Jump to content


Photo

Could we please get a field mod option to replace german 20mms with mg17?


  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#41 JtD

JtD
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2420

Posted 04 January 2017 - 14:51

Hm, German aircraft came with a stressed skin construction, which was proven to be both lighter and more damage resistant than some steel tube framework. Additionally, the German safety factor of 1.4 is against plastic deformation, not against failure. So while you might see a German aircraft bending a spar at 1.7 times the load, it won't have parts fly off or disintegrate.

The same stressed skin approach was used on the wings, at least that of the 190. It used stressed skin in place of a strong wing spar - retaining strength, increasing damage resistance, at a lower weight. If you don't know that, you'll just look at the puny spars and think it's weak.

And WRT damage, plywood sucks in comparison to aluminium.

Imho, Han oversimplifies here, might even be wrong.
  • 0

Facts are the best defence against the experts.


#42 216th_Jordan

216th_Jordan
  • Founder
  • Posts: 1310

Posted 04 January 2017 - 16:48

Hm, German aircraft came with a stressed skin construction, which was proven to be both lighter and more damage resistant than some steel tube framework. Additionally, the German safety factor of 1.4 is against plastic deformation, not against failure. So while you might see a German aircraft bending a spar at 1.7 times the load, it won't have parts fly off or disintegrate.

The same stressed skin approach was used on the wings, at least that of the 190. It used stressed skin in place of a strong wing spar - retaining strength, increasing damage resistance, at a lower weight. If you don't know that, you'll just look at the puny spars and think it's weak.

And WRT damage, plywood sucks in comparison to aluminium.

Imho, Han oversimplifies here, might even be wrong.

 

Maybe if there was a confusion (language barrier and such) it might be good to bring those sources you talk about. Your 1.4 / 1.7 example could be a point that needs to be checked again.


  • 0

System Specifications:        I4820k - overclocked to 4.6 GHz    |    16 GB DDR3 Ram - 1600 MHz      |      Gtx 1070

Operating System/Apps:     Windows 10      |       TrackIR v5.4       |       T.A.R.G.E.T. profile (Hotas Warthog)

Hardware:                          ProFlight Rudder pedals      |      HOTAS Warthog       |        TrackIR with LEDclip


#43 303_Kwiatek

303_Kwiatek
  • Founder
  • Posts: 975

Posted 04 January 2017 - 16:52

So Russian fighters got somewhere worse performance then German ones in BOS so have to be much more resistant to cannons/mgs fire becasue were made from wood?


  • 0

#44 kendo

kendo
  • Founder
  • Posts: 401

Posted 05 January 2017 - 15:40

no...?


  • 0

#45 Venturi

Venturi
  • Founder
  • Posts: 737
  • Location:California

Posted 05 January 2017 - 17:02

You guys would love that unrealistic DCS with 30 mike mike hits not doing much at times and at others, disintegrating airframes in a hit or two. 


Edited by Venturi, 05 January 2017 - 17:05.

  • 0

#46 303_Kwiatek

303_Kwiatek
  • Founder
  • Posts: 975

Posted 06 January 2017 - 17:58

DCS got actually simplificated DM expecially for AI but it probably change at least with WW2 planes in the future.

 

Yes some Russian planes got 2 main spar in the wing so wing construction could be generally stronger but it doeasnt change fact that rest construction of these planes wasn't more resistant to damage then metal constructions or as JtD could be even opposite.

 

Actually it looks that all Rusian planes are far more resistant to damage from cannons fire then German ones which not nessesery historical. 


  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users