zzzspace

You sure about that GG? </P-51 flying missions in South Osetia theatre in modern era environs> ;) Shoot for the head! ED might end up with a Stalker version of CA here. lol :D

lol :D .. where's the green arrows pointing-up on this site anyway?

Sorry, it's just that you're question just comes accross as quite rediculous to me.

Yes I KNOW that for god's sake, and that is exactly why I said what I said. They were BOTH detected during the very same testing. Scheesh! You could check yourself.

The Su-25T is not a supersonic aircraft. Why this obvious fact is not sufficently clear is beyond me. The post I made, second from the top of the first page, is quite detailed and very specific about what was checked. Every fixed wing aircraft in DCS was checked. Most people would tend to presume that if I checked a B-52, and A-50 etc, they probably weren't supersonic. This is what I said: All civil jet aircraft seem to be OK. All propeller driven transports and Tu95 etc., seemed to work OK. All jet transports, tankers, AEW, and B-52 FrontEngine seem to work OK. All other jet bomber FrontEngines do not work. All jet fighter FrontEngines do not work. All jet strike/attack aircraft FrontEngines do not work. Do you think I put them all in a mission set to 800 knots and just didn't notice they were supersonic or something? :D BTW: Nate repeated this test and found the same thing. :P

Removed by zzz

What?! If the aircraft were SLOW at the time of observation, why would they be supersonic, especially if one of them is not a supersonic jet? I think I'm writing English here ... I know exactly what he meant ... do you?

Edited: moved to other thread

This is what I said in the post above yours: "It seems to occur at lower speeds, when the Ai is trying weally, weally hard to maintain a certain speed range a little too tightly," Plus the Su-25T doesn't do supersonic too well. :)

Don't know if this setting is right in the 'begin' sound's .sdef gain = 1.13 The others are both; gain = 2.85 Which seems about right. BTW: I have this week already done something similar with all the figher's guns, and tweaked their sound as well. I think you'll approve. :)

Yes! ... love it ... will use it.

That's one sweet model. I also think you should go ahead and provide a copy of the altered LUAs Keshman. It's a bit too much to expect people to understand the process, manually find, then edit them, and also to not expect errors and omissions to be introduced during the process. If users of your mod then want to include their own specific settings into your LUA versions, then all they have to do is copy and paste them back in, plus these people will already be proficient with doing stuff like that and I'm sure they'll have backups of their preferred settings. Just make sure that the version you're providing is in a final and finished form, so won't have to be changed again for a long time, because people will not want to keep manually changing LUA's each time you update your mod's features. You could perhaps also consider asking people to list what LUA changes could be incorporated (popular useful additions or edits) into your own soundpack's files? Just make sure that people down-loading it understand it's a single-player mod. ;)

I've now seen the F/A-18C, F-15C and Su-25T doing this same thing, the fluttering, "will I or won't I", indecisive rapid-fire use of airbrakes. It seems to occur at lower speeds, when the Ai is trying weally, weally hard to maintain a certain speed range a little too tightly, so it keeps on adjusting, until it ... well, ... sometimes it doesn't stop. We need the Ai cruise control a tad less obsessive about its allowable speed-range modulation.

Found a series of sound and animation bugs within the fixed-wing flyables ported into DCS World (don't know about the BS2 yet as I don't have it installed), described within this link: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1520264&postcount=119 EDIT: See also Made some new observations today of the expression/habit of the flaps and airbrake sound isues on the DCSW flyables. Basically, the Ai seems to get the sounds ok, but human fliers don't get them. Details described here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1521265&postcount=154 "Plus I discovered today that the airbrake mechanical sounds on the A-10C do in fact function and you can hear them, ... BUT, as per the flaps on the Su-25T, it's not for humans ... only the Ai are allowed to have such sounds play. " http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1521295&postcount=156 "RE the A-10C air brakes, I watched them land in order to check various sounds, and when they slow on rollout and drop them you can clearly hear them working. I presume you'll hear them in other phases of flight also, I just didn't notice if they did. I checked this behaviour twice. So the airbrake sound does work on the hog, it sounds fine in fact, just not with a human flier in the jet. I suspect for the Su-25T, that the flaps no-sound issue, and the absence of wind noise, when it's airbrakes are deployed may be the same thing, because I saw two days ago that the flaps did make sound for the Ai in the Su-25T ... but I need to check that the airbrakes do make a wind sound when the Ai is flying the Su-25T ..."

Nice video! Hadn't seen that one.

Have you noticed the Russian CIWS on capital ships can kill ASMs, but the same system on Tunguska can't kill ARMs? I presume that would be to do with the Ship's radar and thermo-optic cuing the missile to a better vector, but is it really so? In FC2.1 I've seen Tunguska (and Buk) also try to engage ARMs, but not in DCS World. Is that the way it's supposed to be? Sorry if this has already been discussed elsewhere.

