philstyle Posted August 6, 2018 Share Posted August 6, 2018 I have been playing around with the density values of the static smoke objects, and I've found that the LEAST dense values (i.e. 0.1 and 0.2) provide the most realistic looking smoke (i.e. a nice transition between smoke to haze to clear) as well as being the most FPS friendly, which allows the use of more of them. I also then noted that the contrails coming from the B17s in particular are very dense/ thick. I was wondering if it might be possible to half the density of the contrails (and maybe even reduce the volume of the cylinder they occupy by anout 25%)? I think they would look more realistic AND at the same time this could provide a few FPS. On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Orso Posted August 6, 2018 Share Posted August 6, 2018 Yeah, I've wondered about this myself. When the contrails leave the engine, they are currently FAR too large and dense, if you compare to era photos and films. They might 'expand' after wards, but exactly how much and how dense I couldn't say. I don't think they should act like smoke-screens in the sky, but I have no actual evidence of that thought. When you hit the wrong button on take-off System Specs. Spoiler System board: MSI X670E ACE Memory: 64GB DDR5-6000 G.Skill Ripjaw System disk: Crucial P5 M.2 2TB CPU: AMD Ryzen 7 7800X3D PSU: Corsair HX1200 PSU Monitor: ASUS MG279Q, 27" CPU cooling: Noctua NH-D15S Graphics card: MSI RTX 3090Ti SuprimX VR: Oculus Rift CV1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reflected Posted August 6, 2018 Share Posted August 6, 2018 Agreed! Facebook Instagram YouTube Discord Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emmy Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 The 8th Air Force had a Meteorologists who worked very hard to help the pilots fly at altitudes that would avoid leaving contrails as much as possible... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] http://www.476vfightergroup.com/content.php High Quality Aviation Photography For Personal Enjoyment And Editorial Use. www.crosswindimages.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xvii-Dietrich Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 An internet image search for "B-17 contrails" returns numerous photographs. These show different densities for B-17 contrails, varying from quite disperse to some as thick as those currently (07-Aug-2018-Beta) rendered in DCS. However, I agree with the original post that it would be of great benefit to turn down the density. My reasoning for this, is to make the trailing edge of the contrail (the point way behind the aircraft where it no longer renders) less distinct. Presently, the contrail is very thick for several kilometres and then it stops abruptly. Making the contrail less diffuse would definitely help with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philstyle Posted August 7, 2018 Author Share Posted August 7, 2018 Presently, the contrail is very thick for several kilometres and then it stops abruptly. Making the contrail less diffuse would definitely help with this. Yup. Same goes for the Smoke effects on the ground. If you use smoke densities above 0.3 (in the FMB) you end up with super-thick smoke followed by a very abrupt termination of the smoke plume that looks . . . silly.... By using a lower density value (0.1 or 0.2) the smoke palls blend out quite nicely. Playing four or five of them in clsoe proximity allows the "ends" of the plumes to overlap a little, resulting in almost a haze effect. If the same were done with the contrails (lower density) then I would expect simiarly ice results. On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts