PDA

View Full Version : 50. cals "hit" visual effect in game vs real. : need your thoughts



RegRag1977
05-20-2010, 03:08 AM
Hi Gentlemen,

My question is to all knowledgeable people around here about the visual effect 50. cal rounds (and also all HMG: 12.7mm, 13mm) should produce when they're hitting a target.

To ask it clearly: should we see small smoke puffs when a target is hit by 50 cal rounds? I'm not sure but i've found some YT videos that seem to show that.
Now in game we only have small sparks and debris, and i was wondering if asking for smoke puffs (something like what we have already for canons but smaller) would be a legitimate request?

But first we need to discuss it! Here are some well known guncams found on YT:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89b3vVwMDDY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...MAlU&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejnxLN0MAlU&feature=related)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...5sqo&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifZfoI85sqo&feature=related)

(I'm aware that all these guncams are not only 50 cal guncams (some are P38s obviously), but i'm confident we can agree that some definitely are.)

Of course, although it could be useful to mention it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif , this is not a discussion about in game 50 cals efficiency, which i personnally find OK. If there is some consensus on it why not then ask Team Daidalos to implement such an effect in the game in a next patch?

Thanks in advance! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JtD
05-20-2010, 04:07 AM
I'd say the flashes of the I rounds should be a bit larger. But mainly I'd like to see more I belting, be it just I or API. 25% just isn't enough. I'd up it to 50% at least, unless you can have different belting for different times.

I've seen some ridiculous stuff in the hacks that claim to have "improved" visual effect, I sure hope I don't have to see that in an official version. What we have imho is about 80% right.

irR4tiOn4L
05-20-2010, 04:09 AM
Hard to judge, but based off those movies alone puffs are appropriate when strafing the ground, but there doesnt seem to be very much indication of hits on aircraft even in those guncam vids.

What would be the physical cause of a puff when hitting an aircraft? On the ground its dirt, but on an aircraft it would mostly be debris. Possibly an explosive effect?

EDIT: Agree with above that flashes should be larger though. They are fairly prominent in the guncams

WTE_Galway
05-20-2010, 04:54 AM
several comments

- IL2 has never visually modelled small calibre gun damage in detail, it is meant to be one of the "big advances" in SOW
- gun cams are notoriously more sensitive to muzzle flash, tracer and hit flashes than the naked eye
- this effect is mainly visual, there are a number of other gameplay effecting lighting effects including the fact that exhaust manifolds historically glowed hot enough to partially blind the pilot at night that are not modelled
- if the smoke puffs are incendiary its already known that IL2 does not use historically correct belt loadouts and lacks incendiary rounds for 0.50 cal

Erkki_M
05-20-2010, 05:14 AM
+1

Except to the last point, oh yes it does, just not the Belting the USAAF used.

Yeah, since when has a camera seen as a human eye anyways? All films are sensitive to IR, and even the human eye doesnt see colours balanced right, relative to the amounts of different actual colours.

Funnily too I have no trouble seeing tracer/incendiary round hits...

Could you see the blue tracer in the MG131 and 151 if it didnt have the smoking trail? Would it be as visible as in some of the 109 guncams in youtube?

BillSwagger
05-20-2010, 05:35 AM
The flashes look fine to me, and upon using the 20mm, I've always thought a similar puff should be used for 50 caliber just a little smaller.

Watching the gun cams you can see these puffs, and it doesn't seem to make much difference whats causing it since the visual effect is there.
There also many shots where we don't see puffs, or at least its not made obvious from the camera.

My only concern would be a that such smoke can cause a performance hit.


Bill

TinyTim
05-20-2010, 09:23 AM
It's imperative to consider that these flashes might not be (so much) visible with naked eye. Photographic films are usually also sensitive to IR spectrum (besides visual one), which is invisible for human eye.

The higher the temperature, the more IR light that spot irradiates.

Treetop64
05-20-2010, 09:40 AM
Having actually fired a mounted .50 cal at metallic targets (cars, old retired AFVs, etc.) in reality, both with AP and incendiary rounds, I can say that the pyrotechnic effects depend more on what's being hit than the rounds themselves, and - importantly - the angle at which the round is striking the target. The APs produce a flash when they strike metal from obvious physical effects. The incendiaries produce a slightly bigger flash, but you really only notice the difference if you're diligently looking for it. You're too focused on the job at hand to be worrying about how big the flashes are - as long as you see them you know you're hitting the target and that's all that matters.

I saw clouds of dust with the impacts, but this was due more to the targets being rusty and dirty than with the effects of the rounds themselves.

In game, you get a flash if you hit anything with any large caliber or rifle caliber round. The 15mm incendiary round out of the Bf-109F2 produce just a slightly larger spark than even the .50s in game, and though I never fired a 15mm weapon in reality it looks realistic enough when compared to the .50 in-game flash. The .303 registers even less, and thus maintains the consistency of the cross-caliber contact flashes.

Television is a poor gauge to do visual comparisons, especially those from the guns cameras of the 1940s. The contrast ratio tended to be elevated in those videos, many showing stark contrasts between black and white and having just a few shades of difference between the two. This tended to exaggerate the viewing of light and dark effects.

Ba5tard5word
05-20-2010, 10:01 AM
I wonder if there are any videos that do a good job of showing what a human eye would see with .50 cals hitting an enemy plane (or whatever) rather than what a guncam would show.

ROXunreal
05-20-2010, 10:27 AM
Aren't there better up to date videos of .50 cals hitting metal? someone should check youtube

horseback
05-20-2010, 02:38 PM
The visual effects of a MG round striking an aircraft are a combination of

a) metal striking metal; we've all seen sparks fly when metal objects collide at high speed

2) dust/debris flying away from the impact point; this can be atomized paint, dirt, oils & coolants spilled on the aircraft's surface, stuff inside the aluminum blowing out, all from general shock/overpressure effect. I remember being on the front end of a four car pileup a day after washing my pickup, and by the time the third car hit the pile, the time slowdown from adrenaline allowed me to see the shockwave progressing from my windshield down my hood-there was 'stuff' flying off in a little wavefront as it went from back to front. I gotta think that there would be more 'stuff' stuck to an aircraft kept outside most of the time, and that the shock at the point of impact would be fairly powerful.

3) Tracer/Incendiary round flashes and aluminum melting and burning. Aluminum melts at less than 1200 degrees F (around 1170, I think), so several high energy impacts closely spaced would heat it up fairly quickly.

My reading of pilot reports and memoirs indicates that they usually knew when and where they were getting strikes on enemy aircraft, so some sort of visual effect needs to be made more obvious in the game. It doesn't have to be terribly lifelike as long as it gives you an indication of where you're hitting.

I'll sacrifice a little realism for the extra frames per second.

cheers

horseback

BillSwagger
05-20-2010, 03:24 PM
Upon using the 4.09m vanilla game, i found that the bullet strikes into the dirt make two different dirt effects. One is a darker plume and the other is a whiter puff. I think use similar, yet subtle white puff would be interesting to see in combination with the flashes.

Bill

RegRag1977
05-22-2010, 03:19 PM
Thank You guys for your interesting participation to this thread!

I can see that there is a lot of different point of view concerning the visual effect 50 cals "should" have, and that most of you consider it more or less correct in the game.

As for me i tend to agree more with Billswagger and Horseback, who did a pretty good description (especially part 2) in his post.

Anyway thanks again for sharing your thoughts http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

jeffmorgan_947
05-22-2010, 10:36 PM
Looking at that first youtube gun cam footage seems strange to me, as i was only days old when all that death and destruction was being played out in Europe [ born 1st july 44 ]

Jeffmorgan

WTE_Galway
05-23-2010, 06:21 AM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:


I can see that there is a lot of different point of view concerning the visual effect 50 cals "should" have, and that most of you consider it more or less correct in the game.



Well more to the point the bits that actually are wrong are not really easily fixed in IL2 apparently due to the limited detail in the damage model.

