Damage Model Upgrades?

[Crow]

Something I've been worried about, but kept forgetting to post about is the damage model in IL-2: BoS. I know that BoS will use the RoF engine and that damage modelling in the game is very good. However, one thing I've never seen much of in Rise of Flight is fire or explosions of aircraft. I can understand why, considering WWI aircraft are probably much less likely to erupt in big fireballs and explosions, but this doesn't really translate to WWII where much faster aircraft with more volatile fuel in easier to burn locations means that fire is a constant threat and explosions on impact are quite large.

 

I'm very worried that the engine won't be properly adapted to suit a WWII-type of experience. My general sense of things is that the particle effects need an upgrade to be thicker and larger, the fire needs to be less transparent and larger, and aircraft explosions need big fireballs. That's just for starters, I'm sure other effects will be needed too like smoke effects from burning wrecked aircraft, etc. I felt like IL-2: 1946 + mods had some really nice effects that captured WWII aerial combat's volatility well. What are your thoughts? For reference, here are some WWII crashes:

 

 

 

Here's examples of fire and explosions in RoF:

 

 

Edited September 9, 2013 by Crow

[Finkeren]

I generally agree with your points, but I'm not really worried at all. It's already been confirmed, that DM has been dramatically rebuilt from RoF to better simulate the different materials. Aluminium, steel and pluwood doesn't behave the same way as hardwood and canvas, so a lot has been changed. And those are really the big things, fire and explosions are much simpler (at least as far as particle effects go - it's simply a matter of proportions) and RoF already have very, very good explosions modelled, when it comes to bombs.

 

The one thing I might be slightly worried about is the way explosions on board would affect an aircrafts flight path. In RoF an explosions fuel tank would sometimes make the aircraft "jump" and propel it several meters off course, and sometimes even stop it dead in its tracks and leave it falling nearly vertical.

 

That's the one issue I hope has been fixed for IL2-BoS.

[Flying_Colander]

Over all, I've been quiet impressed by the RoF damage model. My only disappointment, admittedly mild, is the ground impact model. I've seen a lot of planes spin down from great height only to go -- doink -- when they should have been obliterated.

[Finkeren]

Over all, I've been quiet impressed by the RoF damage model. My only disappointment, admittedly mild, is the ground impact model. I've seen a lot of planes spin down from great height only to go -- doink -- when they should have been obliterated.

What makes you think they should have been "oblirerated"?

 

Planes in RoF very seldom crash at speeds higher than 300 - 400 km/h, which is quite enough to smash the entire structure of the aircraft, which is usually what happens, but it certainly won't tear the plane into tiny bits and scatter it over a large area.

 

Also it really doesn't matter how far the plane has been falling, only the planes velocity relative to the ground. In RoF I've survived falling several thousand feet in an irrecoverable spin, simply because the rate of descend was so slow, that all the impact did was break the landing gear. Even in a WW2 scenario a spinning aircraft will never reach its free fall terminal velocity.

 

Even if speeds were high enough, I'm curious as to what exactly you think should happen to the plane. A very high speed crash might completely crush a WW1 era aircraft, more or less pancaking it against the ground. That effect would be cool, but would require a massively complicated DM. But here's what would NOT happen:

 

1: The plane exploding and completely disappearing in a cloud of shrapnel and burning fuel. Even if the fuel tank exploded on impact (which is far from certain) it wouldn't have enough force to do anything besides setting the wreck ablaze. The only way an explosion would obliterate a crashing aircraft would be, if it carried powerful bombs.

 

2. The plane getting torn to bits and scattering all over the place. Believe it or not: WW1 era aircraft weren't made of glass, and tended to stick together pretty well, once they weren't exposed to a powerful 200km/h airflow.

[Stray]

Finkeren, I think what Flying_Colander refers to is on the last video of OP, circa 0:35 and I totally agree with his point.

[Zoring]

From the livestream video of the LaGG where they spin into the ground I would say there is currently no disintigration of the plane into flaming chunks, they currently break in the same way that the ROF planes do, with the fuselage remaining basically intact.

[Zak]

From the livestream video of the LaGG where they spin into the ground I would say there is currently no disintigration of the plane into flaming chunks, they currently break in the same way that the ROF planes do, with the fuselage remaining basically intact.

Yup, planes haven't been told how to explode yet. Detouching, bending and tearing apart works properly but without necessary FX as you already know.

