[NO BUG] Far too easy to over G the plane with no feedback.

[FSKRipper]

Personally I think there are quite a lot signals you get.

 

If pulling steadily and slow you will get the breathing and black out (blame yourself if you switched it off, got no blackouts during catshots since the Honet bug)

 

You get buffeting at high AoA.

 

You have a G-Meter

 

If you fly at Mach 1+ and pull the stick instantly into your guts, sorry guy, your mistake. This is a simulator which can't build up dozens of lbs pressure on your plastic joystick. If you would do it in RL your life would be over.

No need for vocal "Over-G"'s or blinking strobes at the edge of the screen. This module already has more G awareness possibilities than all the others.

[Tomsk]

If you fly at Mach 1+ and pull the stick instantly into your guts, sorry guy, your mistake. This is a simulator which can't build up dozens of lbs pressure on your plastic joystick. If you would do it in RL your life would be over.

No need for vocal "Over-G"'s or blinking strobes at the edge of the screen. This module already has more G awareness possibilities than all the others.

 

So clearly if I was just honking back on the stick then snapping the wings would be fair. But that's not the case, both times it's happened I've been very mindful I'm going fast. I've explicitly thought to myself "I have to be gentle", so I've slowly and gently eased on the stick, slowly increasing pressure over several seconds (I've even counted it) to avoid exceeding the G limits. However DCS doesn't give you any feedback on G until many seconds after the G has been pulled, and this is both unrealistic and causes all these problems.

 

Let me compare with another flight sim I fly regularly. IL2 BoS, that has the same limitations if you pull too hard you can break your plane. But it's not a problem for two reasons. The first is it models stick forces and pilot strength. A real pilot cannot instantly put 50lbs on pressure on a stick, so even if you command it to do that it eases it in for you. Secondly, and most crucially, there's no delay between applying G and seeing the effects. The blackout effect comes on as soon as you start pulling strong Gs, not 5 seconds after you've pulled too much G. This is much more realistic (because it simulates a pilot feeling the G in their body) and as a result you get much more feedback, so you don't snap wings.

 

I'm not asking for "Over G" warnings or other magic. All I'm asking is to model pilot strength appropriately, and most importantly, to apply G effects when the G starts being present, not a long time after it's present.

Edited March 24, 2019 by Tomsk

[Sandman1330]

I'm wondering myself if there's something going on here.

 

I ripped by wings off today in a dogfight, and according to Tacview, it was at 9.3g. It was a progressive pull out of dive, with slowly building G.

 

I'd earlier in that dogfight hit 10g momentarily, but that was the max I can see that I hit, so I'm not sure if it was a cumulative fatigue thing, but to rip wings off at 9.3g, with a max sortie G of 10, seems a bit excessive? In another thread, it's mentioned the aircraft was tested to 13g before structural failure (other things break first though!)

 

Edit: Tacview file is attached, I spawn into the "incident" aircraft at 13:17, dogfight several different types of aircraft as they spawn, and the wings rip off at 23:53.

 

Peak G I saw was 10.8 for a split second (I admit this is a bit high, but within airframe (if not avionics) limits), then the wings rip off with 9.3G a minute or so later.

 

Tacview File: https://1drv.ms/u/s!Ascm8Kmu7NR0getzfFI1zlkrJzIzVg

Edited March 24, 2019 by Sandman1330

[TLTeo]

Tacview's G-meter is not spot on for short periods of time. I ripped wings off with Tacview only showing 9g, but re-watching the track showed I pulled 11 for a couple of seconds before the wings came off.

[Sandman1330]

Tacview's G-meter is not spot on for short periods of time. I ripped wings off with Tacview only showing 9g, but re-watching the track showed I pulled 11 for a couple of seconds before the wings came off.

 

OK, could be. Also could be an element of rolling G going on, I had a slow roll going but not very fast. I didn't have time to check the G meter for max G before hitting the water :)

[FSKRipper]

It's easy guys, since this is the bug forum: Track/video or it doesn't happened.

 

I just tested with 7-8G and encountered the beginning blackout after 3 seconds. Heavy breathing started before.

[Eldur]

Never had those issues yet, guess I don't pull hard enough since I want to stay fast

 

I've had the soda straw start as low as 4-5G.

