Landing the Spit MK iX with some MINOR PROBLEMS!!!

[-TBC-AeroAce]

 

They say any landing that you can walk away from is a good one (I would love to see that in an Airlines advertisement)...... and with the engine running, I think the crew chief will thank me for that.

 

But what do we think, too easy (not that it was that easy)? Posible....?

 

I am on the fence because the Spit wing always breaks at about a 1/3 hence leaving it with a bit of lifting surface left but not too sure if it should be controllable.

 

???

Edited June 11, 2018 by AeroAce

[69th_Panp]

Something very wrong with that flight model

[-TBC-AeroAce]

18 minutes ago, Panp said:

Something very wrong with that flight model

 

Can you comment on what you think is wrong?

Edited June 11, 2018 by AeroAce
Making a better question

[Eicio]

I always knew dark magic was involved in the creation of the spitfire...

 

I ***** KNEW IT !

[angus26]

I’m not sure if this entirely applies to the situation, but sometimes the damage visually is not synced up or on par with what the damage that is actually done.  (Pardon my lack of technical terms)

[[APAF]VR_Spartan85]

Oh, it’s like the Mc202 with one wing longer then the other

[[CPT]Crunch]

That's the clipped clipped wing mod, with multi computing gun sight.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Axis u will get ur gyro sight in an update or two so watch your words about it!

[unreasonable]

The wings - like everything else in BoS - come off along specific "perforated" lines: this is the outer wing damage graphic line.  If you hit the wing inboard sufficiently the next inner section will come off too. I do not have the track of this any more, but here you can make out the outer section and inner section 9 (with cannon) of a fully detatched Spitfire wing on this still. This is the Vb, but I do not suppose there is any difference, except perhaps there is also another small detachable piece at the wing tip on the IXe.  All BoS aircraft experience parts coming off along these predetermined lines.

 

 

Edited June 12, 2018 by unreasonable

[novicebutdeadly]

7 hours ago, Panp said:

Something very wrong with that flight model

I know what you mean:

[Legioneod]

2 hours ago, unreasonable said:

The wings - like everything else in BoS - come off along specific "perforated" lines: this is the outer wing damage graphic line.  If you hit the wing inboard sufficiently the next inner section will come off too. I do not have the track of this any more, but here you can make out the outer section and inner section 9 (with cannon) of a fully detatched Spitfire wing on this still. This is the Vb, but I do not suppose there is any difference, except perhaps there is also another small detachable piece at the wing tip on the IXe.  All BoS aircraft experience parts coming off along these predetermined lines.

 

Just wish it was more dynamic or at the very least looked better. The nice clean cut line is kinda ugly, I'd rather a mangled mess.

 

Something like Dover would be nice (though dover still has that ugly line I think). Visually dovers damage model still looks the best, though I think BoX has better graphics overall.

 

Sry for the OT post.

Spoiler

 

 

[unreasonable]

I agree - but I think much of the problem is over familiarity. Even most experienced aces of WW2 would not have seen more than a hundred or so planes being shot down - and most of them far fewer than that.  There are people here in MP who must have seen thousands, and have time to linger over their prey's misfortune or play it back in videos and tracks.   

 

Whatever the developers do we are going to start noticing  these artifacts - at some point you have to say that the DM is "good enough" and move onto something that really needs work - such as revenue raising content (or the AI !!!!)

 

Then you have people landing their damaged Spitfires - which even with 2/3 of a wing removed still have about the same wing loading as an intact 109 - so it is feasible. But if I were to stand behind the pilot with a loaded revolver and told him that I would pull the trigger if he died in a crash landing or bailed out too low: I doubt we would be watching any of these videos claiming the Spitfire FM is "bugged".  If you were high enough to bail you would bail.  

 

It is a generic problem for this game - people are sometimes using it in a grotesquely unrealistic fashion and then claiming that the results are not realistic.   IMHO this is not the game's problem, but that of some of the users.  

[Feathered_IV]

I don't think there is a single flight sim out there that doesn't have unusual one wing behaviour. 

[danielprates]

10 hours ago, novicebutdeadly said:

I know what you mean:

 

Those are some impressive images!  Still,  it seems that on those cases the wing area loss was much more marginal (well... less dramatic  anyway,  although any loss is a bad o e).

 

I too think there is no way that spit would have remained in flight with that much area loss,  for assimetry reasons. Think of it: just some rudder usage is enough to raise a wing due to the outer wing being travelling faster,  hence,  generating more lift. How about one wing having something like TWICE the lift on the other side?  It should render the plane uncontrolable,  me thinks.

Edited June 12, 2018 by danielprates

[unreasonable]

The Spitfire wing has IIRC 6 degrees of dihedral. When you side slip using rudder, the leading wing's effective AoA  is increased, and the trailing wing's reduced, which is why you would normally have to use aileron to keep the leading wing from rising if you wanted to slip wings level. This works in the game too - if you put on right rudder and keep ailerons absolutely flat the leading left wing will rise. 

