Jump to content
No.501_Osprey

Pilot Limitation under load and stress

Recommended Posts

Pilot Limitation under load and stress

 

Hi,

 

I would like to enquire as to the implementation of how the pilot is limited during manuovuers in combat and the potential for physical injury, particularly during landing.  I believe this to be a sorely missed inaccuracy in modelling flight sims as development concentrates on the FM envelope and DM of aircraft and they neglect how strain affects the pilot directly.  The only implemtation has been, so far, blackout, redout and bullet/projectile injury.  As an example, should one attack a 109 and surprise him then he will often bunt voilently and avoid damage, particularly with low calibre weapons,  stay on his tail and the bunting from some simmers is extreme, up and down they go like madmen - it is successful because you can't hit them with a decent burst like this.  But upon examining guncam footage this never ever happened, even when under gunfire and this is not surprising since in the real World the pilot would be severly injured from performing such movements.  Furthermore, in combat moves we can presently look around with TrackIR and stare over our shoulders whilst performing high G moves.  This is not really possible, the G load puts the passenger under such strain that they cannot just look about themselves.  I know from my own experience having been given the pleasure to take the controls of a warbird for some manouvering and feeling the pure and instance force and strain when doing so,  and from feeling the force of G during an air display at Duxford.

Furthermore a heavy landing, or sea ditching, or combat landing does not injure the pilot at all,  in 1946 we have all done some spectacular crashes on the airfield and been alive and well in the cockpit with no engine, wings, or tail and yet the pilot is fine!  In real life there are many accounts of sea ditchings killing the pilot due to the sudden stop and of combat landings breaking the nose of the pilot on his gunsight, plus burns, breaks and bruising as the straps dug in.

 

 

I would like to see limitations implemented in a flight sim for the first time.  Perhaps this is what Eric "Winkle" Brown was aiming for when he gave Oleg 'his' realistic joystick settings which, when you tried them, simply limited what the pilot could actually do - this does make perfect sense.

 

We put strain on the airframe, why not put strain and injury on the pilot?

 

 

Thanks.

  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm very much in line with these ideas. While it might be initially disorienting to have your head or view movements restricted during G load, I'd like to see something like this. Fatigue would be something difficult to do well, but I'm open to seeing an approach or two being attempted.

 

I'd like to see pilot injury having a serious effect on career/campaigns, but for multiplayer I'd rather you always spawn "factory fresh", as your aircraft do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it ought to be a selectable difficulty setting, and the effect ought to become more severe with time in a particular mission as the pilot tires. It's a great idea, and it would prevent the mad, extended acrobatics we see in dogfights.

 

:good:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for realistic limitations and injuries for pilots. Though there have been a lot of spectacular aviation crashes where pilots have literally walked away from.

I guess it would be extremely hard to cater for all eventualities.

 

How do you think it should be modeled in-game?  ROF uses the familiar red screen to denote injuries and these take place in crash landings (I'm quite familiar with these type of injuries!)

 

In a campaign structure any injuries should be taken into account for the flow of missions. Even back in CFS it wasn't uncommon to miss out on months (or even the entire ) campaign due to Hospitalization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would very much like the pilot stamina being modelled in some way, so the pilots can`t pull impossible Gs, especially during T&B fights. One would be able to pull the stick for a limited period of time, and depending on how hard he is pulling at the moment. This way, subtle and less straining maneuvers would not limit the stamina whereas hard maneuvers would be penalized, maintaining relatively realistic pilot behavior (much more realistic than being limited only by the blackout). This has been mentioned hunndreds of times before and it would be a dissapontment not to see this feature in BoS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am remembering Bob Hannah's inadvertent +10G pull in Voodoo Chile at Reno in '98.  The P-51 wasn't damaged, and Hannah wasn't injured although he was unconscious for awhile while the plane climbed 5,000 feet or so above the race course.

 

Galloping Ghost (another modified P-51, Race 177) crashed at Reno in 2011 after a pull of more than 14G (estimated at 17.3G by NTSB).  The G forces were extreme enough that you can't even see Jimmy Leeward in the cockpit in Ghost's final pictures - he is slumped down somewhere in the cockpit.  You can also see that the retention system for the tailwheel failed.  Up until the airplane starts that 17 G pull, Mr. Leeward is still trying to recover the airplane, and manages to get it from a 93 degree bank to nearly wings level before the left trim tab failed completely and left him in an uncontrollable airplane.

 

Basically, I am suggesting that it appears unconsciousness and maybe even mechanical failure comes before G induced injuries.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pilots dont take damage from violent maneuvers. Look at some airshows or racings. Some trained Pilots perform crazy aerobatics and pull for short periods of time 9+ Gs. But I think i understand what you are saying and i agree. Overall, pilots can throw around their aircraft way to fast and easy ( at least in il2 1946 and Clod).

 

Most fighters are around 3000 kg and i think because of inertia it takes time for an aircraft to fully respond to your controls (however i dont fly this planes, so real pilots would be the best source). In the game your aircraft respons instantaneously to your control input.

Especially inital turns (the first second of a turn) are extrem and can be done very aggressive. I think this is a major factor for the "unrealistic" feeling during combat or dogfights.

I see this often in Clod. If a Spitfire has a six from a 109 the pilot can pull extremly the  stick and in a fraction of a second the spitfire can build a 90° angle to the 109. Sometimes its quit ridiculous and it looks like vector thrusting ( if you look at it from the distance.)

That way u need alot of lead and defelction shooting becomes quit fiffcult. And that is how most fights go in Clod. Pilots in a 109 shoot most of the time with extreme lead (3 or 4 Revi's) because Spits and Hurris are always in a 60-90° angle to you. As far as i know 30-40° angles would be more realstic (2-3 Revi's), this is also what you often read in books about defelction shooting.

 

Another major thing are forces on your Stick. On some planes they are high on some planes lower, but on your Joystick you have basically none. So you can throw around your joystick which wouldnt be possible in a real cockpit (especially if you fly fast).

 

I like the idea of the fatigue mechanic, but a trained pilot could do aggressiv piloting for quit some time. Expecially in a situation where you have alot of adrenalin and your life is threatened you can withstand extrem situations.

 

BTW, of course on guncams most of the times you dont see extrem maneuvers because the footage is often slowed down. Also you dont know what kind of pilot in the cockpit was. I think alot of pilots were suprised, not seeing the enemy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have a look at Red Orchestra - near misses on you result in suppression effects that limit vision, hearing and reactions. It's very do-able in flight sims imho. Simulating controls getting heavy and/or locking would be good to.

 

The side issue to this is how to simulate the benefits of more experienced or fitter aircrew who don't panic etc. Should it be an experience gained through a repeated play system (eg world of tanks) or a pay for skills system like Warthunder? 

 

Nice idea in the op - thanks!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how the team will end up modeling the influence of fatigue and g limits, but Zak indicated that the team is going to ask a highly skilled pilot about such matters and the team is interested in exploring some form of representation of the effects of various flight conditions on pilot perception and what not. I sure don't know what the typical fighter pilot g limits would be for Allied and Axis pilots or when the pilots would experience significant problems with seeing or what not. I watch too much Red Bull Air Racing. Pilots like Peter Besenyei make taking on 10 g's look easy, but I doubt that I would withstand half that g load without blacking out, unless I has significant training and conditioning. 

 

:salute: MJ

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I sure don't know what the typical fighter pilot g limits would be for Allied and Axis pilots or when the pilots would experience significant problems with seeing or what not.

 

 

6g once sustained for few seconds would probably have blacked or caused severe vision impairment out to the average pilot back in WW2. The official limit loads of their planes usually weren't much past that. The P51-D's stated limit load was +8/-4. You could go a bit past that but you're getting into possible structural damage territory then.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I appreciate the support here, I'm pleased that I'm not the only guy thinking about this.  However I think some people are getting bogged down into just G limits - this is already successfully modelled.  I am not talking about that,  I am talking about

1. The impairment and limitation that increased G load puts onto a pilot, physically.  That means turning your head and just doing things.  Presently, with TrackIR and key binding, I can pull the very edge of blackout and still flick switches and look about everywhere as under 0g.  This is not possible in real life and shouldn't be possible in game.  I can speak from personal experience that the moment the G load comes on (and @StG2xgitarrist it is instant and heavy to control input, the moment you move that stick 1 inch the load appears, just like the moment you hit a dip or rise in the road at speed you feel it immediately)

2. There is no injury for such violence.  Real life pilots have learned their limits so do not injure themselves from manuovers (can never spell it) which is perhaps why, as I indicated in the oP, that guncam footage never displays voilent escape moves (because in reality it's not possible) and Eric Brown's IL2 inputs were so slow, not using even 60% of the possible rates of attitude change, because they reflect what the pilot would actually manage or perform in real life.

3. There is no injury for heavy landings, ditching etc - This happened a lot, I've read it a lot in biographies.

 

All of these implementations one would think initially would spoil what we know, but actually would make it all more realistic since it would affect behaviour.

 

I was heavily involved in the USL for IL2 1946 for a number of years and this used a bespoke scoring system.  It was set up so that realistic behaviour was rewarded,  ultimately leading to pilots behaving like they would in real life (eg trying to get home if damaged).  Those squads which did not tended to lose the battle.  Implementation of the ideas encapsulated in this thread would do exactly the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd agree that an extra switch for these kind of effects would be but it's not going to be a day 1 feature. Something like that would take a lot of extra research to get modelled right while also providing the player with enough feedback so they understand why things are happening. The latter is very hard to properly demonstrate to somebody sitting on a chair staring at a screen.

 

Your point about gun cam footage doesn't really work though. All you're seeing there is the final few seconds of the fight during which he maybe got all his energy bled away. Or maybe the first few seconds as the guy never saw him coming. Or he was a rookie pilot with just 8 hours under his belt. If you listen to pilot interviews from the time they mention blacking out or coming close to it regularly in a fight. I'd say they were pulling some hard maneuvers. Modelling the fatigue from that would be a nice extra but tough to get right without pissing people off. I think the other things you mention like scores for certain types of behaviour are more effective at guiding players to play in a certain manner without impinging on their game play as much.

Edited by Tektolnes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Junkers did a lot of interesting testing on G-LOC when they were working on the Stuka - it is why the Stuka has the automatic pullout system - 6g can be a problem for pilots, especially if it is induced suddenly.  It is easier to take G that are added gradually, but that is easier to say than do when you are dive bombing on CAS missions.

 

It seems like Junkers expected most pilots to be able to take over 7.5 G at sea level with some training and tolerance built up, but Germany had some pretty physically fit pilots that they were testing with I expect, which helps a whole bunch.

 

One of the interesting things is that in an unpressurized airplane at altitude, very low G loads are required to kill someone - like 2g.

 

The air races are happening this coming week at Reno, and the fast guys are going to be sustaining 5 - 6 G for long periods of time.  As I understand it, one of the safety criticism is insufficient G training and awareness.

 

Fly low, fly fast, turn left only gets you so far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting idea to limit the pilot's ability to move his neck/head during high G maneuvering.

 

MAC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's because it has no sides, no factions, so everybody will gain from it.  The moment you put in something that is accurate, but stops a person from 'winning', they get very upset about it - I would rather those types just got themselves another game tbh.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're good ideas it's just how to research them so that they're right both for the pilot and for each individual plane is where it gets tricky. Some planes were considered light, some heavy - but what does this actually mean and how to translate that into code? Then how to provide that feedback to players who, for the most part, aren't using FFB sticks. The violent bunting up and down that you mentioned before (presumably 109s in CloD trying to put off the early Spit & Hurri with the crappy carb) is not something that we need to resort to pilot injury to restrict - proper flight modelling should take care of that. If the 109 was correctly modelled that kind of maneuver would probably see the pilot lose control of the plane before getting injured. CloD lets players get away with some nutty things which I don't think BOS will.

 

With g forces yes they definitely impair head movement but again how much is realistic for all the various levels of g force? If you look at some of the acrobatics performed by P51 pilots on youtube you can see them moving their head around during what look like 4-5g pull outs. And without the player actually feeling the g forces involved how to provide this feedback to them so they're not getting frustrated and understand what's going on.

 

Fatigue is much harder to model realistically and it varied wildly across pilots. There would have to be a sort of average determined and applied to all pilots. Trying to determine what this average actually is would require a lot of research. Then it would be necessary to document precisely what the effects of fatigue actually are and how they impact a pilot's ability. Then the off-setting affect of adrenaline in combat might have to be included as well. 

 

I don't think anybody's knocking your ideas as they make "winning" harder but what you're looking to get implemented is a lot more complex than saying we should x, y, z added as it'll add more to the immersion for a select group of players who want the highly realistic settings. Personally I'd love to see them but only once they're done right as otherwise they just become frustrations like the anthromorphology rubbish in CloD. For 777 to get to that level would be a significant investment of time and effort on their part and I'm not sure I can see it happening to be honest.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I noticed in the dev videos is how easily the pilot can look at his tail.  In real life, it is NOT that easy.  Most real pilots will losen their sholder straps so they can twist their whole body in the cockpit just to be able to see the 5:30/6:30 position.  It is practically impossible to simply turn around like an owl and see out the back of the airplane.

 

I think they should limit the pilot's head rotation to 170 degrees.  At 155 Degrees, the view should begin to shake to simulate the difficulty in keeping a visual track when checking six. 

 

This video shows the kind of difficulty involved in looking behind and how much pilots can really move to see (watch at 3:00 and 7:00): http://vimeo.com/40935850

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With regard to violent pitching maneuvers...the reason you dont see pilots doing that is because of the extreme discomfort  in doing it and the lack of visual cues before redout (as opposed to blackout for positive Gs).  First, your feet and hands are forced away from the controls, so it takes a concious effort to maintain posession of your flight controls.  Positive Gs force your hands and feet to stay close to the controls.  Negative Gs also force you out of the seat.  Depending on how tight your seatbelt is, you could hit your head on the canopy.  The second part is redout which has a much more sudden onset than black out which comes on much more gradually if you use a proper G strain.  Redout occurs at about -3 Gs, and there is no way to fight it.  Black out occurs at about 3.5 Gs with no G strain, but a good strain can get you up to 8+. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing I noticed in the dev videos is how easily the pilot can look at his tail.  In real life, it is NOT that easy.  Most real pilots will losen their sholder straps so they can twist their whole body in the cockpit just to be able to see the 5:30/6:30 position.  It is practically impossible to simply turn around like an owl and see out the back of the airplane.

 

I think they should limit the pilot's head rotation to 170 degrees.  At 155 Degrees, the view should begin to shake to simulate the difficulty in keeping a visual track when checking six. 

 

This video shows the kind of difficulty involved in looking behind and how much pilots can really move to see (watch at 3:00 and 7:00): http://vimeo.com/40935850

Headshaking??? Hopefully not, this is very unrealistic. Like some people already posted in other topics....your eyes and head can compensate most vibrations or violent movments. Just go on a rollercoaster and you will notice that you dont have any problems keeping track of what is around you.

 

And again, if you limit your headrotation and than you zoom-in while looking behind you, you want be able to see your 7 oclock position because your FOV is very restricted if you zoom-in. In reality you have a much better resolution and FOV.

 

If you want hardcore realism than you should limit you headrotation to 90-100°, because thats what an avarage pilot can do without moving his shoulders. Nevertheless you can see directly behind you ( im not talking here about limitations of your panorama view by armorplates or similar things).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, the actual head shaking does not directly reflect reality, but the intent is to simulate the difficulty of looking behind for a stationary pilot who, if it is done like ROF, has absolutely no limitation in head rotation and can easily see even the smallest spec of an aircraft "sneaking" up at 5-7 oclock.

 

If a badguy sees you at 6-9 miles and moves into position at your six, it requires a concious effort to twist your body AND scan the sky for the little spec (that you don't even know is there initially. No radar, no AWACS etc) trying to kill you.  In ROF, you simply twist your head around like an owl, stare at your six until you see the badguy and then turn to fight.  The fighting is fun!  But the simulation of combat doesn't really reflect the threat posed by an enemy approaching from that position. 

 

Once you are actively in a fight, you twist and turn in the cockpit maintain visual on the bad guy and zooming to scan for him in this situation, isn't really applicable.  Prior to the fight though, few, if any, people are twisting in the seat to get a six scan.  In that situation, a realistic limitation to how far behind you can see is about 170 degrees for the center of your field of view with your eyes locked over to one side trying to get the view of six oclock to not be right at the edge of your peripheral vision. 

 

I hope some other pilots here will pile on and share their experiences!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+100 for such idea

 

I can only say that after 15-30minutes of advanced flight manouvers like double combat turn, hi -G combat turn, spiral +4-6 G, few loops I`m exhausted.

Especially changingdirection of the manouver is hard with high G.

If in real someone would try to push so much G like some La5, La7, Spit pilots in old IL-2 sturmovik, they would finished themselves before the enemy pull the triger...

plus

Trims can help you a lot when stick becomes "heavy" as hell in high speed manouvers but most of the WWII planes didnt had trims on stick, so you couldnt used it fast and change every time you need. So if you wanted to survive combat you had to have "strong" arm and legs ( yes, yes legs because in high speed the balance of plane is changing and the slide ball is runing to the left or right and it produce extra drag ).

 

In combat you would have an extra adrenaline, because you would fight for your life!!! I fully agree that such element would make sim more realistic.

But experienced pilot can take more G. When you fly regular your body gets used to hi G.

 

So such factor could be used like in War Thunder when your pilot is better when you have more exp.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Blakky,  and one thing is true as testified by Eric Brown,  the huge amount of rudder applied to the 109 to trim out in a dive - a lot of force required.

 

Even FIFA has included player fatique for several years,  don't see why IL2 can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
votes show that people wont more then just blackout and redouts, 

 


 


 

 

im all for making in-game pilots more then just robots whats the point of realistically simulated airplane when pilots limitations are not realistically modeled

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pilots dont take damage from violent maneuvers. Look at some airshows or racings. Some trained Pilots perform crazy aerobatics and pull for short periods of time 9+ Gs. But I think i understand what you are saying and i agree. Overall, pilots can throw around their aircraft way to fast and easy ( at least in il2 1946 and Clod).

 

Most fighters are around 3000 kg and i think because of inertia it takes time for an aircraft to fully respond to your controls (however i dont fly this planes, so real pilots would be the best source). In the game your aircraft respons instantaneously to your control input.

Especially inital turns (the first second of a turn) are extrem and can be done very aggressive. I think this is a major factor for the "unrealistic" feeling during combat or dogfights.

I see this often in Clod. If a Spitfire has a six from a 109 the pilot can pull extremly the  stick and in a fraction of a second the spitfire can build a 90° angle to the 109. Sometimes its quit ridiculous and it looks like vector thrusting ( if you look at it from the distance.)

That way u need alot of lead and defelction shooting becomes quit fiffcult. And that is how most fights go in Clod. Pilots in a 109 shoot most of the time with extreme lead (3 or 4 Revi's) because Spits and Hurris are always in a 60-90° angle to you. As far as i know 30-40° angles would be more realstic (2-3 Revi's), this is also what you often read in books about defelction shooting.

 

Another major thing are forces on your Stick. On some planes they are high on some planes lower, but on your Joystick you have basically none. So you can throw around your joystick which wouldnt be possible in a real cockpit (especially if you fly fast).

 

I like the idea of the fatigue mechanic, but a trained pilot could do aggressiv piloting for quit some time. Expecially in a situation where you have alot of adrenalin and your life is threatened you can withstand extrem situations.

 

BTW, of course on guncams most of the times you dont see extrem maneuvers because the footage is often slowed down. Also you dont know what kind of pilot in the cockpit was. I think alot of pilots were suprised, not seeing the enemy.

 

I agree but the big problem the Devs would face straight away would be some people complaining that the role rate etc wasn't 'historical'.

 

I think there is too much focus on the figures due to pressure that comes from the community.

By the way. In ROF does an injury make the controls less responsive? It felt that way to me a few times although it could have been damage to the airframe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By the way. In ROF does an injury make the controls less responsive? It felt that way to me a few times although it could have been damage to the airframe.

 

Yes, it does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thought so and I think it would be worth experimenting with this happening gradually over time due to fatigue.

 

Nice idea although might not be in practice :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gforces might be able to be modeled but stamina is something you couldnt realistically do. Every pilot is a human being and has different physiology and stamina levels. What affects one person one way would do something different to another. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree at all.  If that were the case then why is G put in at all?

 

I am really referring to 2 things, because I can see there is a misunderstanding from some people still.

