Can we talk about how some people fly?

[Barnacles]

3 minutes ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

 

That claim comes up every now and then, but so far nobody has explained, why would anyone want to mess up his aim with such a binding and give up the benefit of having these controls on separate axis. I don't also understand, why this kind of hindering setting is called an "exploit".

It's easy to try it. It was not even that effective when the stab. changes were instantaneous. Now, with the slow rate of stab. change, it's even worse. If you see high speed 109s doing 9 g pullouts it's likely the pilot has just trimmed nose up prior to engaging.

[SCG_Tzigy]

I am not saying the sim is perfect - even tho it is pretty close ?.

 

The G effects could use some work, and the trim exploit is what it is.  Btw, I know a little about Gs, i flunked the F-16 profile twice... :)

 

I have read over the last 20-30 years anything and everything i could get my hands on in regard to WW2 air combat.  I do recall quite few WW2 pilot descriptions of extreme maneuvers that saved their live when they had an EA on their 6... even the famous Hartmann's escape...and its no surprise those did not end up as gun camera footage...

 

The -Gs need work for sure; one would think it should not be too hard to model the red-outs better... and u would not see the aggressive nose overs used as frequently

 

As far as not wanting to die in the MP when you are cornered? Unless you truly cheating, I feel you can do whatever you want...and I also agree fully with Thad above.

 

Anyway, my 2 cents..

[Ehret]

1 hour ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

That claim comes up every now and then, but so far nobody has explained, why would anyone want to mess up his aim with such a binding and give up the benefit of having these controls on separate axis. I don't also understand, why this kind of hindering setting is called an "exploit".

 

Unless you had 3rd arm you wouldn't be able to pull hard and at the same time move the stab wheel.

Useful or not it's something what shouldn't be possible in a realistic simulator.

Also, it's kind of weird why only 109s have stab wheel which can be mapped to an axis as many other planes have trim wheels too.

 

There is another legal "exploit" - set mirrors quality to "simple" and fuselage of your plane will not be reflected by them. It's possible to get a perfect backward unobstructed view in some planes that way.

 

There are more "tricks".

[Aap]

42 minutes ago, Ehret said:

Also, it's kind of weird why only 109s have stab wheel which can be mapped to an axis as many other planes have trim wheels too.

 

Well, like I said, it does not really give any benefit to have stick and trim on the same axis. What comes to "only 109s", then what prevents you in a Yak, for example, to push "trim up" button at the same time as you pull your stick? And increase prop pitch with another finger. While closing rads with third finger. And changing supercharger with forth finger. And lower flaps with fifth finger, if you feel like it. Mixture, too? In that sense, when you talk of "exploits" then the ability to control several wheels and levers with your fingertips simultanously gives you an extra "exploit" for these planes, where pilots in real life were just physically not able to do all that, compared to 109s or 190s, where all you had to use was your stick and throttle - or Kommandogerät - and everything else was automated.

[Blackhawk_FR]

3 hours ago, SCG_Tzigy said:

one would think it should not be too hard to model the red-outs better... and u would not see the aggressive nose overs used as frequently

 

What could be better for you?

 

The first thing to know about negative Gs is that you don't see red. You get a blurred vision instead. When not used to negative Gs, it's really hard to support over -4G (like, one negative push of few seconds and you can be already tired). If you push more, you may have a syncope (short loss of consciousness, just like positive Gs, but you don't get blind). The main effect of negative G is that they decrease your resistance to positive Gs (for severals seconds). But when you are trained and in a good shape, you can support -6 or -7 easily. However, not sure all WWII fighters pilots were used to often push negative Gs.

 

To me the best way to model negative G in a game would be: 

- First of all, forget this red vision effect...

- Replace it by a blurred vision effect.

- Simulate the loss of consciousness with the blurred vision + a partial loss of sound + unability to control the aircraft for few seconds. 

Edited April 17, 2019 by F/JG300_Faucon

[SCG_Tzigy]

Faucon i agree with you 100%  & I know you are a RL pilot.   