 

You're lucky still. I have that at 1G. Permanently. And I can't switch that off. I just keep flying anyway. IRL however, I wouldn't even be allowed to ride a bicycle if it was under licensing

[VampireNZ]

I've always turned the DCS GLOC effect off because a) it triggers on cat launches, and b) I've had the soda straw start as low as 4-5G.

 

True - DCS pilot sure needs to go back to the centrifuge and work on his AGSM! His resistance to G-LOC is pathetic:(

[jross194]

This, you guys need to give jetseat and/or the buttkicker a look. The feedback they provide really helps.

 

^^^^

This (and this). I ain't much better at winning A2A engagements but I _am_ littering the desert less with my wings; I have it set to start giving me feedback at about 5-G. But still experimenting. I use a Buttkicker and not the JetSeat. Same principle

[Sandman1330]

Had an epiphany today (I know, I’m as surprised as you are)

 

Do the wings rip off if you overspeed them, ie exceed the CADC schedule and go too fast without sweeping the wing back?

 

The only way to do this would be to put them in emergency mode, except... today’s update corrects the problem where they would not sweep if over 5g.

 

In my tacview file above, I was at 9.3g - but accelerating as I was pulling out of a dive when the wings snapped. If the auto sweep was not working properly, it’s very possible they snapped off due to overspeed rather than over G... correct? 9.3 shouldn’t be enough to snap the wings, but would be enough to trigger the wing sweep bug.

 

I’m not at home till Friday to test, but perhaps we will see an improvement today.

 

Or perhaps I will continue to be a ham fisted monkey! (Or both)

Edited March 27, 2019 by Sandman1330

[The Falcon]

You're right, we need a system to understand how many G we do.

I propose:

1)The pilot's breath increases progressively as he approaches dangerous G

2)The RIO can warn you, it would also be a nice thing to hear.

[lunaticfringe]

1. The RIO is busy doing his own AGSM.

2. Tacview interpolates G between timestamps. I haven't found symmetric load wing removal in DCS during test below 10G at half weight.

3. Realistically, structural failure is a function of load times weight; it doesn't necessarily scale perfectly based on external forces applied, nor aircraft imbalance properties. Thus, tying a response like breathing rate or a call from the back seater is inappropriate, and frankly, impossible for the number of permutations.

 

That said, when someone states they're breaking the wings off this module without any warning, I have to wonder what they're actually doing with the airplane, how low their speakers are set, and whether or not the feedback audio is muted with the "hear like helmet" setting. Because either someone's pulling back entirely too fast to hear the feedback, or are yanking far too hard when too fast- and neither of these things are the fault of the module.

[sirscorpion]

Here is an explanation and a solution to what going on.

 

Simulated aircrafts do not give you seat of pants indicator and important one to knowing what is going on around you.

 

F-14 has cockpit shake all the time, while it is realistic according to SME. however while they are realistic they are inadvertently less so since they over ride the seat of pants feel.

 

Cockpit shake Should be reserved as a "Seat of Pants Indicator" more than realistic aesthetics or less important simulated subjects like transonic flight , along with clear sounds of pilot strain in different stages, sounds of strain on aircraft, and with some sort of Pre G-loc effects "longer and smoother curve than the vanilla DCS effects".

 

Simulating the "feel" of an aircraft, while reaming faithful to the realistic aesthetics is a tough balance act, but as stated above there are tools to get there with out a 6DOF chair.

[FSKRipper]

Fair opinion. Here is mine: If the plane shakes at a specific AoA let it shake in the sim. No need to build an artifical indicator for G's. Fly 2-5h doing some maneuvers and you build some kind of muscle memory. Even a spare time pilot with 4h per week (like myself) is able to do that and in two weeks you know the limits of the cat.

 

You need to invest some hours to learn a high fidelity fighter jet? Well, welcome to the real world, or at least welcome in the world apart from Battlefield. There is no simulation apart from a centrifuge which can give you a feeling for G's. Breathing and Blackout is already done so don't expect magic.

Edited March 27, 2019 by FSKRipper

[Mad_Max2]

Altering realistic effects to compensate for lack of practice is not the answer.

[Galf]

I think this isn't a bug... I'm not a master or anything but with time and practice I developed a sensation for where are the F-14 limits. Today I had a couple of guns/IR dogfights with a friend and an AI Su-27, both times I pushed the plane to exactly 10 G without going over and I broke the wings only once, when I accidentally gave it a wrong input while adjusting my stick.

