Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'damage model'.
Found 13 results
-
If your right or left wing tip gets shot of all your weapons from that side of your aircraft magically dissapear.
-
For immersion reasons, I'd like to make it so that when I start playing a mission, some buildings are already pre-destroyed if you will, or otherwise set on fire. The alternative appears to mean using AI or something to blow up the buildings I wanna blow up before I start flying (or driving since I have Combined Arms). Any advice on what sort of trigger zone to use, what lines of code I must enter, and where? -
the tail got shot down by aa fire and got destroyed. heli lost rudder control, but did not induce counter spin. apppy_crash.trk
-
Just watch 84f851d3c05c84721b26b3d85a58357d.mp4 The visual
-
Does anyone feel that the pilot damage model is a bit off? I have on numerous occasions pumped .303 and 20mm into the side of and into the cockpit of an aircraft to no effect. Even I myself have found a 109 on my six and have watched it's rounds go straight into my face through the cockpit and have it only 'wound' my pilot. Since flying in DCS, I have only once bled out at the controls of my craft. I have seen mentions of this on other posts talking about the DM of 109's and 190's but only in passing, saying that an aircraft had hits all over the cockpit but that they were still flying straight as an arrow. If anyone has tracks to attach to this thread please do. To give you an idea, GS posted a video showing him in an A-10 hit the sidepanelling of a P-47 that should have and would have killed the pilot.
-
Hi @NineLine Hope you're good. Very much in need some help in understanding what's happening here as I'm hitting a bit of wall with my testing. I can obviously see that something not quite right but am unsure which part of the model is falling down. All tracks provided in the zip folder attached - let me know if there are any issues. General Post: I've put off posting this for a while in the hopes of running more tests and working out what was wrong, but each test left more questions rather than fewer so thought it best just to post what I have so far in the hopes that a solution can be found. Having noticed the lack of pilot injuries or deaths, especially with the .50 Cal, I decided to do some testing and have found some pretty odd behaviour. I'm not sure what exactly is happening and whether there are some penetration issue with the rounds itself, the pilot's DM isn't correct, or there is something wrong with the armour values of the cockpit glass and surrounding elements. I tested both German and USAAF planes and both showed the same behaviour. I haven't tested the Hispano AP round although I would assume it has a similar issue based off of the tests run. What's more confusing is there seems to be some inconsistency as well in the tests. In one situation you would have a pilot dying very quickly, in others they simply wouldn't. All tests were run in SP as I don't have the luxury of my own server and can't port forward in my location. We have run some MP tests which did match what you see here, but they weren't controlled or numerous enough to include. For clarity in case anyone's unsure, on every aircraft there is absolutely nothing that would stop even a 50 ball round at combat ranges. It can go through 13mm of RHA at 1000m and none of these planes are fitted with RHA, it's mostly duralumin which is far less effective. The AP round should be sailing straight through the aircraft skin and the armour. The 20mm Hispano AP round is no slouch either so there should be nothing stopping that as well. Yak_Panther made an excellent post on the 50 Cal AP round for the IL2 Devs that runs through the penetration capabilities with sources (https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/72656-50-cal-ap-velocity-and-penetration/). This very much isn't a 50 Cal issue either as both German and British AP or even HE rounds aren't disabling the pilot when they should be. DM x-rays: D9 A8 K4 Testing Methods: Live Tests: These were conducted in SP with a Mustang running the AIr to Ground Belt (4xAP 1xAPIT). Time was slowed down to allow for easier aiming with the idea of landing one bank of guns into the back of the cockpit. I tried to attack slightly from above to completely avoid the fuel tanks. You can see that in almost all scenarios there are numerous rounds hitting directly behind the pilot at an angle where they should be going through and the pilot survives. I fast forwarded time on the tracks and in the video to show the pilot is fine. Ground Tests: AI seem to have a 30s invulnerability window when starting from the ramp so I left some time to avoid this. Used numerous weapon platforms from different eras to see if it was a round issue or a DM/Armour issue. The P51 doesn't have a pilot death animation so was difficult to test in this scenario although the tests conducted produces the same results. Some pretty strange results. Direct pilot shots aren't instant kills even without the armour so this points to either a Pilot DM issue, or some strange armour values for the canopy itself. This would have to be the case even when the canopy is open as the P47 pilot took direct hits (strikes appeared to be slightly infront of the pilot but I'm unsure if that's just the effect registering or the round not going through something). What further confuses this is that in the A8 the rounds are appearing to go through to the engine and cause an oil leak but the pilot appears fine. Scrappy video I put together showing what's happening in the tracks. Chapters in the description: DCS_DMTest_Oct21.zip
-
