Jump to content

Spitfire IX - Snapping those wings off


Recommended Posts

Decided to play about with snapping this Spitfire wings off. I've snapped plenty of these off myself, and I've watched online as loads of other Spitfire pilots have dived in to an attack, only to rip apart mid-air whilst the 109 or 190 they were following happily flies away!

I'm not 100% convinced that ED have got it right with the wing structural integrity yet. The spit still seems* to be ripping wings off when NONE of the other aircraft in the sim do. I read that this might be more related to the absence of stick-force modelling in this spit, allowing us to yank greater amounts of elevator than would be realistically possible given the air-speeds achieved, however I have not seen any comment from ED to confirm this, yet.

The Spitfire's wings will also rip off without any indication of significant G-load on the pilot . . .so it happens without apparent warning.

Despite the above, it is possible to pull out of a dive at 480 to 500 mph indicated in the current version of the DCS Spitfire. But, in order to achieve this you will have to have the saturation on the "pitch" curve turned waaay down, and you'll have to be VERY gentle on the elevators. You will also have to allow plenty of altitude to recover, because the recovery has to be a gentle curve.

Here's me working my way through this, in video form:

The next things I want to look at are:

1. Compare this to the Mustang, under similar conditions. If I owned a 109 or 190 I do it for them also...

2. Comparing the "negative G" blackout implementation in the Spit v the Mustang. This is another aspect of the Spit which seems to me to not have been implemented fully yet.

 

 

* "seems" - this is anecdotal, based on observations from in-cockpit only. I have yet to do thorough testing with different types to see if there really is a signifcant weakness (or control input difference) in the spit when compared to the others.


Edited by philstyle

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz

Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Decided to play about with snapping this Spitfire wings off. I've snapped plenty of these off myself, and I've watched online as loads of other Spitfire pilots have dived in to an attack, only to rip apart mid-air whilst the 109 or 190 they were following happily flies away!

I'm not 100% convinced that ED have got it right with the wing structural integrity yet. The spit still seems* to be ripping wings off when NONE of the other aircraft in the sim do. I read that this might be more related to the absence of stick-force modelling in this spit, allowing us to yank greater amounts of elevator than would be realistically possible given the air-speeds achieved, however I have not seen any comment from ED to confirm this, yet.

The Spitfire's wings will also rip off without any indication of significant G-load on the pilot . . .so it happens without apparent warning.

Despite the above, it is possible to pull out of a dive at 480 to 500 mph indicated in the current version of the DCS Spitfire. But, in order to achieve this you will have to have the saturation on the "pitch" curve turned waaay down, and you'll have to be VERY gentle on the elevators. You will also have to allow plenty of altitude to recover, because the recovery has to be a gentle curve.

Here's me working my way through this, in video form:

The next things I want to look at are:

1. Compare this to the Mustang, under similar conditions. If I owned a 109 or 190 I do it for them also...

2. Comparing the "negative G" blackout implementation in the Spit v the Mustang. This is another aspect of the Spit which seems to me to not have been implemented fully yet.

 

 

* "seems" - this is anecdotal, based on observations from in-cockpit only. I have yet to do thorough testing with different types to see if there really is a signifcant weakness (or control input difference) in the spit when compared to the others.

 

 

 

Good call, I've watched your video several times now. I feel that the wings aren't properly modeled just yet. And the black out seems way to sensitive. I say that because in my experience, when turning low with a 109 I can barely see him through the Black tunnel while he appears to be having no issues. The wings create frustration because it's almost impossible to "boom & zoom". As long as the enemy doesn't move your ok, but if you have to turn at all in the dive your toast. I also think the engine torque in relation to Boost is also to sensitive. I've flown many real world high performance planes. They yaw, but they don't yaw that drastic with a minor power change. Of coarse we make these observations knowing that it's early access and will go through some changes. Overall it's a great module. It's just a little frustrating to dog fight with at the moment. I think once those minor things are ironed out. This plane will be superb.

 

Just my 2cents but I think they should tone down the overall yaw character. I'm all about realism, but you can feel a planes yaw momentum shift in the real world, especially when on the ground. Of coarse you can't feel this inside the sim. That leads to it being very difficult to handle on the ground and during take off. I have over 4000 landing and takeoffs in all variety of real world aircraft and I've never experienced a takeoff as difficult as this spitfire. Please don't mistake this post to be a bashing, it's not! It's just my opinion and observation. I still really love this spit! I just want it to be even better.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've only done it once in the Spit, and it was my fault. I yanked on the elevator. I use no curves. (FFB stick).

 

Thing is this, the Spitfire elevators are very, very light. Take into account our very short sticks, and we can create a situation whereby we can put a huge load of G's on the plane for a very short amount of time.

 

It's not even about the stick travel length, as much as it is about stick travel speed.

 

So you can be very gentle on the stick in a dive, but if you for any reason move it even a very short distance, very quickly, in a dive or hard turn where you are already loading G's on the plane, you can snap your wings, or black (red) out.

 

AFAIK the real Spit was also very light on the elevator, all pilot accounts and it's design seem to prove that. However with their much longer control columns, and ability to feel the elevator resistance of the airflow they probably didn't have these problems.

 

This is just my 2 cents. There might very well be a problem with the structural modeling of the Spit in DCS. Having a FFB stick probably also helps with the "feel" of the plane in a high speed dive. (Though I feel this could be pushed even further in ALL the WWII modules).


Edited by OnlyforDCS

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah its wrong..

 

the spitfire controls were designed to get heavy in high speed situations. so you couldn't fly the damn wings off. :)

 

i don't dive too fast in the P51, not because i think the wings will come off, but because i lose all authority in the elevator..

 

here you touch the stick backwards, and the wings come off..

 

way to much elevator authority. you should pull and nothing should happen :) so you should pull harder.. (the way i prefer it simulated)

 

the aileron reversal speed for that wing is somewhere near 550mph..

see if you can get to that :)

also try rolling in a high-speed dive to check the ailerons.

do they lose authority? Snap the wings?

 

I enjoy your vids :)

My Rig: AM5 7950X, 32GB DDR5 6000, M2 SSD, EVGA 1080 Superclocked, Warthog Throttle and Stick, MFG Crosswinds, Oculus Rift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The structural limit itself is modelled correctly:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3019558&postcount=74

It's worth noting, that 6200 lbs corresponds to about 25% fuel load and nobody flies with that, 'cause it will end with empty plane in no-time. With average fuel loads we can pull DCS Spit to 10-11'ish G sustained, which is OK compared to figures from the link.

 

Elevator force modelling... Well, Yo-You believes his implementation is OK...

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3064495&postcount=3

... so I wouldn't expect major changes here, maybe small tweaks, if any. Mind you, I don't know what programmed "muscle force" of out virtual alter-ego is, though I think it was mentioned long ago, somewhere in the Bf-109 section of the forum.

 

I'd say the crucial problem is we have no idea when we're getting close to the limit. In other sims there are some distinctive clues indicating very high G condition (cracking sounds, more progressive blackout, etc.). In DCS we only have "heavy breathing" effect, but it turns on quite below the structural limit, so it's not a very precise indication.

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't get an adequate sound or visual effect, when the actual conditions occur in a split second. There is no way to simulate that. By the time you hear the wings cracking they are already gone. If you go from say 4 to 12 G's on the wings, in less than a quarter of a second, what kind of effect do you expect?

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Actually in other modules you do have some stress sounds from the aircraft, I am not sure if they are in for the Spitfire, if not I will submit a bug for it. I had to fight for those sounds because its considered not real, but I feel they are important as we are missing other indicators a real pilot would have.

64Sig.png
Forum RulesMy YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**

1146563203_makefg(6).png.82dab0a01be3a361522f3fff75916ba4.png  80141746_makefg(1).png.6fa028f2fe35222644e87c786da1fabb.png  28661714_makefg(2).png.b3816386a8f83b0cceab6cb43ae2477e.png  389390805_makefg(3).png.bca83a238dd2aaf235ea3ce2873b55bc.png  216757889_makefg(4).png.35cb826069cdae5c1a164a94deaff377.png  1359338181_makefg(5).png.e6135dea01fa097e5d841ee5fb3c2dc5.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can't get an adequate sound or visual effect, when the actual conditions occur in a split second. There is no way to simulate that. By the time you hear the wings cracking they are already gone. If you go from say 4 to 12 G's on the wings, in less than a quarter of a second, what kind of effect do you expect?

 

Maybe I shouldn't use a word "cracking". What I meant were any stress sounds (Il-2 CloD style, for example), activating at, let's say 8-9'ish G to warn us about upcoming limit. Ironically, when we obviously can't feel the forces like real pilots do, only somewhat "gamey", additional features are the way to crank up the realism.

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I agree with you there Art-J. However I guarantee that will not help with the wing snapping in most situations. It will help only in situations where you are already pulling lots of G's.

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, it would still require careful elevator management, not to increase the Gs too fast as in your example. But every little bit of information helps!

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I agree with you there Art-J. However I guarantee that will not help with the wing snapping in most situations. It will help only in situations where you are already pulling lots of G's.

 

If you slowly ramp up the G forces, you will have enough time to hear the sound and relax your pull. Personally, I fly EVERY aircraft like this even if I don't have to. The last thing I'd want is to find myself in a dive above maneuver speed and instinctively yank on the stick whilst flying IRL

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

when turning low with a 109 I can barely see him through the Black tunnel while he appears to be having no issues.

 

In situations like that, throttle down for a moment. Once you get a bit slower, you should be able to get inside his turn and get closer, allowing you to get in a better firing position. Results may vary.

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm reasoning to Art here, mainly because he raises questions I'm also considering, in a nice "bulleted" manner, one issue at a time.

 

The structural limit itself is modelled correctly:

Yes, I understand this to be the case also from this thread on SoW, where our resident physicist did some "basic" (cough, cough) calcs:

http://stormofwar.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=36&t=5934#p45431

I don't have Tacview.. maybe I need to get a copy and learn how to work it..

 

 

Elevator force modelling... Well, Yo-You believes his implementation is OK...

Thanks. Presumably this means it will not be changed...

 

I'd say the crucial problem is we have no idea when we're getting close to the limit. In other sims there are some distinctive clues indicating very high G condition (cracking sounds, more progressive blackout, etc.). In DCS we only have "heavy breathing" effect, but it turns on quite below the structural limit, so it's not a very precise indication.

 

The thing is, this is only an issue for the Spitfire in DCS. I don't see 109s, 190s or Ponies breaking apart like this. I also don't hear the pilots of those aircraft asking for such indications.

It's just not an issue for the other types, based on 1) the lack of conversation on the forums and 2) the absence of observing it happen online.

 

----> additional comment

 

If the force modelling and structural limits are already correct.. then why is the spitfire in such a unique position relative to the other types? Sure, the pilots said it had "light" elevators, but the pilots also say that they never knew chaps snapping wings off in a dive and the most relevant quotes** that can be found is where a chap says it was NOT possible because the pilot wouldn't have the strength or would black out first anyway.

 

Someone told me that when the 109 first came out there were loads of wings snapping off, but the issue was "patched" away as it was considered unhistorical/ inaccurate. Does the Spitfire need such attention? Will it get it?

 

** whilst I'm not a fan generally of relying on pilot quotes for performance data, if we are going to use the "light elevator" opinion as an argument then we've already opened that door!

 

Fl/Lt. Irving Kennedy, No.185 Spitfire IXs, June 1943:

I had the throttle open and I rolled over and headed on a course to cut the angle toward the 109s, which had separated a little. I wound on nose-heavy trim so essential to keep the aircraft in a high-speed dive. The Spit responded eagerly as I dove more steeply than the 109s, with Red Two and Three no doubt following, although I could not see them. The controls got very heavy as the airspeed needle moved far right at 480 mph

 

S/L D. E. Kingaby, No.122, March 1943:

As I was climbing and they had the speed on me, they out climbed me when I broke into them, so I went into an aileron turn and dived at full throttle. The aileron turn threw them off and with over 500 m.p.h. on the clock I climbed like a rocket at 18 lbs. boost and 2,900 revs in a steep climbing turn.

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz

Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Stang will happily rip wings off if you're hamfisted.

 

Unlike the Spit, it has an accelerometer on the panel, so it's reasonably easy to keep G forces under control (which is why you don't hear people complaining)

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding behind the reason why the 109 and 190 wings do not snap off is because they physically cannot deflect the elevators like a pilot can in the Spitfire the forces on the stick are too strong.

 

I was sure something was modelled incorrectly until someone posted a paragraph from a book where it tells the story of a Typhoon pilot ripping the wings off his Spitfire when they were switched to them...

 

That story and Yo-Yo's explanation were enough to shut me up.

 

Then I recalled the pilots who say flying the spit is a dream because you only need to fly with your fingers, with other aircraft you hear the pilots talking about how they had to wrestle with the controls.

 

I think the problem here is the control implementation not the physics, the 109 and 190 feel like your flying on rails at high speed, it is damn hard to break something however you feel like your controls are delayed.

 

I have a centre stick with an extension and it is still hard to resist jerking back on the stick and bang there my wings go... so i can't imagine what the experience is like for a sidestick user!!!

 

Yes it is incredibly frustrating however it is these kind of quirks that make DCS a cut above other WWII sims.

 

P.S.

I (perhaps foolishly) refuse to use curves on any aircraft.

Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit

Project IX Cockpit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My understanding behind the reason why the 109 and 190 wings do not snap off is because they physically cannot deflect the elevators like a pilot can in the Spitfire the forces on the stick are too strong.

.... I (perhaps foolishly) refuse to use curves on any aircraft.

 

It's down to curves. I've just proved it.

Youtube video to come in about an hour, once upload finishes.

On YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/philstylenz

Storm of War WW2 server website: https://stormofwar.net/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's down to curves. I've just proved it.

 

Youtube video to come in about an hour, once upload finishes.

