Server with reduced and Realistic setting

[v1per]

:gun_smilie:

[Rhen]

While a pilot -can- G-LOC from a 'short' 8-9g pull, such incidents are rare, and recorded by the USAF. Did I mention those incidents are rare? Like 2 out of 1000 sorties?

It's not impossible for a pilot to screw up his AGSM and so on and so forth. But it's rare. Did I mention that?

 

Late to the IP again... sorry you can't have any rep, as I need to spread it around again...:(

[GGTharos]

Same here :(

But I like your explanation better!

[RedTiger]

Tell me one thing.

 

This Tape is from a flight over Baghdad, Correct?

He flew from Saudi arabia or Kuwait during the first gulf war?

 

I assume he was carrying external Fuel Tanks?

If so, the F-16 limits to 6.5 or 5.5 G depending on payload, and he could not

possibly have pulled more with that G-limiter (unless flipping a switch

overriding it and risking breaking his plane).

 

Thats a good catch Yoda! I've seen that HUD tape footage before and noted the Gs but never thought of that. You're right, if he's CAT III carrying tanks, bombs A to G missiles and such, there's no way he could pull 9 Gs even if he wanted to.

[RedTiger]

Oh, one other thing. Rhen, nice video! OT...I can't help but notice that all this high G BFM is being done at a fairly high altitude...:music_whistling:

[GGTharos]

... where eagles fly? (and flankers die) :D

[Cosmonaut]

Tell me one thing.

 

This Tape is from a flight over Baghdad, Correct?

He flew from Saudi arabia or Kuwait during the first gulf war?

 

I assume he was carrying external Fuel Tanks?

If so, the F-16 limits to 6.5 or 5.5 G depending on payload, and he could not

possibly have pulled more with that G-limiter (unless flipping a switch

overriding it and risking breaking his plane).

 

F-16 wing tanks will limit maneuverability pretty severely.

 

I don't know what the protocol is but wouldn't he have dropped his external tanks? There was a lot going on so maybe not but if ever there was good reason to dump tanks then that's gotta be it. :hmm:

[192nd_Erdem]

... where eagles fly? (and flankers die) :D

 

Oh, I once made a movie about that "Where Eagles fly?" matter . . . poor Eagles :/

[GGTharos]

Anyone can make a movie :)

[192nd_Erdem]

Anyone can make a movie :)

 

Wow, quite interesting to know that.

[The_GOZR]

Rhen ,

Seriously I'll tell you since you can only come up with short remarks toward me , Please talk about missiles and weapons systems and avionics as long as you want it's great and we can all learn from you if you actually pressed the trigger, but now regarding the sim on flight purpose and import feeling from real to the sim ... I have a effroyable doubt from you. A simple example is even in the video posted before, is the ride smooth ? If you want a combat sim with avionics try Falcon 4 you'd love it and probably excel on it ... now what i wish and would love to do is to import the most possible realistic as possible effects of a flight in the SIM then import the avionics and weapons with experienced pilots which it is not me on that matter.

My advice to you is leave the flight/weather/Forces modeling to other test pilots and stick with your avionics where you can perform as a fighter pilot IMO. I don't say your are incapable or wrong i say that you and I have a very different approche to what a sim can be and IMO mixing both would be great.

 

We are still waiting from a nice track from you.. the "how to be" on a F15 since it is your ride.

 

PS Since when the Us pilots are tougher than the Russian counter part?

Something is really missing in your comments... It can't be serious..

 

I'm out.

ED can contact me if they want to test things.

[RedTiger]

 

PS Since when the Us pilots are tougher than the Russian counter part?

Something is really missing in your comments... It can't be serious..

 

I'm out.

ED can contact me if they want to test things.

 

Well, I'm actually reading this long thread here:

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=21282&page=16

 

You have Yo-Yo (a member of ED) saying the following:

 

The g-model for a pilot is THE SAME for all planes. The REALISTIC mode of g-model (see Difficulty settings) was tuned after long investigations amongst the MiG and Su actual pilots and several aero-medical reports was taken in account, too.

Only for information.

