[CLOSED] wings break off at 4g

[sobek]

Yes there is but you are not going to safely recover an aircraft in a steep dive at 500 mph in 6 seconds.

 

Why do you move the goalpost? Nobody said anything about recovering. You said that the pilot would pass out before the wings snap, which is not true, as your graph clearly shows. 5 seconds is ample time to snap your wings.

 

Here it looks like you are saying the physiology model does not have a G suit whereas your previous reply says they DO HAVE a G-suit. It does not really matter though.

 

Existence or absence of a G-suit is taken into account. Models can be parametrized.

Edited January 18, 2015 by sobek

[Crumpp]

You said that the pilot would pass out before the wings snap

 

I am sorry, I did not say the pilot would pass out.

 

I said physiological effects and I also did not say abrupt movement of the controls to full deflection, either.

 

It is a general statement that is confusing without more specific conditions. You need me to make a track of the conditions? I just took the Dora up and put it in a position to pull ~6G's and maintained it for 20 seconds with the only reaction being AGSM breathing.

[Kurfürst]

So... I heard this is fixed already and ca. 10 g loads are now possible, right? :) :thumbup:

[Yo-Yo]

In basic form a realistic model could be done based on systolic blood pressure. That is the mechanism in the human body that causes all the symptoms.

 

The heart can only produce so much pressure to push a column of blood the average distance of 36cm to the brain.

 

Modifiers to that basic relationship have been developed for G-suits and AGSM. The basic formula could easily be modified for seating position thru Z axis vector resolution. It is the Z axis exposure than matters to the human body as a fighter pilot.

 

The various symptoms of G exposure all have an average pressure which they occur at a total G exposure based on onset rate and exposure time.

 

The model is already based exactly on this effects. :) Including warm-up ability and G-suit and/or AGCM.

But I am not confident that this bonuses are off for all planes in current release version.

Edited January 27, 2015 by Yo-Yo

[Crumpp]

The model is already based exactly on this effects. Including warm-up ability and G-suit and/or AGCM. But I am not confident that this bonuses are off for all planes in current release version.

 

Thanks for the information, Yo-Yo! :thumbup:

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

open beta 1.2.15-wings really?

 

still?really?i am very surprised to still have the wings breaking bug in the current open beta, especially after such a changelog....how can it be, that yo-yo and others reported that in their internal version its been fixed since weeks now, and we still get that bug within the open beta...

i understand its open beta, and there might be the possibilty that it will be included in the release version....but it feels as if the guys who are responsible for "whats to be included in a patch" just overlooked that important bug...(or set some completely wrong priorities)

PLEASE pay some attention to it, and include it in the official 1.2.15 patch!

[OnlyforDCS]

"Fixed internally" does not necessarily mean that it's coming in the "next patch". Just saying. Lower your expectations and you will not be dissapointed. If Yo-Yo has said it's fixed, then it's coming. Just have some patience. :thumbup:

[WinterH]

I really hope it is one of those "not listed in changelog" fixes...

 

I love the 109, but currently it isn't really an enjoyable experience for me, so it's a hangar queen.

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

well...ok there are quite some other changes....for example the flare gun is now via the mission editor removable....

also, they now added a stickforces to the virtual stick...so at already 300kph you cannot move the stick fully back anymore(seems a little odd, but still)

it also seems to have different ground handling(the sounds definitely changed as well)

 

the wings themselves though, didnt change it seems.

[golani79]

Just tried and I really had to work to rip a wing off - but I think this was due to the stick forces.

 

Made a screenshot - at ~600 this is the max you can pull back

 

 

But somehow the 109 feels a bit unresponsive and sluggish now with the stick forces.

Think it will take some time to getting used to it but I think the effect is a bit overdone at the moment.

Edited February 25, 2015 by golani79

[LcSummers]

well...ok there are quite some other changes....for example the flare gun is now via the mission editor removable....

also, they now added a stickforces to the virtual stick...so at already 300kph you cannot move the stick fully back anymore(seems a little odd, but still)

it also seems to have different ground handling(the sounds definitely changed as well)

 

the wings themselves though, didnt change it seems.

 

 

Hi David,

 

i do not have the beta, can you please explain me, how to disable the flare gun?

 

I know and i use the ME but i can not imagine how the flare gun was implemented in the ME.

 

Thanks

 

LC

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

Hi Carlo!

yes...have a look at this screenshot.

 

[LcSummers]

Hi David,

 

its more than i expected. I thought of some words and now i get a HUGE SCREENSHOOT. :)

 

Have read there are some remaining problems with the K-4. Hopefullly i will geta "new" K-4 Friday.

 

Thanks for your respond and help

 

 

Salute and greetings

Edited February 25, 2015 by LcSummers

[Echo38]

It suspicious because the real thing had a break limit of around 11-12 g.

 

Do you have any source for this at all, or is it an assumption?

[Solty]

Just tried and I really had to work to rip a wing off - but I think this was due to the stick forces.

 

Made a screenshot - at ~600 this is the max you can pull back

 

 

 

But somehow the 109 feels a bit unresponsive and sluggish now with the stick forces.

Think it will take some time to getting used to it but I think the effect is a bit overdone at the moment.

Was your trim neutral or set down for level flight? It looks how I would imagine it and how pilots described it. Plane is controlable at 600kph but the recovery from dives is very slow and I suppose at 750kph the stick will be solid and you will need to use trim to get out of a dive.

