AB FX and wing flex (flying) WiP yet?

[fl0w]

The effects from the side view of the afterburner look good in the correct lighting conditions, ie. dusk or night where the flame is dynamic. However, a total back view shows the horrifying textures and the engine seems to destroy lighting in the daytime.

[Blinde]

I agree with watermanpc's opinion of both fx. More wing flex would be nice and seemingly appropriate from the vids I have seen so far. As for the AB, I also know that sadly HB is limited by DCS's engine.

]

DCS Hornet looks good enough, so does F-15 and Flanker for example, compared to current F-14 footage.

[Torso]

DCS Hornet looks good enough, so does F-15 and Flanker for example, compared to current F-14 footage.

 

Good enough does not mean correct or even exhibiting correct effects. DCS has HUGE room for improvement when it comes to anything related to lights or light emitting anything. I just am pretty convinced at this point the engine is just not capable or the devs aren't. I will go with engine as it is less of a trigger choice.

Edited December 18, 2018 by Torso

[Blinde]

I can't disagree but even those modules that I mentioned look better than current F-14 afterburner effects.

[turkeydriver]

I can't disagree but even those modules that I mentioned look better than current F-14 afterburner effects.

 

Based on filtered photos taken during specific lighting conditions that make the AB plume stand out. I agree the plume could use a bit of lengthening but comparing the plume of one model to another based on what looks neato doesn't really have credibility. I would like an F-14 that spouts 40-50ft afterburner plumes when above 500kts but that's just based on what pretty pictures I've seen. Not based on what the human eye was seen taking the photo. We haven't seen the HB tomcat demo at speed at dusk or dawn- they may look more dramatic...…and the burner plume we all really want is the TF-30 bright yellow or white. The F-110 is cool and looks great at night, but doesn't hold a candle to the TF-30. It hasn't even been shown yet.

[Cobra847]

Worth noting is that the VFAT video is recorded with a low gamma setting. This has significant impact on the visuals of e.g. the AB.

 

We generally master our art for physically accurate 2.2. As seen here;

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/videos/285254165669879/

[Blinde]

 

Someone at Heatblur should really see this and compare the footage with their product and think that does their F-14 afterburner effects look like properly done. ;)

 

Seriously, they need to be remade and look like that. What's the point to make super realistic model with bells and whistles and leave one of the most visually stunning aspect in so poor state?

Edited January 4, 2019 by Blinde

[Banzaiib]

 

Someone at Heatblur should really see this and compare the footage with their product and think that does their F-14 afterburner effects look like properly done. ;)

 

Seriously, they need to be remade and look like that. What's the point to make super realistic model with bells and whistles and leave one of the most visually stunning aspect in so poor state?

 

What? Are you serious? If you look at your video and the Heatblur video directly above, I'd say HB did a great job! (maybe I misunderstood your post?)

 

As said previously, our eyes adjust automatically and see with greater dynamic range than any imaging sensor (camera). You have to calibrate your camera with great precision to capture things as your eye would see them, and even then, this can be very difficult or impossible as ambient light decreases. You also have to take into account the ability of a display media (monitor or photograph) to display dynamic range. Even if a sensor could accurately capture image data like your mark-1 eyeball, that doesn't mean you'd see it on your monitor. Developers have to choose a fairly limited dynamic range to display, and again, this is most apparent when rendering the transition to low light conditions (dawn and dusk).

 

Source: been a photographer for over a decade.

 

Edited January 4, 2019 by Banzaiib

[Blinde]

What? Are you serious? If you look at your video and the Heatblur video directly above, I'd say HB did a great job! (maybe I misunderstood your post?)

 

As said previously, our eyes adjust automatically and see with greater dynamic range than any imaging sensor (camera). You have to calibrate your camera with great precision to capture things as your eye would see them, and even then, this can be very difficult or impossible as ambient light decreases. You also have to take into account the ability of a display media (monitor or photograph) to display dynamic range. Even if a sensor could accurately capture image data like your mark-1 eyeball, that doesn't mean you'd see it on your monitor. Developers have to choose a fairly limited dynamic range to display, and again, this is most apparent when rendering the transition to low light conditions (dawn and dusk).