TL;DR No, but their machine guns are possibly a bit too powerful (though that's up for debate). Below is the proof. To find out I performed a series of semi-scientific tests. I've set up a mission where I'm shooting at an AI fighter flying straight and level. The test parameters were: I'll be matching each weapon type of each fighter against every fighter. This later turned out to be unnecessary. I'll explain why below. I'll perform 5 tests per match. This is to rule out a lucky shot or unlucky hits. I'll be shooting from behind, at convergence or from a distance of about 1000 feet so that the maximum number of bullets shot would hit the target. The AI plane will be flying straight and level to make sure aiming isn't an issue. The theory was: if the German planes are tougher than Alliance ones they will require more hits from the same weapons. First I tested all aircraft against P-51s 6 .50 cals. Results: a short burst was enough for every aircraft to either be destroyed or damaged enough to force a crash landing. The toughest aircraft were the P-47 and FW-190 A8 (both were in most cases damaged and forced to land). Then I decided to test out how additional 2 .50 cals of P-47 affect the performance. So I did 5 tests agains Fw-190 A8. Results: a short burst was enough to destroy the aircraft every time. Then I tested the Spitfire. Since it has 2 different weapon types I decided to test each one separately. First I started with machineguns. Results: As expected, they're weak. It's difficult to kill with those weapons. This had one benefit though - it made it easy to compare the toughness of each aircraft. The P-47 was the toughest one (each time emptied full mags, didn't even manage to force a landing). Then the Fw-190A8 (1 damaged, 1 destroyed). Then P-51 (mixed results of damaged and survived). Then the Spit, Bf-109 and Fw-190D9 (mixed results of damaged and destroyed). The I-16 was the easiest to kill (engine stopped after a short burst on each test). At this point I was able to determine that the German fighters are not tougher than Allied ones. Still, I decided to continue the tests to see how different weapons compare to each other. So I tested the Hispanos. Results: a very powerful weapon, possibly on the same level as 8x .50 cals (although more difficult to aim). Also an interesting discovery: the aiming point of the Hispanos is just below the center of the reticle. This could result in many misses when fired together with the machineguns. I started with the P-51 (all destroyed) but then decided to try how they fare against the P-47 since it's the toughest aircraft. All 5 tests ended up with the Thunderbolt destroyed after just a few hits. Then, just to be sure I tested it against all German fighters. The results were very consistent - all destroyed after just a few hits. After that I tested the Bf-109's machineguns. Results: I was surprised by how effective they are. Even the P-47 was destroyed every time after a quick burst. 2x MG-131s are almost as powerful as Mustang's 6 M2s. I'm guessing they'd be as effective as 4x .50 cals but there's no way to test this in DCS. Then came the time for the 109's big 30mm. Result: As expected - everything (tested against the P-51 and P-47) torn to shreds, mostly after a single hit. The Thunderbolt managed to survive the first hit a few times but it was still heavily damaged. At last, just to be sure, I tested the Fw-109D9's machineguns and cannons (against the P-47). Results: Machineguns worked just like in the 109, cannons worked just like the Spit's Hispanos. I don't own the Fw-190A8 or the I-16 so couldn't test those. Here is a google drive link to tracks and Tacview files: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/17kGX2JBw4O4V4IAU6EhT19yF6nKHiaw-?usp=sharing Cheers!
-
Is there any page or instruction covering the current damage model of the f-16? I am not sure if it's done properly or just you-get-hit-you-go-boom at the early access stage? Best,
-
Hi, AFAIK ever ytime you start the Chopper everything will be fine and dandy - so basically checklist-checks like lights-test or engine-fire-test are totally pointless because nothing is ever wrong/broken anyways. Therefore I'd like to ask for some (configurable) "Problem"-Generator (before and In-Flight) to force you doing the pre-flight checks right or you might miss something. I know that's a little bit of a "Hardcore" feature but I think a variety of virtual Pilots would appreciate that, as it creates another level of challenge. Regards Hawk -
Happy New Year!. So, i dont fly anton, but i fight a lot against those, and i think they need a big DM tweak, its so hard to beat, several times me and my squadron buddies (we fly spits on SoW Server) spent all the ammo just in one Anton, we take turns shooting him, then with a lot of visible damage they start to flutter like butterflies, and they manage to fly for a long time including climbing so well that some time they escape, or it gives time for some enemies to reach us and catch us already without ammunition. So lately if we see an anton we let him go and much more if it is an AI. I don't usually complain about these things but it happens very often already, I know of many who are only grabbing it for that "super mega" resistance, historically I know it was hard but this is not normal the number of shots they can receive Cheers!
-
As in the topic. Is there any page with clearly indicated possible damages? I did some testing myself and visual damage is already done pretty well, but how about systems damage? I had the same question regarding F-16 damage model, but on the other forum. Best,
-
Just wanna ask if theres anything new on mentioned topics? Couldnt find anything in the progress and news posts. Just if you want more specific what I mean: Damage to F-16 seems quite simplistic in some ways; you obviously dont "tank" damage in an aircraft, but its always massive fuel leakage, most of the time damage results in pilot kill, it doesnt feel realistic. Storage overstress isnt simulated, mostly no FPL features, etc. To some degree that also applies to the F-18, makes me wonder if theres shared systems being developed or so. Eg in an F-14 damage control and recovery is actually pretty interesting imo.
- 5 replies
-
- 6
-
-
- damage model
- pilot fault list
- (and 1 more)
-
Never seen that before. At first I though I had some controller problems. Not 100% verified as it's tricky to just damage ailerons and nothing else for the purpose of testing. But seen it happen with damaged ailerons, never seen it happen with undamaged ailerons.
