and they could not inflict any realy damage. The tracers themselves only gave a rough idea of where the bullets fell.
Sorry if I'm not making myself clear...

The RAF did use tracer rounds but they were bullets.

Left to Right:

Tracer, Armour piercing and incendiary.



all of these are .303 rounds used by the RAF

[philip.ed]

No, I meant that the tracer wasn't inside a bullet that was meant to inflict damage...

[swiss]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

No, I meant that the tracer wasn't inside a bullet that was meant to inflict damage...

...and therefore carried a smoke trail behind(?).

Maybe we're done here anyway.

[philip.ed]

Originally Posted by swiss

...and therefore carried a smoke trail behind(?).

Maybe we're done here anyway.

Sorry, I thought you were trying to say that the .303 bullets carried the tracer inside them. On some levels this is right, but none of the .303 bullets intended to inflict damage did
The tracer-rounds, of course, would be in the shape/calibre of the round required to be fired.

[Cobra8472]

Regarding tracers;

Guys, tracers do not appear as squiggly lines in real life. It only appears that way in GunCam videos due to the fact that the wing/camera/surfaces are shaking when the camera is recording, leading to the entire image shaking.

Specifically noticeable on the tracers.

EDIT: This has already been covered. My bad, just noticed

[Gourmand]

I'm totally addicted to friday update ... it's getting better to better...



congratulation for the works

[imaca]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

Sorry, I thought you were trying to say that the .303 bullets carried the tracer inside them. On some levels this is right, but none of the .303 bullets intended to inflict damage did
The tracer-rounds, of course, would be in the shape/calibre of the round required to be fired.

From:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk/BoB.htm

The incendiary ammunition was also variable in performance. Comparative British tests of British .303" and German 7.92 mm incendiary ammunition against the self-sealing wing tanks in the Blenheim, also fired from 200 yards (180m) astern, revealed that the .303" B. Mk IV incendiary tracer (based on the First World War Buckingham design – it was ignited on firing and burned on its way to the target) and the 7.92 mm were about equal, each setting the tanks alight with about one in ten shots fired.

[bf-110]

Why the (same) weapons sound are different?
The 50 Cal of IceFire video sounds to blow a person away,but at Xilon 50 Cal video it sounds like kid fireworks...

And BTW,is there any plans to add infantry to SoW,Oleg?

[Richie]

The other Battle Of Britain movie witch I actually like even more than the 1969 Battle Of Britain. Hope And Glory

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hLJKI...mment_received

[Skoshi Tiger]

Very Good work Oleg&Co!

The wait for this sim to be released will be hard!

Originally Posted by bf-110

Why the (same) weapons sound are different?
The 50 Cal of IceFire video sounds to blow a person away,but at Xilon 50 Cal video it sounds like kid fireworks...

And BTW,is there any plans to add infantry to SoW,Oleg?

Microphones on consumer vidio cameras have a very limited range compared to proffesional ones and vary in their capabilities. Also the noise is too loud or if a camera is too close to the sound source it can be pushed beyond their range.

There are other factors such as in some video's are in the open field and the another (with the flares) looks like it was shot from the deck of a boat (sorry - ship!). From the ship you would get echo's from the hard surfaces which would completly alter the sound.

Cheers!