Nate, when a flight of two aircraft (perhaps more) takes-off, whilst illuminated by an enemy SAM radar (a hawk in this case), the second aircraft often goes into a steep dive, soon after reaching about 500 feet alt off the runway, and then will hit water or land -- not always hitting it, but often hitting it. I'll try to get you a track of this, and post it here

Can't hear a peep out of these within the Su-25T, even with a standard installation. Tried boosting gain within the .sdef's, still nothing. But the standard sdef settings look ok, and the files are ok too, so suspect this is bugged.

The issue I discovered with the Su-33's airbrake use still exists, but this time I've found the Su-27 is doing it too - in the same way as I've originally described above. It appears the FrontEngine sounds also still do not work. Could someone please look into these bugs.

It is randomised because of this bit of script within the "Hit.sdef" file, in the "sdef/Damage" folder; wave = { "Effects/Damage/Hit1", "Effects/Damage/Hit2", "Effects/Damage/Hit3", "Effects/Damage/Hit4", "Effects/Damage/Hit5", } There is an explanatory note within the file ".sdef", that is situated within the folder /sdef/ i.e. -- RANDOM SAMPLE SELECTION: -- If you provide a list of samples, in this way: wave = {"sample0", "sample1", "sample2"} -- on each playback a random sample from the list will be used. I like your video example, as it makes more sense to me also, when implemented with specific impact sounds for specific gun and cannon calibres. I came to the same conclusion as you when testing new weapon impact sounds last week. However, I suspect we're not going to be able to de-randomise the hits, in the way which you have in the video (i.e. I realise you made all the 'hit' files to have the same .wav sound in them for your displayed examples) But I also think this random file replay function has incredible possibilities, especially when applied to the jets, and to weapon detonations, and even to things like rocket motors or stuff like different parachute openings, and missile launch variations. I've yet to experiment with all of this stuff, but I plan to do that soon. I've experimented with pitch and the sound cones a lot, and a few other of the .sdef script options, and they all work great for detailed shaping and polishing of the sound-image. There are many options and possibilities here, and it's going to be a lot of fun finding novel ways to use them. What I personally would love to hear in the sound-image is the sound of bombs falling, and artillery and tank shells before they hit their target. I suspect that is not going to be a trivial sound-engine level development. Tank rounds, cannon shells and the bombs are discrete objects within the sim, so these can all be made to emit sounds (i.e. of them displacing air during their passage), just like any other object can emit. But the emitting air is not travelling forwards, with the projectiles and missiles, so the sound emission from the disturbed air should therefore not be doppler-shifted (a rocket motor's emission is of course doppler-shifted, because the emitting motor is actually moving forward with the missile). I think the key here is to show ED what we can do, with these existing options, and then they'll have a much clearer idea of how to develop the sound engine's available options even further, as it will become apparent to all what those next steps will need to be. Your variable weapon calibre 'hit' approach is obviously one of those. -- One of the aspects that I don't like within DCS:WORLD's sound implementation, at the moment, is how the cannon shells from the AAA are all using the missile's explosion sounds! What this means it that when a Tunguska or ZSU fires at a helicopter or jet, the shells travel up past it, and reach the end of their flight at about 5 km down-range, where they all explode with small puffs of smoke. That bit's fine, BUT, each individual cannon shell exploding then sets off a sound of a missile warhead airbursting! And those missile detonations can now be heard up to 15 miles away, in a realistic sound-image ... which becomes a significant problem, with several occurring per second ... for up to several minutes of AAA firing off bursts into the air). So I hope that ED will change that particular aspect of the cannon shell detonations before the SIM's release date (hopefully within the next public BETA version), otherwise it'll interfere quite a lot with making a realistic sound-image of the extended battlefield. Basically, the AAA cannon shells, when exploding/expiring, should only be making an short airburst 'pop' sound, so these will need a separate .sdef file, to separate them from the missile warhead detonation sounds, and their audible scale and range settings.

Fully understood Keshman, and thankyou for that, and the permission to utilise your sound collection within the sound file and sound-image modification I'm putting together for DCS:WORLD BETA. I've already extensively modified the standard armour and battle sound, and re-balanced their .sdef files. So your sound files should plug right-in, with few if any changes, except maybe to make sure the amplitudes are fully set to 100% of their available peak range. I'll make an audio recording of what I've done so far, and then make a second recording of your substitute sounds, using the same sound-image settings, and at various distances, then send you a PM with a link to those recordings, for your impressions and feedback. I'll also send you a PM with a private link to my full sound mod (when it's finally basically ready) so that you can listen to it within it's full-scale battle context, so can suggest any refinement or corrections etc., before being released. Looking forward to it, because the battle sounds I've already worked into DCS:WORLD are all rather vivid. :) That said, it'll still take a few renditions of settings to perfect the realism of both the sounds, and of the sound-image. So the first version will just be the foundation to expand and refine it further (there's a lot that I can't work on, or polish, untill all of the flyables become available). I've got a lot of hours at my work this coming week, but should have something ready for you to test by about the end of weekend after next (i.e. in about 9 days). cheers zzz

