Bigger Explosions For Fuel Tankers & Fuel Trucks

[Wrecking Crew]

Suggest to make bigger explosive fireballs for fuel carriers.

 

Wrecking Crew

 

:idea:

[jp203000]

The request has been for a long time，and I think something's wrong with the explosion. If the distances between two tanks are within the lethal radius, then a bomb hitting one will also destory another, but because of the bad explosion , it looks like two bombs destory two tanks separately.

Excuse my poor English!

[HiJack]

It is demanding CPU and GPU to do bigger explosions. I think ED have set it good fo now but they maybe should implemet a "Very High" settings with bigger explosions to the SIM. But then again, I ONLY WANT BUG FIXES NOW!

 

(HJ)

[wolfstriked]

Maybe a modder?Arma has blah explosions and the modders make them extraordinary.

[dooom]

yes - bigger fuel explosions would be a great wish! that kind of feedback would be nice indeed - also more varied secondaries/smoke densities.

[HiJack]

Yes. For now a MOD would be the best thing.

[sobek]

Hmm, i kinda feel this is a two edged sword. You will only get a fireball if the fuel is vaporized or thrown about very quickly, otherwise it will just burn. So, in the case of a bomb hitting one, i agree, there probably should be a fireball, but if a fuel truck is hit (and destroyed) by AP ammunition, the fuel might not even ignite. In the absence of any system that checks what caused the damage (ressource intensive), i'd rather have small explosions than big ones.

[SmokeyTheLung]

You can add an explode unit trigger in the ME (you can change the volume of the explosion so it looks massive) with a condition of "unit damaged/dead"

 

I like to place one or two random enemy trucks laden with explosives :D in my missions. Don't get to close for those strafings runs. Reminds me of a lot of those great WWII ground attack guncams where the pilot scores a lucky hit... And BOOM!

[elchacal]

It would be great but, how about the system resources consumption?

[Frostiken]

I think he meant a larger fireball, not explosion. A fuel truck would definitely not explode, but would certainly burn. A fully-loaded KC-135 hitting the ground would probably release a fireball big enough to be seen fifty miles away.

Edited January 7, 2012 by Frostiken

[Demongornot]

I think he meant a larger fireball, not explosion. A fuel truck would definitely not explode, but would certainly burn. A fully-loaded KC-135 hitting the ground would probably release a fireball big enough to be seen fifty miles away.

 

Technically the only difference against explosion and simple burning its the speed of the burning for the same thing, a burning thing like tree paper and more just create eat, fuel burn more faster and create extreme eat and big fireball who can burn people far away but a light shockwave, and explosion like gas or bombs burn more faster and the eat wave create a big shockwave who are more dangerous than the eat...

 

For me fuel its between burn and explosion but you are totally right, fuel create a massive fireball with light shockwave (i thing a good tank like T-90 or M1A1/2 next to the explosion will have nothing expect feel "moderate" eat for people inside but for gaz tank the same armored vehicle like the Russian/US Tank or other can be damaged due to shockwave and if its not the tank can be intact but the shockwave can kill people inside...

 

Like this fireball

or like that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5m-VgWwfh0c for petrol and this explosion http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFFDLk1fXcU for gas

The only explosion from a fuel tank is the fuel vapor who will ignite the rest of the fuel and create massive fireball

 

So yeah i agree we want big fireball !!!

With new explosion/smoke and fire effect too please...

[EtherealN]

The thing is that depending on how it's all hit, there might not even be a fire. You need to ignite, and while fuel is definitely flammable it's actually still pretty patricular about what's needed to make it burn as far as oxygen/fuel mixture.

 

Links to videos of fires isn't good enough, since this self-selects for those cases where a major fire is caused in the first place. What would be needed is actual data for what happens when munition X strikes a truck carrying Y and in how many cases. For example you can see the classic "debunkings" that have been done on hollywood's treatment of the subject - in movies you always get this nice big boom and a nice toasty fire when you shoot a car in the gas tank, but in reality what you usually get is... a hole in the gas tank... Consider the concept of self-sealing fuel tanks in combat aircraft - this is specifically for cases where weapons or shrapnel has gone through the fuel tank and the only thing that happened is that there's a leak that needs to be sealed.

 

Of course, if you hit with incendiary ammunition you are more likely to get a fire, but even then you still need to create conditions where you can get the appropriate fuel/air mixture. (Or heat the volume of flammables above it's spontaneous combustion temperature.)

[Cali]

People seem to want Hollywood explosions, damn movies!

[Demongornot]

@EtherealN Yes of course but actual explosion in DCS are so big for fuel vapor ignition and so small for fuel itself fire, In the Georgia the air pollution are moderate so we have good oxygen quantity in the air and in summer with little wind a all the natural condition are here, we just need good temperature for ignition, like the truck/tank in fire and a minimal wind for more oxygen but not so strong wind or the air will kill the heat.

The best will be to just make a script, with weather condition are here just after a random time have a random chance for see fireball, cause we can't in real time calculate every condition like structure heat and fire potential of the vehicle and more that will eat CPU power, Fireball are not present every time but we don't see fuel truck in fire every day and several time that.