 

So side slipping with the damaged wing leading will reduce the asymmetry in lift from the missing wing section, although in this case you will also have to use aileron to stop the trailing undamaged wing from rising.    Whether side slip and aileron can give enough effect to counteract the asymmetry in lift someone would have to calculate.  The FM obviously calculates that it is possible: someone who thinks this is wrong needs to do the maths and show that it is not.   I do not think that just looking at it and giving an opinion is especially convincing. 

 

If the pilot can maintain control at the moment the wing is damaged, he can probably maintain control for a while.  This particular damage effect has not happened to me yet, although I have lost one entire wing to ground fire: it certainly cannot be flown like that!

Edited June 12, 2018 by unreasonable

[AndyJWest]

It is also worth noting that (like a lot of WW2 aircraft) the Spitfire wing has a twist from root to tip - the tip is at 2 1/2º less incidence than the root, moving the centre of lift inwards. As I noted in the other thread discussing this issue (https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/37196-spitix-fm-and-dm-bugs/?page=2&tab=comments#comment-628734), the AI manages to control a 'half-wing Spit IX' at normal speeds, but runs out of aileron authority if it slows down to land, since it doesn't try to side-slip.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

21 minutes ago, unreasonable said:

 

If the pilot can maintain control at the moment the wing is damaged, he can probably maintain control for a while.  This particular damage effect has not happened to me yet, although I have lost one entire wing to ground fire: it certainly cannot be flown like that!

 

I completely believe that the spit could fly with a third of the wing and all the other aircraft for that matter if they started in a state of zero roll acceleration. 

 

What I question (not at all saying the FM is wrong) is why the initial roll acceleration for the spit when it loses it wing is highly damped, allowing for the pilot to maintain control?

 

All the other aircraft have such a large undamped roll acceleration/force after losing wing area that gives the pilot no chance to gain control and once that happens there is no recovering.  I think the Spit also will not recover if it goes into a spin with wing missing as well.

 

 

Edited June 12, 2018 by AeroAce

[VesseL]

All the IRL pictures I have seen shows there is still about half of the wing left. Flying only 1/3 wing left is possible I guess too. And in this video Ace sent the wing is cut about half. Both flaps are still working. I believe that at half the wing its possible to do IRL what Ace did in the video, but 1/3 wing left, i think its impossible. But what do I know, just guessing.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

7 minutes ago, VesseL said:

All the IRL pictures I have seen shows there is still about half of the wing left. Flying only 1/3 wing left is possible I guess too. And in this video Ace sent the wing is cut about half. Both flaps are still working. I believe that at half the wing its possible to do IRL what Ace did in the video, but 1/3 wing left, i think its impossible. But what do I know, just guessing.

 

You are never gonna let me escape with wing missing now you know I can land it! NOOO OOO! !!!!

[Sgt_Joch]

there is also the story of a F15 which managed to land with the whole right wing missing.

 

https://theaviationist.com/2014/09/15/f-15-lands-with-one-wing/

 

 

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Just now, Sgt_Joch said:

there is also the story of a F15 which managed to land with the whole right wing missing.

 

https://theaviationist.com/2014/09/15/f-15-lands-with-one-wing/

 

 

 

Yeah but that thing has a computer flying it.

[unreasonable]

44 minutes ago, AeroAce said:

 

I completely believe that the spit could fly with a third of the wing and all the other aircraft for that matter if they started in a state of zero roll acceleration. 

 

What I question (not at all saying the FM is wrong) is why the initial roll acceleration for the spit when it loses it wing is highly damped, allowing for the pilot to maintain control?

 

All the other aircraft have such a large undamped roll acceleration/force after losing wing area that gives the pilot no chance to gain control and once that happens there is no recovering.  I think the Spit also will not recover if it goes into a spin with wing missing as well.

 

 

 

As AndyJWest points out, the wing washout means that the lift is not simply proportional to the area - you would have to measure the missing part as a % of the whole wing's area, but also adjust for the washout.  So the initial roll acceleration may be much less than you think.

 

btw, has anyone actually measured the area of the two pieces yet?  Except me that is: place a grid over the wing and count squares, I make the outer section approx 58% of the area of the outer + inner sections.  It looks more since it is much longer, but this is an illusion.  This ignores the area under the wing fillet, and does not take into account washout: so I would say that losing the outer section is much more likely to lose 50% of one wing's lift than 2/3, and maybe considerably less. 

[Cpt_Cool]

Also remember that the lift profile is semicircular from wingtip to wingtip, so even if you lose the outer 1/3 of the wing, you are losing much less than 1/3 of the lift that wing provides.

[AndyJWest]

4 minutes ago, Cpt_Cool said:

Also remember that the lift profile is semicircular from wingtip to wingtip, so even if you lose the outer 1/3 of the wing, you are losing much less than 1/3 of the lift that wing provides.

 

The lift profile of a wing is approximately semicircular, true. As will be the profile of the remaining part of the wing. And lower aspect ratio wings are less efficient. Not that it matters really since the issue isn't 'losing lift', but losing control.

[VesseL]

Even thou this doesnt affect the game play its good finding. There are atleast 2 other video that is about the same thing, spit flying suspisious way. I think Spit is fine the way it is now. So do all the other planes i have flown. Yak 7 is ok now, so is 109, even G-2 turn better now. I could swear that 3.003 or 3.002 did change FM. And for the better.