Nice VIDEO, Uther.


P.S. have you human eyes in your head or some kind of bionic video system for seeing ?

(This is RAF specific) The smoke trail tracers were not actually tracers they were Buckingham incendiaries. They ignited on firing and burned on their way to the target. No visible light. They had a small hole in the casing which let the smoke out (spiral tracer smoke). The acutal G Mk II type tracer round, a flaming tracer (visible light, source of the 'laser debate') was smokeless, as was the 'de-wilde'.

Well some ex military people are stating that the tracers look unrealistic,and some ex military people are stating that the tracers look realistic.

I still haven't seen comments from 'ex military' people that are saying they don't look realistic.

Blackdog made a good comment that if anything they look a bit too thick.

Thats the funny thing, u dont even have to be ex military to understand that it looks "pretty much" how it should.

Every single clip/pic showing tracer fire shows different variations on the same theme.


The only thing i can think of is that Oleg is "representing" tracers the way filmcameras/pics show it and not the human eye when you are "there" so to speak, for dramatic effect. From personal experience a single shot with tracer does/did not produce that streak, at least not clearly or slowly enough for me to see it. (would however have done so if i filmed it and paused it at the exact right moment). High rate machingun fire is another thing as far as i know. I also think the "clarety" of the effect is more pronounced at night compared to daylight.

Had a lot of military training (but was never actually in the military)...fired and saw many different tracers from various platforms, and these look fine to me :grin: And based on some of the real WW2 gun cam footage I've seen I think the team have done a great job!

If I was going to be pernickety (which I will ;)), then:

a) I remember red tracer to be slightly front heavy, trailing off towards the rear of the streak...when viewing from the rear that is...
b) tracers were a lot brighter, even in day time...actually looked like fire and had the same brightness...but I don't think any game can represent that on a screen.


Then again, I don't have any experience viewing tracers at 2000ft, flying at 300mph+, so will assume that Oleg and team know better than I do. :grin:
Besides, when I'm firing all cannons/guns, I won't be judging the realism of the tracer, I'll desperately be trying to keep my sights on the target and hold the right angle and speed.

Hehe :)

This is one of the biggest 'complaint' from what I have read on various forums - people want them to be less bright in daylight. Good to have someone saying that they should be more brighter.

In engineer terms: Oleg made a compromise, not too bright and not too dark - just perfect. An interpolation. :-P

yes, maybe a bit too thick, but that's it :)

To be honest I'd rather remove them altogether: Leonard "Kit" Carson and his squadron used to fly without tracers, since they give a false impression of distance and expose your attacking position.

You can do this in the armament screen. ;) One of the first things I'll try to get used to too.

Fair enough, and they still look good :grin: