BiBa

Now with the new 1.2.5 Update of 2 August the crushes are gone. So case closed. But there is still a FPS performance lost.

It's a modified custom mission. but the crashes also happened with custom missions too. Now with the new 1.2.5 Update of 2 August the crushes are gone. So case closed. But there is still a FPS performance lost.

All Add-Ons I embedded with JSGME are functioning with the exception of JTAC for KA-50. I've used mission where a JTAC can be summoned upon by a A-10C and I've set the right frequencies in mission Editor, but still I'm not getting the JTAC option for the Ka-50 in COM-Menu. Is there something else maybe I've forgotten to make it work?

This is the "DCS Wishlist" Forum and NOT the "Bugs and Problems" Forum where you can get really fussy! Every user is FREE to wish whatever he likes and should be accordingly treated with respect! The reason why a lot of wise guys gets palpably funny is that as Babies, they've been continuously spanked... Next time I'll visit my Brother in Australia, I may try Kangaroo steak and avoid hopping around under the sun, because its seems sunstrokes on the cranium there are turning people to gooders who thinks they're the real wiseguys and anybody else who's different is not normal. I think with it this Thread came to a close up.

Thanks for your clearing insight... Yet compared with the other ricochet Threads, there is indeed a small gain, as it did corner the right Bullet's angle of approach. Also the Ricochet's deflection springs up 45° off the water, whereas it should be a lot flatter. It was simply a harmless effort for a better Realism and its funny how other made out of it a state affair! As a Sim-User, I adore DCS for its realism and all sort of "Productive Wishes" that help improving that, are in my opinion a boon for ED.

Your luck I'm vegetarian, but I prefer pineapple :D

This was a rhetorical way of an approach with a question mark packed with spiritual polemic, which can be understood in both ways, (a stereotyped that serves the purpose of motivation) but you can't corner this statement as an assertion of mine claiming it was factually incorrect. Ask for fun any lawyer if you can use it your way as an evidence even before any court of law. You won't find one single sentence of mine claiming it was factually incorrect! (I also have a master in Mass Media psychology and linguistic, and I LOVE testing new strategies of approach) In fact already on page one, in my first reply I granted the fact that it does take place in a 10° margin and later, and in my second reply I finally cited the late quotation that the ricochets I'm talking about are happening in DCS at an angle > 30°! . With it your question: "WHAT, EXACTLY, is wrong?" is hopefully answered. OK, I should have done that in the first place! Shock and awe! But it worked. Based on this premise, the other allegations become irrelevant and are overruled your highness. Well I didn't know that. I really meant to help by slimming down superfluous effects that are not totally realistic! (because I was frustrated with the latest 1.2.5 Update that caused me and others Framerate stuttering and crashes) Its as simple as that. Look at it the positive way: it did bring us new insight of knowledge on that topic. That's the kind of uplift that makes out of the DCS Forum a sophisticated one!

Well you can try and see. In case you're facing problems like I did, you can re-install the old update. How to do that? Go to my Thread page two: Bugs and Problems » Game Crash » 1.2.5. Update Ranting http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=110662

Thanks a lot for the input Ivan. Again out of this military document Ivan provided us, most ricochets take place in an angle between 0 - 15°.

Can you clarify the bold part please? You've piqued my curiosity with that one. It also can even happen on thin air. It's about the proportion between volume, mass, speed and the transit between two different Air density. (Vacuum in this case) Take the Space Shuttle as an example: its like a huge bullet, which if its re-entering sequence in the atmosphere is at a too high angle, it can burn up. If it is too shallow, it will bounce back on the thin air toward space. This is called an outer space ricochet. The angle thematic is similar to the ricochet of a bullet on a water surface.

...apples & oranges..hmmm...I see...I think somebody is suffering from an unbalanced diet. If Melons can fly, this place would be an Airport... I pledge members who find this topic boring to spare us their sarcasm and go bashing their frustration elsewhere!

My point of view in the whole debate was not to perfect the performance of ricochet, but rather to refrain on the use of superfluous effects, especially the one that breaches over the wedge of realism! The same attitude have I towards all kind of counterproductive nagging that turns academic disclosure down.

You're twisting things upside down! You take one sentence out of the context and delete the core of the call, so again: The food of thought behind my thread in the first place was to spare the Graphic-card any redundant calculation that can be rather applied, there where badly needed...

