LiquidFuse

I agree, under that reasoning.

The reason I labeled it a flight envelope issue was because the F-15C could not hold a turn at its RL turning speed of 350 KIAS for more than a few seconds. This I stated on numerous previous posts. I can understand why you say it is not a flight envelope issue, but further thought on the subject will prove that the relativity between turning speed and back pressure required to hold that specified speed on the turn will create an almost constant G-load as long as this speed is held constant on a level circle turn. In real life, "turning speed" assumes that the pilot can hold the speed in question for prolonged periods of time, making it possible for him/her to perform a fight in that speed envelope. If the pilot cannot hold the speed, this speed would not be classified as "turning speed". What good is a "turning speed" if you cannot turn in it? :icon_roll The overall flight envelope is based on this. Hence the problem, if the F-15C's turning speed is 350 KIAS, then the pilot MUST be able to hold that turn for prolonged periods of time in order to fight in it. Finally, in real life, USAF pilots who cannot hold 7 G turns are classified with "low G tolerance". Regardless of what some may believe, USAF fighters are speed fighters pulling turns in the 7 - 9 G realm. They train for this, plain and simple.

You're absolutely right. LOL The only reason I began to do my own research was to prove some of my arguments once they were being disregarded simply as "bad flying". A track was posted afterwards that proved otherwise. The flight envelope issue is with the F-15C's inability to sustain a turn at its turning speed of 350 KIAS. I'm sure I don't need to explain further for you to realize that the current G-model does not allow for a sustained turn at this speed for more than a few seconds. Hence, the result is always a slow speed fight for all aircraft with A-LOC occuring at as little as 5 G's...F-15C forced to fight at 280-250 KIAS, where its turn rate is slower when compared to the flanker. The length of this thread is due the continued debate after ED "representatives" felt it was more prudent to defend the model at all costs before accepting the possibility that it was overdone in some areas. Cheers.

Hi GGTharos, I'm sorry, could you provide a source I can read that would support that statement? Nearly every source I have says otherwise, with the Eagle lacking in low speed / high AoA maneuverability due to the absence of automatic flap lowering like in the Super Hornet. Also, if you take notice on the Eagle's design, you can come to the conclusion that its shape is not for a high lift/drag scenario, but completely the opposite. The Eagle was aparently designed to reach Mach 2+ sacrificing wingspan, thus sacrificing low speed maneuverability. The Eagle's wingspan as FAR shorter than that of the Flanker. I cannot produce where I found the following, but I remember hearing (or reading) that USAF pilots train exceptionally hard to withstand high G's for very prolonged periods of time since it is critical to extract the last ounce of turning performance out of their fighters. Most USAF fighters turn at the 350-450 KIAS range - definitely not a slow speed realm.

S! Goshawk1, I agree with your post fully and I take this opportunity to point our the following: From the research that I've done this past month I can conclude that your personal tolerance is normal, where 7 G's is usually implicitely used as the benchmark G figure to test USAF pilots in (8 G's is used to test F-16 pilots). Consider the following: I've undergone consistent testing while flying the F-15C and under a normal dogfight situation, a sustained 7 G turn for at least 30 seconds is not possible in FC 1.1. Within the second or third turn, my pilot goes into A-LOC on a 300 KIAS turn holding 6 G's at a time frame of merely 14-16 seconds. I haver argued all along that 7 G's is the figure that modern pilots should be able to hold and is the NATO minimum G load factor that all flight crews need to withstand for 15 seconds in order to have "normal" G load tolerance. Again, the current G model does not allow for this to happen except on the very first turn after a fresh respawn. All subsequent turns result in A-LOC in 15 seconds or less at 6 G's, with 5 G's being the "turning G load" figure in which dogfights must be carried out in FC 1.1. - This means, sustained 5 G turn on an F-15C with 6,000 pounds of fuel onboard = 280 KIAS turn. - The turning speed for the F-15C is 350 KIAS. - At 280 KIAS, the F-15C is turning at about 70% of its total turn rate capacity. - At the same speed, the Flanker is turning close ot 100% of its total turn rate capacity. In conclusion, my argument with ED is that unless the pilots can withstand 7 G's for 30 seconds or more, the F-15C has no chance of fighting in speed figures in which it was designed to fight on (350 KIAS). Hence, the Flanker wins, nearly everytime. I have personally concluded that they are happy with this outcome.

LOL :icon_lol: Give me a break, are you serious? Grab your reading glasses before you attempt to read the following: 1 - Edit the G-model to allow for the F-15C to sustain a turn at its real world turning speed of 350 KIAS without going into A-LOC. 2 - I am an ONLINE PLAYER, not single play. The SERVERS control this, not my personal settings. Placed it nice and big in bold letters for you, there should be no mistakes here. Sorry buddy, but you can't excuse an oversensitive G-model with the existence of precise aiming at high G turns... There's no excusing 1 attribute with the effect of another... Just like there was no excuse for the Flanker not turning properly in 1.02 at low speeds because it kept stalling... Why don't we save ourselves some time and energy and you post here plain and clearly if you will do something about this, or not. I'm waiting for your answer.

What Ice 169th is describing here is known as A-LOC which is *almost* a G-LOC. Real pilots are trained to recognize light loss (their unique type of light loss) and to take appropiate action once they detect light loss. Light loss is the singlemost important symptoss of G-LOC, with a blackout being the last symptom. Real pilots don't go on pulling constant G's when their field of vision has shrunk to the size of a peanut. As I stated before, I recently talked to several pilots and one of them (KnellKnell) actually posted here that 7G's can be sustained for prolonged periods of time without A-LOC. I'm not sure which part of this statement is confusing to the Dev's. Instead, you (ED) make a track that shows several yanks and hard pulls with the pilot almost G-LOC'ed on several occasions and say this is how its supposed to be... Does the word brain damage mean anything to you? Do you truly think pilots go on to Gray/Black Out at every single hop? Why don't you get one of your "source" pilots to come in here and say "I G-LOC at 6 G's after 50 seconds EVERY TIME. I can't do any better than that". It is clear to me that you are more interested in defending your model than actually evaluating "the other data" that other players (and pilots) have posted here and truly consider the possibility that you may have gone overboard just a tad on the g-tolerances.

YO-YO, Please view this: http://169thpanthers.net/main/Tracks/Gz-1.zip This is a test track made by the CO of 169th Black Panthers putting the Full G Effects model to the test. As you will see in this track, he slowly pulls from 1 to 6 G's as gently as he can, holding G's at each integer every 10 - 20 seconds each. There is absolutely no hard turning or yanking in this track at any time...simple pull to 6 G's. Here its proven that the model goes into A-LOC at 6 G's in merely 10 - 15 seconds. The results from the track contradict the AnPetrovich data you just posted. I don't think that arguing over the pinpoint accuracy of the model is going to do anyone any good. What is clear here is that the current behavior of the model contradicts real world data, even the data you just posted, where it clearly states 6 G's for 70 seconds. FC 1.1 - 6 G's = A-LOC in 10 - 15 seconds. Please mark Ice's track for your review, which essentially proves and shows what I explained from the very beggining... :frown: Thank you.

1.02 operated in the exact opposite spectrum as 1.1. The change was so dramatic in fact, that the average turning speed for the Eagle went down from 350 - 450 KIAS (1.02) to 280 - 250 KIAS (1.1). Being tired of watching players doing loopies at 500+ KIAS (I hated this) without blacking out will surely give an itch to any realism "junkie" like myself and other pilots. On the 1.1 spectrum, the Eagle can't do sustained 500+ KIAS turns at 10G's anymore, which is great! But by the same token, it can't turn at 350 - 320 KIAS for more than a few seconds either. The latter range is where the Eagle turns best. So now the Eagle is forced to fly at lower speeds by necessity to keep its pilot from going into G-LOC. In short, the Eagle fights at 70-80% of its total turn rate in FC 1.1, 100% sustained turning capacity is not achievable anymore. So, the devs will need to do 1 of the following: 1 - Bring up the G-tolerances to a degree where the Eagle pilot can sustain a turn at its turning speed of 350 KIAS without going into G-LOC. 2 - Modify the Eagle's FM to allow 100% turning capacity at a lower speed. In other words, this would be lowering the turning speed of the Eagle to a speed range that the pilot can hold in FC without G-LOC. Please keep in mind that option #2 will cause the Eagle to fly more like a Flanker than a real Eagle, and as such it would be unrealistic. You're right, its not impossible. But think about this: For a Flanker pilot, how unpleasant would it be for him or her to have to fly the Flanker at high speed fights to win because the FM didnt allow accurate and proper slow speed turning? If this were the case, you would see this forum flooded with critical posts claiming that the Flanker sucks, crying outrage because its a Russian sim not properly modelling its own bird. Fair is fair gentlemen, all planes from all sides have to perform how they're meant to perform, not only as well as a G-limitation lets it.

