jakm75

Very much so, but at this point, It's almost 'par' for ED at the moment. We have DTC, bomb physics, SDBs,dynamic campaign among other things holding back the developement of various different parts of the game and modules which have been an ongoing issue since forever. Whatever though, best I'll do is vote with my wallet..

So... The logistics, the entire theme behind this module, almost the entire reason to buy it... won't be available on release? I'll sit this one out, thanks.

I've had this happen a couple times with mk82s... so I don't think it's exclusive. But settings were: 4*mk82 RP MPL, 10 feet. Both CFTs selected.

Look at what BN said... You're full of it.

Enough to know that 14Gs of repeated manuevering would result in a bent wing. There is a reason that most pilots try to ease into a turn rather than ripping the stick... this also is multiplied concern with wing loads. Such as an external tank. if I have a tank, on a hornet, with another 3000 pounds added to the center of a wing and pull 14Gs in a hornet... it doesn't take a scientist to tell you that 14*3k= 42,000 pounds of force, in one area, pulling the wing down. That's the equivelent to a whole other plane, in addition to the rest of the wing pulling down on it. I don't need a major in material science to tell you what happens when that much force is exerted on 'steel' let alone the softer and 'not as strong' alloy that the least of your worries is a 'bent wing'. But hey, if you think a dinky wing off a hornet can hold upwards of 42k+ pounds of force with no damage.. be my guest and do a similar test IRL.

This is all I'm getting at. XD

What did I say in there? Go on... what does it say? "You're obviously numbed by the hornet if you think that 12-13Gs can be seen and no damage occurs." Now... take a moment.. read what BN said... I am not saying you experience 'wing failure' 'a snap' or 'a crack'... Instead, a bent wing at the very least. But in DCS, no failure can occur until 15Gs... There is no damage in between, no buildup, just 'pop' the moment you hit 15Gs. It's just that, realistically, if a plane saw 13Gs, 11 repeated, etc... it'd see some form of deformation of the wings, until the wings eventually gave.

You could've just read a few sentences and see what I mean... The hornet, is not typically authorized to exceed it's set G-limiter... I would also love to see an aircraft which can see 11Gs (Which is a very stressful spec) and not see the wings atleast damaged...) You're obviously numbed by the hornet if you think that 12-13Gs can be seen and no damage occurs. I am also referring to repeated 11Gs of stress which doesn't accumulate to damage.

11Gs hit repeatedly... 11.6 peak. no deterioration of the wings to any noticeable extent... seems rather unrealistic for a hornet to get that much abuse and not see at-least a bit of bend in their wing structure. NATOPs declassified FA18C manuals show a maximum operating G limit of 7.5Gs, to exceed the suggested G-limits in excess of 50% seems a tad silly to walk away unscathed repeatedly. wing load test.trk