Tracers

[mtnman]

And really, how often to you teach people to use tracers as a means of becoming a better shot in your professional "instructor" position? Just curious.

"To you"?  Do you mean did you?  Or do you?  IRL, never, as I stated above.  As an AH trainer, it seldom came up.  When it did, I always recommended leaving them on.  I'm not an AH Trainer anymore though.  I stepped down due to lack of time.

Maybe its because you havent tried it enough in "most" of your ten years or so.

Maybe.  But then of course, that argument could be sent back your way as well...  As in "maybe you haven't tried using tracers enough...".

Since you brought it up, I do fire at ranges up to 1000 and get hits 80% of the time. NO it doesnt show in my hit%, and as an "instructor" you should be able to figure that out.

No you don't.  Now, if you put the word "some" between "get" and "hits", I could almost see it...  Nobody gets an 80% hit% at 1000 yards.  But getting a single hit at 1000yards would make your statement rue with the "some" in there.

But the hit% question raises an interesting question...  What does it matter?  It could be argued that a high hit% is better than a low%, and that one pilot is more effective than another.  Or, it could mean that one pilot only takes "high%" shots (bombers, picks, or well saddled-up shots).  But does that make him more effective overall?  I hesitate to say yes... 

Me, I could have a drastically higher hit% if I did that.  When I've played with the idea, I've scored 60%+ against bombers, for example.  But I don't...  I take all sorts of low% shots (high-speed crossing, snap shots, blacked out, etc), waste ammo on GV's and ground targets, fire next to friendlies on the ground to "scare" them, etc.  So my hit% doesn't tell the real story either.

And really, taking those low% shots makes me much more effective overall than I'd be if I didn't take them.  There's a mental "toll" taken when you hit your opponent, even if it doesn't do any real damage.  It effects the way he flies, and the way I fly.  I often pick an enemy apart little by little, firing little "trickle's", which again, isn't necessarily related by my hit%.  I make constant adjustments based on the feedback from my tracers.  My tracers allow me to make quick, factual decisions, while I'd only be guessing at without tracers. 

I've "lived" through many fights because my opponent couldn't get his tracer-less rounds on target.  On the other hand, I've never been beaten because he wasn't using tracers.

I just did. As did a few others. The tracers are a distraction and take concentration away from the sight picture.

Didn't answer the question.  That's simply "opinion", not "data". 

Curious, in all your years as an "instructor" how many of them did you spend in a ww2 fighter aircraft teaching aerial gunnery?

None.  But of course, the basics of teaching/learning are the same.  Where would you like to take this part of the discussion?

[mtnman]

My way of improving my accuracy is to use aircraft with limited ammo, such as my favorite Yak 9's. You don't have many rounds on you, so you have to be conservative and fire when & where it counts. If you can do that, imagine what you can do in an aircraft with a lot more ammo.

Another superstition, I believe.  This isn't how humans learn.  Effectively, you're stating that you'll improve faster with less practice.

In reality, you'll improve faster with more practice, as long as it's good, effective practice.

Retention/learning is much higher with increased time and interaction (practice).  Retention can be as high as 75% with quality practice and feedback (constructive criticism), and even higher (up to80%) if you use the information to teach others.  Conversely, retention drops quickly without those aspects (as low as 5% if you watch it, 10% if you read it, etc).

Where your getting your improvement from in this case is by "focusing" and "practicing better".  The amount of ammo in your clip doesn't effect that.  It's the decision to be focused that matters.  Staying that focused with a larger clip just means more quality practice, which results in faster learning.  You just need to be "mentally strong", and don't allow yourself to get lazy.

[mtnman]

Yes, simply because they provide feedback when you miss.  Hit sprites are only good when you hit.  Without tracers, how would you know if you are firing long or short, up or down?

And when you hit, how much more feedback do you need?  Not all that much...  You've accomplished the goal, after all.  That's why the hit sprites are a pointless argument when it comes to tracers on/off.  The feedback from hits is the same whether you use tracers or not...  Both are equally positive, so cannot be used to argue either point.

As you state, tracers offer feedback when you need it (because you're missing).

[mtnman]

I need to ask...

The primary reason I've always heard/seen/read when it comes to WWII use of "no tracers" has been the idea that they gave away your presence to the enemy. 

In WWII, that was a very valid point, since the majority of the time the enemy was shot down because he was unaware of your presence...  In units that didn't use tracers, I've seen the reports where it was linked to more success.  Again, though, it was likely due to the same reason...  Most planes were shot down by "surprise", using no tracers increased the chances of "surprise", so using no tracers led to increased success.