RegRag1977
05-23-2010, 03:54 PM
As i was searching for more 50 cal guncam footage i found this (please look directly at 0:22)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...NHxY&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=48Mvy7uNHxY&feature=related)

I'm not sure but to me it looks like 50 cals hitting a german aircraft, we can see white smoke puffs more clearly...(Please correct me if i'm wrong)

BillSwagger
05-23-2010, 04:28 PM
Looks like white puffs to me, and although it could be anything, the color film reveals a bit more about it. Might be part of the incendiary element.
Often, it depends on the reel you want to refer to, and if API or I rounds are included in the load outs of the plane.

I was thinking more about this question because i've also seen footage of rounds hitting solid objects, and even bullets tend to fragment and dissipate on impact. I know there are mixtures of belting like ball rounds, which are softer than the AP rounds. So there's a chance that what you are seeing is also portions of the bullets fragmenting apart as well as portions of the aircraft.


Bill

M_Gunz
05-23-2010, 07:09 PM
When a still burning tracer hits IRL you probably should know it. That might be what those puffs are in the YT vid there.

BillSwagger
05-23-2010, 07:22 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QfDoQwIAaXg

I thought i'd post this again, as it demonstrates the fragmentation of the bullets as well as the dust of the displaced metal when as they go through.


Bill

M_Gunz
05-23-2010, 09:15 PM
At 1 million FPS how long do you think those bits would need to be there for you to see them at all?
1/10th second runs 100,000 frames. Let's say the display is 30 FPS (more likely 25). You want to do the math?

BillSwagger
05-23-2010, 10:39 PM
Interesting point MGunz.
Most of which would be well out of frame in real time, though some shots look like there is significant displacement of metal to make a perceived puff. You just compile that with the other factors already mentioned.
Needless to say, the effect is there but not in game.

Bill

Friendly_flyer
05-24-2010, 02:16 AM
Here's a video from utube showing shooting at an old car with an M2 Browning (just spool past some .30 cal M-60 stuff). According to the presenter, the belting for the .50 is a ball-AP-incendiary w/tracer combination (in unspecified numbers).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...x7KQ&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL6haX5x7KQ&feature=related)

Notice there appears to be no smoke puffs from hits on the car, all the smoke-like stuff appears behind the car and is probably all dust. The incendiaries produces flashes, but only from the engine compartment, possibly related to gasoline.

Another thing to notice is the exit holes we get to see. They look very much like the small callibre damage in-game!

M_Gunz
05-24-2010, 03:08 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
Interesting point MGunz.
Most of which would be well out of frame in real time, though some shots look like there is significant displacement of metal to make a perceived puff. You just compile that with the other factors already mentioned.
Needless to say, the effect is there but not in game.

Bill

At the rate of that slo-motion the 'puff' would have to hang there for whole minutes to be visible in real time.
You didn't do the math Bill.
1,000,000 frames PER SECOND showed at 30 FPS -- 1 second real time takes over 9 HOURS to watch at that speed!
You can no more see those bits of metal than you can watch the bullet spin IRL. You see how slow the bullets
spin in the film? IRL that's typically over 100,000 RPM which should be a clue.

You've also perhaps never spent time shooting made things at a gun range or dump? Punching holes in sheet metal
just isn't usually spectacular, especially with non-sparking targets and non-sparking bullets. If there is
something inside to 'puff', then you get your effects, or if you have explosive target dots you really get effect.

Of course I didn't have tracers to fire. In the color film Youtube look at how often/few puffs there are and note
they match the frequency of tracers. For every 'puff' there's probably a handful of hits going on you don't see,
not the whole steady pattern you should see at 12-13/second per gun as it crosses the target.

M_Gunz
05-24-2010, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by Friendly_flyer:
Here's a video from utube showing shooting at an old car with an M2 Browning (just spool past some .30 cal M-60 stuff). According to the presenter, the belting for the .50 is a ball-AP-incendiary w/tracer combination (in unspecified numbers).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...x7KQ&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL6haX5x7KQ&feature=related)

Notice there appears to be no smoke puffs from hits on the car, all the smoke-like stuff appears behind the car and is probably all dust. The incendiaries produces flashes, but only from the engine compartment, possibly related to gasoline.

Another thing to notice is the exit holes we get to see. They look very much like the small callibre damage in-game!

When the incendiaries hit something solid, more solid than the steel skin like the front wheel hub (1 or 2 went through
the car before finding something solid enough of the far side) or engine there was a flash easy to see in the slo-mo
but visible in real-time.

My surprise was that tracers apparently left no sign other than a bright streak ending on the car.

I think that if you hit a hardened armored section of a WWII fighter (1mm-2mm engine armor for instance?) that a
flash would show.

Friendly_flyer
05-24-2010, 11:52 AM
The incendiaries contain a small charge of something that burn with a very bright flame, right? I suppose that is the flash we are seeing.

What the little film shows very clearly, is that sheet metal (like the surface of an aeroplane or the body of a car) isn't hard enough to set off the incendiaries. If a plane is hit with such a round, it would leave a small, round hole just large enough to poke your finger through, and any flash and accompanied damage would happen when the round hit something inside the plane.

I guess a very realistic scenario would be hosing down a plane with .50ies, only to see it abruptly fall from the sky with no obvious damage.

BillSwagger
05-24-2010, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
Interesting point MGunz.
Most of which would be well out of frame in real time, though some shots look like there is significant displacement of metal to make a perceived puff. You just compile that with the other factors already mentioned.
Needless to say, the effect is there but not in game.

Bill

At the rate of that slo-motion the 'puff' would have to hang there for whole minutes to be visible in real time.
You didn't do the math Bill.
1,000,000 frames PER SECOND showed at 30 FPS -- 1 second real time takes over 9 HOURS to watch at that speed!
You can no more see those bits of metal than you can watch the bullet spin IRL. You see how slow the bullets
spin in the film? IRL that's typically over 100,000 RPM which should be a clue.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I get that as much and understood what you were referring to, but at some point the fragments slow down, and at that point it would be out of frame in these shots. That does not mean there wouldn't be a dust cloud caused from the bullet impacting alone.
Of course hitting sheet metal or paper alone isn't going to make any thing visible from the naked eye, and even as such i doubt a WW2 film camera would be capable of picking up much of it, however repeated impacts in short succession might be more visible.
I still think what's being seen is more or less the incendiary element burning off and causing the puff of smoke.



You've also perhaps never spent time shooting made things at a gun range or dump? Punching holes in sheet metal
just isn't usually spectacular, especially with non-sparking targets and non-sparking bullets.

That depends what i'm shooting at because most times the target coming apart is more visible than the bullet impact.
I've seen others shooting in real time and there is dust that comes off some targets. Some of this is the targets being displaced, and some of it is the bullet being displaced. The naked eye could not tell the difference.



My surprise was that tracers apparently left no sign other than a bright streak ending on the car.

Thats because tracers are not the same as incendiary rounds. Incendiary rounds are designed to emit the flash on impact, while tracers burn to present the shooter with a bullet path. Both act as indicators of where the shot is going. They do have incendiary tracer rounds that do both. IT or APIT



Bill

M_Gunz
05-24-2010, 09:19 PM
50 cal incendiaries flash on substantial impact. Aircraft skin, even steel car skin is nothing that solid.

WTE_Galway
05-24-2010, 09:26 PM
Originally posted by M_Gunz:
50 cal incendiaries flash on substantial impact. Aircraft skin, even steel car skin is nothing that solid.

Presumably incendiary hitting the skin in the vicinity of a wing or fuselage spar will flash though.

M_Gunz
05-24-2010, 10:37 PM
I couldn't really say. The skin is about .02" aluminum and the ribs about .03 to .06" with neither being hardened.
I've seen 'hat section' stiffeners in some drawings and for sure some thicker structure of hardened aluminum.
At a guess the bullet would penetrate before flashing but on films I see occasional undeniable flashes.

What happens to the bullet after the flash? You want the incendiary to penetrate before burning.

BillSwagger
05-24-2010, 11:41 PM
The incendiary is nothing more than a marker so the pilot knows the shot is hitting. The burning element was later discovered to ignite fuels, but it wasn't initially used for that intention.

Id be interested in knowing more about how the incendiary is designed but the only things i've seen on it is that it had a chemical agent that ignited on impact.

