Failures and G-Effects Problems (SU-27)

[Worrazen]

Hello

 

I've noticed the failures behave buggy when SIMULATION G-effects are enabled. Compared to NONE when you receive natural damage. Now yes, I might be making a big mistake by not trying SIMULATION on normal damage, however I do not agree with this, why would mehanics fail if hydros have been out for some time, just doesn't make sense - if true i think it has nothign to do with realism, it should be put into a separate "difficulty" option.

 

 

 

 

I flew once throuhg helicopters, I had one engine on fire, radar was off, ECM, EOS, ACS, ..etc - I can't prove it since I just deleted those videos (huge files) since I crashed in the end wasn't serious enough but I could land if I could have more tries, the hydros were also damaged, but it was still working although it was obviously mehanical only.

 

---------------

---------------

 

 

Now, today I enabled SIMULATION G-Effects, then I went into custom map and I went to use scripted failures, I wanted to try landing without engines and to make it harder also ruin Hydros, well, it kinda worked, the hydros got broken and I only had a few moments before the mehanics also broke and the aircraft just went into wobble, and the transition was kind of artificial, it felt like it entered into a mode, because I had enough speed to keep flying, but when something happend it just slowed down artificially and entered wobble with zero controls, because if mehanics also broke, shouldn't they lock in place or are they freely allowed to be affected by environment, couldn't we have an option to choose between the two?

 

Then I disabled Hydro faliure, to avoid this, but I added all other failures, the ECM, and ACS, etc, and with those settings, as I had configured, some stuff like RADAR and ECM got broken earlier, then all black screen and the plane going NOSEDOWN into the sea, well I thought it was a HELMET bug most probably, so I quit and disable helmet also, KEEP in mind Hydros are not scripted to break anymore.

 

So the Helmet caused this black screen in F1 view, I guess if it's suppsed to be like this it's fine, I just expected something else, but the plane wasn't responding to controls, something else also broke, the speed was 700, so why would it enter some crash mode like it was shot down or something.

 

I think several of these failures are kind of buggy, they affect other systems they shouldn't.

 

 

 

 

-----------------------

 

And even on NONE the failures caused more uncontrollable aircraft than I would get naturally.

 

Because I had Helmet and Hydro failures disabled and the aicraft still went down wobbling, is it the ACS, but I had all these broken and I was still able to fly on mehanics.

 

There is some kind of bug with scripted failures that makes the mehanical faliure also, I wish this separated.

 

---------

Futher, and idea popped up, these mehanical fails should also be separated from the wires snapping so the flaps/ruder can be affected by environment, and another subtype of mehanical where it breaks in front area causing the ruder/flaps to lock in place.

 

Maybe this cannot be done for some aircraft due to realism, but probably could be done on others where it would make sense to separate these failures even more, cause there seems to be a number of things happening behind scenes.

---------

 

I heard flaps don't have mehanical control in real life, is it known for sure if all the hydro leaks out do the flaps stay locked (too heavy) or can be affected by windforce in real life ?

 

 

----------

Gonna do some more tests of my own, if the weird bugs show up also due to different chronology of failures in one session it's going to be very complex to test out everything.

 

 

EDIT: Now I'm reading in this thead that FCS is different from ACS, I have a English mod for the Cockpit, it was showing FCS red light on one ocassion, just so you guys know that some things are switched, like for example the letter for early warning radar is E, while it wouldn't be E if translated from original Russian Cockpit, but probably only a few diffs here and there. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=137234&page=2

 

 

EDIT:2 - No Sound Voice Warning For RWR and MFD - Just saying, might be that way in real life.

Edited March 11, 2016 by Worrazen

[Worrazen]

Okay I went like this - due to "activate within" minutes it is impossible to totally accurately specify activation time, so it's still random, setting the "within" minutes to 0 wrongly disables the failure activator instead of removing the randomization and activating only according to "activate after".

 

With English Cockpit Mod

G-EFFECTS > NONE

 

MFD,RWS,ECM == 1 min (Voice: ECM Failure)

HUD, RADAR == 2 min ( Voice: ECM + Radar)

EOS == 3 min (Voice: ECM + Radar + EOS)

AUTOPILOT == 4 min (Voice: ECM + Radar + EOS + ACS Failure)

(first red light shows up, "MANUAL CONTROL" Light)

RL ENGINES == 5 min (Voice: Above + REngine Fire + LEngine Fire, only Left actually has activated FireGFX animations, FIRE Light)

ACS == 6 min ("FCS" Red Light)

HELMET == 7 min (Nothing Obviously Noticable)

HYDRO == 8 min (Voice: Above + Hydro, HYDRO Red Light, moments later plane goes into uncontrolable wobble dive mode and loses speed for no reason?)