 

Here is an explanation and a solution to what going on.

 

Simulated aircrafts do not give you seat of pants indicator and important one to knowing what is going on around you.

 

F-14 has cockpit shake all the time, while it is realistic according to SME. however while they are realistic they are inadvertently less so since they over ride the seat of pants feel.

 

Cockpit shake Should be reserved as a "Seat of Pants Indicator" more than realistic aesthetics or less important simulated subjects like transonic flight , along with clear sounds of pilot strain in different stages, sounds of strain on aircraft, and with some sort of Pre G-loc effects "longer and smoother curve than the vanilla DCS effects".

 

Simulating the "feel" of an aircraft, while reaming faithful to the realistic aesthetics is a tough balance act, but as stated above there are tools to get there with out a 6DOF chair.

 

Mine does not shake all the time. Learn to understand the varying degrees of shaking and what they mean, and keep an eye on that AoA indicator. It's in your face for a reason.

[Sandman1330]

“Lack of practice” is not the real answer, even if it does seem to have become the popular one.

 

In a real aircraft, you feel the G - I mean, really feel it. When you pull 9G, you friggin know it. I think the max I’ve pulled is 6 or so, and that is enough to really feel it (though that was without a G suit).

 

Now, this is a double edged sword - on the one hand, it makes over G a lot less likely because you have the feel for how much you are pulling. Entering a 4G pull for a loop, I would make the initial pull with my eyes outside to what felt like about 4G, then glance inside at the G meter to verify - and usually would be within 0.5G. If I was dogfighting, I probably would not be looking at the G meter, unless it’s after the fight to confirm if I over G’d the machine.

 

On the other hand, it makes EVERYTHING ELSE a lot harder. Looking at your 6 o’clock while pulling 6G? Good luck. Even simple things like reaching for a switch on the panel in front of you become a lot harder, your hand and arm weigh 6x their normal weight!

 

In DCS, we don’t get the advantage of the feel, but we also don’t get the disadvantages either. As other players or the AI also don’t get the disadvantage, that part balances out.

 

However, not having the G feel is huge. It means you are fighting an airplane that requires you to fly by feel with one hand tied behind your back. Buffet cueing is for AoA; I can pull 10G at low AoA if I’m fast enough, and max out at 4G at just below stall AoA if I’m slow enough. Buffet in game is not a reliable indicator of G.

 

Now, player tomcat vs player tomcat this all evens out as both players have the same disadvantages. However, against AI, or worse, another player in a simulated FBW machine like the Hornet, and you are at a major disadvantage. As has been said numerous times, you need to feel this airplane, while you don’t near as much with other modules. We are held to real world limitations (as we should be) but we are not getting all the information a real pilot would have to stay within those limits. This is why it is so hard to do.

 

Perhaps it would not be so bad to have some kind of auditory indication, above and beyond the breathing sound. Something that scales, from breathing at 4-6 G to audible G-straining from 7-9, and jester crying above 9 (I joke, but you get the idea).

 

To simply say one needs more practice oversimplifies the topic. Yes, we all need more practice - but we also are not getting all the feedback we need to fight this plane realistically!

[Nealius]

↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑↑

 

That is precisely what Mover and Gonky talked about when they tried the Hornet. Gonky in particular was having problems in BFM because he couldn't feel the G.

[lunaticfringe]

“Lack of practice” is not the real answer, even if it does seem to have become the popular one.

 

It is the correct answer. How many hours do you have in HB's F-14B?

 

However, not having the G feel is huge. It means you are fighting an airplane that requires you to fly by feel with one hand tied behind your back. Buffet cueing is for AoA; I can pull 10G at low AoA if I’m fast enough, and max out at 4G at just below stall AoA if I’m slow enough. Buffet in game is not a reliable indicator of G.

 

Buffet in game is a wonderful indicator of G state if you know what you're doing relative to the airplane.

 

If you're at 10 G at low AoA, you're missing the low transsonic sound and visual cues as you get there. You're missing the grossly diminished nose rate. You're missing the audio breathing cues. The massive initial deceleration is a dead giveaway. And unless you simply went from dead center to full aft instantaneously, you've missed the initiation of gray out. Every bit of this stems from the right hand trying to set effective AoA not knowing the left hand doesn't know how to get out of burner.