WTE_Galway
05-25-2010, 01:41 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
The incendiary is nothing more than a marker so the pilot knows the shot is hitting. The burning element was later discovered to ignite fuels, but it wasn't initially used for that intention.

Id be interested in knowing more about how the incendiary is designed but the only things i've seen on it is that it had a chemical agent that ignited on impact.

Rather large image so linked it ... and Imperial Japanese Navy ... but still it shows basics of incendiary.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wi...mm_Japanese_navy.jpg (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/7.7_mm_Japanese_navy.jpg)

ImpStarDuece
05-25-2010, 01:54 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
The incendiary is nothing more than a marker so the pilot knows the shot is hitting. The burning element was later discovered to ignite fuels, but it wasn't initially used for that intention.



Incendiary means "capable of causing fire". They wouldn't of named it incendiary unless it was designed to cause fires.

During WW2 (as now) there were distinct tracer, incendiary and armour piercing incendiary rounds for the M2.

Unless you're referencing the 'flash' of the incendiary material hitting the target.

To quote Tony Williams: "The US M1 incendiary round... was a scaled-up and simplified version of the British Dixon ("De Wilde") .303. This consisted of four elements: the bullet jacket which enclosed the whole bullet except for the base; a hollow steel sleeve fitting inside the jacket for the central helf of its length; the incendiary mixture which filled all of the nose, plus the inside of the steel sleeve; and a base plug, usually of lead."

The De Wilde incendiary was certainly designed to flash on impact, but it was primarily designed to cause fires in any target it hit. It burned at around 4000 degrees on impact.

The incendiary mixture used by both the RAF and the USAAF was a mix of 50% barium nitrate and 50% powdered aluminium/magnesium alloy.

There was also the US M8 API round, in which the tip in front of the armour-piercing core is filled with a small quantity of incendiary material.

M_Gunz
05-25-2010, 02:51 AM
Incendiaries are fire starters. The flash will weaken aluminum, burn clear through thin aluminum, burn
insulation off wiring, ignite fuel fumes or oil.

We've had historic documents posted here about how in late war ammo belting was switched all API/APIT
that had the most effect in downing aircraft and the fire-causing properties of those rounds.

In this thread we have link to video of a 50 cal shooting a car wreck with the incendiary flashes
mostly on the inside of the wreck and fires still burning after the shooting. Where did they flash on
the front surfaces? Wheels and hubs, none on the steel skin that is thicker and harder than aircraft
skin.

Yeah you can tell where the incendiaries and tracers hit something solid. Like trains in one popular
video while the pilot is saying that's how they knew when they were on target.

Lastly from dozen of 50 cal threads we know the incendiaries are 'not right' because they don't start
the fires they're supposed to.

But all that's wrong because they're really supposed to flash on the outside of the target plane, and
LOL make occasional smoke puffs.

RegRag1977
05-25-2010, 05:35 AM
Found this:

Look directly at 0:44;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSDE47vNq1Q

Look carefully at the starboard wing.

More footage though it is difficult to decide whether they are from 50 cal only or 20mm + 50cals (P38). Please look especially at 1:24.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...N5PI&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajh4wQEN5PI&feature=related)

Here at 3:06, german bomber attacked:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53LGJhjYICM

And for those who did not look at the first links i posted (in their integrality) here is another one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89b3vVwMDDY

Look at min 3, especially starboard wing tip.

M_Gunz
05-25-2010, 09:56 AM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Found this:

Look directly at 0:44;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OSDE47vNq1Q

Look carefully at the starboard wing.

More footage though it is difficult to decide whether they are from 50 cal only or 20mm + 50cals (P38). Please look especially at 1:24.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...N5PI&feature=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ajh4wQEN5PI&feature=related)

Here at 3:06, german bomber attacked:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=53LGJhjYICM

And for those who did not look at the first links i posted (in their integrality) here is another one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89b3vVwMDDY

Look at min 3, especially starboard wing tip.

Especially the last video in its entirety, incendiary flashes (sometimes staccato) and in some cases fires.

Also puff and streams of leaking fuel in all of them. Sometimes the self-sealing tanks worked.