[Zoring]

That's alright Zak, I have full faith in the team, there is no other developer out there with the focused goals and level of community interaction that you guys have. My firstborn is yours.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

What makes you think they should have been "oblirerated"?

 

Planes in RoF very seldom crash at speeds higher than 300 - 400 km/h, which is quite enough to smash the entire structure of the aircraft, which is usually what happens, but it certainly won't tear the plane into tiny bits and scatter it over a large area.

 

Also it really doesn't matter how far the plane has been falling, only the planes velocity relative to the ground. In RoF I've survived falling several thousand feet in an irrecoverable spin, simply because the rate of descend was so slow, that all the impact did was break the landing gear. Even in a WW2 scenario a spinning aircraft will never reach its free fall terminal velocity.

 

Even if speeds were high enough, I'm curious as to what exactly you think should happen to the plane. A very high speed crash might completely crush a WW1 era aircraft, more or less pancaking it against the ground. That effect would be cool, but would require a massively complicated DM. But here's what would NOT happen:

 

1: The plane exploding and completely disappearing in a cloud of shrapnel and burning fuel. Even if the fuel tank exploded on impact (which is far from certain) it wouldn't have enough force to do anything besides setting the wreck ablaze. The only way an explosion would obliterate a crashing aircraft would be, if it carried powerful bombs.

 

2. The plane getting torn to bits and scattering all over the place. Believe it or not: WW1 era aircraft weren't made of glass, and tended to stick together pretty well, once they weren't exposed to a powerful 200km/h airflow.

 

Good post

 

[Mac_Messer]

I'm very worried that the engine won't be properly adapted to suit a WWII-type of experience. My general sense of things is that the particle effects need an upgrade to be thicker and larger, the fire needs to be less transparent and larger, and aircraft explosions need big fireballs. That's just for starters, I'm sure other effects will be needed too like smoke effects from burning wrecked aircraft, etc. I felt like IL-2: 1946 + mods had some really nice effects that captured WWII aerial combat's volatility well. What are your thoughts? For reference, here are some WWII crashes:

Aircraft crashes don`t concern me nearly as much as different ammo types vs different construction fabric ie. canvas, wood, metal. Every one of those reacts different to various type of ammo. AFAIK there will not be custom belt option for the user, so what is going to happen when a LW plane pops a LaGG full of AP rounds? How will different aircraft react to 23mm/30mm/37mm/45mm hits? The same goes for different bomb types against buildings/armor.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Personally I'm glad there wont be custom ammo belts.

 

AP rounds will surely be effective against any armour plates/glass/engine and make holes in the fuel tanks?

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

Agree with Zoring, this is one aspect of the sim I don't really think we need to worry about.

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

What makes you think they should have been "oblirerated"?

 

Planes in RoF very seldom crash at speeds higher than 300 - 400 km/h, which is quite enough to smash the entire structure of the aircraft, which is usually what happens, but it certainly won't tear the plane into tiny bits and scatter it over a large area.

 

Also it really doesn't matter how far the plane has been falling, only the planes velocity relative to the ground. In RoF I've survived falling several thousand feet in an irrecoverable spin, simply because the rate of descend was so slow, that all the impact did was break the landing gear. Even in a WW2 scenario a spinning aircraft will never reach its free fall terminal velocity.

 

Even if speeds were high enough, I'm curious as to what exactly you think should happen to the plane. A very high speed crash might completely crush a WW1 era aircraft, more or less pancaking it against the ground. That effect would be cool, but would require a massively complicated DM. But here's what would NOT happen:

 

1: The plane exploding and completely disappearing in a cloud of shrapnel and burning fuel. Even if the fuel tank exploded on impact (which is far from certain) it wouldn't have enough force to do anything besides setting the wreck ablaze. The only way an explosion would obliterate a crashing aircraft would be, if it carried powerful bombs.

 

2. The plane getting torn to bits and scattering all over the place. Believe it or not: WW1 era aircraft weren't made of glass, and tended to stick together pretty well, once they weren't exposed to a powerful 200km/h airflow.

 

I have seen quite a few pictures of crashed WW1 aircraft that were pretty recognizable as crashed airplanes after impact, but others where it was just a collection of parts scattered around a small area (for example Voss' triplane).  I think RoF is good at representing the first case, but not great at representing the second.  

 

I wouldn't expect all aircraft to become just loose and broken parts, but it would be nice if they occasionally did that if they hit the ground hard enough.  For me, it is a minor point though.

[Finkeren]

I have seen quite a few pictures of crashed WW1 aircraft that were pretty recognizable as crashed airplanes after impact, but others where it was just a collection of parts scattered around a small area (for example Voss' triplane). I think RoF is good at representing the first case, but not great at representing the second.

 

I have never seen pictures of a WW1 era aircraft being anything close to "obliterated" (that being broken into many smaller, nearly unreconizable pieces and scattered) as the result of a crash.

 

I haven't seen the picture of Voss' crash site that you talk about, but it sounds interesting, have you got a link to it?

 

BTW: All this has little to do with IL2-BoS. Things were markedly different in WW2, where higher speeds, different materials, many aircraft carrying high explosive ammunition and larger quantities of more volatile fuel conspired to make crashes nothing like their WW1 counterparts.

[BFsSmurfy]

In some of the late war guncam footage you see a fair few 190s losing a wing at roughly the half way point due to the ammunition "exploding" from enemy fire?, wonder if we`ll see that, it`s quite common in the footage I`ve seen (limited though that may be).

 

I`m not concerned about choosing your own loadout, I doubt whether many common or garden pilots had that luxury irl at the frt.

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

I have never seen pictures of a WW1 era aircraft being anything close to "obliterated" (that being broken into many smaller, nearly unreconizable pieces and scattered) as the result of a crash.

 

I haven't seen the picture of Voss' crash site that you talk about, but it sounds interesting, have you got a link to it?

 

BTW: All this has little to do with IL2-BoS. Things were markedly different in WW2, where higher speeds, different materials, many aircraft carrying high explosive ammunition and larger quantities of more volatile fuel conspired to make crashes nothing like their WW1 counterparts.

 

No pictures of Voss' crash exist as far as I know.  We just have eye witness accounts and a description of the surviving piece (the rudder).

 

"Capt. J. McCudden, No. 56 Squadron ... saw a S.E.5a fighting a triplane, so with others dived at it, and for the next ten minutes the enemy triplane fought the five S.E.5s with great skill and determination. Eventually, however, it was destroyed by 2nd-Lieut. Rhys Davids of the same squadron, who had previously driven down a two-seater. . .The triplane was seen to crash in our lines by other pilots and the other occupant proved to be Lieut. Werner Voss, who was killed." Royal Flying Corps Communique

 

"I shall never forget my admiration for that German pilot, who single handed, fought seven of us for ten minutes . . . I saw him go into a fairly steep dive and so I continued to watch, and then saw the triplane hit the ground and disappear into a thousand fragments, for it seemed to me that it literally went into powder."   McCudden

[FuriousMeow]

Typically if you see a WWI plane that is just an engine and a bunch of parts around it, it's because the aircraft caught fire, or was on fire, when it crashed and burned away. It didn't explode sending material scattering.

 

Even WWII planes, the majority of them that exploded were just the gas tanks on impact. The engine(s) and more solid parts get lodged into the ground, either a few inches or several feet depending on what the surface as like.

 

The old Il-2 explode parts across the map, not so much accurate.

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

Yeah, some of those pics it is obvious the plane burned.  Others the wreckage is just a mess with maybe the landing gear recognizable, but the fabric doesn't look burned and the remnants of tires are there which you wouldn't expect to survive a fire.

[Mac_Messer]

Personally I'm glad there wont be custom ammo belts.

 

AP rounds will surely be effective against any armour plates/glass/engine and make holes in the fuel tanks?

Could be, though you need to assume those plates/glass/engine dm are modelled at all. And for the LaGG I`d rather have incediary ammo. AP rounds were very unpopular in the IL2 because of problems with it actually producing realistic results.

[Skoshi_Tiger]

 

Even WWII planes, the majority of them that exploded were just the gas tanks on impact. The engine(s) and more solid parts get lodged into the ground, either a few inches or several feet depending on what the surface as like.

 

 

 

This is what generally remains from a WWII aircraft that has flown into the ground any like cruise speed. I took this photo at the crash site of  a B25 ("Happy Landings") that flew in to a hill side on the Kokoda Track. The wreckage had been dug from many meters under the ground when they recovered the crew.   

 

Recently there was two BBC documentaries about recovering planes, one in Britain and the other in France. In both films the Engines were dug up from over five meters below the ground. The rest of the planes were in similar condition to the one above so for a full speed impact I guess my photo shows the typical remains.

 

Of course depending on the speed and angle of impact there should be a whole range of damage possible.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

 

 

This is what generally remains from a WWII aircraft that has flown into the ground any like cruise speed. I took this photo at the crash site of  a B25 ("Happy Landings") that flew in to a hill side on the Kokoda Track. The wreckage had been dug from many meters under the ground when they recovered the crew.   

 

Recently there was two BBC documentaries about recovering planes, one in Britain and the other in France. In both films the Engines were dug up from over five meters below the ground. The rest of the planes were in similar condition to the one above so for a full speed impact I guess my photo shows the typical remains.

 

Of course depending on the speed and angle of impact there should be a whole range of damage possible.

 

Isn't that the Happy Legend that crashed with bombs on board and exploded on impact?

[Skoshi_Tiger]

Isn't that the Happy Legend that crashed with bombs on board and exploded on impact?

Hey Emil, Your 100% right on the name, I think I must have had a senior moment! My track guide book puts the planes serial as "The Happy Legend" 41-12907

 

But the bomb load did not explode as they are not armed inside the bomb bay during transit. There is a bloody big hole at the crash site, but apparently that was made when the US CILH (Central Identification Laboratory: Hawaii) dug up the wreckage. The pile of wreckage above was one of a number of piles taken from the hole by the identification unit.

 

One bomb is still at the bottom of the hole (underwater when I was there)  There was a partial bomb casing torn open but still containing explosives and the bomb picture I took below was found over two hundred yards from the crash site and returned later on by the locals for tourist purposes. Notice the "Safety bucket" over the fuse!

 

From memory our guide said there was another 500lb bomb missing from the wreak.

 

 

Thanks for the correction.

Edited September 10, 2013 by Skoshi_Tiger

[VeryOldMan]

I have never seen pictures of a WW1 era aircraft being anything close to "obliterated" (that being broken into many smaller, nearly unreconizable pieces and scattered) as the result of a crash.

 

I haven't seen the picture of Voss' crash site that you talk about, but it sounds interesting, have you got a link to it?

 

BTW: All this has little to do with IL2-BoS. Things were markedly different in WW2, where higher speeds, different materials, many aircraft carrying high explosive ammunition and larger quantities of more volatile fuel conspired to make crashes nothing like their WW1 counterparts.

 

 

Do nto forget mass.  THe ammount of energy on a FW190  crashing and a camel is  veeeeeery different.

[71st_AH_Hooves]

Not sure about you guys, but I could not care less if the plane breaks into 1million pieces. As long as I see it hit the ground ans some fire or an explosion happens. I'm cool. It will shortly be deleted from the game world. And I will be looking for my next kill.

[Skoshi_Tiger]

I spend a lot of my time down near the ground doing ground attack, and many of the scrapes I get into are at low level. I guess details are easier to pick out down low. A varied damage model including instantaneous explosions right through the range to a gentle wheels up landing depending on the circumstances would be fantastic.

 

In my opinion it's the fleeting glance over your shoulder as my target goes in, and it's not a canned generic explosion that really adds life to the sim. It also one thing that ROF does well. All I would like is it to be put into context and have appropriate effects.

Edited September 10, 2013 by Skoshi_Tiger

[FuriousMeow]

Yeah, some of those pics it is obvious the plane burned.  Others the wreckage is just a mess with maybe the landing gear recognizable, but the fabric doesn't look burned and the remnants of tires are there which you wouldn't expect to survive a fire.

 

 

Seen those. They were scavenged wreckage. What good wood and metal that was left was taken, in addition to identifying markings for souvenirs.

[Crow]

In my opinion it's the fleeting glance over your shoulder as my target goes in, and it's not a canned generic explosion that really adds life to the sim. It also one thing that ROF does well. All I would like is it to be put into context and have appropriate effects.

This is exactly what I was trying to express.

 

I know the new effects aren't finished yet, but I sure hope we get a look at them on the stream sometime very soon.

Edited September 10, 2013 by Crow

[LLv34_Stafroty]

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/7-questions-developers/page-9?do=findComment&comment=25781

 

these are my worry points about damage model.. and of course thats not all, but main points.

[LLv34_Stafroty]

i really hope that exploding planes WONT behave like 250kg bombs, sending fragments to all over, making close attacks as suicidal.