 

I should have have put redouts in quotation marks...Visual disturbance from negative Gs have been called redouts historically and for a reason..and the terminology most likely is here to stay. 

 

Blurred vision and sensory loss would be perfect

 

Maybe with a little touch of red/reddish or pink if sustained/extreme..... 

 

 

 

[Ehret]

1 hour ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

 

Well, like I said, it does not really give any benefit to have stick and trim on the same axis. What comes to "only 109s", then what prevents you in a Yak, for example, to push "trim up" button at the same time as you pull your stick? And increase prop pitch with another finger.

 

There is a difference - stab and elevator on the same stick axis track themselves automatically. Sure, you can explicitly push up the trim in the Yak but it won't track elevator down or to the neutral. You don't have ruin your aim neither with the stab trick - just map stab and elevator with modifier key/button (among your normal elevator bind) and you will be able to choose between normal and stab-trick control on demand.

 

So yes - it gives advantages at no cost if setup properly. You can evade much harder that way. You can re-trim quicker that way - just push modifier and pitch the plane to the angle you want then release it. It lowers piloting workload even further.

[Aap]

32 minutes ago, Ehret said:

There is a difference - stab and elevator on the same stick axis track themselves automatically.

 

And that clearly is a bad thing. Why would you ever want to lose the ability to trim your plane separately and also make your life harder by having a slower-responding trim wheel move your nose up or down by itself still several seconds after you have stopped moving your stick?

 

32 minutes ago, Ehret said:

You can evade much harder that way.

 

How is that? Let's say I want to do max pull up - how is it possible much harder, if the controls are on the same axis, compared to putting two separate axis to max up? It just takes away the possibility to have these axis on different settings, which can be useful.

 

Edited April 17, 2019 by II./JG77_Kemp

[Ehret]

1 hour ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

 

And that clearly is a bad thing. Why would you ever want to lose the ability to trim your plane separately and also make your life harder by having a slower-responding trim wheel move your nose up or down by itself still several seconds after you have stopped moving your stick?

 

 

How is that? Let's say I want to do max pull up - how is it possible much harder, if the controls are on the same axis, compared to putting two separate axis to max up? It just takes away the possibility to have these axis on different settings, which can be useful.

 

Shorter reaction time and easier to do than doing everything explicitly; instead just push the modifier key/button and pull. True, the stab wheel has limited turning speed but it will start to move instantly with the stick - will be ahead than doing it normally even if by a moment. That can be enough to make difference especially if you are suddenly bounced and couldn't anticipate the need to re-trim beforehand.

And you don't have sacrifice anything with parallel stab+elevator mapping with a modifier.

Other planes have build-in lower speeds for their virtual trim wheels too but they don't have the option to bind them to an axis.

 

Overall it may not change that much but it's still unfair.

Edited April 17, 2019 by Ehret

[Tony_Kito]

2 hours ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

But when you are trained and in a good shape, you can support -6 or -7 easily.

 

""""""""""""""""""""Easily"""""""""""""""""""""""""

 

FAA considers -5G sustained to be the absolute limit anyone can sustain before incurring severe and possibly irreversible damage to a person's eyes, eyelids and brain due to hemorrhaging and swolen blood vessels.

 

My Source: http://www.avstop.com/ac/ac91-61.html

 

Your source: Your behind, it seems.

Edited April 17, 2019 by Tony_Kito

[/top_lad/CaptainJack]

3 hours ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

 But when you are trained and in a good shape, you can support -6 or -7 easily.

Maybe if you wanted to die instantly

[Motherbrain]

Just do what I do and don't play multiplayer. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Blackhawk_FR]

51 minutes ago, Tony_Kito said:

Your source: Your behind, it seems.

 

I'm used to take -7G. That's my source 

[Tony_Kito]

4 minutes ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

I'm used to take -7G. That's my source 

 

Ah I see, so it's anecdotal and of no value, gotcha.