My video link are not for show that it can explode i just want to show the difference against a fireball from fuel ignition and explosion like gas tank ^^

 

Its not a really needed thing but that can be really nice and realistic to see every time little explosion from vapor and after that sometime and if condition are here secondary massive fireball.

 

@Cali I think several people want to see real fireball, maybe we have people too who want see explosion from movie :/

I hate how movie exaggerate everything...

[EtherealN]

Errr, what does air pollution have to do with oxygen quantity? If you have enough pollution to noticeably affect oxygen levels everyone is already dead. :P Also, as regards the required fuel/air mixture, you can also have too much oxygen, so even if there was a change it would just change which circumstances would cause a fireball - wouldn't make it impossible.

 

I'm not opposed to eye candy, but if the argument is about realism then it does have to be made realistic, and that's what I mean about the dearth of sources relevant for guidance - in this case there should also be a change made where the majority of targets hit does not burn at all. ;) As it stands right now, the explosions are partly there to indicate that a unit is "out of play", which compensates for the current inability to properly model mission kills and similar circumstances.

Edited January 7, 2012 by EtherealN

[Eddie]

Yes, for certain targets, fireballs and/or long burning fires can and do result. But more often that not, there is no fire at all, at most you'll get a bit of smoke from thing slowly smouldering away.

 

Example of the effect of a 2000lb JDAM

 

 

When it comes to thinks like the gun kills (yes even the GAU-8), it can be impossible to tell it a target is actually 'dead' from the air, even with a good TGP. Hell, I've seen footage from Brimstone strikes on MBts where unless you knew it'd been hit, you wouldn't be able to tell it wasn't still operational.

 

As EtherealN said, nobody is against eye candy, but it needs to be realistic. As it is now, where targets always explode and burn and you can easily tell something is dead, it's not realistic at all. I wonder how many people would complain if half the time they couldn't tell if a ground unit was still active, dead or disabled.

Edited January 7, 2012 by Eddie
Posting via the iPad leads to less than perfect spelling and grammar.

[EtherealN]

I wonder how many people would complain if half the time they could tell if a ground unit was dead or disabled.

 

If complaints about figuring out what is friendly or hostile is guidance... a lot of people. :D

 

It's a bit like the question of whether people really want completely realistic radars, and how many of them realize the false-positive problems that they'd get at the same time. (Though I'd personally love that - a bit more fog of war action to keep me thinking.)

[Bushmanni]

I don't think you can get a huge fireball unless you explode a fuel container with decent amount of explosives. If you put a Mk-82 or maverick to a fuel truck you would get a huge fireball for sure but with 30mm HE I don't think so. More likely it would just start to burn like an inferno but no Hollywood fireball. Hollywood creates fireballs by throwing fuel into the air by explosives as that's the only reliable way of getting a fireball. Fuel-air explosions are very hard to get to occur even if you try.

[magnetic]

I think smoke and explosions are very immersive inside war-game, and war sim.

Maybe sending question at Nikolay Brezin ( Smoke effects and new model format support inside flight manual programmers list).

•Why smoke and explosions are so poor ?

•It' is true than DCS-A10 don't use all core inside processor ?

•Why can not use illusion and false 3D effect for more smoke ? similar flat smoke seen by player ?

•And heat blur don't good too, I compare with X-plane10 and the exhaust gas from reactor are more accurate with reality (need more long, I think)

•Smoke from factory look like all equal, it's ugly. In real world, smoke are different size, and some don't smoke.

•All this little effect give immersive or not immersive flight simulator.

[213]

how many types do you want? maybe they should program a smoke simulator into this game. smoke down to the atomic level.

[leafer]

We're lucky ED didn't program the "pew pew" for GAU.

 

pew pew pew...

[Witchking]

Check out this footage for realistic effects. Actual A-10 footage. Ignore the song...terrible combo...just mute it.

 

http://youtu.be/5AEy7jWhbJg

[magnetic]

•And heat blur don't good too, I compare with X-plane10 and the exhaust gas from reactor are more accurate with reality (need more long, I think)

 

Here a good picture for heat blur http://www.flightchief.com/pictures/a-10/LiveFire/674G6532.jpg

[Frogisis]

Maybe it's just because I upgraded my video card around the same time and can turn on the HDR now, but does anyone else think the explosions in 1.1.1.1 look a little better? I turned off the HDR again and took another look and still thought so, but it might be my imagination.

 

But yeah, whenever ED has enough slack to think about something visual, more photogenic and realistic pyrotechnics would really bring the experience up a level. Everything else is so well done that with the flat black puffball explosions it's a little like replacing the cannons in the 1812 Overture with a guy yelling "boom!"

If they were upgraded overall I would actually be down with what someone mentioned earlier about having some hits (shaped charges?) be very subtle, where it'd be difficult to tell if a target was destroyed, since it would then be clear that it was modeled that way intentionally and still fell under the umbrella of "well-made explosions."

As long as I'm dreaming, how about a "Hollywoodize" slider in the options menu, where you can increase the size and fireball ratio of explosions and smoke clouds till your heart's content, or if a friend who asked you to show him what that baseball cap with the 3 metal prongs on it is used for starts talking about how much he likes HAWX?

[213]

why would it? it's the exact same effect.

 

also, why does everyone want a hollywood option? if you want something resembling call of duty or battlefield, you bought the wrong game. sorry.