Author Topic: Enhancement: Contrails as appropriate (Read 293 times)

Chairboy · « **on:** September 18, 2002, 07:39:48 PM »

Howdy,

I'd like to request consideration be given to generating contrails for high alt flying (as appropriate, of course). I see lots of paintings and photos of bombers at high alt leaving contrails, and I think it would be a nice touch.

Regards,

Chairboy

Kweassa · « **Reply #1 on:** September 18, 2002, 07:47:29 PM »

That's the most cleanest, un-whiney, gentlest, simple request I've ever seen!!

I second the notion! Let's see more of that cool looking particle system!!

Blank · « **Reply #2 on:** September 18, 2002, 10:12:53 PM »

third the motion.

Particle generators are on wingtips already, just make them white last longer and thinner.

And code it so it turns on under G:

if over 25k smoke on
if under 25k smoke off

if G force over 5g smoke on
if G force under 5g smoke off

please

Sundog · « **Reply #3 on:** September 19, 2002, 07:51:53 PM »

And as long as you're at it, how about some smoke trails from jet engines. I don't think they were clean burning engines back then

. I know it's all FR issues, but it would look cool

Xjazz · « **Reply #4 on:** September 20, 2002, 06:17:06 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Blank
third the motion.

Particle generators are on wingtips already, just make them white last longer and thinner.

And code it so it turns on under G:

if over 25k smoke on
if under 25k smoke off

if G force over 5g smoke on
if G force under 5g smoke off

please

Sounds great!!!

Sancho · « **Reply #5 on:** September 20, 2002, 08:48:43 AM »

I don't think contrails are possible in the current game. Sure, you could just turn on smoke and you'd have a contrail effect--it's already coded right? But think about this:

You ever watch how the airplanes move at long range? They are jerky and make abrupt heading changes. Its like your computer only downloads occasional update for planes that are far away, reserving bandwidth for the ones that are within a short range. Only planes that are close to you move smoothly, which is what you want when you are trying to shoot or avoid being shot.

So basically what I'm saying is that just using smoke as currently coded turning on above X number of feet wouldn't work--it would look strange. For anything other than a bomber in level flight, you would see really unnatural looking contrails which aren't the smooth tracing of the plane flew, but rather jerky straight lines that abruptly change 90 degrees at some points.

It could be done, but HT would have to add in some code for contrails on far away planes that make the contrails like bezier curve control points so that they would look smooth. But even then I'm not sure they would look right. Also, for a plane that is shot down or leaves the area, how long would the contrail last? You would have to download a lot more information to keep those contrails visible. (Then again, how many people fly above 25k.

)

It's definitely doable, IMO, and would be great eye candy, but I'm not sure it would be an easy addition is what I'm saying if it's going to be done right.

Chairboy · « **Reply #6 on:** November 10, 2002, 08:57:42 PM »

Perhaps there would be a technical challenge for when they were really far away, but when I look up from a field at a formation of bombers that are at 25k and doing their bombing run, their motion looks smooth enough...

Any thoughts?

Bonden · « **Reply #7 on:** November 10, 2002, 10:09:54 PM »

Worth a try for HT imho. I vote yes

ergRTC · « **Reply #8 on:** November 11, 2002, 11:45:00 AM »

contrails are very tricky though. They only exist at certain altitudes and these change on a day to day basis, and they may stop or start when maintaining an altitude. Another problem is they would last a long time. There are theories that they even changed the climate over europe after 43 because of the number of allied bombers flying over. It is known that they change the weather over the pacific thanks to 911 we were able to monitor what happened when jet aircraft stopped travelling to the USA. I think they may just be too complicated and not worth it.

Although they would be pretty.

Bonden · « **Reply #9 on:** November 11, 2002, 12:06:12 PM »

I don't think we have to worry excessively about the climate in the various arenas

ergRTC · « **Reply #10 on:** November 11, 2002, 12:23:09 PM »

hehe, no I guess we dont. I was just thinking of the fps hit from 2000 contrails slowly dispersing for a couple of hours (in the game).
erg

Mitsu · « **Reply #11 on:** November 11, 2002, 12:40:40 PM »

i love it.

Mitsu · « **Reply #12 on:** November 11, 2002, 12:49:43 PM »

Here is my guess:
If they use the particle system type smoke to contrails, it hits FPS very much.
But if they use old type smoke to it, it won't hit FPS so much.

Although I saw the contrails in Il-2 Sturmovik and Strike Fighters: Project1, I didn't feel that it is the FPS eater.

Bonden · « **Reply #13 on:** November 11, 2002, 03:01:26 PM »

Yes, any FPS loss would hurt my puter's environment - frame rates not great as it is

JB73 · « **Reply #14 on:** November 12, 2002, 08:46:34 AM »

well my 2¢....

the con trail thing above 25k would be cool (WAY cool) but...

for the bases on AKdesert that start at like 15k the dogfights above the base routinely get well above 25k. that would kill framerates like if the somke from a destroyed base went up 10k

another problem is the 25k limit would put a cap on some pilots flying above that.

imagine you see a dot coming in high now.... you dont know the ALT or the plane type. it really benefits the enemy.

if you added this bombers and other IB's would stay below 25k to avoid giving up the information of how high they are. yes i know we'd be able to tell they are below 25k, but thats a very general statement.

oh well MHO i guess.