I'm talking here about the track of one single Bullet. If its first contact is on the wave slope, the second ricochet would be on the next ascending wave. It's not easy sometimes with words to draw a clear picture. Therefore attached is a drawing

Bullet hitting the first wave on its slope side will definitely smoothen the angle of surface friction to a ricochet, altering an angle of 30° to <20°, depending on the wave height. Yet I'm not quite sure what happens after the first wave ricochet, because the encounter with the next subsequent wave would be on its ascending side, therefore should intercept its track rather to a halt than a second ricochet. However, I say this now with reservations. This needs definitely more physical elaboration. If desired as agreed, the responsiveness of ricochet must be in DCS in this case dependent on weather. But that's not the case. The food of thought behind my thread in the first place was to spare the Graphic-card any redundant calculation that can be rather applied, there where badly needed...

Ok I'll see what I can do... In the meanwhile out of that scientific brochure, let us temporarily agree on the following: "the average limit of Bullets ricochet on water is <18° and NOT <30°, let alone form, velocity, mass and spinning effect". until the contrary is proven. My allegation of an error was in respect of ricochet taking place on high diving angle >30°. So I may have to revise my <10° for now as I took also into account the high velocities of all Guns I encountered in A-10C, P51D, Ka-50 etc. Also you're right about the velocity loss from far distances, let alone shot < or > gravity factor (Direction Up or Down)

Try this: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/archive/index.php/t-10745.html

...Well that is indeed a good argument. I wonder if the complexity of water movement has been virtually embedded in the DCS programming with all its sophistication. That alone would set high demands on the CPU... That is not 100% obvious to see, as some might had razed edges and caused deviation of projectiles. Only shots with high speed camera can give a real objective diagnosis. On other cuts in this video, where shots are far away from any target, you don't see one single ricochet on water! I'll make some research to give a 100% reliable evidence on that. On the other hand, next time if I'm on tour abroad as a war photograph, I'll be shooting a reportage extra for you. Here in Germany that won't be possible for now...

This is the type of language I like. So remains to be clarified: At what angle the perpendicular ricochet on water is absorbed! High velocity projectiles hitting a water surface >30° like we witness in DCS is not correct!

The second video is the good example of the 10% angle I mentioned above. The first video, not only it has a bad quality, but is most probably a fake. I'm a camera man and I also work with 3D Max and 2D Photoshop. The bullet that hits the water should cause circular wave disturbances which should make the reflection of the followings turbid. The water surface here remains calm like a mirror. Dump it...

It's not a matter of a metaphysical belief related issue like for e.g. if G.O.D. exist or not. You can't prove G exists, and you can't prove G doesn't exist. This is a matter of pure physical properties. You can't compare water density to wooden branch. There are thousand of scenery in Films and documentaries, where you see bullets diving in a shallow angle. Show me one clear video evidence on CLEAR water! The water ricochet is a matter of less than 5% event. This is a very thin marge, and the exception should't be the rule.

A very bad example! They were shooting on some targets in the water, and the ricochets you see here are from the bullets hitting the boot! Show me one single video of high caliber velocity projectile >30° ricochet on clear water and you'll win an massage coupon!

...I see now there have been four other debates on this issue... But I can guarantee you that I, personally have witnessed for hours how some guys sitting in a small boat were fishing with an M16! I didn't witness not one single ricochet! The shooting angle was not > 30°. No need to mention that the velocity of an M16 bullet is a lot less than the caliber of any machine-gun used on planes. The ricochets I'm talking about are happening in DCS at an angle > 30°!

Maybe the blunt headed one hitting the water at an angle of less than 10°. All type of guns used in DCS have pointed projectiles! The rest may only happens in your dreams with a little bit magic... Additional Edit It was a misplaced unnecessary sarcasm... Apologies Also pointed headed Bullets do ricochet. I was wrong.

Isn't weird to see bullets ricochet on water? We heard Jesus walked on water, so maybe the water is holy and Jesus is in the Cockpit!? The Programmers have done a pretty good job in simulating the white mushroom effect when bullets are bouncing on water, which is quite different from those which bounce on the ground with its appropriate ricochets. So if the simulation recognize the difference between hard and liquid surfaces, they only have to delete this beautiful ricochet effect on water, by just deleting this algorithm out of equation. Really no extra work! The advantage out of it is that the Graphic-Card has less calculation to fulfill, which is at the same time a relief of strain to the CPU. So For the sake of total reality, think about in the next Update. Additional Edit To avoid any further misunderstanding and bevor any transverse reader gets the wrong picture: in my reply further down on this page, I've cleared out what I think is not real in the Ricochet visualisation when I've said: "The ricochets I'm talking about are happening in DCS at an angle > 30°!" My statement above is ambivalent, but it does not exclude the fact that Bullet do ricochet on water! I've also clarified this point of view in my reply on Page 6, 07-31-2013, 02:15 AM "Also the Ricochet's deflection in DCS springs up 45° off the water should be a lot flatter. " The scientific outcome of Ricochet researches on water corner incoming Bullets angle between 0° & <18°