Su(bmarine)-33 campaign bug :)

[guilhermemtr]

Hi,

 

Well, the update to the SU-33 is very good, but with it came one problem in the campaign of SU-33: when the second plane tries to take off, it just lands on the sea (the same would've happened to my plane if I hadn't taken out part of the fuel [i think the wheels still got wet with about 50% fuel]).

 

cheers!

[shonist]

yep, i manage to takeoff with 50% and 4-6 missiles. but my wingman likes to swim.

[MadDog-IC]

Hi,

 

Well, the update to the SU-33 is very good, but with it came one problem in the campaign of SU-33: when the second plane tries to take off, it just lands on the sea (the same would've happened to my plane if I hadn't taken out part of the fuel [i think the wheels still got wet with about 50% fuel]).

 

cheers!

 

Will be getting looked at ASAP to see if a simple solution can be implemented, it might be a little more complicated than it appears on the surface.

 

I know I want to retain as much ordinance and fuel as I can get away with and still take-off. I am not fully aware of true stats for carrier takeoffs as yet, I have seen 27000kg (Forward Take-off position) and 33000kg (Rear Take-off position) talked about in the forums.

 

Regards, Ian.

[Vilab]

A quick fix would be to open the mission editor and set 50% fuel to every su33 flight.

 

I have only played a few mission, and it looks like the conflict zone is small enough there is no need of more fuel.

[MadDog-IC]

A quick fix would be to open the mission editor and set 50% fuel to every su33 flight.

 

I have only played a few mission, and it looks like the conflict zone is small enough there is no need of more fuel.

 

Yes this is most likely the case in the Sea Dragon campaign mission design.

 

Not so much with the way Su-33 Heavy Sky campaign missions are designed:

 

• A lot of sorties are quite away from the carrier.
  
• You are frequently ambushed coming home to the carrier after an engagement.
  
• Sometime you have to attack enemy aircraft the moment you take off from the carrier.
  
• All of the above don't lend themselves well to putting in a refuel stop at the beginning or end of a mission, even though I did put a tanker into some of the longer sorties.
  

I did a quick test with mission 10 of the Heavy sky campaign, and all AI in forward 2 positions crashed on take off with only 20-25% fuel load and existing weapons load, so not looking to good.

 

 

 

Regards, Ian.

Edited September 25, 2017 by MadDog-IC

[Ironhand]

Yes this is most likely the case in the Sea Dragon campaign mission design.

 

Not so much with the way Su-33 Heavy Sky campaign missions are designed:

 

• A lot of sorties are quite away from the carrier.
  
• You are frequently ambushed coming home to the carrier after an engagement.
  
• Sometime you have to attack enemy aircraft the moment you take off from the carrier.
  
• All of the above don't lend themselves well to putting in a refuel stop at the beginning or end of a mission, even though I did put a tanker into some of the longer sorties.
  

I did a quick test with mission 10 of the Heavy sky campaign, and all AI in forward 2 positions crashed on take off with only 20-25% fuel load and existing weapons load, so not looking to good.

 

 

 

Regards, Ian.

You can get the AI to takeoff successfully with a total weight of 25000 kg. So 35% fuel, sorbtsiya, R-73*2, R-27ER*2 and R-27ET*2. But the carrier needs to be steaming at full speed. A human can make it off the deck from the forward positon with a total weight of 27000 kg without a problem. But, again, the carrier needs to be steaming at full speed.

 

And it helps if there's also a headwind (for human pilots-the AI seems not to care). This morning, when I tested, I used the real time wind in the area at both sea level and 500 meters. Takeoff was a walk in the park. But, again, with a weight of 27,000 kg.

[MadDog-IC]

You can get the AI to takeoff successfully with a total weight of 25000 kg. So 35% fuel, sorbtsiya, R-73*2, R-27ER*2 and R-27ET*2. But the carrier needs to be steaming at full speed. A human can make it off the deck from the forward position with a total weight of 27000 kg without a problem. But, again, the carrier needs to be steaming at full speed.

 

And it helps if there's also a headwind (for human pilots-the AI seems not to care). This morning, when I tested, I used the real time wind in the area at both sea level and 500 meters. Takeoff was a walk in the park. But, again, with a weight of 27,000 kg.

 

Thanks for the good info, but on reading other material I would expect that any Su-33 should be able to carrier take off with a max load of 30,000kg (About 72% fuel and full complement of missiles)or (100% fuel and no missiles).

 

1. Player driven Su-33 PFM with realistic physics, Blast flap, chocks and braking until engine to max thrust, emergency special extra thrust enhancement, Head wind assist and carrier full speed should allow a short take off with ease.
   
2. AI driven Su-33 SFM with unrealistic physics, no braking until engine to max thrust, no emergency special extra thrust enhancement, no head wind assist and no carrier full speed would disallow a short take off.
   

I would respectfully suggest that something is amiss or needs to be added to address the discrepency in the Max take off weights. The AI should simulate the emergency extra engine thrust for take off at the least.

 

 

Kind Regards, Ian.

[Ironhand]

Thanks for the good info, but on reading other material I would expect that any Su-33 should be able to carrier take off with a max load of 30,000kg (About 72% fuel and full complement of missiles)or (100% fuel and no missiles).

 

...

I would respectfully suggest that something is amiss or needs to be added to address the discrepency in the Max take off weights. The AI should simulate the emergency extra engine thrust for take off at the least.

I haven't attempted it with a 30,000 kg gross weight but this is one from yesterday using 29,500:

 

 

 

And something is definitely amiss. I attached the track used to make the video. The 2nd identical track has the AI in control (opened the track in the ME and changed my aircraft to AI). We leave the ramp with two very different airspeeds. And, yes, it's not a walk in the park but the AI doesn't stand a chance.

PFM 29.5Kg Takeoff-Carrier 50.trk

PFM 29.5Kg AI Takeoff-Carrier 50.trk

[JunMcKill]

If you dont want to wait for the update, edit the wingman loadout in all the Su-33 campaign missions to not exceed 29,000 Kg, they will always takeoff from the long lane in the carrier.

[MadDog-IC]

I haven't attempted it with a 30,000 kg gross weight but this is one from yesterday using 29,500:

 

And something is definitely amiss. I attached the track used to make the video. The 2nd identical track has the AI in control (opened the track in the ME and changed my aircraft to AI). We leave the ramp with two very different airspeeds. And, yes, it's not a walk in the park but the AI doesn't stand a chance.

 

Good effort, I couldn't see that becoming best practice for takeoffs though.:megalol:

 

This is the only reference to real life limitations I found online, not exactly definitive (Doesn't give enough details on amount of fuel or weapons and contradicts itself, by saying Max carrier T-O weight is 30,000kg, but is mentioned that is somewhere below that of a clean plane with full internal fuel at 100%).

 

 

Weights and Loadings:

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

 

Max military load 7,045 kg (15,532 lb)

Normal T-O weight 25,000 kg (55,115 lb)

Max carrier T-O weight 30,000 kg (66,135 lb)

Max T-O weight 33,000 kg (72,752 lb)

Max landing weight 24,500 kg (54,013 lb)

Max wing loading 486.4 kg/m2 (99.63 lb/sq ft)

Max power loading 131 kg/kN (1.29 lb/lb st)

(source: Jane's All the World's Aircraft 2001-2002)

 

In real terms, the SU-33 cannot take off from the Kuznetsov with a full load of fuel. So its maximum takeoff weight is somewhere below its "weight empty with full internal fuel" when operating from a ski jump.

 

Either way, thanks for your testing, a bit further ahead of me and very useful.

 

I have passed my concerns onto WAG's, stating I wouldn't be willing to modify the missions Su-33 fuel levels as I believed it to be more of a physics / AI problem.

 

He has passed it on to the appropriate coders/testers to investigate our claims further.

 

Regards, Ian.

[Ironhand]

...

I have passed my concerns onto WAG's, stating ... it to be more of a physics / AI problem.

 

He has passed it on to the appropriate coders/testers to investigate our claims further.

 

Regards, Ian.

Excellent.

[MadDog-IC]

Excellent.

 

Even more excellent is that it has been fixed already in the dcs v1.57.10175 patch today 30-09-2017, so long as the carrier is steaming at 50km/h.

 

Got to love those boffins at ED.

 

My first take off and fly around, I tore both wings off, oh well.

 

I have checked the Su-33 Heavy Sky campaign and made a few alterations to some missions, making sure the Kuznetsov is steaming at max speed into wind and that all missions are playable (Uploaded updated campaign files onto the ED DCS files section).

 

Will be checking and updating the SU-33 Sea Dragon Campaign in the near future for compatibility also, I suspect a little more work with that one, as I never played with carrier speeds or wind data last time around.

 

Cheers.

Edited September 30, 2017 by MadDog-IC

[Ironhand]

Even more excellent is that it has been fixed already in the dcs v1.57.10175 patch today 30-09-2017, so long as the carrier is steaming at 50km/h.

 

Got to love those boffins at ED.

 

My first take off and fly around, I tore both wings off, oh well.

 

I have checked the Su-33 Heavy Sky campaign and made a few alterations to some missions, making sure the Kuznetsov is steaming at max speed into wind and that all missions are playable (Uploaded updated campaign files onto the ED DCS files section).

 

Will be checking and updating the SU-33 Sea Dragon Campaign in the near future for compatibility also, I suspect a little more work with that one, as I never played with carrier speeds or wind data last time around.

 

Cheers.

Cool! And great work.