reported MAX AB does not jump chocks

[F16FLCS-SME]

Cold and dark.

1. Start the engine.

2. Ask ground crew to put chocks.

3. Push throttle to MAX AB.

Aircraft will not jump the chocks.

The internet is full of these cases where F-16 jumped the chocks.

[BIGNEWY]

Please include a track replay and real world examples.

 

thanks

[Florence201]

BN, surely common sense prevails here that MAX AB would cause the jet to jump chocks. Advancing the throttle clicks off parking brake too

[BIGNEWY]

BN, surely common sense prevails here that MAX AB would cause the jet to jump chocks. Advancing the throttle clicks off parking brake too

 

I'm not a pilot and I have never worked on the F-16, I can not just make request to the team without some data to back it up, even for something like this which is very low on a priority list.

 

 

[F16FLCS-SME]

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/46892

The aircraft jumped the chocks while in segment 2 afterburner.

 

[F16FLCS-SME]

Here is the track file.

http://www.mediafire.com/file/bj9jlos3rwql11w/NOTJUMPCHCOKS.trk/file

 

[=Panther=]

Read the note from 6 Feb 2003 on this link: http://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-16/airframe-profile/3090/

Airframe Details for F-16 #90-0718

[F16FLCS-SME]

Click the card:

https://quizlet.com/124944988/f-16-engine-run-procedures-flash-cards/

[Alpiinoo]

You can see no chocks just hook. https://youtu.be/z2MZi9dJ8vU chocks cant stand.

[Dunx]

I checked the tubes for Hornet afterburner tests again... I never noticed the restraints before... good call...

 

https://youtu.be/QtE-EGFhtZI

 

... and the F22...

 

 

 

[deadpool]

https://youtu.be/x3NKK86K7Zc?t=74

 

I find it frightening that common sense doesn't prevail here. But I can understand better now why the F-16 drops chocks when switching from MRM to DGFT mode .. it makes no sense .. but I guess no one actually proved it to ED yet that it doesn't .. 

 

Not the right approach when building a realistic airplane in my book. 

 

Anyways .. to help current topic. above is a photo of an F-16 with chocks and an arresting hook which is added - most likely - because it would otherwise jump over the chocks and go.

 

Now I just have to say that I do not know if this is particularily the model and type of F-16 that ED builds in DCS, of course that would be a good reason to disregard this and wait for a photo of the specific model and type we fly in DCS with this hook. Yet I think we can assume that this chock-protecting-arresting-hook-setup is something universal on all modern F-16s .. unlike SDBs and other gimmicks that we won't be getting because they were .. ah .. never mind .. I digress.

Edited December 11, 2020 by deadpool

[bkthunder]

 

2 hours ago, deadpool said:

 

 

Now I just have to say that I do not know if this is particularily the model and type of F-16 that ED builds in DCS, of course that would be a good reason to disregard this and wait for a photo of the specific model and type we fly in DCS with this hook. Yet I think we can assume that this chock-protecting-arresting-hook-setup is something universal on all modern F-16s .. unlike SDBs and other gimmicks that we won't be getting because they were .. ah .. never mind .. I digress.

 

 

I think that's the key here, how can we know if the specific F-16 modeled by ED jumps the chocks or not? I mean, the one in your picutre is a block 40 from Aviano AB, in Italy, so maybe they have to tie it down due to local regulations. I think if ED could share the exact airframe number they are simulating, it would then be easier for you to find a picutre or video of that specific aircraft jumping the chocks while in afterburner. 

[WHOGX5]

I mean, there should be a good couple of tens of thousand F-16 mechanics worldwide that could answer this question. I don't understand why the burden of proof is always on us when ED has access to proper documentation and SME's? And does anyone here honestly think that a little yellow brick that's not even fixed to the ground can restrain an aircraft capable of producing 131 kN of thrust? It's basic physics; the answer is no.

 

http://www.f-16.net/g3/f-16-photos/album30/aad

 

Here is #90-0718 which is an F-16C block 40 (so at least the same amount of thrust as the F-16 that's modeled in DCS).:

 

"Jumped the chocks during a hot oil servicing run at Eielson AFB, Alaska and slid 400ft sideways across the ramp on hard packed snow. The aircraft ended up in a balancing act on its nose and starboard wing on the ground and port landing gear in the air. The aircraft was fixed, although there was extensive damage. A ground crew member in the cockpit was fine. A few years later, the aircraft ended up in the exact same position after being tipped over by the engine exhaust of a taxiing B-1B."

[bkthunder]

I don't doubt the report of the Block 40 in Alaska jumping the chocks, but this is not nearly the same aircraft nor the same conditions that we have in DCS. 

The question is, would and F-16CM Block 50 (again the specific airframe number would help) jump the chocks in the conditions depicted in DCS i.e. one of the Caucaus map airports for example? 

There are so many variables, off the top of my head:

- the friction of the ground, we know that soviet airports are much more rugged and they have those tiles that certainly provide more grip to a chock placed on the ground!

- the slope of the ramp

- the humidity and temperature that cause the engine to produce more or less thrust

- the fact that a pilot in full gear weighs more than a ground technician, giving a slightly lower T/W ratio that could indeed prevent the F-16 from jumping the chocks. As a matter of fact, do you know the weight of the technician that was in the cockpit when that F-16 jumped the chocks? It might have been a very skinny 18 y/o or something...

 

As you said, ED has their SMEs so if they modelled it the way it is, they probably have a good reason, so yes, the burden of the proof is on your side. 

[Machalot]

On 12/11/2020 at 11:55 PM, bkthunder said:

- the fact that a pilot in full gear weighs more than a ground technician, giving a slightly lower T/W ratio that could indeed prevent the F-16 from jumping the chocks. As a matter of fact, do you know the weight of the technician that was in the cockpit when that F-16 jumped the chocks? It might have been a very skinny 18 y/o or something...

Your other points were good, but here you're taking about a few tens of pounds difference between pilot and ground crew in a jet that burns hundreds of pounds of fuel per second. 

 

Maybe you're joking and I missed it?

Edited December 13, 2020 by Machalot

[Deano87]

An F-16 would absolutly jump the chocks in Full AB, regardless of model. It is however a massive waste of the developers time working on something like this when there are a million other more useful systems they could be working on. IMHO

[lxsapper]

On 12/14/2020 at 2:34 PM, Deano87 said:

An F-16 would absolutly jump the chocks in Full AB, regardless of model. It is however a massive waste of the developers time working on something like this when there are a million other more useful systems they could be working on. IMHO

Absolutely agree, both with the fact that any F-16 would jump chocks and with the fact that there are much more important things to work on. Also consider the fact that chocks in DCS are probably an event implemented "on rails" with physics suspended, I supose creating an event that would deactivate the chocks when the aircraft (for all apropriate jets in DCS) was producing over a certain amount of thrust would be easy enough, but it wouldn't "jump the chocks" in a realistic manner. But do we really want/need it? When so many other core features would be more desirable?

[WHOGX5]

On 12/12/2020 at 8:55 AM, bkthunder said:

I don't doubt the report of the Block 40 in Alaska jumping the chocks, but this is not nearly the same aircraft nor the same conditions that we have in DCS.

The only palpable difference in performance between a Block 40 and Block 50 is that the block 40 has a less powerful F110-GE-100 (125 kN) engine compared to the Block 50's F110-GE-129 (131 kN). Anyone who claims that the Block 40 and Block 50 "isn't nearly the same aircraft" obviously hasn't done too much reading into the different F-16C variants because it is an absolutely ridiculous statement.

On 12/12/2020 at 8:55 AM, bkthunder said:

As you said, ED has their SMEs so if they modelled it the way it is, they probably have a good reason, so yes, the burden of the proof is on your side. 

Do you honestly think every single decision made by ED is correct? They're only human, errors are bound to happen. If everything is correct as is, why even have a bug section?

On 12/31/2020 at 2:45 PM, lxsapper said:

Absolutely agree, both with the fact that any F-16 would jump chocks and with the fact that there are much more important things to work on. Also consider the fact that chocks in DCS are probably an event implemented "on rails" with physics suspended, I supose creating an event that would deactivate the chocks when the aircraft (for all apropriate jets in DCS) was producing over a certain amount of thrust would be easy enough, but it wouldn't "jump the chocks" in a realistic manner. But do we really want/need it? When so many other core features would be more desirable?

I fully agree. In my opinion it obviously isn't the most pressing issue regarding the DCS F-16 in it's current state, but I think it is one of those small things that defines an in-depth simulator. Having a tonne of these minor features is what makes actually following real life procedures and regulations a worthwhile endeavor. If mistakes don't have consequences, why even bother avoiding them? And like you mention, it wouldn't be too hard to implement, but I agree it's also not a priority.

[bkthunder]

4 hours ago, WHOGX5 said:

Do you honestly think every single decision made by ED is correct? They're only human, errors are bound to happen. If everything is correct as is, why even have a bug section?

 

Sorry but, are you an F-16CM block 50 (circa 2007) pilot? ED have SMEs and DCS, while not perfect, is by far the best and most accurate flight simulator on the market. The bug section exists for users to report bugs, but as you see this bug has been labelled as "Need Reference", which means it's definitely not enough for anyone to just come here and say "logic says that rubber chocks that are 4 inches high will not stop a 131Kn engine from pushing the aircraft past them". It also doesn't help to post articles related to different aircraft such as the block 40, in different condtions etc. 

ED coders need to have precise data to make a change, this has been said a million times. I am sure that if you could provide data about the specific F-16 model we have in game (again I asked for the a/c serial number for a reason!), in the very same conditions, then ED would act on it. 

[=Panther=]

They are not made of rubber, but are made of plastic and occasionally find some wooden ones. 

[BIGNEWY]

I will run it by the team, but this is very minor and low priority 

 

thanks

[LCO489]

 

Hi all, I've searched on the forum and found nothing about it, so i'm reporting. The video shows it all. When chocks are applied and you go full burner front wheel get damaged and go past the ground. Also notice the behavior of the chocks itself.

Track file as required: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1RygHyWHJGn8tpOstLfZayAPQ_gcHKLuw/view?usp=sharing

Edited August 6, 2022 by LCO489

[Tholozor]

Ultimately the issue is that the aircraft should jump the chocks before it would break the nose gear. It's been reported:

 

Edited August 6, 2022 by Tholozor

[BIGNEWY]

threads merged

[SMH]

The nosewheel buries itself in the ground, and breaks backwards, when you select full afterburner with wheel chocks on. You can still steer and takeoff with it in that condition, but it will no longer retract.

Is this just a "then don't do that" problem? (Still, the nosewheel probably shouldn't go under the ground.)

F-16_Nosewheel_Chocks_Bug.trk