 

Source: been a photographer for over a decade.

 

 

I'm serious. Just look at HB's previous work, Viggen which also has same kind of simple textured afterburner with yellow and orange texture. It's way too short even in darker light conditions and missing those "circles" in flames that can be seen in so many fighter pictures, videos etc.

 

And I've seen lots of airshows over the past 20 years so I know what i'm talking about. I also spent one year of my mandatory military service in air force watching Hornets so don't give me that crap about our eyes seeing this and that and cameras doing that.

Edited January 4, 2019 by Blinde

[DD_Fenrir]

Wow Blinde, such a well documented and argued response. :doh:

 

If ignorance is bliss you should be nearly orgasmic!

[Cobra847]

We know it's too short; but if we make it longer - it looks far too bright in daylight conditions. Emissive materials are not easy to get perfect in all conditions.

[Strikeeagle345]

We know it's too short; but if we make it longer - it looks far too bright in daylight conditions. Emissive materials are not easy to get perfect in all conditions.

 

the hornet seems to have it close, although the color inside the nozzle is off. but the afterburner cone seems done well. Its hard to see in the day time in game but is pretty prominent at night if my memory serves me well.

 

There has to be some way of doing it?

 

Also, this is obviously something that can be looked at, at a later date.

[Nexus-6]

We know it's too short; but if we make it longer - it looks far too bright in daylight conditions. Emissive materials are not easy to get perfect in all conditions.

I honestly don't care if it isn't perfect. This is far and away the most thorough F-14 mimicry that anyone has ever done....ever.

 

 

If it LOOKS like a Tomcat, SOUNDS like a Tomcat, and most importantly, HANDLES like a Tomcat, then it's good enough for me and probably the bulk of this community.

 

 

All you need to do is get it as close as you can get it. I don't think anyone can reasonably expect more than that.

[Gunslinger22]

Digging up something very old here but with how amazing the F-4E bends and warps are we going to see an update to the Tomcats wing flex? From all media I can find it seems that there should be a substantially greater level of movement and flex from the F-14, especially how the wings flex from the over wing fairing outwards, not half way down the wing. 
 

This is a great example of truly how much the wings flex both at low and high loads. Would love to see it updated when the F-4E is released. 

Edited January 2, 2024 by Gunslinger22

[Ala12Rv-watermanpc]

On 12/31/2023 at 1:27 AM, Gunslinger22 said:

Digging up something very old here but with how amazing the F-4E bends and warps are we going to see an update to the Tomcats wing flex? From all media I can find it seems that there should be a substantially greater level of movement and flex from the F-14, especially how the wings flex from the over wing fairing outwards, not half way down the wing. 
 

This is a great example of truly how much the wings flex both at low and high loads. Would love to see it updated when the F-4E is released. 

 

 

Yes, there is clearly not enough bending/flex in the Tomcat (and all other modules) since the initial point of the flex is way too far in the outer side of the wing. The flex should start in the infinitesimal start of the wing, inmediately after the insertion with the fuselage, but thats not the case in any module as far as I can tell. Of course, in that infinitesimal slide, the flex is zero (otherwise the wing would be broken) but the point is, the flex starts way too far on the wing, leading to a weak/insuficient deformation in ALL modules. I guess this is done this way to avoid modeling pylons movement but I would love to see improvements in this regard in DCS.

[r4y30n]

On 7/22/2024 at 7:09 AM, Ala12Rv-watermanpc said:

I guess this is done this way to avoid modeling pylons movement but I would love to see improvements in this regard in DCS.

Thankfully not an issue on the F-14.

[JupiterJoe]

Blimey!    Good thing it has a titanium wing-box.