 

 

ACS and Autopilot seem a bit mixed ?

 

Master caution keeps beeping and lighting from as soon as MFD/ECM/RWS fail.

Edited March 12, 2016 by Worrazen

[Ironhand]

A couple of things:

 

HYDRO: The hydraulic system. In the event of a complete failure (as modeled), you have about 45 seconds of flight control left. After that, you have no control whatsoever over the control surfaces. If you are lucky enough to be sitting on the ground, you will see flaps and elevators droop. If you are unlucky enough to be in the air, they are free floating and subject to the vagaries of the airflow over their surfaces. At speed, the lift provided by the airflow that holds your 18+ ton aircraft up in the sky, has no problem manhandling your control surfaces.

 

ACS: This is actually the CDU-10 FBW flight control system. Not sure why they refer to it as the ACS on the failures page but they do. The fault indicator light in the cockpit reads: СДУ (CDU). Switching off the system and taking direct control of the aircraft requires expertise and you need to be ready for it. Having it completely fail unexpectedly in the air is more or less a death warrant unless you are lucky enough to be neutrally trimmed at the time. And, even then, life will be real interesting for a few moments and you might lose your life anyway. The real system has redundancy built in. The failure screen simply wipes out both sides of the system and, most likely, you'll go arse over tea kettle.

 

EDIT: AUTOPILOT: The thing to remember about the AP is that, when you turn it off (or it fails) you go back to the trim you hand mechanically entered prior to engaging it. As a matter of habit, you should trim for airspeed, then engage the system and hold that airspeed. Then, when you turn it off or it fails, there are no trim issues to fight. :EDIT ENDS

 

BTW, you can turn off the failure audible for each failure with R-Shift+N (Audible Warning Reset).

Edited March 12, 2016 by Ironhand

[Worrazen]

What if I forgot that I was using Su-33 in that previous mission when Hydros would still work. Keep in mind that was helicopter damage, not scripted failure.

I don't know, I played my own small free-flight mission for some time, switched to Su-27 when I found out the Su-33 has only simple model and no full manual, but this was recently, I don't think it was the Su-33, but I'm not sure.

 

I ran the same sequence you see above with the G-EFFECTS > SIMULATION yielded the same thing, not sure why in this case there was no black screen in F1 view, and the aicraft did not nosedive as in the initial go when I wasn't testing like that. It could mean that the order of which scripted failures start first and which ones go ontop of them would matter, and that would be very unfortunate, it would create load of possible combinations, and to figure it out, someone would have to test them all.

 

 

Now with the ACS and AutoPilot, what I can see is basically, when AUTOPILOT scripted failure is activated you get "MANUAL CONTROL" red light and "ACS Failure" voice, and for the ACS scripted failure you get no voice but an "FCS" (CDU) Red light. I don't know so I will not judge the contexts behind the development, but the results don't make sense to me seeing this from outside viewpoint.

 

 

------------

Also I seem to found a bug with DCS World 1.5.3, sometimes restarting mission via Shift+R would make some sounds not work, the engine wouldn't be heard in the cockpit (13K meter Alt spawn), resetting another time or quitting and restarting mission will fix the issue. I am not sure if this is contained to Su-27 or not, but i was using it at the time.

Edited March 12, 2016 by Worrazen

[Ironhand]

...

 

 

Now with the ACS and AutoPilot, what I can see is basically, when AUTOPILOT scripted failure is activated you get "MANUAL CONTROL" red light and "ACS Failure" voice, and for the ACS scripted failure you get no voice but an "FCS" (CDU) Red light. I don't know so I will not judge the contexts behind the development, but the results don't make sense to me seeing this from outside viewpoint...

 

The sudden black screen in F1 view sounds like the sudden complete disability (the devs simply show it as loss of consciousness--hence the blackout) caused by extreme negative-Gs. When you lose (or turn off) the CDU and you aren't trimmed neutral, you often suddenly pitch nose down (extreme negative-Gs). Is this what's happening on the occasions you black out?

 

And, yes, depending on the types of failures, the cascade of multiples would probably yield differing results.

 

The AP failure light is telling you that you are no longer able to use the Automatic Control System (Autopilot). You once again have manual control of the aircraft. So that part makes sense. As I mentioned in my previous post, the ACS line on that failure screen is actually referring to the FBW system. So what you are experiencing in the cockpit makes sense. Not sure what you think makes no sense in external view. Can you expand on that a bit more? When I tested this morning, everything behaved (and looked) as I would expect it to concerning these two failures.

Edited March 12, 2016 by Ironhand

[Ironhand]

...

ACS: This is actually the CDU-10 FBW flight control system. Not sure why they refer to it as the ACS on the failures page but they do. The fault indicator light in the cockpit reads: СДУ (CDU). Switching off the system and taking direct control of the aircraft requires expertise and you need to be ready for it. Having it completely fail unexpectedly in the air is more or less a death warrant unless you are lucky enough to be neutrally trimmed at the time...

This failures screen goes back a very long time in this sim's history. Back in 2003 or so, the LOMAC manual described ACS and Autopilot this way:

 

ACS - A failure of the Automatic Control System (ACS) will cause the aircraft’s flight control system to switch to “proportional control mode” in which a control sign from the stick delivers proportional movement of elevator. The AOA (Angle of Attack) and G limiters are disabled. However, in this situation the aircraft still benefits from a particular degree of stability augmentation unlike in direct link mode when doing a Cobra maneuver. If the ACS fails use very smooth stick movement to avoid large angles of attack and G-loads and don’t rely on the Autopilot as it will also be inoperative.

 

Autopilot - A failure of the autopilot leads to the aircraft’s inability to automatically follow the pre-set route or keep a given altitude in the Altitude Stabilization mode (Horizontal lock).

 

So it seems I might be wrong in believing that it's failure is the same as dropping into direct control mode. ACS also seems to involve more than merely the AP.

[Worrazen]

Well, I never ... never knew what to say here, forgot the intro statement cause ... you can see how big of a wall I had in my head, but I think i meant I never, umm i think, I never did any wacky movements, but it's all deeply explained several times in the post now.

 

-------------------

 

The whole point was to fly straight, get some things to fail, then try to land, there was no any manouvers in any of these events.

 

So as I see it now, in the bug department, it comes down to three things then, "ACS" failure voice being played in cockpit when only Autopilot is dead. The right engine never has any fire fx animation. And the failure of the Hydros in scripted version causes the plane to lose mehanical and all control after like 30 seconds, but it actually enters into uncontrollable wobble dive sort of an artificial mode, and explained below how that actually looks like (sorry if I wasn't clear earlier, should made a video)

 

I just think I hears somewhere about this mehanical control thing, probably in the manual, if this is intended I think this is wrong, it clearly isn't since normal damage to hydros doesn't do this, and maybe there are several levels of hydro damage? At which level is then appropriate to show the fail light, so that's a stretch. But this is confusing, the hydros shouldn't even pick into mehanical stuff, shouldn't even be talking about it. I know we can't change the cockpit and separate the warning light, but I'm sure that in reality if the fluid leaks out, it doesn't magically cut the mehanical structure.

 

If the Hydros receive partial damage, okay, you'd have full but dwindling control and over some time as the fluid leaks you'd have less response, it would go slower, until, as the manual said, it will run out and the brakes would stay partially open, that's right, that should happen, but not disabling the mehanical steering, it doesn't make sense at all, without hydro oil you wouldn't be able to use breaks, but according to manual you should be able to use ruder and pitch, and yes, this mehanical mode is NOT direct control mode, it doesn't behave the same, this mehanical mode is super slow and slow responsive, but it's landable.

 

I need to make something clear, when the wobble-dive-mode starts, the aircraft is going down 500 knots at 5 degrees descending, after supposably the hydros leak out, or whatever happens, it's all not obvious to the pilot, it stalls instantly when it goes into this weird scripted uncontrollable mode, without me doing anything, that's the whole point, I'm not doing anything, i'm not trying to steer or dive or land or go up, it's straight free flight, first it goes super nose up or down, and it alternates like paper until it crashes, and the ruder/pitch flaps aren't at all moving, like they're sealed shut, won't get affected by wind, gear won't work, like it's dead, but the cokpit still lit up, so it feels artificial, it feels like a bug, but I was hesitant to outright say it.

 

And maybe it's a known bug with scripted failures, maybe I'm just stating the obvious to devs, but so many patches have gone through hardly any Su-27 updates so I started kind of getting more in depth to look for inconsistencies, it took me a year to get a feel of it, so previously I was just for enjoyment, and I wouldn't start this thread without something substantial.

 

 

And the ACS Failure affecting the "different monikers but same things" ? FWB/CDU/FCS/ACS it's kind of confusing to say at least but half of that is part of realism, and the FCS thing is just an english translation unoficially in the mod so that's not a genuine issue.

 

If scripted failures have ACS and APilot separated then ACS event shouldn't go an disable the AP, then what's the point. That's just for scripted events, in normal damage, if you get ACS damaged and if that affects the AutoPilot then so it should be for realism and accuracy.

 

 

There could be something in combination of ACS and Hydraulics that makes this bug, since ACS affests more than just autopilot features, it looks like it affects a number of things pertaining to the normal-mode flight, so yeah if you lose ACS you'd get something like direct-control, and I remember now, I did not had "FCS red light" shown up when I played against heli damage with one working engine, I did had all the rest tho including "Manual Control" red light (except stall ofcourse) - I'm not sure whow much that had an effect. Maybe it's the FCS (labeled as "ACS" in scripted failure) then responsible for the mehanical controls, and takes longer like 2 minutes to make the bug, since I have scripted ACS Failure set to 6 min, and Hydro failure set to 8 min, so if you say it's the hydros causing this after 30 to 45 mins leaking oil out, it doesn't mean it's 100%, I remember I still didn't had "FCS" red light at the time, maybe that's what kept super basic sterring going, if we are to belive that scripted failures are comparable to real ones.

 

But this is gettings more complex buy the minute, the official Manual has ACS and FCS as separate things altogether, furthermore the , but the english cockpit mod uses "FCS" red like to indicate scripted "ACS Failure", which brings me maybe the DCS Worlds was wrong all along, and that the "AUTOPILOT" is named wrongly and should be labeled as "ACS", and that he scripted "ACS Failure" is also mislabeled and should be renamed to "FCS" ... now I'll need more digging to do to prove this or not, but it's late, so next time.

 

 

Now, the ACS affects these things, from the maunal:

 

Automatic Control System (ACS)

ACS provides:

• Autostabilization of pitch/bank and barometric altitude

• Automatic leveling of the aircraft in roll and pitch

• Stabilization of absolute altitude in accordance to the radar altimeter at altitudes between

100-1000 m, with automatic ground collision avoidance

• Automatic control of climbing and descending

• Automatic control in the horizontal plane in accordance with data from the navigation

system during enroute navigation mode

• Automatic return to the programmed airfield and landing approach down to the altitude of

50-60 m in accordance with input from the navigation system

 

 

 

Now I'll go down onto my other findings The ACS then has some automation stuff that makes it easier, and some AutoPilot stuff (probably whole AP won't work in practise right?) But then this shouldn't make the aircraft go into direct-control mode, there seems some similar terminology but it's not the place this is covered.

 

Flight Control System (FCS)

The Su-27 is controlled by a combination of mechanical and fly-by-wire sub-systems. The longitudinal

control is maintained by the synchronous deflection of stabilizers and lateral control is maintained by

the differential deflection of flaperons, stabilizers, and rudders. Directional control is maintained by

the deflection of rudders.

The mechanical control system is intended for differential deflection of flaperons as part of the lateral

control system; synchronous deflection of flaperons during takeoff and landing; rudder deflection

during pedal movement; and artificial flight control loading and trimming.

The fly-by-wire system is intended for manual control of the aircraft via longitudinal and lateral

channels to provide desired stability and control qualities; to limit angle-of-attack and g load; to

control wing leading edges; and for synchronous control of flaperons during maneuvering.

 

 

The longitudinal channel of the fly-by-wire system has three operational modes:

 

• TAKEOFF-LANDING mode: In this mode, the stabilizer deflects in accordance with control

stick inputs and rate of pitch.

 

• FLIGHT mode: In this mode, the stabilizer deflects in accordance with the control stick

inputs, rate of pitch, and g force.

 

• DIRECT CONTROL EMERGENCY mode: in this mode, the stabilizer deflects in accordance

with the control stick inputs only.

 

The TAKEOFF-LANDING and FLIGHT modes of the fly-by-wire system are switched automatically in

accordance with landing gear position.

 

The DIRECT CONTROL mode is switched on by pressing the key if the fly-by-wire system fails.

 

Piloting in this mode requires special care; the flight is characterized by:

• Insufficient pitching stability of the aircraft

• Low aerodynamic damping

• Increased longitudinal stick sensitivity ***

 

 

 

 

As we can see it's the FCS that has the flight mode, direct mode, landing mode stuff. So, you kind of corrected yourself there, but I think in some fashion you were right that if the FCS would fail, it would put you out of the flight mode, presumably into the direct-control mode and via that mode I would make some bad moves and start spinning but no it's something else (as we explained already), then again, direct-mode is PART of the FCS, so none of those 3 modes should work theoretically, now here comes the crazy part, what on earth would the Hydros do then if the FCS is dead and Hydros are OK, what kind of mode would it be in that case, it can't be the basic mehanical-only one if the Hydro's work right?, Would it be a super-direct version then. What kind of characteristics does the mehanical one have anyway, and what kind of does the direct-mode have, they're both different that's for sure. This needs some brainstorming, if the ACS and FCS are off but Hydros are on, what kind of mode then? Obviously if the direct-mode has the characteristics of FCS being off, then it would be it, but not sure now. *** See, in the quote, Direct-Mode increases sensetivity, while mehanical mode I experienced has super low sensetivity and super low slow response.

 

For the aircraft to work there has to be some mode they used, I don't know which one, I should go probably test this scenario, but then I would have to use scripted failures unfortunately because doing this live just it'll take forever to get the right combination.

And the big problem is obviously if the scripted failures are bugged themselfs.

 

-----------------------

-----------------------

 

And here we go with this, there is no such audio warning ever played:

Flight control systems have been damaged or destroyed. "Flight controls"

So this is what should be played when FCS Red light shows up I guess ? - if we are to believe the scripted misnamed "ACS" failure is actually for the FCS.

 

 

This sound also never plays: Maybe it has to do with some of the analog sensors, but

you can't make those fail via scripts, so never heard of it, first time.

Keep in mind it's not the ADI, since ADI has separate one, what then?

Navigation systems failure - "NCS failure"

Is this the MFD (Navigation/Radar display) ? If so, probably mislabeled but the sound doesn't work either way.

 

 

So the hydraulics are maybe a art of the flight control, or just a coincidence in naming?

And they would behave differently if both or one or the other are broken?

Flight control system hydraulics are not functional "Hydraulics failure"

 

 

Hello, what happened to you, never heard of it's existance. Now what would this be responsible for? Doesn't look like it's supprted in scripted failures either.

Avionics systems failure "Systems failure"

 

 

As mentioned before, the MLWS (RWS?) audio also never plays, another bug.

The missile launch warning system (MLWS) is not functional "MLWS failure"

 

 

Separately, unrelated, but to mention it at least, I never had it in mission so I never heard it, so I don't know if it works or not, but also not supported by scripted failures.

This is more of a feature wish, than a bug.

ADI in the cockpit does not function. "Attitude indicaton failure"

 

 

 

-----

I just screwd up the 2 videos, didn't record sound, and had Flux enabled so it looks crappy, I might recreate it later when I test more tomorrow.

Edited March 13, 2016 by Worrazen

[esb77]

So what mechanical backup system are you talking about?

 

The major difference between the Su-27 and the MiG-29, apart from size, is that where

the Mikoyan fighter has mechanical flight controls and a traditional degree of longitudinal static stability (disturb the aircraft in pitch and it will naturally return to its undisturbed state), the Sukhoi has relaxed stability and fly-by-wire controls.

 

Echoing the F-16, the Su-27 has multichannel analogue electronic flight controls, with no mechanical backup.

 

Flight International 2 September 1989

 

As far as I know, once the fluid is gone you loose all control authority, and I've never seen a source that says differently.

 

I've seen lots of sources saying that the control system is purely FBW hydraulic, i.e. no mechanical cables for backup.

[Worrazen]

Yes there is another possibility that the real damage failure was a bug and I shouldn't had the controls I had back in that case, I had 1 engine running, most of the stuff beeping, but was still able to fly for 20 minutes. And the Hydros were down, but not the "FCS" (according to eng cockpit mod, whatever that FCS red light means in reality) as far as I remember. I only had steering like 1/5 of normal range, and it was very slow, but enough for emergency, so we would have to figure out what kind of mode that was and why it's not being used in scripted failures.

 

If the fluid leaks out, it shouldn't do anything to the plane, the plane should keep on-course, as far as the windforce doesn't move the ruder/pitch, but I don't know how far realism goes in this area if this is even possible game-wide. Instead, it goes for a leaf-stall basically for no reason.

 

So I woke up this morning and this is basically the TLDR of the above wall post. Doesn't mean details are not important ofcourse not, it's just to make it clearer.

 

EDIT: Seems like the engine which fails first receives the fire fx animation, so I have one case where the right was on fire big not the left one.

EDIT2: another small correction but i just forgot about it, rats. Aha, I haven't found "mehanical" anything in the Manual, unfortunately, but I just heard it somewhere around here.

 

EDIT3: Album http://imgur.com/a/caPks - they all look yellow because I use Flux.

Edited March 13, 2016 by Worrazen

[Ironhand]

Yes there is another possibility that the real damage failure was a bug and I shouldn't had the controls I had back in that case, I had 1 engine running, most of the stuff beeping, but was still able to fly for 20 minutes. And the Hydros were down, but not the "FCS" (according to eng cockpit mod, whatever that FCS red light means in reality) as far as I remember. I only had steering like 1/5 of normal range, and it was very slow, but enough for emergency, so we would have to figure out what kind of mode that was and why it's not being used in scripted failures.

This is something that you need to reproduce so you know exactly what the situation was.

 

If the fluid leaks out, it shouldn't do anything to the plane, the plane should keep on-course, as far as the windforce doesn't move the ruder/pitch, but I don't know how far realism goes in this area if this is even possible game-wide. Instead, it goes for a leaf-stall basically for no reason...

What exactly is it keeping the aircraft on course? Why again do you think nothing would change?

[Worrazen]

And the video, not the perfect one, cause I was moving the stick a bit but when I put the stick up to pitch down it's already frozen at that point, it won't register any input.

 

[Ironhand]

Yes, the hydro failure is scripted in that, if you are airborne, regardless of your fuel load, weapons payload, airspeed, or gear extension, the flaps and the elevator set to exactly the same setting each time. The elevator resets to the same specific degree of "up" elevator which is what causes your nose to pitch up, etc, etc, etc. OTOH, if you are sitting on the ground, both elevator and flaps droop to full "down".

 

EDIT: Just came back to mention that it's scripted to the degree that, should your flaps be extended at the time hydraulics run "dry", they actually retract to the exact setting I saw in every other trial.

 

EDIT 2: An ACS failure is not the same a having an FCS failure. The aircraft does behave differently with an ACS failure as opposed to taking direct control.

Edited March 13, 2016 by Ironhand

[Worrazen]

I remember now, I think the correction was also that I think it doesn't have to do with G-EFFECTS setting for most of the stuff mentioned, but doesn't mean that's necessairly true.

 

I kinda had G-Effects to NONE for a long time, it was a mistake, I only used none when doing some smoke manouvers for fun, i'll have it to SIMULATION from now on.

 

But are you just explaining to me so I know, or are you also impling it's suppose to do like it's scripted, because, while I'm in no position yet to make such calls, it's for the developers to take these findings into consideration, I honestly don't agree with it. Initially, why I wanted to use scripted failures was to recreate the other mission that I explained when the helis damaged me, I do not believe it will take a short time to trial-and-error it to recreate the exact case that I got into with the helis a week ago, so I wasn't even trying to attempt it again.

 

I do not agree with AUTOPILOT scripted failure actually breaking the ACS and tripping it's alarm.

I do not agree with ACS scripted failure actually breaking the FCS and tripping it's alarm.

I do not agree that using a scripted HYDRO failure and some time after activation results in the aircraft spinning out of control while having perfect gliding conditions.

 

And with the audio messages MLWS(RWS), FCS, Avionics and NCS it's pretty clear they're bugs, they don't work.

 

The scripted failures screen should provide a parent option and it's childre, since AVIONICS contains stuff about radar, gun, weapon targeting, fire control, the AVIONICS should be a selectable parent, if you wish to make all avionics fail, or selecting only the children such as what is now RADAR, EOS, ECM, etc

 

So I guess ALL of those has to fail for the "Systems Failure" voice message to play? Problem here is the airplane would blow up before you'd get to that in most cases, I know I never heard it, so even if it works, the aircraft's structural health compared to components health therefore wouldn't be optimized, now if that's the case in real life I back away.

 

 

Because, I'm figuring things out in order to understand what the bugs and what is the intended things are to then fix and change it, but scripted failures are not part of realism, so why do they have to be one way and no other way ?

 

 

---------------

EDIT: http://steamcommunity.com/app/223750/discussions/0/864976114995267084/

So "Flaming Cliffs" aircraft are all "less complex" than they should be? Because I have Su-27 from FC3 - That may be obsolete and it no longer accurate? - just checking

Edited March 13, 2016 by Worrazen

[Ironhand]

...

But are you just explaining to me so I know, or are you also impling it's suppose to do like it's scripted, because, while I'm in no position yet to make such calls, it's for the developers to take these findings into consideration, I honestly don't agree with it...

What is scripted is the immediate effect of the hydro failure. After about 40-45 seconds, the elevator moves to a slight "UP' position and the flaps drop about 10*. It doesn't matter where the a/c's CG is, what speed you're traveling, etc. No matter what the situation is, they move to the exact same position. There the scripting ends.

 

 

 

 

I do not agree with AUTOPILOT scripted failure actually breaking the ACS and tripping it's alarm.

I do not agree with ACS scripted failure actually breaking the FCS and tripping it's alarm.

I haven't seen the AP break the FCS, FWIW. And, as near as I can tell from the Su-27's real world manual as I wade through the Russian, the ACS is the autopilot.

 

 

 

 

I do not agree that using a scripted HYDRO failure and some time after activation results in the aircraft spinning out of control while having perfect gliding conditions....

See my first paragraph. You are not in perfect gliding conditions. The "UP" elevator, puts you into a climbing stall. After that, what happens happens. You should not be in a glide because the positions of those two elements changes as a result of the failure. The scripting is that the same position is taken regardless of the situation. Unless you're parked on the ground. Then they do what you would expect upon pressure loss, they droop toward the ground.

[Worrazen]

I went playing some other stuff, tried out other aircraft, and went a quick Intercept mission for Su-27, as it was over, I kept pushing the plane to 1300 speeds and flying super low, i flew like that for a few minutes, 2 or 3, and I don't think I hit any terrain, but at some point "MANUAL CONTROL" red light would turn on, without master caution, without any sounds. I landed at nearby airport and took a video to prove this.

 

Now, that could be some component of the ACS being damaged, but not the whole ACS ? And probably damaged by something sticking out of terrain like maybe some misplaced hitbox or something. Or the speed it self shook the plane too much?

 

----------------------------

----------------------------

 

I'm not in the perfect gliding environment? Ehm, looking at it from one way just feels like a "Make plane crash after 45 sec of the HYDRO light turning red" Failure, I can't wrap my head around it.

 

I see 2 versions of Hydro faliure, a leak or a piston internal damage.

 

The internal pison damage would make all the controls that depend on hydraulics to lock-in-place, which is probably the worst one than a leak (if my theory pans out)

 

If it's a leak, then the controls would be less and less responsive until they're dead and elevators and all the stuff can move freely affected by windforce, what would that mean I don't know for sure, but you'd probably want to be steady in the firstplace to not make them move and use throttles to steer and pitch as done here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_Baghdad_DHL_attempted_shootdown_incident

 

And obviously the leak one could also be on top of the already piston-type hydro failure, which would just gradually release the grip of the ruder/elevators.

 

The only problem with my theory is that I don't know for sure if does a leaked hydro system really cause the ruder/elevators to flap around in the air freely, are they light enough, is the airflow strong enough?

 

----------------

 

The leaf-wobble-dive I experience has no moving things, it feels like a solid model just entered an animation that doesn't look like it's interacting with the environment.

 

Obviously if it's like you explained, then I really can't be using the scripted failures.

 

Are these planes so vulnerable and one little bump and eject already? should I switch to A-10A then to practise engine-only landing? I should have probably started with that in the beginning, but hey I don't mind brainstorming and reporting some bugs along the way :) And I only noticed A-10A is part of FC3 like today lol stupid me.

 

I'm kind of doubting if the Hydros were dead in theat heli mission right now, but as we said that whole mission could be a bug and I wasn't supposed to fly in which case I don't know what the heck is closer to realism anymore.

 

I distinctly remember somewhere reading about "mehanical control". I didn't made it up myself.

Edited March 14, 2016 by Worrazen

[esb77]

A relaxed stability airframe with damage to its control systems is not an ideal aircraft for safe gliding.

 

 

In a stable airframe, flight changes are resisted, so the plane tends to self correct to stable flight. The airbus you cite as an example has a classic stable airframe design.

 

In an unstable airframe, this does not happen, so the correct active controls must be constantly applied by the FCS and/or the pilot for flight to remain stable. If the controls are damaged enough so that this correction does not occur, rapid loss of aircraft control is the expected result.

 

 

The Su-27 has an unstable airframe, the benefit is great maneuverability in combat. The downside is that control system malfunctions or damage are potentially unrecoverable situations.

 

This is a common problem with advanced FBW combat aircraft. If the system is sufficiently complex even things like an airspeed sensor failure can cause a crash that may not be preventable by the pilot(s).

 

 

The scripted behavior Ironhand describes sounds suspicious, and may well be improperly modeled. However, once the hydro was fully gone the plane would be uncontrollable in any case, so I'm not sure how much that matters.

Edited March 14, 2016 by esb77

[Ironhand]

...

 

I distinctly remember somewhere reading about "mehanical control". I didn't made it up myself.

Pg 110 in the manual. First two paragraphs under the FCS heading.

 

If you would like to see any of what you have been talking about changed, create succinct bug reports and/or add them to the wish list where they are not specifically bugs. Hopefully, at some point, this area will become less scripted.

[Worrazen]

Pg 110 in the manual. First two paragraphs under the FCS heading.

 

The reason why I didn't found it is because I was searching for "mehanical" instead of "mechanical" :idiot:

 

The unstable airframe thing goes against my arguments that's why I'm hesitant to make an actual bug report since I'm not sure myself how it really should be, at this moment. If devs don't make some tests and research I don't think we can solve it by just talking and speculating, although I don't have a problem with a long discussion at all.

Edited March 14, 2016 by Worrazen

[Ironhand]

The reason why I didn't found it is because I was searching for "mehanical" instead of "mechanical" :idiot:

 

The unstable airframe thing goes against my arguments that's why I'm hesitant to make an actual bug report since I'm not sure myself how it really should be, at this moment. If devs don't make some tests and research I don't think we can solve it by just talking and speculating, although I don't have a problem with a long discussion at all.

:) I've been known to misspell things from time to time as well...

 

Only concerning the HYDRO. The failure screen only allows a complete failure of both sides of the system. All I can say is that the real world manual for the aircraft simply and succinctly states that, if both hydro systems fail, establish flight conditions for ejection and leave the aircraft. There is no mention of attempting anything else. You could always ask for a more nuanced or randomized type of failure--for instance, one side or the other, etc.

Edited March 14, 2016 by Ironhand

[Worrazen]

Well the preferred thing would be to have the scripted failures cover more of the stuff, and customizable, and as someone said earlier it's all old and needs to be refreshed for the whole game anyway right ?

 

Maybe adding some individual stuff that, like making only the Tachometer to fail, or the NSI, or the ADI, or the Fuel gauge, etc

[Ironhand]

Well the preferred thing would be to have the scripted failures cover more of the stuff, and customizable, and as someone said earlier it's all old and needs to be refreshed for the whole game anyway right ?

 

Maybe adding some individual stuff that, like making only the Tachometer to fail, or the NSI, or the ADI, or the Fuel gauge, etc

Good luck with that. :) I doubt any of this would be given a high priority given the size of the team. I'd plan on working with what we have now for the foreseeable future.

[Worrazen]

I do agree this is probably the worst example of such a detail becuase it's just mission editor helper, it's not part of realism, part of the actual simulator and realism, in simulators details are more than just making a better game or software, small thing can lead to a totally unrealistic outcome.

 

Consumer video game developers just have a list of known bugs and issues they're willing to ignore, I don't think the same approach is appropriate for a simulator, but because of real-world limitations, ED probably simply delays the low-priority ones for a long time, how much is long enough?

 

Is it necessary to make another proper bug report thread for those sounds not working, a list of known issues would also help, does it exist anywhere or only internal ?

 

And there is no chance the size of the team would get bigger, like, when 2.0 is getting finalized, cram in some overall refreshments, to make 2.0 feel more genuine a bit, and I'm not for taking resources away from the good new stuff, it's just that it doesn't feel right when you leave some other stuff kind of forgotten and not updated for 5+ years and anyone kind of trying to go back to play some good old stuff finds out the same old bug still exists it's definitely not pleasant revisit, so that image of the whole game.

 

Infact I'm patient, I rather take them longer for first stable release of 2.0 and with more things fixed. Now I didn't had FC3 back when I had 1.2, so I'm not sure if this voice alarm messages worked for the SU-27 previously.

 

And my most obvious, most noticable problem I have is when missiles hit the plane without really causing any commotion, like sometimes the whole plane is already on fire and I wouldn't know unless I'd have a look in F2. Missile explosions don't make sound effects sometimes, don't make any shockwaves, it doesn't rattle the plane at all, yes the cockpit muffles sound, but all these hits should still be heard as muffled not totally unheard, except supersonic, then I guess some bullet hits probably should be very silent if not completely.

Edited March 14, 2016 by Worrazen

[Ironhand]

...

 

Is it necessary to make another proper bug report thread for those sounds not working, a list of known issues would also help, does it exist anywhere or only internal ?..

There is no public master list that I'm aware of. My suggestion would be to create a bug report on the issues you have and post it in this forum with "[bUG]" leading the title.

 

Personally I have no idea what verbal cues really exist in the cockpit for which failures. There is also a failure annunciator in the cockpit (next to the warning lights panel) which, last time I checked, is non-functional in the sim. Failure information is also displayed there in the real aircraft.

 

Damage modeling for the aircraft remains unfinished. That is something that will probably be improved.

[Worrazen]

Correction: The MLWS/RWS "EM EL DABLYOU ES Failure" voice message is playing normally, so that's only a bug with the scripted failures.

[DarkFire]

Re-reading pages 110 - 117 of the Su-27 flight manual, and 'reading between the lines' to a certain extent, the impression I get is:

 

On CDU Failure: You probably lose the K-calculator, the pitch auto-stabilizer, pitch damper, the roll damper and differential stabilizer but probably maintain hydro-mechanical control under what it used to describe as a "proportional" control condition. Whether this is mechanical, purely hydraulic or mechanical linkages with hydraulic boosting it doesn't say.

 

On FCS Failure: You probably lose everything except "direct" control mode. This would be a nightmare to fly but would not lead to instant death, unless the 'direct' trim conditions were wildly different from the last FCS-set trim conditions.

 

On total hydraulic failure: The Su-27 isn't known to have a ram air turbine so once hydraulic pressure bleeds away the only thing effecting the control surfaces would be wind pressure. Given that the Su-27 is longitudinally unstable I would imagine that the aircraft would depart very quickly under this condition. Immediate ejection is probably mandatory if both the primary and secondary hydraulic circuits are lost.