The part where they discuss the 8G limit for relaxed G tolerance is a hypothetical case of a pilot withstanding 6 G's, prepping himself with lower G turns to get his heart rate up before the first high G pull. I have read and heard from several pilots recently that they have flown at 7G with their suit inflated and not have to strain at all or very little. The more I talk and read on the subject, the more I hear that the G limit that USAF pilots do talk about with some "fear" is 9 G's. Aparently this is extremely hard to achieve and mantain without A-LOC unless at top leg and abdominal shape coupled with the best strain manuever (G-Hook) and the best G-suit available. The F-16 keeps popping up and its "magic" seat with 30* degree rotation. lol :icon_lol:

Try lowering the effects setting to low.

Heres a link to an interesting Power Point briefing for Navy pilots. http://www.nomi.med.navy.mil/GTIP.PPT Cheers!

I completely agree that its relevant and valid. However, for the sake of simplicity of the thread (quite complex already) and making it as short as possible (quite long already), I agree that its best if we concentrate on the G issue affecting only the pilots for now. The thread is quite contested with the dev's taking very careful steps towards a decision to modify the model and other players here defending it against those that feel it is overdone. I personally will keep all my attention to the Pilot g-tolerance issue since this directly affects (in some cases destroys) online gameplay for some F-15C pilots. Cheers. :beer:

Right, and I complained about this during 1.02. Eagles were abusing G's and making cartoony turns combined with rudder and flaps pulling 10 G's and getting everyone's 6oc because the late model allowed this. In addition, please note that in 1.02, pilots were turning their Eagles at 500+ KIAS deliberately without G-LOC, which is absolute crap. Now its completely the opposite, the only way for the Eagle to even put up a fight is by flying with 35% of fuel (4000 - 5000 pounds), with FULL flaps down doing 150 knots stall turns with your stick about to snap off due to shaking. Sure, anyone can contest that you can use boom and zoom tactics (and I do), but sooner or later you will have to slow down to ridiculous speeds in order to get a good gun shot that is not head on when fighting the Flanker. What I'm asking is simply for the pilots to withstand not 8, not 9, but an acceptable 7 G's as per sources and centrifuge training done on USAF pilots. At 7 G's the Eagle can mantain a 350 - 320 KIAS as necessary to combat the slow speed high turn rate of the Flanker. Ignore this, and the Flanker will be become the F-22 of Lo-Mac skies...

Thank you, I completely concurr with you. I talked to a UK RAF pilot, which I won't name here, that lurks in HL from time to time and happened to be on last night. He flies in the F/A-18 and tells me that the G tolerances in FC 1.1 are more akin to personell classified with low G-tolerance. The better pilots can withstand sustained 7 G turns without G-LOC and 8 G for short amounts of time. 9 G's is a very short pull and goes into G-LOC after 5 or so seconds with current F/A-18 TLLS equipment.