[/top_lad/CaptainJack]

9 minutes ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

 

I'm used to take -7G. That's my source 

Holy crap a ghost

[Blackhawk_FR]

3 minutes ago, Tony_Kito said:

 

Ah I see, so it's anecdotal and of no value, gotcha.

 

As far as I know every aerobatic aircrafts has an accelerometer so you know how much Gs you take per flights. 

Extra330SC is certified +10/-10.

In unlimited aerobatics it's common to take +7/-6. Somes take a bit more, somes take a bit less. 

 

Here is an (extreme) example of a -9G push: 

 

 

[Tony_Kito]

5 minutes ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

Here is an (extreme) example of a -9G push: 

 

Alright, fair enough, but it seems much more like a maneuver where it has an instantaneous -9G element and a less pronounced sustained negative G.

 

But I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that ok, maybe perhaps -7G sustained is """easy""", but acrobatic pilots are not the same as fighter pilots. The same way athletes and soldiers are different, I don't believe the G tolerance of a modern day acrobatic pilot can be compared to that of your run of the mill fighter pilot in the 1940s, specially considering the absence of G-Suits and, as was the case with the VVS and RAF at the onset of the war, rushed pilot selection and training.

[ZachariasX]

7 hours ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

Here is an (extreme) example of a -9G push: 

What makes you think this push is -9G?

 

You can‘t really train negative G resistance, you don‘t have any muscles in your brain or eyes that compress your blood vessels. You just put yourself at risk of a stroke.

 

But you‘re saying you do -7 routinely? How long can you hold that? 

[Blackhawk_FR]

3 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

What makes you think this push is -9G?

 

Because I know the guy who posted the video. So I trust him. It's in the description btw. He was there when Renaud made this flight. The accelerometer said about +9/-9.

But as Tony Kito said, the -9G must be very short (like 1sec). 

 

3 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

You can‘t really train negative G resistance, you don‘t have any muscles in your brain or eyes that compress your blood vessels.

 

Yes you can. The more you fly, the more you push negative G, the more you resist (by contracting muscles). 

 

3 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

But you‘re saying you do -7 routinely? How long can you hold that? 

 

Not very long... few seconds. And few hard negative pushes can be enough to tire you.

The resistance to negative G will depend a lot from the guy, from his training, etc... 

[/top_lad/CaptainJack]

11 minutes ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

 

 

 

 

 the more you push negative G, the more you resist (by contracting muscles). 

 

 

What muscles stop blood vessels in your eyes, eyelids and brain exploding from too much blood pressure?

[Blackhawk_FR]

8 minutes ago, /top_lad/CaptainJack said:

What muscles stop blood vessels in your eyes, eyelids and brain exploding from too much blood pressure?

 

None but by contracting abdominals and higher (thorax), you limit the blood moving up from your legs to your head.

[/top_lad/CaptainJack]

44 minutes ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

 

None but by contracting abdominals and higher (thorax), you limit the blood moving up from your legs to your head.

That's all well and good, but Tony did actually provide a sourced claim, where as your frankly outlandish claim is merely an anecdote that we have no reason to believe.

[Blackhawk_FR]

9 minutes ago, /top_lad/CaptainJack said:

That's all well and good, but Tony did actually provide a sourced claim, where as your frankly outlandish claim is merely an anecdote that we have no reason to believe.

 

Ok, give me an hour...  

[SCG_Tzigy]

 

1 hour ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

 

None but by contracting abdominals and higher (thorax), you limit the blood moving up from your legs to your head.

 

That is simply not correct. You certainly can train and be more adapt to -Gs. But this is not the physiology.

Any good Flight Surgery textbook/manual will explain.

Edited April 18, 2019 by SCG_Tzigy

[ZachariasX]

Accelerations < 1 sec are surely a different thing than constant (say > 5 sec) ones. It is plausible that muscle contractions reduce blood flow upwards as well if it is only for such short time. G meters are sensitive to spike loads. Still impressive. Certainly not how you would see in warbirds. Stick forces would certainly be too high at speeds allowing such high g maneuvers like that.