[golani79]

Was your trim neutral or set down for level flight?

 

It was set for level flight.

When getting out of a dive I always use additional trim.

 

As I´ve mentioned it probably just needs time to get used to it although it feels like a very big difference and maybe a bit overdone compared to what we have now.

But this is just my personal opinion in regards of the experiences which I´ve made with the 109 since it´s beta release and I don´t have any numbers on how far it should be possible to influence the control surfaces on certain speeds.

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

the problem is, at 700kph dive, you can still happily pull out of the dive(slower than previous though), but at already 300kph the virtual stick will not move completely back

[Solty]

It was set for level flight.

When getting out of a dive I always use additional trim.

 

As I´ve mentioned it probably just needs time to get used to it although it feels like a very big difference and maybe a bit overdone compared to what we have now.

But this is just my personal opinion in regards of the experiences which I´ve made with the 109 since it´s beta release and I don´t have any numbers on how far it should be possible to influence the control surfaces on certain speeds.

What we have now is completely wrong and should not be taken as a reference. The 109 is "heaveir on controls" than most western planes(well maybe except P-38 before L and Hawker Typhoon and some others... but you get what I mean). It could probably be compared to some Yaks and LaGGs.

 

This is one of the reasons it was seen as vastly inferior to Fw190 and so many pilots like Hartmann and Rall fought with B&Z tactics.

 

Bf109 will have very good alerion and elevator controll at speeds below 400kph and very good handling at 250-300kph threshold due to slats and alerions optimised for low speeds. But at 600-700kph it should be a flying tank.:book:

 

Again, not realy a problem against most planes as they also had higher stick forces... But P-51 and Fw190 have much better handling at high speeds. P-47D too.

 

Spitfire will have problems with roll rate at high speeds but I don't remember how the elevator forces looked like in the Spit.

 

the problem is, at 700kph dive, you can still happily pull out of the dive(slower than previous though), but at already 300kph the virtual stick will not move completely back

In that case it seems a little bit off and wierd. I don't think there should be any problems with pulling stick with one hand fully at 300kph and at 700 it should be realy slow... well you know that the best :P

 

EDIT: I am waiting for friday patch. (not enough space on disk to install open beta)

Edited February 25, 2015 by Solty

[Schnarre Aggro]

had a situation yesterday - saetta is my witness - were i blacked out in my 109 after a quite fast divebombattack....

i looked it up in tacview ... couldnt hardly believe what i saw ... see for yourself.

Its the current version and not the 1.2.15beta

 

 

 

whoo says the wings brake at 4g ? :smartass:

 

as far as i think its due to pulling the Gs too "sharp/quickly":joystick:

the only mod i use is the "50+hours_Mod" which i "wrote" mostly on the ACGserver ;)

the more i fly it, the less my wings snap :smartass:

[NineLine]

I have the same findings, I dont think they are as brittle as they were, I think they are closer to what we would expect. As always, if anyone see anything different, please post a track of the issue.

 

Edit: I sort of think that the black out effects should kick in a little sooner, thoughts?

Edited February 26, 2015 by NineLine

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

^^black out effects seem weird...sometimes i start to black out in situations were normally the wings come off and where normally no black out symptoms are visible at all...it seems inconsistent somehow.

 

i would like to have them a little sooner tbh.

 

 

i remember a bug online with the p51 back then, were the pilot decided to not black out at all anymore, and that was by no means an advantage...

Edited February 26, 2015 by 9./JG27 DavidRed

[9.JG27 DavidRed]

regarding the wings...i think we all experience some kind of learning effect.and thats the only reason why the wings break off less often..still, with the p51 it took me a few days, and then my wings never broke off again.

 

thats not the case with the 109.there are still situations, where the wing just decides to break off.

i know, that Yo-Yo stated that they have implemented forces a wing can withstand for x seconds until it brakes.and also that it has a "memory" effect, and that when you pull hard, the wing can get damaged without braking and next time it will brake sooner...all nice to have.

 

but there are situations especially when air-spawning in a brand new plane, and then you pull a moderate turn, and all of a sudden you lose a wing.you start the same mission again, do the same or pull even more, and there is no damage at all...

 

it feels inconsistent again, and it seems as if there is a bug deeper in the code.yes there were definitely situations were i pulled 8+ g, and then there were definitely situations were i pulled 4g in a brand new plane and my wing fell off....

Edited February 26, 2015 by 9./JG27 DavidRed

[NineLine]

I need to see a track of wing damage at 4g, I havent seen it so far.

[IvanK]

Just flew the New OB 109 ... didnt see much change in the Wing breaking off in the 109. Looking through the thread there is the contention that only 4G is required to rip a wing off. ... though how this 4G is being determined is unknown.

 

We then see a Tacview Track showing 7.5G ... though how accurate the G displayed in Tacview is perhaps debatable. If it was accurate I find it hard to believe that 7.5G symmetrical pull would break a 109 wing IRL.

 

In general terms I think there is an issue and the 109 wings seem to break far to readily compared to the P51 and D9 ... which I am pretty sure is in the same "H" category as the 109.

[Kwiatek]

Well i dont think also P-51 IRL wings broke at 8 G. 7-8 G (depend of weight) was allowed G limit but ultimate load factor was 1.5 more ( so about 9-10 G).

 

I think probably DCS casue structural fatal damages at limit load not at ultimate load?