Invisibull Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 Hi, Just wondering if Belsimtek could comment on when they plan on modeling damage when g-limits are exceeded. I have to say, it doesn't feel like I'm even flying an F-86F when i can pull in excess of 10 G with a full load of HVAR's and not cause a bit of damage to either the wings, the racks or the rockets themselves. According to the F-86F flight manual, I shouldn't be able to pass 6 G with such a loadout without causing damage. Even with a clean jet I shouldn't be able to pull more than 7 G below 15K or 6 G above 15K without structurally compromising my aircraft. Everyone who flies the Sabre knows that you can easily pull 10 G until you blackout with no damage penalty whatsoever. To my understanding, this is just simply unrealistic and needs to be addressed asap. Thanks for your attention, Bull i9 9900k - GTX 2080 Ti - MSI Z87 GD65 Mobo - 64GB HyperX Predator RGB DDR4 3200MHz - Win10 64 bit - TM Warthog w FSSB R3 mod - TrackIr 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UVPMechan Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 Hi, Just wondering if Belsimtek could comment on when they plan on modeling damage when g-limits are exceeded. I have to say, it doesn't feel like I'm even flying an F-86F when i can pull in excess of 10 G with a full load of HVAR's and not cause a bit of damage to either the wings, the racks or the rockets themselves. According to the F-86F flight manual, I shouldn't be able to pass 6 G with such a loadout without causing damage. Even with a clean jet I shouldn't be able to pull more than 7 G below 15K or 6 G above 15K without structurally compromising my aircraft. Everyone who flies the Sabre knows that you can easily pull 10 G until you blackout with no damage penalty whatsoever. To my understanding, this is just simply unrealistic and needs to be addressed asap. Thanks for your attention, Bull +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaz0 Posted April 14, 2015 Share Posted April 14, 2015 yes, it would be big improvement Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtPappy Posted April 15, 2015 Share Posted April 15, 2015 Yes, Bull, we need this badly for both the MiG and the Sabre. Note though that the manual doesn't explicitly forbid 6G above 15,000 ft but it does warn of a higher possibility of overshoot when pulling 6G above 15,000 ft. Absolute limit is still 7G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KewinSawicki Posted April 23, 2015 Share Posted April 23, 2015 I see that this hasn't been noted or anything. It's rather annoying. Anyone else also notices the fact that flying at higher speed a slight movement to pitch down makes the pilot black out instantly? Rather unflyable right now for me due to the g-force problems ... 'Fear the strike' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exorcet Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 Even with a clean jet I shouldn't be able to pull more than 7 G below 15K or 6 G above 15K without structurally compromising my aircraft. Well technically, the plane can survive fine up to the ultimate limit, so pulling 10 g isn't and surviving isn't necessarily a problem. However I agree, a damage model is needed. Early on I was constantly going over G in dogfights routinely, flying like that really needs to be penalized if the plane can't actually handle it. I see that this hasn't been noted or anything. It's rather annoying. I'm sure it's known, both planes are still in Beta. Likewise ED has acknowledged the structural issues with the Su-27 and F-15, but they don't have their priority on this right now. Awaiting: DCS F-15C Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f86enthusiast Posted April 25, 2015 Share Posted April 25, 2015 (edited) Well technically, the plane can survive fine up to the ultimate limit, so pulling 10 g isn't and surviving isn't necessarily a problem. However I agree, a damage model is needed. Early on I was constantly going over G in dogfights routinely, flying like that really needs to be penalized if the plane can't actually handle it. I'm sure it's known, both planes are still in Beta. Likewise ED has acknowledged the structural issues with the Su-27 and F-15, but they don't have their priority on this right now. Hit it on the head of nail Exorcet. 7-10 g's was likely a quick maintenance inspection, and a free six pack from the pilot to the maintenance crew for being a bonehead. Over 10 likely required the engine to be dropped borescoped, spars checked blah blah blah. With no persistent map or server monitoring continual use, it is almost not worth the effort to make this too detailed. Over 10g's you could have gear doors and stores ripped off (or something similar) increasing exponentially from there. From say 7-10g have a more random way for minor pieces of damage to occur or bend up there aircraft's dihedral so it flies cockeyed. Edited April 25, 2015 by f86enthusiast Aggressiveness was a fundamental to success in air-to-air combat and if you ever caught a fighter pilot in a defensive mood you had him licked before you started shooting. — Captain David McCampbell, USN, leading U.S. Navy ace in WWII Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SgtPappy Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 I'm not too sure 7-10 G's should be treated so lightly. Once the plane goes above 7 G's there's supposed to be a check of the entire aircraft as per the manual. Above 10 G's, is an engine inspection. It's not a maybe, or a perhaps. An engine needing to be dropped signifies damage. Over 7.33 G's, there is likely to be some kind of structural yielding (which is not the same as ultimate failure). I don't have the source of that on me right now, but perhaps I'll see if I can find it later if people want to see it. And yielding is not structural failure, it's permanent plastic deformation of certain parts and that is not something to chuckle at. Perhaps, just past 7 G's, yeah, it's not too TOO much a big deal, but passing 7.33 G's (given a factor of safety of 1.2) gives you 8.4 G's. So perhaps, you would see some yielding around 8.4 G's and then failure would be around 11 according to what I've read so far. Furthermore, if you bring plastic deformation to a part, its ultimate load will decrease, meaning that maybe 8 G's will cause failure. Note that I used the lower 1.2 factor of safety value for military aircraft which are expected to pull more G's and fight hard where civil planes would use a factor of safety of 1.5. Additionally, pulling 7 G's with load can rip pylons off: http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/017568.pdf Forgive me, I can't find the page now but somewhere in there, it states how the pylons left the plane at 7 G's. Ralph Parr has also mentioned gun jams, and blown fuses at 8 G's. As with any aircraft, fatigue comes into play which means that pulling the aircraft past 7 over and over again for years would eventually bring that plastic deformation point lower. Our F-86 is simply not acting as it should. A single instance past 8 G will almost certainly cause yielding, and continuously going past 7.33 will lead to failure somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoBlue Posted April 26, 2015 Share Posted April 26, 2015 +1 on that Invisibull! i7 8700k@4.7, 1080ti, DDR4 32GB, 2x SSD , HD 2TB, W10, ASUS 27", TrackIr5, TMWH, X-56, GProR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dok_rp Posted May 4, 2015 Share Posted May 4, 2015 It would be awesome. Along with the long-awaited Overheating in the UH1. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts