F-15 still pulling 14G with two bags and no damage

[SDsc0rch]

Just set bases to have a limited aircrafts and missiles and then have a roster of the K/M (Kill per Missile ratio) where badly flying pilots gets penalties....

 

Same for all other sort things like over stressed airframes etc.

 

Similar as that ejected pilots dont get that pilot to fly before rescue helicopter has rescued and brought pilot back. So a "same account" to have a two virtual pilots but otherwise no flying if not being careful.

 

It would be the HC simulation server...

 

Did you take off or land without permission? Penalties.... Did you shoot a friendly? Penalties...

 

A ruined aircraft is bad in combat.... Better to come home without accomplished mission than without aircraft...

 

ah! linked to your ED login - servers already do this : )

 

i like it!

[GGTharos]

1. I know what you're getting at, and the system almost all sims use today is good at providing decent and equal playing field. But i'm always up for experimenting with something new. Like in that episode of "Dogfights", i think it was "The last Gunfighter", when that guy (forgot his name, it was a long time ago) had accumulated so much fatigue in his arms from all the hard turns, his capillaries started to pop? I would like having something like that simulated.

 

This is a normal effect of pulling a lot of G. To be very clear about why I am so opposed to this:

 

G tolerance is less than it should be, at least for certain countries. The g system is already just fine and fair.

 

And a couple of other things: Taking away g capability immediately takes away the ability to use a high-g capable fighter as a high-g capable fighter. Imagine for a moment if it was an F-16, and not an F-15 ... people would complain about not being able to turn that plane as they ought to, and rightly so.

This sort of thing actually happened with a WW2 plane (I forget which), where the virtual g-suit was removed, and so you couldn't really do with that aircraft what the real pilots had been able to. Yo-Yo put that suit back in after a well argumented explanation :)

 

Imagine if we started introducing random handicaps like 'The flanker's auto-flaps won't work'. Suddenly you have no automatic turn optimization.

 

I'm not going anywhere near as far as suggesting that certain countries known for aggressively taking pilots out of fighter slots if they can't handle certain amount of g, and those air forces thus have some exceptionally capable pilots. It doesn't mean you can't make mistakes and g-loc, but we're talking peeps who stick around at 9g for 30sec, then relax the stick and keep flying.

 

 

2. I haven't made up my mind on that subject yet. In some cases his arguments make sense. Like turning your head around freely in high g turns, or reaching up knobs and switches above your head and shoulders. It's not something easily simulated though, even with people with first hand experience to act as advisors.

 

Also, people who in some cases paid many hundreds of dollars to build their pits/get VR rigs might be really unhappy about this.

 

After all there is no penalty for crushing your plane in the ground, except for maybe a bit of a bruised ego and some role playing. And i like that aspect of it, but i just don't see it working in practice.

 

Exactly.

[GGTharos]

Yep, I'm very familiar with these sorts of set-ups. But again let me re-iterate, since we're talking about F-15's ... under a certain weight I can turn at 10g all day and not accumulate any damage. In reality you shorten the airframe's lifespan, but in a war (which is more or less what we're simulating), we just don't care.

 

My point here is to emphasize differences between airframe capabilities. I hope that is fairly clear.

 

Agree with you that DCS needs to implement the 'accumulated damage' to all PFM and EFM models, at least until you change slot, or repair the aircraft.

 

Usually in the official Tournaments, we try to keep things like RL, it's one life, is forbidden to change aircraft slot unless you have a windows crash or internet fail, if you have damage and return to base, you need to repáir the aircraft, not change slot, etc. With acumulated damage, pilots will not exploit their aircraft beyond real limits with no consecuences

[winchesterdelta1]

Just set bases to have a limited aircrafts and missiles and then have a roster of the K/M (Kill per Missile ratio) where badly flying pilots gets penalties....

 

Same for all other sort things like over stressed airframes etc.

 

Similar as that ejected pilots don't get that pilot to fly before rescue helicopter has rescued and brought pilot back. So a "same account" to have a two virtual pilots but otherwise no flying if not being careful.

 

It would be the HC simulation server...

 

Did you take off or land without permission? Penalties.... Did you shoot a friendly? Penalties...

 

A ruined aircraft is bad in combat.... Better to come home without accomplished mission than without aircraft...

 

Ow cool. Nice to know that pilots get punished for bended air frames and missed missiles in wartime. Do they even get punished when they bend their air frame but in the process save their own life or their wingmans? Also, how would you implement this when all your missiles miss from 4 miles because of the state of missiles DCS has now. Or do you want pilots to stop shooting at the target and disengage when they miss within 4 miles.. Afraid that they will get punished for missing even more. You ever fired at a mirage? Some experienced Mirage pilots dodge missiles all day from any range.

 

Much realistic. Much hardcore.

Edited March 31, 2017 by winchesterdelta1

[lunaticfringe]

In a conflict situation, it can be upwards of hours for a SAR helo to reach a downed pilot, let alone anyone hour or more on a range such as in thexcess continental US. Are we going to model evasion from capture and the potential for being taken as a POW, too? Does your avatar have to have SERE certification before being allowed to take part?

 

Persistent servers refresh their scenarios every 90 minutes to four hours or so. So what makes you think someone is going to wait around until half an hour before a reset occurs, knowing it takes them ten minutes to start up and taxi, rather than just finding something else to do with the rest of their free time?

[Fri13]

Ow cool. Nice to know that pilots get punished for bended air frames and missed missiles in wartime. Do they even get that punished when they bend their air frame but in the process save their own life or their wingmans? Also, how would you implement this when all your missiles miss from 4 miles because of the state of missiles DCS have now. Or do you want pilots to stop shooting at the target and disengage when they miss within 4 miles.. Afraid that they will get punished for missing even more. You ever fired at a mirage? Some experienced Mirage pilots dodge missiles all day from any range.

 

Much realistic. Much hardcore.

I a wartime specific limitations are removed, but still you are required to uphold operational capabilities in the future. Meaning you can't fool around and try to be a Top Gun hero.

 

You train as you fight, fight as you train.

 

And you don't waste missiles for nothing. Your task is to hit the target, not to launch missiles for fun. That's reason why it is in your training to learn the procedures correctly.

 

You never know in war time if suddenly your 2 targets turns to be a 4 and your 4 missiles are something else even with your wingman by capabilities.

[Fri13]

In a conflict situation, it can be upwards of hours for a SAR helo to reach a downed pilot, let alone anyone hour or more on a range such as in thexcess continental US. Are we going to model evasion from capture and the potential for being taken as a POW, too? Does your avatar have to have SERE certification before being allowed to take part?

 

Persistent servers refresh their scenarios every 90 minutes to four hours or so. So what makes you think someone is going to wait around until half an hour before a reset occurs, knowing it takes them ten minutes to start up and taxi, rather than just finding something else to do with the rest of their free time?

"few virtual pilots in a roster per server" i said.

 

The idea is to give the reason for pilot to be careful, not to chase death for glory if server owner wants.

[Pocket Sized]

Regarding G limits during war time - a damaged airframe is better than no airframe and a dead pilot.

 

You do whatever is necessary to prevent loss of the aircraft, which means pulling the wings off is out of the question, but so is getting shot down or crashing into terrain. Now, if the pilot was using very poor judgment, found himself 70° nose down at 500 knots, and pulled 13G to narrowly avoid a crash, then he repercussions may be slightly different when he gets back to base.

[GGTharos]

Just stop. Maybe what you should consider is to fly with specific sets of squadrons that do less airquake and more air combat.

 

Divest yourself of the delusion that you can force this onto a public server in any way, shape, or form - especially with restrictions that bring less, not more realism. And for the above squadrons, you just don't need it.

 

"few virtual pilots in a roster per server" i said.

 

The idea is to give the reason for pilot to be careful, not to chase death for glory if server owner wants.

[JunMcKill]

Yep, I'm very familiar with these sorts of set-ups. But again let me re-iterate, since we're talking about F-15's ... under a certain weight I can turn at 10g all day and not accumulate any damage. In reality you shorten the airframe's lifespan, but in a war (which is more or less what we're simulating), we just don't care.

 

My point here is to emphasize differences between airframe capabilities. I hope that is fairly clear.

 

Im talking about the continues 14+G to gain lead in merge with full weapons and bags!

[GGTharos]

We just proved that it doesn't exist.

[JunMcKill]

We just proved that it doesn't exist.

 

and my video and the video of razor what? are fake?

[Fri13]

and my video and the video of razor what? are fake?

Yes... Fake from start to stop and all between.... Just fly with the squadron who doesn't do air quake and problem solved.... Fixing it doesn't add realism...

[lunaticfringe]

It's a lag spike. A lower G makes the same turn. And the Tacview interpolation to 3G less validates the contention that it's a spike, because the turn would have been made with less.

 

14 G didn't kill the defender. Hell, even 11 G didn't kill the defender.

 

A mistaken nose-high reversal killed the defender. And if he doesn't turn, we're not spending pages on a non-issue.

[JunMcKill]

It's a lag spike. A lower G makes the same turn. And the Tacview interpolation to 3G less validates the contention that it's a spike, because the turn would have been made with less.

 

14 G didn't kill the defender. Hell, even 11 G didn't kill the defender.

 

A mistaken nose-high reversal killed the defender. And if he doesn't turn, we're not spending pages on a non-issue.

 

My test was made in single player, what lag are you talking about? And the test was not in tacview, is a third person view in DCS with the data in the bottom bar, full bags and weapons reaching a peak of 14.4Gs with no damage to the airframe, have you seen the video?

Edited March 31, 2017 by JunMcKill

[lunaticfringe]

You missed the part where the request for the original recording of Razer's track was made, with a response that while it wasn't available and could be tested (which as GG showed, doesn't actually work), the Tacview from the engagement in question shows a highest record of 11.3 in the same turn.

 

Now you're welcome to go review Tacview's documentation on recording speed frequency, and then come make a case that

 

1. a legitimate pull up to 14 G and release or drag induced speed loss degrading that stick position down to 11 G would occur between stamps, and

 

2. such an event would be tactically advantageous.

 

Until then, it remains moot.

[JunMcKill]

You missed the part where the request for the original recording of Razer's track was made, with a response that while it wasn't available and could be tested (which as GG showed, doesn't actually work), the Tacview from the engagement in question shows a highest record of 11.3 in the same turn.

 

Now you're welcome to go review Tacview's documentation on recording speed frequency, and then come make a case that

 

1. a legitimate pull up to 14 G and release or drag induced speed loss degrading that stick position down to 11 G would occur between stamps, and

 

2. such an event would be tactically advantageous.

 

Until then, it remains moot.

 

Im not talking now of Razer shot, but my video. What do you want? another test like mine in SP with tacview and track? will do it!

 

DuUQ6Oq7xoM

Edited March 31, 2017 by JunMcKill

[lunaticfringe]

Yes... Fake from start to stop and all between.... Just fly with the squadron who doesn't do air quake and problem solved.... Fixing it doesn't add realism...

 

Somebody is mad the patients are unimpressed with prescriptions that don't help the symptoms, let alone the disease, and are apt to make the ailment worse.

 

Not a good look, doctor.

 

You want to fix MP, you start with actual changes in scenario design- not a bunch of supposed "realistic" bandaids that are ludicrous and unmanageable.

[GGTharos]

Show me something that's actually useful in a fight and really needs to be fixed right now. I want to see a 14g turn, not a 14g roll. I really don't care about the 14g roll.

 

You wrote:

Im talking about the continues 14+G to gain lead in merge with full weapons and bags!

 

All you're doing is rolling. You're certainly not turning at 14g, so where are you gaining lead in the merge?

 

To be more precise, it's just not an emergency. Flankers pulling 40g 180s were an emergency - by comparison this is a curiocity - almost literally a parlor trick.

 

And don't get me wrong, I agree you shouldn't be able to do it. To me the higher priority is the F-15 control issue that can actually cause you to lose a fight. It mostly affects slow speed maneuvering.

 

Im not talking now of Razer shot, but my video. What do you want? another test like mine in SP with tacview and track? will do it!

Edited March 31, 2017 by GGTharos

[Pocket Sized]

To me the higher priority is the F-15 control issue that can actually cause you to lose a fight. It mostly affects slow speed maneuvering.

 

Do tell.

[*Rage*]

Its only when these limits are imposed and fixed that people will realise how much G they are inadvertently putting on the airframe. However they do it. Till then the F15 AFM is a poor imitation of the Su27s.

[GGTharos]

In some cases the controls get stuck when trying to reposition the stick - eg quickly reposition from high deflection to low deflection or the other way around, and the controls can get stuck in the previous position without the pilot realizing it. So you believe you're maneuvering, but you're not. It's very subtle and largely costs you a slow-speed jink or circle diameter reduction just when you could most use it.

 

Do tell.

[Pocket Sized]

In some cases the controls get stuck when trying to reposition the stick - eg quickly reposition from high deflection to low deflection or the other way around, and the controls can get stuck in the previous position without the pilot realizing it. So you believe you're maneuvering, but you're not. It's very subtle and largely costs you a slow-speed jink or circle diameter reduction just when you could most use it.

 

I THINK I've seen what you're describing. Does it sometimes lead to the stabilators "jumping" from one position to another when the stick is near center at high AoA/low airspeed? (Full back stick gives less stab angle than ~1/4 stick deflection) If so, that's something I've been trying to figure out as well.

[TAW_Blaze]

From everything I've seen it's only possible to achieve anything far beyond 10 G is a loaded barrel roll which is borderline worthless in any combat scenario. IIRC even in a steep dive turn you will not be able to reach so much Gs (not to mention this will both black you out and the excess speed will also destroy your turn radius). If you go nose up you will run out of speed before you could reach so much unless you were flying in so fast it literally won't matter because you will have orbital turn radius (and you still won't reach 10+).

[GGTharos]

Yes, that's what it is.

 

I THINK I've seen what you're describing. Does it sometimes lead to the stabilators "jumping" from one position to another when the stick is near center at high AoA/low airspeed? (Full back stick gives less stab angle than ~1/4 stick deflection) If so, that's something I've been trying to figure out as well.