PDA

View Full Version : Dust on a carrier deck and prop wash showing in the water from launching planes off a deck



Reschke
09-10-2004, 12:34 PM
A little nitpicky on my part but after having seen both jets and prop aircraft take off of carriers (video footage never in RL but wish to); I have never seen tires billow smoke on take off like the ones in the PF movies (Seafire movie especially as I watched it last evening.). Nor have I ever noticed prop wash from aircraft revving up engines and launching off a carrier. Aren't these just a little suspect if you are trying to pull off a "simulation" instead of an arcade game. As I said maybe a little nitpicky but hey I like realism and gameplay but sometimes realism far outweighs game play if you are supposed to be striving for a simulation. If this is a byproduct of the way that the IL-2 game engine handles landing gear contact with a surface then so be it but is there a way to change it?

Flame if you want its just a question.

Lcdr. Reschke
CO VF-17 " The Jolly Rogers"
The Jolly Rogers (http://www.vf-17.org)

Reschke
09-10-2004, 12:34 PM
A little nitpicky on my part but after having seen both jets and prop aircraft take off of carriers (video footage never in RL but wish to); I have never seen tires billow smoke on take off like the ones in the PF movies (Seafire movie especially as I watched it last evening.). Nor have I ever noticed prop wash from aircraft revving up engines and launching off a carrier. Aren't these just a little suspect if you are trying to pull off a "simulation" instead of an arcade game. As I said maybe a little nitpicky but hey I like realism and gameplay but sometimes realism far outweighs game play if you are supposed to be striving for a simulation. If this is a byproduct of the way that the IL-2 game engine handles landing gear contact with a surface then so be it but is there a way to change it?

Flame if you want its just a question.

Lcdr. Reschke
CO VF-17 " The Jolly Rogers"
The Jolly Rogers (http://www.vf-17.org)

vonSchnitter
09-10-2004, 01:31 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by vonSchnitter:
Hi Reschke,

a VF-17 CO should kno better ...
Do not mind me, the Black Sheep stuff ye know, people who ever heard about one Squadron because of a TV soap (soup ?) in their youth ..

some shots (official US NAVY colour Shots - you attribute credibility ..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

http://ww2airfronts.org/pf/pf4.jpg ww2airfronts.org/pf/pf4.jpg - Well - Landing

ww2airfronts.org/pf/pf5.jpg - take off

ww2airfronts.org/pf/pf6.jpg things go wrong.

From: Lawson/Tillman; U.S. Navy Air Combat. 1939-1946. A book republishing the Navy official colour pics

See - dust only when things go wrong .....

In the officicial pictography ... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
Cheers
vonSchnitter<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

TAGERT.
09-10-2004, 01:38 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Reschke:
A little nitpicky on my part<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>Agreed 100%

http://www.geocities.com/grantsenn/4ALL2SEE/PICTURES/UBI_FORUMS/MyUbiSig.jpg
TAGERT

vonSchnitter
09-10-2004, 01:41 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by vonSchnitter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by vonSchnitter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by vonSchnitter:
Hi Reschke,

a VF-17 CO should know better ...
Do not mind me, the Black Sheep stuff ye know, people who ever heard about one Squadron because of a TV soap (soup ?) in their youth ..

some shots (official US NAVY colour Shots - you attribute credibility ..... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif )

http://ww2airfronts.org/pf/pf4.jpg ww2airfronts.org/pf/pf4.jpg - Well - Landing
http://ww2airfronts.org/pf/pf5.jpg
http://ww2airfronts.org/pf/pf6.jpg things go wrong.

From: Lawson/Tillman; U.S. Navy Air Combat. 1939-1946. A book republishing the Navy official colour pics

See - dust only when things go wrong .....

In the officicial pictography ... http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_cool.gif
Cheers
vonSchnitter<HR></BLOCKQUOTE><HR></BLOCKQUOTE><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

vonSchnitter
09-10-2004, 01:44 PM
This stupid me does not get more than one pic per post to show ...

Is it me ? Please say it it is ....

I should not have diverted from simHQ ..

Cheers
vonSchnitter

Fliger747
09-10-2004, 02:54 PM
True enough on the tire dust and the wing waggling. The US planes were big, and heavy and pretty stable on takeoff.

The one thing that I have seen on rainy days, and in photos of HUMID days in the Pacific on Carrier launches is corkscrew vapor trails off of the prop tips. Due to a vortex formation just like the ones that very ocassioanlly form off of wing tips under similar conditions.

Perhaps, as with movie special effects, the illustrators enjoy seeing the results of what te CAN do, which tends to overwhelm what they should sometimes do.

IV_JG51_Razor
09-10-2004, 04:12 PM
Reschke, I couldn't agree more, and no, I don't think you're being too nitpicky at all.

When Oleg introduced the dust clouds behind planes, I thought it was pretty cool. But, when it was also present on concrete fields, I figured, 'OH well'. Now it appears we are going to have to put up with them on board carriers too. I wish Oleg would get rid of them all together if he can't restrict them to just dirt strips, or at the very least, to just land bases. It's a real immersion killer for me, especially when you see that the dust cloud is more prominent than the ship's wake!! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/51.gif

Razor
IV/JG51 11/12 Staffelkapitan
www.jg51.net (http://www.jg51.net)
Forgotten Skies Online War
http://www.forgottenskies.com/ForgottenWars/default.aspx
"Good judgement comes from experience, and experience comes from poor judgement"

Reschke
09-10-2004, 04:55 PM
Or more prominent than the huge push of what should be a tremendous bow waves for lack of a better term when the ship is moving forward. But you are correct about the wake that is trailing the ship. In my opinion it should be much more prominent and last longer than what it appears to in the pictures and films we are seeing.

Lcdr. Reschke
CO VF-17 " The Jolly Rogers"
The Jolly Rogers (http://www.vf-17.org)

Reschke
09-10-2004, 05:00 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fliger747:
The one thing that I have seen on rainy days, and in photos of HUMID days in the Pacific on Carrier launches is corkscrew vapor trails off of the prop tips. Due to a vortex formation just like the ones that very ocassioanlly form off of wing tips under similar conditions.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yep that is true but I haven't seen that on any of the shots either and its not as big of an immersion killer for me as the prop wash.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fliger747:
Perhaps, as with movie special effects, the illustrators enjoy seeing the results of what te CAN do, which tends to overwhelm what they should sometimes do.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

AMEN! Sometimes these artists do go a bit overboard. One thing I learned from a good buddy who used to work for Epic when he was building levels for Unreal2 is that less is more in some respects and if you are trying to create a feeling of actually being there then you may want to step away and view it as a customer would and then ask for suggestions on some items.

Lcdr. Reschke
CO VF-17 " The Jolly Rogers"
The Jolly Rogers (http://www.vf-17.org)

Fliger747
09-10-2004, 05:31 PM
Even from 40,000' (not that we will be flying that high in PF) the ships wake (Band of turbulent water from the screws) is what stands out and leads you visually right to the ship.

Periscopes were often spotted from their 'feather'.

From altitude, if the light is just right, you can see the generated waveforms, but it requires relatively calm seas, good visibility and having first spotted the ship!

VOL_Hans
09-11-2004, 01:47 PM
Do remember though, that a periscope wake and feather would be MUCH smaller and MUCH harder to spot than a ship wake.

Periscopes left a narrow wake about half the length of the average submarine, as long as the captain was smart. True, at high speeds, and when schnorkel masts were up, the wake and feather would increase, but it should still be very hard to spot a submerged submarine.

http://www.altitude.us/missions/The%20Volunteers/hanssig.jpg

Fliger747
09-11-2004, 03:15 PM
Typically anti-sub patrols were flown at 1000' of so, not so far from the ships, sort of an anti-sub CAP. From that altitude it is even possible in really clear water to see a sub submerged at periscope depth, though it doesn't pop right out at you.

No 'snorts' were used in the Pacific, though US subs would often come up briefly to 'radar depth' exposing the antenna for a few sweeps, ie. to get a RANGE. Periscopes need some attention to spot, but were spottable, and good sub skippers kept observations very short. Aircraft were the subs ultimate bane.