Strange handling after damage

[Tango777]

When hit, the Hornet flies like there is nothing wrong with when you reach 300 kts or greater. The moment you are just below that speed, the plane is very difficult to control.

 

In this case I lost my left TEF. With flaps set, and the usual speed for landing, the airplane was very unstable. The FCS page however still showed that I had functioning left TEF. So instead of landing on the carrier I landed on an air base with a no flaps landing.

 

A screenshot of the damage is attached.

 

Is an FCS page fix to show improper functionality after damage in the pipeline?

[MurderOne]

IRL, if one of the TEF are screwed/missing/inop, you're not supposed to deploy them.

[did]

One pilot had a flap attach point fail. The flap, still attach to the servo, swing around and got stuck in the v stab. The pilot just got a slight nudge on the stick. He had to land flap up. FCC reported flap servo 4 chan x out.

[LooseSeal]

I really don't think damage to the flight model is modelled much at the moment, early access and all that. I once flew through my own bomb fragments to the extent that literally every part of the Hornet had holes in it... absolutely nothing changed with flight performance though and I kept flying as normal. Not even a radio failure as it turned out!

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Is an FCS page fix to show improper functionality after damage in the pipeline?

 

If the actuator still moves, and position sensors report that it has moved to the commanded position, what do you expect the FCS to report? Remember that the FCS doesn't have eyes and can't necessarily tell if part/all of the flap is missing.

[Tango777]

If the actuator still moves, and position sensors report that it has moved to the commanded position, what do you expect the FCS to report? Remember that the FCS doesn't have eyes and can't necessarily tell if part/all of the flap is missing.

 

Firstly keep in mind that 300 kias is or was the magic number. The Hornet handled poorly under 300 kias, as it should, and the slower I flew the worst it handled. I was able to keep an airspeed of 290 to 297 kias for a while to see how it handled in increments of speed as I slowed down, but the moment I hit 300 kias or greater the plane handled like a new bird out of the hangar.

 

As to your question: I find it hard to believe that after taking enough damage to lose a flap, that all actuators and position sensors would be undamaged. So to me this sounds like a WIP.

[Tango777]

IRL, if one of the TEF are screwed/missing/inop, you're not supposed to deploy them.

 

I did not know I had a damaged TEF until later in the flight when I was out of harms way and I then looked outside by hitting F2.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Firstly keep in mind that 300 kias is or was the magic number. The Hornet handled poorly under 300 kias, as it should, and the slower I flew the worst it handled. I was able to keep an airspeed of 290 to 297 kias for a while to see how it handled in increments of speed as I slowed down, but the moment I hit 300 kias or greater the plane handled like a new bird out of the hangar.

 

As to your question: I find it hard to believe that after taking enough damage to lose a flap, that all actuators and position sensors would be undamaged. So to me this sounds like a WIP.

 

It wasn't a question, I was telling you. Nothing you've said (in your example) indicates that the damage model is wrong (although it might be). There is no guarantee that damage, much less structural, will be picked up by the caution and warning system. You simply can't rely on the plane to think for you.

 

In fact you can't even rely on the plane to relay errors when it should:

 

 

Watch from 28 mins.

[Tango777]

It wasn't a question, I was telling you. Nothing you've said (in your example) indicates that the damage model is wrong (although it might be). There is no guarantee that damage, much less structural, will be picked up by the caution and warning system. You simply can't rely on the plane to think for you.

 

In fact you can't even rely on the plane to relay errors when it should:

 

 

Watch from 28 mins.

 

It looks like you misunderstood my post.

 

When a question mark is at the end of a sentence, that means a question is being asked.

 

Aircraft are never supposed to think for you, but many modern day aircraft (going back to the 1980's to present) that cost millions of Dollars have more split second error reports and corresponding error consequences than anyone can memorize that alert pilots as to what is wrong. Many times even before a pilot senses a problem...The MD-11 is a good circa 1980's example.

 

So it looks like my problem is that I've been in too many commercial airliner aircraft for the last 25 years. A close relative of mine captains Emb-170/175s, and he has done 3 no flap landings. Why? When calling for flaps 1 the slats did not move, and at that very moment more than 1 error message popped up immediately and simultaneously. The error messages not only said what malfunctioned, but on another page it detailed the reason that caused the slats for not moving and the plane automatically calculates the no flaps landing speed (Vref + "x").

 

As for the simulated Hornet, I think LooseSeal is correct in that the damage to the flight model is not modeled much. If you look at the left wing in the picture I posted there is 1 large hole and other small holes, but yet my fuel page showed the exact same amount of fuel in the left wing as there was in the undamaged right wing. Also with a wing with that kind of damage, I doubt that the wing's integrity would have remained after the really high G-loads I pulled to get out of harms way and then going over Mach 1 below 5,000 ft.

 

The video you posted shows that the guy had a problem and he did not not know what was wrong, but at 29:20 minutes he says that the plane's "Betty" gives an audio warning concerning flight controls and that he thinks the FCS page automatically popped up (automatic pop-up of a display has not happened to me yet) and the FCS page showed him that something was wrong with his right TEF by showing 4 x's. In my case, the FCS page showed no problems in any control surface while I flew it straight and level for 45nm at an altitude of 4,000 ft. and at a speed of 320 kias.

 

I simply think that damage to the flight model is a WIP on the Hornet.