 

gasoline really does burn fast when in PERFECT mixture with AIR, but when imperperct, its just flameball, which isnt explosion by speed means, so, there should not be fragments flying 150m all around from exploding aircraft in air/ground.. it was ridiculous in il-2 46. you zoom n boom enemy figter, attack from behind, hit him and he gots on fire, u go past him, and then BOOM, u get destroyed because enemy figter exploded 200m behind you.

 

those explosions were too big, WAY too big in effectiveness. Erich Hartman would have never survived with so many kills with that "game engine"

 

its of course different thing if ur attacking plane which is carrying bombs, and u hit one of those bombs, and making it explode,, making whole load explode, then there would be blast radius with fragmentation effect, compared to aluminium parts falling of..

and what comes to exploding ammunition. machinegun ammunition explosion. the rounds dont get much speed from that explosion, but the casing , because it is lighter.  with cannon ammo, there isnt too big blast/fragment range from those too, few meters or so. and plane parts flying after explosion. plane is made mainly from aluminium, thin plates pressed to different shapes, loses fast its kinetic energy, so no go in there too.

 

same with everything else, exploding plane should not react like 250kg bomb, not even closely.

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

Seen those. They were scavenged wreckage. What good wood and metal that was left was taken, in addition to identifying markings for souvenirs.

 

Strange they left the bodies under the wreckage, and things like engines and engine pieces lying around in that case.  

 

 

(Warning - Some pictures are graphic.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I'm not prepared to say eye witnesses and photographic evidence is wrong and I'm surprised that we're still talking about this.

[FuriousMeow]

Strange how they are supine next to the wreckage. Guess they went zombie and then decided for a nap, or more likely pulled from the wreckage. And those engines aren't going to be reused after a crash like that. They had enough problems with factory fresh engines.

Edited September 11, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

We is it strange? I would expect that they were checked by the first people to get there to see if they had survived.

 

no the engine won't be reused, but it is the sort of thing that would be scraped or scavenged if you were right in your earlier claim.

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

I suppose the first things to be scavenged would be the guns and ammunition, next up would be souvenirs I'd guess. Some of the wrecks in those pictures have the surrounding grass trampled flat, suggesting considerable human disturbance. "Arranging" scenes for photography was quite common back in the day, e.g. the famous "sniper" from Gettysburg.

[FuriousMeow]

We is it strange? I would expect that they were checked by the first people to get there to see if they had survived.

 

no the engine won't be reused, but it is the sort of thing that would be scraped or scavenged if you were right in your earlier claim.

 

Not really. Engine parts that fit one engine may not quite fit another of the same type back then, plus if they are damaged they can't be reused. They are going to just disassemble a busted engine to find one pipe.

 

Nevertheless, a lot of those photos in books have captions and they say things like "after being scavenged by souvenir hunters" or to that effect.

 

But no, you're right. Those planes spontaneously exploded without a single charred part, therefore gasless explosions!

Edited September 11, 2013 by FuriousMeow

[HeavyCavalrySgt]

Not really. Engine parts that fit one engine may not quite fit another of the same type back then, plus if they are damaged they can't be reused. They are going to just disassemble a busted engine to find one pipe.

 

Nevertheless, a lot of those photos in books have captions and they say things like "after being scavenged by souvenir hunters" or to that effect.

 

But no, you're right. Those planes spontaneously exploded without a single charred part, therefore gasless explosions!

 

Why on earth did you think the engine parts would be reused in their current form?  Like you said, good wood and good metal get scavenged, but not to make another airplane.  At least be consistent.

 

I wasn't the one claiming the planes exploded.  I'm the one saying that I'm not going to call eye witnesses liars.

[FuriousMeow]

It's mostly souvenirs that were recovered, that's usually what those crashes were molested for. Wood for things like a fire to keep soldiers warm in or near the trenches. The fabric was pretty much worthless since it was doped and may as well have been like a pair of shorts dipped in flammable glue - hard, unusable, and very flammable.

 

I don't know what eyewitnesses you are going by, those are just pictures with no accounts. The majority of eyewitness accounts, usually by pilots, in the material dating to WWI was that the plane caught fire, or the pilot slumped forward, or the wings separated or folded, and it went plummeting down to the ground. No shattering into a milllion splinters, or the majority of it disappearing just leaving behind a few scraps and all fabric.

 

If you want WWII accounts, it depended on the angle of impact. Some aircraft hit, bounced, and skidded across the ground leaving a debri trail but didn't vaporize or turn into the majillion of pieces of the previous Il-2 series.