 

I missed the fact that Renaud died in a crash, tragically along with his family during a flight with his private plane. So no matter how good you are as a pilot and no matter how many g‘s you tolerate, one really, really should read the weather bulletin before the flight. RIP.

 

Edited April 18, 2019 by ZachariasX

[Blackhawk_FR]

32 minutes ago, SCG_Tzigy said:

That is simply not correct. You certainly can train and be more adapt to -Gs. But this is not the physiology.

Any good Flight Surgery textbook/manual will explain.

 

Well this is just how I feel when I try to resist to those horrible negative Gs. 

As ZachariasX said, it's also a question of how long you have to sustain those G. In the aerobatics I practice, it's very short (few seconds). 

 

 

1 hour ago, /top_lad/CaptainJack said:

where as your frankly outlandish claim is merely an anecdote that we have no reason to believe.

 

 

Anyway... to go back to the subject. Most of aircraft we have in IL2 (especially La5FN for example) don't have enough elevator authority to take so much negative G. 

For sure, after a negative push of just few seconds, pilot should be less resistant to positive G after (for a short moment). 

 

35 minutes ago, ZachariasX said:

So no matter how good you are as a pilot and no matter how many g‘s you tolerate, one really, really should read the weather bulletin before the flight. RIP.

 

It's a bit more complicated of course. He completely knew the weather. Problem is, with his experience, he was completely able (and so not scared) to fly in bad weather. The radar trajectory showed that he was doing a perfect descent path through heavy clouds before the crash. He had no GPS, he though he had passed the mountains...

[RedKestrel]

20 minutes ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

 

 

It's a bit more complicated of course. He completely knew the weather. Problem is, with his experience, he was completely able (and so not scared) to fly in bad weather. The radar trajectory showed that he was doing a perfect descent path through heavy clouds before the crash. He had no GPS, he though he had passed the mountains...

Just like how most of the people who drown are strong swimmers. Sometimes being good at something means you have the ability to get into much worse situations than your average person.

[Blackhawk_FR]

Exacly, unfortunatly... 

[/top_lad/CaptainJack]

1 hour ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

 

Well this is just how I feel when I try to resist to those horrible negative Gs. 

As ZachariasX said, it's also a question of how long you have to sustain those G. In the aerobatics I practice, it's very short (few seconds). 

 

 

 

 

Anyway... to go back to the subject. Most of aircraft we have in IL2 (especially La5FN for example) don't have enough elevator authority to take so much negative G. 

For sure, after a negative push of just few seconds, pilot should be less resistant to positive G after (for a short moment). 

 

 

It's a bit more complicated of course. He completely knew the weather. Problem is, with his experience, he was completely able (and so not scared) to fly in bad weather. The radar trajectory showed that he was doing a perfect descent path through heavy clouds before the crash. He had no GPS, he though he had passed the mountains...

Go see a doctor immediately if you sustained -7G

[Blackhawk_FR]

So we are few hundreds people in the world who need to see a doctor...

[RedKestrel]

5 minutes ago, F/JG300_Faucon said:

So we are few hundreds people in the world who need to see a doctor...

I mean, you're alive, but you're posting on a flight sim forum. So, like all of us, it's clear you're no longer all the way there.

Myself, I'm beyond help. Negative Gs would just be the icing on the cake.
 

[Blackhawk_FR]

5 hours ago, Krisu said:

In CloD your virtual neck/head moves when you roll harshly and you lose the sight for a moment, this effect isn't present in BoS

 

And it's a very good thing (that is not present in BoX), because the head is very far from moving that much even with stronger roll rates. 

[[110]xJammer]

On 4/17/2019 at 12:08 AM, /top_lad/CaptainJack said:

If you think you're a good pilot you're more likely not

 

Talk about being patronising 

 

On topic though, without a video from the OP the discussion is pointless. We could have a full range starting from a newbie getting outraged at non-AI evasive from a competent player to an actual pilot meeting one of the stick jerkers. 

Edited August 5, 2019 by [110]xJammer