Sorry, this has nothing to do with that in my case, I carefully watch my accelerometer to not pull more than 4 G's while on closure, then pull 7 g's on the initial turn usually, since I'm already slowed down to 350 - 320 knots for the merge turn. The MAXIMUM amount of time I can pull 7 G's for, even after a fresh respawn, is 15 seconds. After this the pilot starts to blackout, fast. :icon_excl Please note that I said 7 G's, not 9. I wouldn't be making my case that the pilot should be able to pull 9 G's without blacking out... :icon_roll You're right, some people do fly wrong, of course. However, I will be making a few tracks soon to prove some of my points. The tracks will be fights against some of the best 27 pilots in HL, while I fly the F-15. You would be in a position to watch my flight tendencies and judge for yourself if its a situation of careless yanking or simply G limitations pressed on the F-15 pilot that cause him to lose. This all too true in a real life situation, but this does not relate to Lo-Mac in any way shape or form since ALL planes use the same G effect model. Pilots in Lo-Mac don't do leg presses. No amount of slow speed turning will prepare my pilot to tolerate more G's... Like I said before, even after a fresh respawn, the maximum amount of time I can withstand 7 G's (not 8, nor 9!!!) is 15 s. 7 G's acounts for a 350 KIAS turn while bleeding speed slowly during the turn with 8,000 pounds of fuel onboard. Of course. Please note however that on these videos you can see those speeds only when the aircrafts are being inverted during a slow speed loop and not out of necesity to make another overshoot. In real life this is extremely dangerous and rarely used in real combat because if it fails, you are dead. I don't blame the Jet, I blame the G model limiting me from flying the F-15 at slightly higher speeds (320 - 350 KIAS) than what I can now (250 - 280KIAS) without going into G-LOC. TO ED Please keep in mind that I am not asking you to make the F-15C make ridiculous 450 - 500 KIAS turns like it did in 1.02 with no troubles. I am asking you to modifiy the G model to allow the pilot to handle more short term high G pulls and to pull 7 G sustained with a grey out. This will allow the F-15 to fly at the 350 - 320 KIAS range sustained for about 30 - 60 second time periods. It would also help alot of the pilot could regain its stamina faster. Right now the pilot goes into G-LOC at 6 G's after 30 - 60 seconds and 7 G's after 15 s. This is more akin to a pilot flying without a flight suit than a military pilot sitting on an F-15C with TODAY's (not 1980's) TLLS equipment.

Idea To add to my previous post - I think a possible solution would me not to raise the "resting" threshold from 4 G's to a high G setting, but make the pilot tolerate G's longer. Deliberate abuse will cause him to blackout fast, but sustained turns should let the F-15 pilot (USAF Combat Edge equipment and training) pull 6 - 7 g's without G-LOC. 8 G should G-LOC after 15 seconds and 9 should G-LOC at 5 or less seconds. This is my impression of how it should be from all that I'm reading and have read in the past. This will also allow for the Eagle pilot to sustain 350 KIAS like it should.

Documentation S! gentlemen. Please read the following: Please note that the 7 G test is conducted on a conventional flight seat and IS conducted with a flight suit. The 8 G test uses the F-16's configured seat, which ups the scale of minimum required G tolerance to rapidly applied 8 G's for 15s before the pilot can even pass the test. I will check with a cousin of mine who works F-15C avionics in Arizona (can't remember if its Arizona or Texas) to see if he can give me some light on what USAF pilots are currently being benchmarked in terms of G tolerance. Also, please note that to pass the tests above, the pilot MUST mantain consciousness. They do not pass if they go into G-LOC. For the full clip, go to: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=3675463&query_hl=2 On the second clip we have a description of 1985 - 86 Fighter Aircrew High G training: Key points on this clip: 1 - Pilots without a flight suit could sustain 5.2 G's sustained while NOT straining and 8.3 G's WHILE straining. 2 - With flight suits, pilots were able to sustain 9 G's Rapid-Onset-Runs for 15's with the suit inflated. 3 - This clip informs of tesing and training done in the late 80's. I have info that suggests better outcomes from newer TLLS like Combat Edge. That info I can post on a different post, this one is becoming quite long. For the clip go to: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=3355460&dopt=Abstract Now my question to ED is this: If this info, and tons other I've come across, all suggest that USAF fighter crews are screened to tolerate the above thresholds before they can even become pilots, why is the Eagle pilot in FC 1.1 going into G-LOC in as little as 5.5 G's???...even though most sources claim USAF pilots can withstand at least 6 G's without straining with newer flight suits?

Hello, and thank you for the reply. Several things I need to clarify here: 1 - In FC 1.1, the pilot slips into full blackout not after a sustained 9 or 8 G turn, but a 7 G turn. After reading about all of the modern modifications made to aircraft seating configuration and shape, seating angles, flight suit engineering (Combat Edge) and modern pilot training, I can't possibly concieve that a modern F-15 pilot can ONLY tolerate 5.5 sustained G's in a fight like it does in FC 1.1. After all, the minimum benchmark for USAF pilots to be able to turn with 1980 flight suits is 6 G's. Modern flight suits will allow for at least 1 more G, hence 7 G's. 2 - Lo-Mac is set on the "near future", not back in the 1980's. This implicates that new technology is implemented into the aircraft, namely the improvements mentioned in issue #1. 3 - You have made EXTENSIVE improvements to the Russian SU-27 and 33 to make it more adapt at turning where its "supposed" to, yet you create a new limitation that cripples the Eagle's ability to fight at higher speeds - the only realm in which it has a chance against the Flanker. Does this not strike you as wierd and unfair?? :confused: 4 - Arguments about pilot health in Lo-Mac will be irrelevant AS LONG as a single health profile is used for all planes. Every plane will have the "same" pilot and will have the same tolerance to G load. IRL every plane has a different pilot, hence different capabilities for each. This does not apply to Lo-Mac. I fully respect this. I'm sure his data was accurate and invaluable to the fine tuning of the Eagle. However, I can't help but think that the "slowing" part would be due to deliberate slowing by the pilot and not out of limitation. To be able to stay within the same turning radius of a slow target, you WILL need to slow down yourself while you position your pipper for a gun kill. I could be wrong in this of course, but that will have to be confirmed by an F-15C pilot. My last argument on the whole issue is this: Adjust the G load to allow for the Eagle to fight on its advertised and documented speed of 350 KIAS. If this will not be done then at least modify the manual to state a different turning speed, since the F-15 clearly cannot sustain a turn at 350 KIAS in FC1.1 anymore... Right now the Eagle is FORCED to fight the Flanker fight, where it stands no chance at winning... In all honesty, I can't help but feel that this is a set up of the Flanker over the Eagle in terms of overall ALLOWED turning capability in FC 1.1. :icon_frow

I appreciate your post and fully understand the criteria which you are describing. However, the issue with the Eagle still stands. As I posted before, the Eagle can no longer achieve a sustained turn at its advertised turning speed of 350 knots, simply because the pilot can no longer tolerate 7 sustained G's. Please note that turning speed implies that the pilot can sustain a turn at the speed in question. This is precisely where the problem lies as the Eagle simply cannot turn and keep turning at 350 KIAS anymore without a full blackout 15 seconds into the fight! :confused: So now we have the Su-27 which has been fine tuned exquisitely to sweetly turn at 200 KIAS (around 450 KM/h) plus an indirect degraded effective turning ability of its rival (F-15C)?!... I'm sure I don't need to explain further for you to see that this creates a HUGE imbalance in aircraft capabilities in your sim when these 2 planes go head to head up close, and unless you consider gunzo a trivial part of air combat, I believe this to be something that should be looked into. :icon_excl If the current coefficients are "realistic" then perhaps ED needs to fix the Eagle to fly in right envelope...and not at ridiculously slow speeds of 280 - 250 knots with the pilot still fairly blacked out and the Flanker shredding the Eagle up all too easily. :mad:

S! all, I write this post to inform you of a discrepancy in the Eagle's envelope during high g turns when playing under full g effects. I'm an Eagle online player who normally plays on Ace settings unless the server uses otherwise. I want to point the following issues that I find troubling: Under Full G Effects, the Eagle can no longer turn and mantain its documented and advertised 350 knot turn that is signature to its high speed fighting style. Except at very high altitudes, the Eagle has to slow down to about 280 - 250 knots at 5.5G's or less in order to fight without a full blackout. In short, the Eagle is being forced into the singlemost situation in which it is most vulnerable: the slow speed fight. At these speeds of 250 - 280 knots, the Flanker makes very short work of the Eagle. This situation, to my eyes, is unfair and unacceptable if the Eagle is to continue to be an overall contender in this sim. :icon_frow I started a thread in Lo-Mac forum about these issues : http://forums.ubi.com/eve/ubb.x/a/tpc/f/38610606/m/2101082433 I hope the developers will take note of this. Please note that I absolutely love the blackout effect in FC 1.1 except for the fact that its blackout threshold is most probably set too low. A small detail, but one that has crippled the Eagle in all High G turning scenario, especially its ability to gunzo. S! all