The basic parameters of g-lock are the sustained value of g in conjunction with dg/dt derivative. If you smoothly achieve 6.5 g you can bear it for a long time. 5 g has more longer time or maybe (I don't remember exactly) to eternity.

 

Actual MiG and Su pilots eh? I just read a post on SimHQ a couple days ago from Beer Camel (see his bio here: http://www.simhq.com/_aboutus/putze.html) saying that he has centrifuge footage of himself taking 7.5 Gs WITHOUT A G SUIT and doing a "check six" excercise -- in other words, looking behind him -- and making bandit calls.

 

Compare these two bits of information and do the math. I'm not going to say that Russian pilots can't pull as many Gs, but there's nothing wrong with questioning it.

 

EDIT: I want to add that if the positions were reversed, and we were questioning the G tolerances of American pilots, I would still expect this to be questioned. If a simulation is to be realistic, all things need to be verified, regardless of anyone's fragile national pride. IIRC, the Su-27 FBW has a G limit on it of 9 Gs, like the Viper. I would think that this is noteworthy and perhaps telling as to the G limits expected of Soviet pilots. However, maybe pulling 9 Gs is not as practiced as it once was due to any number of limiting factors. Rhen has said elsewhere that G tolerance is something you can build up and get better with. If you are not able to consistently pull 7 to 9 Gs in training, I would think this would affect your overall ability to pull Gs.

[159th_Viper]

WOW

 

This Thread has turned into quite an entertaining contest!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gotta Love It :D

[tflash]

WOW

 

This Thread has turned into quite an entertaining contest!

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gotta Love It :D

 

At 9 G's, that's quite a contest! :cry:

[GGTharos]

They're limited to 7.5g's by the limiter which can be over-ridden. Doing so risks the wrath of your ground chief for having to do an over-g inspection.

 

F18's are limited to 8G's. so where you get Aussie pilots pulling 9g's. I have no idea.

[GGTharos]

And on the other hand, most of us thing that is the wrong way around. Really, I don't see why I need to have turbulence causing my screen to shake and my eyes to bleed; nor do I really need thermal layers. The purpose here is modern air combat, not modern gliding or test piloting. And in case you didn't notice, Rhen didn't say those are useless; but they're not high priority for a -combat- sim since the effect is relatively minimal on a good day.

 

... now what i wish and would love to do is to import the most possible realistic as possible effects of a flight in the SIM then import the avionics and weapons with experienced pilots which it is not me on that matter.

 

And the other thing you missed was Rhen describing how LOMAC lacks certian effects of forces on the plane ... see, those are wanted too. You're just going a little too far with wanting an entire atmosphere modeled though ;)

 

My advice to you is leave the flight/weather/Forces modeling to other test pilots and stick with your avionics where you can perform as a fighter pilot IMO. I don't say your are incapable or wrong i say that you and I have a very different approche to what a sim can be and IMO mixing both would be great.

 

Perhaps it's a language barrier, so you may have missed it. Rhen said that the Russian pilots, who were at the time getting maybe 20 flight hours a year, would not be as tough as USAF pilots who were getting MANY more flight hours and were much more used to pulling high-G's.

It has nothing to do with which country they belong to - but how many flight hours they get.

 

PS Since when the Us pilots are tougher than the Russian counter part?

Something is really missing in your comments... It can't be serious..

 

Test what? They have access to their own pilots and who knows what else.

 

I'm out.

ED can contact me if they want to test things.

[Rhen]

The_GOZR, if you're referring to the aerodynamic buffet shown in the video I posted and thinking that's meterological turbulence, then you need a better understanding of aerodynamics and aircraft flight - beyond that apparently taught to test pilots. If you were referring to some other video posted in this thread, I humbly apologize. With regard to the difference between Russian and NATO pilots, evidently you still don't understand the concept of G-tolerance, and how it's gained. If you fly more often, and pull G's more often, you can sustain them better than those who do not fly as often or pull G's more often. I didn't say anthing about their ability to fly and fight. I only point out that a pilot who flys often and fights even more, is better at withstanding the rigors of the high G environment. Your keenly mistaken if you think I said that NATO pilots are better. I know better than to get pulled into that discussion on these boards.... :lol: So, why don't you stick to things you know, and I'll do the same and we can just agree to disagree.