 

1. Violent moves injuring the pilot. StG2xgitarrist mentions airshow pilots not being injured - well of course not,  they are performing ridiculous bunts up and down, pulling and pushing on the stick are they?  That is exactly the point - real pilots don't do this because they can't.

2. G force restricting pilot head movement.  Airshow pilots are not trying to shake a bandit off their tails,  they follow a strict plan.  Fact is,  under G load, you can't be swinging your head about to the same degree as under no load.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree on both points, and would add that people were probably saying ah who needs simulate pilots G blackouts in sim about airplanes, every pilot has diferant G limits how to correctly simulate that, but now its normal thing to have this in all air game or sim. 

Someone made risk and add something more to genre.

Edited by Yaklover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Fact is,  under G load, you can't be swinging your head about to the same degree as under no load."

 

This

 

  :) Although could be difficult to implement, it would also have to affect AI

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not about to make different limits...

 

Its to make at least some limits to avoid ridiciulous situations with Spit/La5/etc. ( old il2 ) uber-pilots pushing 6-7 G all the time and survive only because of the plane abilities...

 

Virtual combat shouldnt populate retards who base all their tactic on hi-G manouvers...

 

 

About swinging your head...

Its possible even with hi G but after short time you are completly exhausted. Adrenaline will help you of course but as Osprey said its very hard to track enemy during Hi G combat plus you cant push Hi -G-track enemy- control plane-aim-shoot-defend against other enemies...

Edited by =LG=Blakhart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its not about to make different limits...

 

Its to make at least some limits to avoid ridiciulous situations with Spit/La5/etc. ( old il2 ) uber-pilots pushing 6-7 G all the time and survive only because of the plane abilities...

 

Virtual combat shouldnt populate retards who base all their tactic on hi-G manouvers...

 

Excactly  :)

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+

Pilot Limitation under load and stress
 
Furthermore, in combat moves we can presently look around with TrackIR and stare over our shoulders whilst performing high G moves.  This is not really possible, the G load puts the passenger under such strain that they cannot just look about themselves.  I know from my own experience having been given the pleasure to take the controls of a warbird for some manouvering and feeling the pure and instance force and strain when doing so,  and from feeling the force of G during an air display at Duxford.
 

 

you flew at duxford? where is your review with pictures? :P

 

anyway, my limited experience was to 4G, and you can still headbang all you want at that load. neck muscles are really strong.

 

Else, i really agree with the rough landings. we really need to get some injuries from those, since even when the plane flips you usually remain unscratched ( in ROF, you actually die crushed in some planes tough)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a headcam video of it Pupo,  I'm too lazy to put it on YouTube,  I really must do that though because lots of people have asked for it.......and I did promise  :P

 

The main reason I raised this thread was because of violent bunting that people do in order to avoid getting hit when you are tailing them though,  I find that very very annoying, especially in these early war MG only machines.  An immediate bunt, fine, maybe,  but the continuous bucking bronco stuff - it's just War Thunder stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i personally dont really have problem with that. i appretiate when my targets do that.... let them bleed energy i'll be back for the next pass  :ph34r:

 

my main issue is indeed the High G breaks that can be pulled with no penalty, specially in 1946, where can trim and fly the plane while passed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

let them bleed energy i'll be back for the next pass

 

Pupo... 2nd attack is risky, 3rd is sudden death ;p

We do not talk about tournament 1vs1 fights...

1 well controlled I 153, i16, La5, Spit, etc. can focus on defence and keep busy 1-4 zooming fighters enough time to reverse tactical situation...

 

You know rule 5-10-15 ?

 

In "war sector"/"combat sector"/ "work sector" or whatever you call combat area you have:

 

5 seconds -  to ident and destroy target and disengage

 

10 seconds - before other enemy spot you

 

15 seconds - before you will be engaged and shot down

 

1 "circling" s^^t can be easily used as a bait and Its well known science fiction tactic in sims which is very succesfull thanks to the magical virtual pilots abilities ie. to keep 7g in spiral from 4k to deck...

 

There is nothing realistic in such tactic nor situations.

You dont think in combat ?

 

Die then, your plane nor tricks shouldnt let you survive combat with more than 3-4 enemies.

 

p.s.

Some older Poles should understand ;p

 

Edited by =LG=Blakhart
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...