That's fine Keshman, I understood your reply fully. I've been re-balancing all of the standard sound levels, distances, orientations and perspective's from which things can be heard, via the .sdef files. And it's making a huge difference to what's ultimately need in order to realistically hear much of what's going on across a ground and air battle-space that's up to 25nm wide. Basically we need to re-balance the very loudest and longest-ranging sounds (i.e. that of thunder) with the quietest and closest-range sounds (i.e. that of rain drops falling), and then fit everything else in between those two ends of the sound distance and amplitude spectrum, so all sounds can be heard at realistic distances, and also at realistic relative amplitudes and orientations, with respect to all the other sounds. I've now done this for most of the sounds in DCS:WORLD, but even just last night when testing it, I could hear a strange sound. It turned out to be flares so I looked around for the source of the flares, and it was coming from a Ka-50 behind a ridgeline, about a mile away ... so I could just hear it's flares ... but I could not hear the helicopter's engines, or rotors, at all ... lol. I had up to that point presumed the helicopters would be basically ok as standard, because they sound pretty good when close-up, but unfortunately, even the helicopters fade-out much too early with distance. So I'm still tweaking stuff like that. I'm saying this to you for one reason; to increase the plug-in 'compatibility' between respective sound mod files. This sim is now getting a bit too big for one person to try and get the sound of everything optimal or perfected within a "complete soundpack", so it's a good thing for people (like yourself) to start specialising in fine-tuning the sound in one particular area, namely, ground vehicles. So to get to this I've decided to give every sound 100% of it's sound file's maximum available amplitude (i.e. peak, before clipping), then adjust the gain level within every .sdef file so that in this way, any forthcoming max-amplitude .wav or .ogg sound files could be added to a "community sound-mod" audio simulation .sdef framework. Thus any file could be plugged into it, and would basically fit into a realistic sound image, immediately, as defined by the available .sdef files. So if we do this, and as a community 'mix' a realistic audio-simulation sound-image, for files to just be plugged into ... so then, instant and continuous development of a realism sound-pack becomes viable, and very rapid, because anyone can then contribute to making each individual sound file incrementally more realistic than the last one, and still the new file will fit into the audio image, and people will be able to immediately hear if the result is better or worse than how the last file performed. Plus there's much more fine control in doing it in .sdef's, plus you've got to adjust the .sdef files anyway to create a realistic sound-image with distance, so why not do it all from within the .sdef, and thus provide a framework for anyone to plug their own sounds into, and still have them fit into a realistic audio simulation sound-image that everyone can access and use? As from there it's just a case of piecemeal plug-in improvements to each individual sound file (better recordings, better editing, better sound-matching, better pitch mixing, better quality samples, etc.), in order to constantly make DCS:WORLD sound better and better, over time. Indeed, Eagle could host a constantly community edited and updated set of .sdef, settings, for DCS:WORLD, so that you can set the sim so that when it boots, it checks the Eagle online sdef database, and updates the local sdef's to the latest standard (and could provide links to audio file mod updates as well) So then, in that case, any sound mod, made by any one, could just plug straight into the existing .sdef sound-image audio simulation, if the .wav or .ogg amplitudes of the file were set to 100% of the peak amplitude, with in that sound file. Thus, if you created your sounds with 100% amplitude, they could be plugged directly into the .sdef audio environment sound image that I'm now creating, and they would immediately 'fit' into that fully re-jigged audio simulation's battlefield sound-image, with no further changes required to combine separate sound mods. And anyone else could do the same. This seems to me the logical best way forward, for various audio modders, in order to get their mods to work much better in the SIM than previously, and also much faster to update them. Certainly it would become very much easier to constantly develop and expand the quality of the sounds available in DCS:WORLD. -- I hope you can follow what I'm saying above, Keshman. :)

Sounds very nice. One question; how do they sound further away? Like 250 and 500 meters or so from the listener? Does the sound fade with increasing distance, as set within the sdef file, for each sound file, sound 'life-like'? This is the thing that will need to be balanced-out and mixed, in a battlefield engagement context.

Ok, you agree, you're more astute and less bamboozled by the pro-camp cheersquad BS than most, apparently. But seriously, show me where your thesis is born-out by evidence that I "attacked a dev" somewhere above. sheesh! Your apology has been pre-accepted.

Completely incorrect, afterburners are loud in predominantly the rear hemisphere of the aircraft, especially when a jet is approaching, particularly if it's a fast mover. The sound coming from the front of the jet is easily and plainly heard, in that case, regardless of afterburners being lit, and that is why I am referring to this. I'm not presumptuously wise, I'm merely correct. And if you read my comment before responding thus, you would realise I said that the sound dev should have been left to do their job, because it seems fairly clear that they were not permitted to complete it as they would have, and someone else has come in and made a right mess of their good work, after the fact. I think the sound engine dev did a great job, it's the configuration of it that's been all messed up.