Jump to content
Barton

Pre-update MiG Sortie

Recommended Posts

Good grief the GLOC is ridiculous... who determines these values???  Someone put their long necked skinny ass in a machine and give them a ride so they can get some understanding how GLOC works.... sheeeesh….....  Nice job Barton (as usual) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ludwig said:

Good grief the GLOC is ridiculous... who determines these values???  Someone put their long necked skinny ass in a machine and give them a ride so they can get some understanding how GLOC works.... sheeeesh….....  Nice job Barton (as usual) 

Been saying this since the current GLOC came out. I couldn't believe how many people defended it as "realistic". They've obviously never exceeded 1G sitting in their gaming chair...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Vonrd said:

Been saying this since the current GLOC came out. I couldn't believe how many people defended it as "realistic". They've obviously never exceeded 1G sitting in their gaming chair...

I went on a roller coaster once.  Well, ok, a kiddie coaster.   I passed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do think the GLOC is abit overdone.  I wish there was a g-meter in the instrument stack at the bottom, so we could do some testing.  I think the onset of GLOC comes on WAY too fast.  If you're in a 109 at cruise and just start an easy pull, maybe 5G, it seems you start blacking out

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've hated it since the beginning....not going to pretend I know what's realistic or not, just hated it.  It's bad enough it comes on at what seems so early, but then after you reach that point, it gets even easier to black out after that....and on and on.  In terms of the WWII side,  I feel like I'm flying a flippin' F-4 Phantom at full throttle all of the time, just trying to dive in on an enemy from above.  Of course most if not all of that is my fault....but it was that kind of change, from before.  I just gave up.

I think in certain areas, there is a real need to do things a little differently when making a flight sim.  We simply lack sensory input that would have been SO obvious in real life.  Therefore we need a little forgiveness and a good bit of forewarning for a lot of things.  For example something tells me that in real life somebody would have some inkling before hand when their wings were about to snap off strictly through their own maneuvering (not bullet damage effects).  It would also, I think, be very clear through some means, that you were taking damage from enemy weapons hits (applies to WWI more than WWII).  Since we lack so much of the sensory input, we need compensation in those areas that we do have sensory input for (like hearing!).  In terms of blacking out, how about we see some "stars" at the onset, before your flippin' vision immediately begins to seriously be impaired?  Have any of you seen stars before something worse happens?  I have, plenty of times.

If they don't do some serious revision on that aspect, I doubt I'll ever waste time again trying to dogfight the WWII planes, even more so now that I've seen an absolute expert like Barton comes near to losing in a situation he would normally have ruled in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding it being easier to black out after blacking out or the onset, actually does happen in real life.  The more you put your body through, the more tired you get, the easier it is for you to black out on subsequent maneuvering, now having said that, something that seems lacking in IL 2 is a pilot's ability to condition himself to it.  For acrobatic pilots, they can, on average, pull more sustained Gs than you or I could simply because repeated exposure toughens their body to it.  Having some sort of mechanic like that in game wouldn't mean that the pilot starts a sortie barely able to pull 6 sustained Gs, and by the end is pulling 9 sustained Gs, but possibly something within the off-line game, and a way on-line to control it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also if you think a pilot couldn't be caught unawares of blacking out, I can show you a fatal accident video of a very experienced acrobatic pilot that it happened to, doing the same routine he'd done 100s of times before, and had just performed the same routine earlier that morning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/24/2020 at 11:03 AM, Ludwig said:

Good grief the GLOC is ridiculous... who determines these values???  Someone put their long necked skinny ass in a machine and give them a ride so they can get some understanding how GLOC works.... sheeeesh….....  Nice job Barton (as usual) 

 

11 hours ago, Kliegmann said:

Regarding it being easier to black out after blacking out or the onset, actually does happen in real life.  The more you put your body through, the more tired you get, the easier it is for you to black out on subsequent maneuvering, now having said that, something that seems lacking in IL 2 is a pilot's ability to condition himself to it.  For acrobatic pilots, they can, on average, pull more sustained Gs than you or I could simply because repeated exposure toughens their body to it.  Having some sort of mechanic like that in game wouldn't mean that the pilot starts a sortie barely able to pull 6 sustained Gs, and by the end is pulling 9 sustained Gs, but possibly something within the off-line game, and a way on-line to control it.

Both quotes tie into this.  Maybe that is what someone did. They went up in a plane and figured everyone blacks out at 5G's.  I did  that Air Combat USA some years ago. Was graying out at around  5 G's.  I kept my eyes on the bandit.  Always kept my head moving around, even though pulling those kind of G's was tiring  and made my neck sore fore a couple of days.  The instructor was bouncing around in the seat as if it didn't effect him at all. He didn't black out at 5 G's and he didn't get tired from doing it all day.  He was conditioned.  So would have been the pilots of WWII.  Also don't tell me "well at the end of the war they were tired from fighting" or "had inexperienced pilots flying"  because that isn't the argument here.  

As far as an in game conditioning mechanic the only thing I could see is if a server used the number of flights you have to determine the amount of G's you can sustain.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With GLOC you have to have it in game and it certainly is a factor in actual combat.  It affects everyone differently in real life because of conditioning and even the build of the person.  This can't easily be translated to online fighting in a sim like IL-2 and the most fair thing is to have everyone the same, so the only thing different is the pilot skill and the aircraft performance.  Outside, at least, the presence of a G-suit like the P-51s have.  In the other video I posted you could easily see the effects of G-fatigue and the difference between having a G-suit and not.  The P-51 easily pulls a few more Gs than me without blacking out because of this.  I really don't have a problem with this.  It is just hard to get used to because GLOC was such a small part of the game before.  You really had to pull like a madman to blackout.  But that's just not the case in real life.  The only way I could see them implementing a gradual GLOC sensitivity in game is having it be linked to Virtual Lives on the server.  But this would require servers to record another variable of a pilot's interactions on the server.  I also feel like this would be something some shitheads would try to game.  Just taking off and flying around in their own backfields, far away from any combat, just pulling Gs and trying to build conditioning before going into an actual combat.  Maybe they could make the GLOC a little more forgiving, assuming that everyone's pilot is a little more conditioned.  This would help the game a bit I think, but I really don't have much problem with it.  I have adjusted a lot by incorporating more negative-g maneuvers to force the blood back into the head of my pilot.  It is also useful for fooling opponents when used well.  It's part of how I was able to defeat both this 109 and the P-51.  Later on in the next sortie on this same server, flying another MiG, I met this same pilot and had another fight with him, but this time I pulled into greying out in a high speed turn down low and he GLOC'd into the trees trying to follow me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to see it done properly... give CLoD a try... the modeling there is really pretty darn good. 

I have flown numerous biplanes and spray planes, the T-6 Texan and the P-51D along with the T-38 and the F-16. I discount the jets because of the G suit involved... the principles remain exactly the same but the G suit obviously is a game changer and the forces are more easily achieved. 

We routinely gave rides in the PT-17 Stearman and the T-6 and it was great fun to give the guy a considerable ride. The physiology is pretty basic, the distance between the head and the heart is what it is all about. A long tall Texan will drop out faster than a short fat guy that eats a lot of red meat. High blood pressure will keep you alert (assuming you don't pop your cork) better than a taller, skinny person. Your head location makes a difference as well. If you are turning and twisting your head around you can side-load your self and THAT will become really apparent SUPER fast.  In jets you actually let go of the throttle quadrant and slam your hand on the canopy so you can force yourself up and back to wedge your helmet against the canopy and seat in order to see better and take some of the load off your neck. Your straps won't let you move much but you have probably loosened up some by that point. (They don't show you THAT in the movies) 

Fast onset...  sure... it can happen but it also is typically the first pull and you are at  your strongest and you recover quickly assuming you don't go under, but typically you see the onset and react. Sure, there are lots of videos out there of guys in jets that drop like a stone and the IP has to take the jet, but again force multipliers here and G suits. Typically if you are involved in ACM you are limited to 6 Gs and if you exceed it, you are really close to bending the jet which will get you a visit to the head shed. 

The more you pull, over a period of time the more debilitated you become and therefore more likely to go under. All kinds of stories about guys trimming their plane nose up when making a high speed pass with a pull up so if they blacked out the plane would tend to climb and slow down and allow them time to recover. I heard these stories... but...…   yeah... maybe... don't know.. I wasn't there.  Of course the Stuka and the Ju-88 had a preset pull up... which was really pretty clever and is actually modeled in CLoD. 

What I saw Barton subjected to was silly...  that in NO way represents anything close to what it is.  You PULL G's.....emphasis on the PULL... it is a LOAD. Your arm weighs 20+ lbs and you pull 4 G's  you are curling 80lbs.   I can't do that. You can hang on to your stick...and support 80-100 lbs... I can do that...  how much control and how precise can you be at such loading??? NOT MUCH...   that is akin to being shot to pieces in RoF and still able to fly AND AIM and hit a moving target.   What a load that is.... (no pun intended) 

We could routinely pull 3 Gs on the girls/ladies that went for a ride and they giggled and complained 4-5 Gs and they were ready to go back and land. Don't forget though that it is cumulative... and I you are pulling 3-4 SUSTAINED Gs that is way tougher than 5-6 Gs for only a couple of seconds.  If you pull 6 Gs in a WWII fighter, you are really close to bending something, and the P-51 was famous for losing the use of some MGs because of G loading. The force would be great enough to bend the feeder chute for the ammo belt and allow the belt to misfeed. If you have ordinance on the wings, or fuel tanks.... ouch.... and the F-86 was famous for one tank dropping and the other not....look THAT up sometime...  some pretty hairy stories of guys getting back to base with one tank hanging.

All in all... it was not that much of an issue or problem or you would read more about it.  Desperate times call for desperate measures so sure, some times you had to push the envelope or the end result was going to be the same and if you were stronger than the other guy you might get away with it...  but simply put...  IL-2 G loading is porked. 

Shame on them for allowing it to be so far wrong.  AND... if you want to see something even worse... try NEGATIVE Gs…   anything more than 1 -G will make you pray for death. It is horribly painful, and you feel like your head will explode, and you would be grateful if it did. They usually keep negative Gs out of the sim by limiting the performance of the plane (W-R-O-N-G) and not by the -G induced forces on the pilot.  RoF was terrible about this, you could NEVER push over even when you were slow and the loading was minimal. You might lose the engine but the plane still performed as it should...but in RoF… they just flat limited your ability to push over rapidly.  Watch the guy at the airshow fly vertical into a hammerhead and just before he gets to the top, he pushes over in a tight vertical outside maneuver. 

PS... as to the AIR COMBAT guys that take you up in a trainer and let you fly against someone else... great stuff... lots of fun, not too terribly expensive...  but look up the safety record because more than a few of those operators have been involved in fatal crashes due to the aircraft breaking up from excessive G loading. Those are the companies that you won't find in business any more (spelled wrongful death lawsuit)  which came after losing their aircraft.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with EVERYTHING Ludwig says. My experience... Pitts S2b, Extra 300, Pilatus PC-7, L-39, Decathlon and Citabria. 

When I began aerobatics 4-5g sustained was my limit but after 10 or so hours I could sustain 6 easily. More than that I would fuzz out but it was not sudden and easily calmed by reducing G for just a few seconds. In the Extra we routinely pulled more than 9g momentarily. (I routinely had to do over G inspections of the Extra because they didn't re-set the G meter and I was legally bound to do it when I saw the meter pegged at 10G. Never saw any problems with the plane though... well, except for overstressed landing gear components... but that has nothing to do with Gs... it's tricky to land).

I second what he says about negative Gs... it f**cn HURTS. That, I never got accustomed to.

Bottom line, I think we agree that the way it's modeled is not correct... much to sudden for the GLOC in my opinion.

"PS... as to the AIR COMBAT guys that take you up in a trainer and let you fly against someone else... great stuff... lots of fun, not too terribly expensive...  but look up the safety record because more than a few of those operators have been involved in fatal crashes due to the aircraft breaking up from excessive G loading. Those are the companies that you won't find in business any more (spelled wrongful death lawsuit)  which came after losing their aircraft."

Good advice for anything related to flying. I would also suggest looking into a well reputed aerobatic flight school. Take an intro flight. The instructors are trained in how to assess the student's (passenger's) comfort level. They will gladly take it as far as you want (but if you hurl... you might be cleaning the cockpit 🙄...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ludwig said:

PS... as to the AIR COMBAT guys that take you up in a trainer and let you fly against someone else... great stuff... lots of fun, not too terribly expensive...  but look up the safety record because more than a few of those operators have been involved in fatal crashes due to the aircraft breaking up from excessive G loading. Those are the companies that you won't find in business any more (spelled wrongful death lawsuit)  which came after losing their aircraft.

 

I just read the lawsuit.  Luckily I flew back in 2006 before all this nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...