 

F18's are limited to 8G's. so where you get Aussie pilots pulling 9g's. I have no idea.

 

Don't be so obtuse, Ice! :smilewink: The limit's imposed to minimize airframe stress. AFAIK bugs still can pull more Gs if the pilot needed it to live through the engagement. However, in normal operations, it's limited to 7.5Gs I believe.

 

At any rate, it's the PILOT - now let me say it again THE PILOT. One more time PAPA INDIA LIMA OSCAR TANGO that pulls the Gs. It's the pilot that needs to sustain them. Therefore it's usually the PILOT that's the limiting factor. When I was a T-38 IP, I didn't fly an aircraft rated to 9Gs, however I was rated for 9Gs in the centrifuge. I'm sure your pilots are as well.

 

This has been a great learning experience to me. I've been under the assumption that people around here had a little bit of a fighter pilots character in their hearts, and they were trying to simulate what it's like to be a fighter pilot, so they can test themselves in this environment and understand the complexities of aerial tactical combat - and, of course, along the way - have some fun (the more important goal, arguably :thumbup:). Perhaps I'm mistaken in that department. So, go ahead and defend what you've got - it's all you'll ever get.

[Rhen]

 

Rhen ey?

 

Someone else said theat this was them to me along, long time ago. Give it some time and I will remember who. Unless of course you would like to remind me now ;-)

 

Yep, that's me on the left. Would you like my ISOPREP card too? :lol:

[Rhen]

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=294603&postcount=205

 

Just to refresh your memory, Ice....

[G3]

 

even my forum name can do 3 G's.:smartass:

 

seriously, great to hear info from actual fighter pilots,

can only imagine what its like to pilot these things in RL with all

the physical and mental demands, thanks for sharing your experience.

[Kuky]

Well maybe there is some alternative way of solving this Pilot G loading. Why can't developers create separate loading for pilots from different countries?

 

If US pilots have lot more flying hours in their jets and Russian don't then it would be natural that average pilot would have bit different physical G tolerances simply dependant on flying/G loading practice. It doesn't have to be very different but maybe it should be somewhat different.

 

I know people would straight away start complaining how their virtual pilot is weak and can't handle G's where as their oponent can. This can also be suplemented in gradual development of G tollerance through pilot carreer. Maybe a sim should have offline training course that pilot has to undego for different types of missions and have them all passed and with more and more flying hours his G tollerance would increase. Naturally rookies would have slightly lower G tollerance then more experienced pilots, but also this should vary with how often you do fly.

 

I guess this won't even be implemented in lockon because it would require lot of code rewriting but I hope something like this can and will be implemented in future... maybe DCS when first fighters are released.

 

Till then I think it doesn't really matter what G tollerance is chosen in any particular server because if it's too high or to little it's SAME for anyone flying in it.

 

Then again I am just thinking maybe realistic G tollerance is better because then all the ease of missile evasion and constant barrel roling to avoid missiles, which many are complaining about, would not be possible or at least greatly limited. Then the pilot would really have to be carefull when and how he uses his virtual strength and how much G's he's pulling... in another words... use it only when it's really needed. I think this would solve problem of people evading missiles too easy which really shouldn't happen.

[Rhen]

My point Rhen is, what was your alias when you sent me that picture via msn. Must be 2 years ago now. I think i remember who but Im not going to say until I'm sure.

 

Dude! I barely talk with you on this forum. What makes you think I'd message you IRL? :doh:

 

Just google "redneck dogs" and perhaps you'll see that you can pick that picture up anywhere.

[Eagle Driver]

IBTL

[Kuky]

Some fresh info from one of our 3Squdron guys... I was just told person in question flew in the back of F-16D recently (actually I knew he had this flight while back but didn't know what aircraft he flew in) and the pilot asked him if he wanted to pull 9G's. He said he would like to but managed to sustain up to 6.5G... the F-16D had wing fuel tanks.

[GGTharos]

It may be possible to pull 9 when your wing tanks are empty ... they'd weigh as much as an AAM probably, or less.