I've never seen any correlation in WWII for increased gunnery skill due to lack of tracers, like is sometimes argued in AH.  In  WWII, it very well could have led to an increased hit%, because an unaware pilot was more likely to be flying straight/level (easy to hit) than doing any hard maneuvering (hard to hit).  I would certainly hope that an level-flying plane with an unaware pilot would be easier to shoot down, and therefore removing tracers would likely lead to greater success.

That's generally not the case in AH though, and lack of tracers is being used to argue something else entirely.  I suspect it could be a distortion of historical fact to link lack of tracers to increased skill... 

[Sunka]

 
I seen what others can do in the game and i know the ones that just talk big, Mtnman has proved time and time again that he is one of the best in the game,its a shame more people don't listen to addvice more because they are to busy trying to be right. And for my money Mtnman is or was one of the best trainers out their.But now I'm just ankle humping 

[mtnman]

I seen what others can do in the game and i know the ones that just talk big, Mtnman has proved time and time again that he is one of the best in the game,its a shame more people don't listen to addvice more because they are to busy trying to be right. And for my money Mtnman is or was one of the best trainers out their.But now I'm just ankle humping  

Ha!  Just don't wear all the hair off that ankle (or get tangled in it, either).  You may need to switch to the other side once in a while to keep the wear even...

Thanks for the compliment though, seriously.  I enjoyed that aspect of the game a LOT, I just don't have the time to do the position justice anymore.  Move over, make room for those that can, and maybe things will change in the future...

[F6Fraven]

As I said before, I do not use tracers, I'm not afraid to take outside shots and shots on stick stirring planes when I get the opportunity, and I still average a high hit%. When I'm getting ready to take the shot it's almost instantaneous,I know exactly where I need to orient the plane in order to get rounds on, it just comes down to how steady my hand is. If you need to look at tracers to find out that you're shooting left or right then go back to the TA, because against a seasoned pilot that 2 seconds of confusion on your part can get you a ticket to the tower. When the person shooting at me is spraying cannon rounds everywhere, usually that's an automatic forced overshoot and kill for me. I'm not saying that no tracers leads to better shooting, I do think it forces people to pay attention to the way they shoot though, and that's a good thing. I know I've worked with people on their accuracy, and after flying with no tracers for a week or so they were dead on when they turned tracers on again.

[Sunka]

Ha!  Just don't wear all the hair off that ankle (or get tangled in it, either).  You may need to switch to the other side once in a while to keep the wear even...

Thanks for the compliment though, seriously.  I enjoyed that aspect of the game a LOT, I just don't have the time to do the position justice anymore.  Move over, make room for those that can, and maybe things will change in the future...

Right on ..im not at home, but at home i lost net so i have not been able to play in some time,but once im back ,trainer or not i will need to wing up with you and get my wings back in order.

[icepac]

I leave them on to confuse the opponent in a HO situation.........which is very common here.

It's hard to see hit sprites when tracers are streaming toward you.

[AWRaid]

over the years i have done long stints with and without tracers. My overall hit percentage with and without is pretty much the same. I go with what looks cooler, so I leave them on. I also like being able to mark GVs for other people.

Damn dude you're still flying?

I remember fighting you in FR AW on AOL in like 1996 and BigT too.

Well, actually I remember quite a few guys especially the JG-27 guys I flew with a lot...

Guess it is just good to see an old player still playing.


-Raid

[bustr]

From what I read in an 8th Airforce gunnery analysis for why a tracer was not a good way to aim. The round and the flair ball behind it are far enough apart that the gunner or pilot looking at it is already behind in his mental timing. The flair ball is so large your eyes will naturaly tend to track the flair rather than looking to a point ahead of it. The shooter will tend to under compensate for the 4 or 5 rounds between tracers that he cannot see. That exaserbated the already large problem most pilots had with judging lead on a moving target befor the K14 Gyro sight came on the scene.

This is why they wanted the gunner or pilot to learn their sight picture and understand elevation, lead for given distances and  angles of attack, and speed. Much of the gunnery in WW2 between fighters and their target was 300 to point blank. At those ranges a tracer helps at 300 to correct into the target. Inside of that your target is filling your gunsight and even a myopic man can pour automatic fire into something as large as a 30ft wingspan fighter. This may have been part of what eventualy dictated homogenious ammo belts to get the most damage for the load.

The real skill in WW2 or in Aces High comes down to piloting your ride inside of 300 yards at which point most players can even hit themselves in the kester with a banjo. There is nothing like flying offline and shooting over and over for 30 minutes or more at full zoom to key your brain into the proper sight picture to place a stream of rounds where the con will fly into them. I will ventur mntman has one graticule he uses all the time and the sight picture burned into his brain for elevation and lead at 400 into point blank in his favorite ride. Nothing like repetition to remove hesitation.

