MFCD Failure

[Merlin216]

Yesterday during an MP coop mission I lost my left MFCD after a pass. Myself and my wingman did not see any sort of tracer fire towards me, and I was well away from the target so it could not have been small arms. We never noticed any other AAA from our ingress point, not to mention my aircraft had no indication of taking hits from the ground. The left MFCD just went dark and I of course got a master caution for the CICU, and Left MFCD not ready message on my Right MFCD. As I was starting up the aircraft just now, the same thing happened to my right display. At this point I had not touched anything as I was waiting for the INS to align. My engines were both running, apu had been off for a while and yes the generators were on.

 

Is there a random chance these will fail, or am I doing something in the cockpit wrong. Has anyone else had these problems?

[bartleby]

Yesterday during an MP coop mission I lost my left MFCD after a pass. Myself and my wingman did not see any sort of tracer fire towards me, and I was well away from the target so it could not have been small arms. We never noticed any other AAA from our ingress point, not to mention my aircraft had no indication of taking hits from the ground. The left MFCD just went dark and I of course got a master caution for the CICU, and Left MFCD not ready message on my Right MFCD. As I was starting up the aircraft just now, the same thing happened to my right display. At this point I had not touched anything as I was waiting for the INS to align. My engines were both running, apu had been off for a while and yes the generators were on.

 

Is there a random chance these will fail, or am I doing something in the cockpit wrong. Has anyone else had these problems?

 

The mission creator can set a random chance of failure. If you check in the debriefing, it should show component failures. If it happened on the ground, sounds like that's what happened. Not sure about the air one - sometimes AAA sneaks up on you.

[Merlin216]

The mission creator can set a random chance of failure. If you check in the debriefing, it should show component failures. If it happened on the ground, sounds like that's what happened. Not sure about the air one - sometimes AAA sneaks up on you.

 

I made the mission I was in when it happened during startup, and to my knowledge I did not touch the failures. If there is a default input then that could be I guess. Thank you.

[Speed]

ED has implemented a random chance of failure on just about everything that cannot be turned off. Additionally, despite what they may claim, this chance of failure is much higher than the real life chance of failure. Probably somewhere between 1 to 2 orders of magnitude higher than the real life chane of failure. Everyone in the squad I'm in has been getting pretty ticked off about it too. Personally, once I had my HUD just randomly die twice in a row in the same mission. I've had alot of random CADC failures too. You'll be just flying around at like 18k feet and suddenly lose it. I've heard of MFCD dying randomly, but never seen it myself.

 

Unrealistic features that serve no purpose other than to be annoying, for the lose. :(

Edited April 18, 2011 by Speed

[Merlin216]

ED has implemented a random chance of failure on just about everything that cannot be turned off. Additionally, despite what they may claim, this chance of failure is much higher than the real life chance of failure. Probably somewhere between 1 to 2 orders of magnitude higher than the real life chane of failure. Everyone in the squad I'm in has been getting pretty ticked off about it too. Personally, once I had my HUD just randomly die twice in a row in the same mission. I've had alot of random CADC failures too. You'll be just flying around at like 18k feet and suddenly lose it. I've heard of MFCD dying randomly, but never seen it myself.

 

Unrealistic features that serve no purpose other than to be annoying, for the lose. :(

 

That is quite interesting. I would hate to lose the HUD. When I lost my MFCD during the engagement it was not a big deal, especially since it was just the left one. Its nice that you can swap out the different pages though so if you do lose one MFCD you can add the essential pages to the last operational one.

[ФрогФут]

I've had alot of random CADC failures too.

I assume most CADC failures are combat - don't get hit under the cockpit and yes it had higher probability of failure, than other systems - now that's fixed and gonna be in the patch.

All failure probabilities in game are 0.5 for 200 hours.

Edited April 18, 2011 by ФрогФут

[159th_Viper]

.....Additionally, despite what they may claim, this chance of failure is much higher than the real life chance of failure. Probably somewhere between 1 to 2 orders of magnitude higher than the real life chane of failure.....

 

And you base this allegation on what exactly?

 

Personal supposition?

 

I hope not.

[epoch]

I lost my HUD last night, for no apparent reason. Quite disconcerting. Peering through a completely empty windscreen felt most unusual!

 

Easy enough to land and repair, but annoying nonetheless.

[Speed]

And you base this allegation on what exactly?

 

Personal supposition?

 

I hope not.

 

The fact that real pilots say so about avionics. They are not nearly as flakey as what we have simulated.

 

Also, the fact that A-10s can complete overseas redeployment flights without every aircraft having multiple, major systems completely die. If I had to fly in a single A-10C in this sim for like 15 hours, I can GAURENTEE you that by the time I landed, I would have a broken CADC, most likely two to three other systems completely dead as well. If the real A-10C had this failure rate, it would be withdrawn from service to figure out why it's constantly failing.

 

My question is, where does ED get its failure statistics from, and, MORE IMPORTANTLY, how do they interpret them? Because it is not accurate if the rate of minor system problems in the real aircraft is translated to be the rate of total system failures in DCS. I suspect that this is what is going on.

[ФрогФут]

If I had to fly in a single A-10C in this sim for like 15 hours, I can GAURENTEE you that by the time I landed, I would have a broken CADC, most likely two to three other systems completely dead as well

I had NO failures for the past month.;) You're lucky.

[Speed]

I assume most CADC failures are combat - don't get hit under the cockpit and yes it had higher probability of failure, than other systems - now that's fixed and gonna be in the patch.

All failure probabilities in game are 0.5 for 200 hours.

 

Well, I wish you guys would listen to your customers on this one; at least make this something that can be toggled off. Even if you fixed the CADC, we still just can't believe the real aircraft fails as much as this. Minor system problems, yes, I believe that, but complete failures? I just don't believe it. It's also VERY annoying while trying to train someone.

 

Perhaps if we could see the data source where you get this information about failure rates, it must be unclassified, but perhaps you guys can't share it anyway?

 

Oh and finally, is there a lua file where failure rates can be adjusted, or is it hard-coded?

Edited April 18, 2011 by Speed

[159th_Viper]

Perhaps if we could see the data source where you get this information about failure rates, it must be unclassified, but perhaps you guys can't share it anyway?

 

I'm gonna state the obvious here, but the Devs do not pull figures out of a Hamster's A$$, and before all jump on the bandwagon, nor am I inferring that you implied as such: My phrase alone.....

 

That said, what I am inferring is that we can take it as read that, in accordance with the Fidelity of the product, the systems are modelled to the highest possible standard with due regard to substantive and corroborated fact.

 

As such, when placing any issue/system behaviour in dispute, the very least that is needed is fact to the contrary capable of substantiation/corroboration. Mere customer dissatisfaction/annoyance/unwillingness to believe is simply not good enough to effect change, but then again I'm sure you do not need me to tell you that.

 

Rather than asking ED for the source of the documentation/information on systems already modelled, would it not be prudent to provide conclusive data to the contrary?

[Rainmaker]

The fact that real pilots say so about avionics. They are not nearly as flakey as what we have simulated.

 

1. Don't believe pilots and what you read on the internet. Media reports and garbage that floats around is so fluffed to no end that it's unreal.

 

 

Also, the fact that A-10s can complete overseas redeployment flights without every aircraft having multiple, major systems completely die.

 

Have you ever been on an overseas deployment before? Yah, I didn't think so. You are trying to claim facts with insubstatial information.

 

 

If I had to fly in a single A-10C in this sim for like 15 hours, I can GAURENTEE you that by the time I landed, I would have a broken CADC, most likely two to three other systems completely dead as well.

 

I have had one CADC failure in my entire time of flying the sim. Next

 

 

If the real A-10C had this failure rate, it would be withdrawn from service to figure out why it's constantly failing.

 

Sorry...doesn't happen. Perhaps you should do some research of maintenance hours per flying hours on some US military aircraft.

 

 

My question is, where does ED get its failure statistics from, and, MORE IMPORTANTLY, how do they interpret them? Because it is not accurate if the rate of minor system problems in the real aircraft is translated to be the rate of total system failures in DCS. I suspect that this is what is going on.

 

 

Although the simplicity of the system failure is implemented, the failure rates are not far off. I can think of 50 ways a display can break..would you rather ED spent time coding in a degraded display failure you create the same effect as just having a complete failure? instead of fixing and improving everything else.

 

FMC, PMC, ground abort, and repeat/recur rates in A-10 land are comparable to every thing else in the Air Force on average, which puts them around the 75%-85% FMC rate at any given time. In order for that to happen, the planes have to be down for maintenance, otherwise, you would see normal rates in the 90's. This isn't the case. Getting spun up and raising a stink about something you think you have an idea about because you read it on the internet or saw it on a TV documentary is hogwash(pun intended). The real world military aircraft operate a lot differently than what is portraid to everyone else on the outside looking in.

 

Try pulling some legitimate research first before making claims that what someone else has done is incorrect and wrong, especailly if you have no personal experience or knowledge to back up any of your claims.

[atledreier]

So Rainmaker, do you have firsthand experience servicing the Hog then, or did you just pull those numbers out of thin air as well?

[Rainmaker]

So Rainmaker, do you have firsthand experience servicing the Hog then, or did you just pull those numbers out of thin air as well?

 

 

Technically speaking, yes, I have worked and touched a hog before. I also have about 10 months time working directly side by side with the folks that work them on a daily basis, as well as being thier boss.

 

Anything else since you are obviously in question about my experience with this?

 

 

 

Here's is some further information regarding FMC rates of some of our most glamorous airplanes. This was pulled from an article on the Air Force times in Dec.

 

http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2010/11/air-force-osprey-availability-about-50-percent-112910w/

 

RQ-4, 41.64%

B-1B, 43.82%

C-5A, 52.66%

CV-22, 54.30%

B-2, 54.86%

C-5B, 59.59%

F-22, 60.94%

EC-130J, 65.17%

HC-130, 69.90%

A-10, 70.46%

EC-130H, 70.62%

F-15C, 70.96%

E-3, 71.60%

F-15E, 72.46%

C-130H, 73.85%

B-52H, 74.61%

HH-60, 74.65%

KC-10A, 74.78%

F-16, 75.39%

T-38C, 76.15%

C-130E, 76.67%

T-1A, 79.73%

T-6A, 80.34%

T-38A, 80.41%

KC-135T, 80.41%

UH-1, 80.87%

KC-135R, 81.06%

E-8, 81.08%

U-2, 81.22%

C-130J, 82.27%

C-17A, 84.43%

MQ-9, 91.95%

MQ-1, 92.98%

Edited April 19, 2011 by Rainmaker

[atledreier]

Rainmaker, chill. I wasn't questioning your knowledge on this any more than you just did to the rest of us here. You gave us a number with no reference to where you got it from, while asking the rest of us to provide references.

 

Thanks for the numbers, really appreciated!

[Rainmaker]

Rainmaker, chill. I wasn't questioning your knowledge on this any more than you just did to the rest of us here. You gave us a number with no reference to where you got it from, while asking the rest of us to provide references.

 

Thanks for the numbers, really appreciated!

 

 

Fair enough...and please accept my appology for being a little arrogant on that last post towards you. ;)

 

It gets a little nerving at times seeing the armchair posts when if comes to stuff like this where people are claiming that things aren't realistic the way they are in there right now just because people don't like the way something is currently modeled. They way things are and the way they seem are two different things, regardless if it's a good thing or a bad thing.

[atledreier]

I agree. I have the same thing in my field of work.

 

Also, I guess the sheer number of flight hours some people get compared to the real thing can accentuate the 'problem' with failuremodelling.

 

I have a relative flying the F-16, and talking to him makes it clear they rarely make a flight without SOMETHING going wrong. Of course full system failures like we get is very rare.

[=Panther=]

I have a relative flying the F-16, and talking to him makes it clear they rarely make a flight without SOMETHING going wrong. Of course full system failures like we get is very rare.