 

 

 

Awesome! I hope you discuss your (Hotas) curves and why you have them setup like you do!!!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure curves help that is why they are there, however I feel like they are a bit of a cheat... unless I am being rather ignorant...

Windows 10 Pro | ASUS RANGER VIII | i5 6600K @ 4.6GHz| MSI RTX 2060 SUPER | 32GB RAM | Corsair H100i | Corsair Carbide 540 | HP Reverb G2 | MFG crosswind Pedals | Custom Spitfire Cockpit

Project IX Cockpit

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure curves help that is why they are there, however I feel like they are a bit of a cheat... unless I am being rather ignorant...

 

If the aircraft stick deflection was modeled to a 1:1 mapping with your joystick sitting on the desk you'd be more on the the correct side.

 

Reality is they arent. You also have to take into account most people do not fly with extensions on there sticks which curves help mimic to a small degree.

 

I don't know why this myth about curves continues to persist when there is little relation between the real and your pc controler.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Desk pulls no G's. We experience only visual and sound effects with virtual flying, but no physical (even with ffb stick its just the tip of the iceberg) ones - hence why other means of feedback like curves in joystick tuning and sound of cracking metal, even if considered unrealistic, are simply necessary.

 

Most of us maneuver as hard as possible, until we hit structural limits. In reality before you make it to structural limits there is your body that can handle far less - and that is a limiting factor in real combat.

AMD Ryzen 5900X @ 4.95 Ghz / Asus Crosshair VII X470 / 32 GB DDR4 3600 Mhz Cl16 / Radeon 6800XT / Samsung 960 EVO M.2 SSD / Creative SoundBlaster AE-9 / HP Reverb G2 / VIRPIL T-50CM /
Thrustmaster TPR Pendular Rudder Pedals / Audio Technica ATH-MSR7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with curves is at somepoint in the physical travel of your stick the in game deflection accelerates quickly; in certain circumstances someones 'half' stick input at the controller side could result in a two-thirds deflection of the control surface.

 

And Krupis right - the 109/190 can't suffer from this because the elevator forces prevent the amount of deflection required to generate the g necessary to overload the airframe.

 

I've done it once or twice in the Pony and once in the Spitty - both aircraft being noted for their effective elevator controls at speed. Whomever said Spitfire elevator becomes too heavy to move at speed is talking nonsense frankly. There are a few unfortunate Spitfire Mk.V pilots who would attest to that if they could speak.

 

I wonder if half the issue is a lack of awareness of the airspeed; not enough wind noise - coming from other sims you were made audibly quite cognisant of reaching your very high airspeed by suitably - if slightly theatrically perhaps - ramped up wind speed noise. I've noticed it's not quite so obvious in the dear old DCS Spitty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Desk pulls no G's. We experience only visual and sound effects with virtual flying, but no physical (even with ffb stick its just the tip of the iceberg) ones - hence why other means of feedback like curves in joystick tuning and sound of cracking metal, even if considered unrealistic, are simply necessary.

 

Most of us maneuver as hard as possible, until we hit structural limits. In reality before you make it to structural limits there is your body that can handle far less - and that is a limiting factor in real combat.

 

Whilst I don't disagree in principle Hiro, the issue here is that people snapping wings are, by virtue of the Spits powerful elevators, loading the airframe so quickly at high airspeeds that there would be no point in the warning 'creaking' sounds as the failure would occur within a heartbeat of the sound being triggered - by the time you'd registered the sound and tried to lessen the stick force you're already too late.

 

Don't forget that G modelling on the pilot in DCS takes account of the delayed onset of G - it takes a couple of seconds for the blood to move away from the head due to friction with blood vessels, non vertical blood vessels not being drained as effectively etc. This means it is entirely possible to load the airframe up to the ~10g failure point almost instantaneously with the pilot suffering no visual cues as to the load he's experiencing during that time.

 

I broke the DCS Spitty's wings once early on during an online scrap; I've never done it again. Why? Because I learnt the lesson, I am PAINFULLY aware of my airspeed in all flight regimes and am VERY circumspect with stick movement at speeds above 350mph IAS.


Edited by DD_Fenrir
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am sure curves help that is why they are there, however I feel like they are a bit of a cheat... unless I am being rather ignorant...

 

 

 

Considering no 2 real world planes feel the same in flight and everyone has different control setups through different computers. I would hardly consider a curve a cheat. There's nothing to cheat with? The sim planes don't fly or feel like the real thing. You have zero resistance on your stick and no G's in your pants. If anything, a curve will bring things more in line to the response that you would get from the real thing. It's funny, I fly sims when I'm off work. When go back the first thing I always notice is how heavy the stick actually is and how much play there is. There just not equal in anyway! But we can sure have a blast pretending!

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...