From watching several hours of offline drone killing film a few months back at very slow motion. The tracer in aces high is kind of like an 6 ft plasma streak 3inches in diameter tapered at both ends. When the tip of it intersects the pixel area representing parts of the con it makes damage on contact to damagable areas. Looks like plasma bolts from some FPS game. If you are leading far enough ahead of your con you will see the tracer round intersect and damge the con. I've found them to be helpful in making lead corrections to get the rest of my rounds on target. But, in most cases knowing my sight picture to begin my shooting was more important for placing enough rounds on the target to matter.

You only get better at shooting by shooting. Ergo, in an air combat simulator you have to practice flying along with the shooting to make the shooting better. Chicken or Egg.....hmmmm...KFC...heheheh ee

[muzik]

Yes, simply because they provide feedback when you miss.  Hit sprites are only good when you hit.  Without tracers, how would you know if you are firing long or short, up or down?

You dont. You try a different shot!  Thats the whole point of not using tracers. Keep trying until you can find the shot without the help of tracers.

[muzik]

Maybe.  But then of course, that argument could be sent back your way as well...  As in "maybe you haven't tried using tracers enough...".

wrong again. MOST of my time, I would guess more than 70% of my time in game was with tracers.

No you don't.  Now, if you put the word "some" between "get" and "hits", I could almost see it...  Nobody gets an 80% hit% at 1000 yards.  But getting a single hit at 1000yards would make your statement rue with the "some" in there.

If you read correctly, it says I "get hits" 80% of the time, NOT 80% hit percent.

Didn't answer the question.  That's simply "opinion", not "data". 

No, thats FACT. You and many others may have become desensitized to it and learned to use it, but it is still a distraction. It is fact that the more stimulus, the more the human brain and eye has to focus on the worse the results of the overall task. It has been scientifically proven beyond all doubt. So when firing, you have to watch the pipper, the target, and the tracers. Compared to just the target and the pipper. And that doesnt even consider all of the other stimulus the pilot has to deal with... "what is my e state, what is his, where are the other cons, how much fuel do I have, how much ammo do I have..."

And tell me this, how well are you really judging where those tracers are going when there are dozens of them arcing in your view? So not only do you see the bullets on the upward leg of the arc, but you are seeing tracers that preceded those on the downward arc further out, PLUS the crisscrossing on wing mounted guns. It all adds up to excessive stimulus. It is a distraction and unnecessary.

And if you want data, Bustr just gave it to you and it verified everything that I said.

U.S. Navy and AAF had similare thoughts on this in the PTO concerning tracer ammo and it signaling the enemy pilot. Hit percentages increased as tracer ammo was discontinued.

(Schiessfibel.pdf) Illustrates the Luft's focus on precision aiming via the sight picture. Or the British (Bag the Hun.pdf) which relys on learning your sight picture relative to the angle of travers of your con.


United States Strategic Bombing Survey
Report On
Armament In The Air War
1939-1945
Published at London, 1945

[mtnman]

If you read correctly, it says I "get hits" 80% of the time, NOT 80% hit percent.

I read it correctly.  If you get hits 80% of the time you have an 80% hit%.  You're firing a stream of individual shots.  Each one is directed independently of the rest, which is proven with tracers and film.  A shot-stream fired while pulling fans out, it doesn't curve...  In reality, you probably get hits less than 5% of the time.  Even a blind man gets lucky sometimes...

No, thats FACT.

Until you expand your knowledge, and learn the definition of fact vs. opinion, there's no point in arguing with you...  Grab a dictionary, or PM me and I can direct you to the information you need.

And if you want data, Bustr just gave it to you and it verified everything that I said.

Not that I'm seeing from what he's posted here.  Which line/lines are you referring to?

[Ghosth]

I minor point, there are no "tracers" with civilian pistols, rifles, shotguns.
If you need tracers to learn to shoot how did anyone ever shoot anything?

The answer is feedback, when you did it right, something happened, ie the duck died.
The same is also true for AH. Its "feedback" that for some people is vital. Mind you, I did not say ALL, I said SOME.

For those people, tracers get in the way of seeing that feedback.

With repetition, and desire in an hour the average person can hit a thrown beer can in the air with a BB gun 4 out of 5 times. No tracers, feedback. You hear the "ding" and your brain remembers what things looked like.  You learn to hit it at the top of the thrown arc, when for a split second its virtually standing still. With repeated practice some of those could move on to hitting a silver dollar sized washer with a .22 with similar results.  Pure instinctive shooting.

Now for some, tracers on works better for them. For others tracers off. Why anyone would put anyone else down for their choice absolutely baffles me. Do what works for you, and if what your doing isn't working, try it the other way.