Well of course, it's the Viper. That thing never lands Code 1, it's Code 2 for fuel, code 2 for HUD, code 2 for FCR, code 2 mfd, code 3 UFC, code 3 ins, code 3 iff, code 3 canopy, IFE for engines, IFE for hydraulics, IFE for FLCS, IFE for sick pilot. Sometimes I think they 'the pilot' just doesn't want to fly them and wants to watch the maintainers work 12 hours, plus weekends trying to chase a problem. :joystick:

[Snoopy]

Well yesterday all our jets landed code 1 after the first sortie I'd the day....don't know about the second because they came down after I got off work. We fly the hell out of these jets RW both when deployed and at home. Code 2 or 3 is common....some jets more than others but they all have their moments.

 

The comment about them not breaking when flying to and from long range deployments....they don't operate many of the systems and if ita not a safety of flight issue it won't be reported until it gets to it's destination, especially on the trip home. The pilots are ready to get back so many systems may break but they'll fly with it like that.

 

I agree with my experience some of the failures happen more often in the aim than on the line.

Edited April 19, 2011 by Snoopy

[Ptroinks]

I just had an MFCD die on me. In the past, there have been multiple CADC and HUD failures, and none of them have been related to enemy fire (it has happened before I arrived where the bad guys were). It's extremely annoying, to say the least! ED could at least give us the choice of having random failures in the sim or not.

[miguelaco]

Totally agree with it. It would be nice if not needed to have a switch to turn failures on/off.

[Chrisakky]

ED has implemented a random chance of failure on just about everything that cannot be turned off. Additionally, despite what they may claim, this chance of failure is much higher than the real life chance of failure. Probably somewhere between 1 to 2 orders of magnitude higher than the real life chane of failure. Everyone in the squad I'm in has been getting pretty ticked off about it too. Personally, once I had my HUD just randomly die twice in a row in the same mission. I've had alot of random CADC failures too. You'll be just flying around at like 18k feet and suddenly lose it. I've heard of MFCD dying randomly, but never seen it myself.

 

Unrealistic features that serve no purpose other than to be annoying, for the lose. :(

 

This random chance of failure would be great in a dynamic campaign with maintenance, like B17 was, but just annoying otherwise.:crash:

[ErichVon]

ED has implemented a random chance of failure on just about everything that cannot be turned off. Additionally, despite what they may claim, this chance of failure is much higher than the real life chance of failure. Probably somewhere between 1 to 2 orders of magnitude higher than the real life chane of failure. Everyone in the squad I'm in has been getting pretty ticked off about it too. Personally, once I had my HUD just randomly die twice in a row in the same mission. I've had alot of random CADC failures too. You'll be just flying around at like 18k feet and suddenly lose it. I've heard of MFCD dying randomly, but never seen it myself.

 

Unrealistic features that serve no purpose other than to be annoying, for the lose. :(

 

Me, too!

 

Is it possible to get it back up flying to target zone?

 

Nice thing about flying a sim like Aces High, those planes are basic WWII aircraft, therefore no 2011 avionics, just basic fly by the seat of your pants in usually a no turbulence environment, so getting home to land it, is the F10 map, and compass and is all I need in full sim mode.

 

The big hassle is: how to fire the weapons without the MFCDs? I give up and RTB.

 

After landing, I counted a hundred little bullet holes from AAA and panels were missing. Best tactic to a good mission is do not get too close to SAMS and AAA.

 

In real life I bet a real fighter pilot has a backup radio he could use to get home in his survival vest.

 

That guy that landed the jet in the Hudson River used to be Top Gun type of guy instructor at the company's simulator. Those real life sims and the failures they practice that rarely happen, do pay off, when they do occur.

 

I used to know a guy that flew the 747 and the sim time was mandatory to re-qualify for his license.

 

Well, my take on this sim game, is, it is still in beta working out the bugs and the programming typos. LOL!

 

Erich

:pilotfly:

Edited April 19, 2011 by ErichVon

[GGTharos]

The big hassle is: how to fire the weapons without the MFCDs? I give up and RTB.

 

HUD as SOI, set SPI with HUD, bomb away.

 

That guy that landed the jet in the Hudson River used to be Top Gun type of guy instructor at the company's simulator. Those real life sims and the failures they practice that rarely happen, do pay off, when they do occur.

That wasn't a failure, that was flying into a flock of geese. And it's something you don't encounter in A-10C. Different types of issues.