 

Everything you see and hear is literally telling you that you're underperforming the airplane, and you need another cue? And it's a fabricated OWS, no less. Because the airplane in your example would tell you everything is wrong, and it still wouldn't be enough. It's clearly not enough, given the propensity of people to keep breaking the wings off.

 

To simply say one needs more practice oversimplifies the topic. Yes, we all need more practice - but we also are not getting all the feedback we need to fight this plane realistically!

 

No other plane in DCS provides more organic audible and visual feedback as to the current performance state of the aircraft as the F-14B- non-FBW or otherwise, yet it's the only one expected- within two weeks of release, mind you, to add even more because it's full capabilities and indications aren't fully understood and practiced to yet.

 

I guess we could just call it being blessed with an overabundance of exuberance at the onset?

[sirscorpion]

Altering realistic effects to compensate for lack of practice is not the answer.

 

Well that's not a valid argument haha, See the issue is that its a sort of Paradox of balance.

 

The feel of G strain and limits of the Aircrafts "AKA seat of pants feel" Is very much a realistic effect, And well simulated "effects" can provide human-machine data points that are critical for practice. and there are many more tools to create such feedback loops.

 

Stating the "Learn to Play b/c it is realistic" argument in a simulation is not a valid argument, feed back loops are important in practice or training and what differentiate good simulation from other. hence why the highest level of simulators like Level D need to have 6DOF axies to simulate seat of pants.

[TLTeo]

I've stopped over G-ing the jet (which I define as losing the wings) ever since I moved the curvature from 0 to 10 (Thrustmaster T16000M stick). It also greatly reduced pilot mistakes like increasing AoA too much.

 

I thought the wings were coming off too often at first but after more hours on it, it just does not happen to me, ever. Whether in DCS or real life, flying a jet is complicated and flying one properly even more so, especially the Tomcat, and when flown correctly the wings do not in fact come off, so it is indeed about practice.

[lunaticfringe]

Stating the "Learn to Play b/c it is realistic" argument in a simulation is not a valid argument, feed back loops are important in practice or training and what differentiate good simulation from other.

 

All the feedback loops in the world are immaterial if the user fails to assimilate themselves to their application; that is very much the "learn to play" aspect. Refusing to attempt, or even acknowledge, the depth of additional feedback available to a F-14 crew member in this simulation beyond any other type while demanding more is an invalid argument. And invoking arbitrary balance to do so- in an environment where actual repetitive skill and cognitive situational recognition is the final arbiter is the worst argument one can make.

 

hence why the highest level of simulators like Level D need to have 6DOF axies to simulate seat of pants.

 

Non-argument. If you fail at managing the existing feedback loops in a 6DOF and keep augering short of the threshold because you're not honoring the cues, they don't add a 150% flaps and throttle trainer to get you to wheels contact; you are told, and made, to keep learning and practicing approach technique until you get it right or fail to make certification.

 

You pay your dues with time. The time spent on this argument is valuable time that would have gotten many of you past the wall you're currently hitting if you'd actually pay attention.

[Galf]

Lack of practice IS the answer. I went from breaking the wings every flight to never breaking them because I mentally adjusted to the plane.

HB gave you all the tools to feel the G's through your screen. Stop pulling like a madman, this isn't the F-18 (and even in the F-18 you won't kill the plane but you will lose the fight.)

[Deano87]

Lack of practice IS the answer. I went from breaking the wings every flight to never breaking them because I mentally adjusted to the plane.

HB gave you all the tools to feel the G's through your screen. Stop pulling like a madman, this isn't the F-18 (and even in the F-18 you won't kill the plane but you will lose the fight.)

 

+1

 

Learn what the aircraft is telling you and fly within its limits. I've yet to break the wings off yet.

[rrohde]

Lack of practice IS the answer. I went from breaking the wings every flight to never breaking them because I mentally adjusted to the plane.

HB gave you all the tools to feel the G's through your screen. Stop pulling like a madman, this isn't the F-18 (and even in the F-18 you won't kill the plane but you will lose the fight.)

 

+1

 

And I cannot recommend this enough: If you haven't already done so, grab Andre's JetSeat, install "Sim Shaker for Aviators (SSA)" and the Tomcat comes alive. You can feel the feedback in your butt - literally - and can thus adjust your flying based on what you feel.

 

Until Bergison's "Motion Integrated G Seat" is available to the masses, the JetSeat is the best thing for tactile feedback we have, imho.