Jump to content
stupor-mundi

Is physiology a bit overdone?

Recommended Posts

As a bit of context, I've not used a flight sim other than Il-2 in some years now. I've used various older sims which had, maybe badly modeled, physiology. I've got no IRL experience with flight physiology.

There was a F18 sim in the 90s which had physiology, much faster planes, and wayyy harder to actually pass out. This makes me wonder: is that mainly the effect of the better G suits which no doubt an F18 pilot has, or is the Il-2 physiology somewhat too extreme.

In particular, when I use the faster, Bodenplatte planes, in my usual, boom-and-zoom kind of way, there is this moment where I've lined up behind my victim, that plane breaks hard, right or left, which means that at the last moment I have to pull hard a little in order to execute that deflection shot. We're talking a fraction of a second, between 1/4 to 1/2 a second.

Where, before that little pull, vision was still normal, not greyscale yet.

This maneuver now tends to make the pilot pass out, for like 10 or more seconds, and it seems to me a bit extreme. Even if those are the Gs which would make a pilot pass out, *when continued for a number of seconds*, I struggle to see how the interruption of the oxygen supply for a fraction of a second would have this extreme effect.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The physiology effects are based on hard data from three different contemporary sources. If it 'feels' wrong, then it's probably because we have limited experience carting round the sky in ww2 warbirds. 

 

About your 'little pull', if you're blacking out for 10+ seconds in game, your pull was not little. 

 

A large factor is also not only how many g's are applied, but also the rate at which they are applied. Smoothly pulling 5 g's will enable you to stay conscious for much longer than an instant 'twitch' application of 5 g's. 

 

When the physiology was upgraded, several of my fellow FLAPS pilots really struggled with it, whereas I didn't. I personally believe this is down to flying style. Concentrate on flying smooth, coordinated and thinking a few 'moves' ahead of your target, and you'll soon get used to it, pass out much less, and start seeing results. 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, they should tone physiology down across the board: it punishes good pilots because they can no longer fly their planes on the limit.

This also means that turn-fighters like Yak family are now at severe disadvantage compared to energy-fighters like FW190.

  • Haha 10
  • Confused 3
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The modelling itself is probably correct. What's a problem now is the interaction between the physiology modelling and the controls and their feedback (or the lack thereof). With how sensitive controls are, it's quite easy to smash the pilot with high G without realising it. Red planes, specifically the good turners, are particularly affected by this since even small stick deflections already cause a lot of Gs and it's hard to tell whether you're already murdering your stamina or not.

 

There's also the problem of riding the border of blackout. I frankly don't believe a human pilot would be able to do it like we can in the game now.

Edited by Mauf
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, [_FLAPS_]Diggun said:

 Smoothly pulling 5 g's will enable you to stay conscious for much longer than an instant 'twitch' application of 5 g's. 

 

 

That's the thing that surprises me. I thought blacking out has to do with oxygen and the bloodstream. That's why I struggle to comprehend that a short pull can have this effect, even if the Gs are a lot. There will be some reservoir of oxygen-containing blood in the brain. And even with a lot of Gs, you can't do more than completely stopping the transport of blood, so it would seem to me that it almost doesn't matter how many Gs, as long as it's really short...

Edited by stupor-mundi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, stupor-mundi said:

 

That's the thing that surprises me. I thought blacking out has to do with oxygen and the bloodstream. That's why I struggle to comprehend that a short pull can have this effect, even if the Gs are a lot. There will be some reservoir of oxygen containing blood in the brain. And even with a lot of Gs, you can't do more than completely stopping the transport of blood, so it would seem to me that it almost doesn't matter how many Gs, as long as it's really short...

 

It has to do with your vascular system actually adjusting to the high G. So if you ease into the higher Gs, the muscles around your blood vessels can react to the sacking blood and reduce the loss of oxygen rich blood better than if the G onset was sudden and the whole supply in the head suddenly goes south. So the effect does indeed exist. About the "oxygen storage", the brain virtually has none so the effect of oxygen lack starts within a few seconds already.

 

 

Edited by Mauf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mauf said:

It has to do with your vascular system actually adjusting to the high G. So if you ease into the higher Gs, the muscles around your blood vessels can react to the sacking blood and reduce the loss of oxygen rich blood better than if the G onset was sudden and the whole supply in the head suddenly goes south. So the effect does indeed exist. About the "oxygen storage", the brain virtually has none.

Ah! Seems I have some reading to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, stupor-mundi said:

Ah! Seems I have some reading to do.

 

You can try something (be careful about it though) : When in the shower, squat down for 2-3 minutes in the warm water (which relaxes your muscles), then stand up quickly. You'll actually feel the effect of muscles not counteracting the sudden movement of blood going down. Do the same outside of the shower and you won't feel the same effect (cause your muscles aren't as relaxed). Don't overdo it though, people actually managed to knock themselves out by doing this in the shower:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, stupor-mundi said:

...

There was a F18 sim in the 90s which had physiology, much faster planes, and wayyy harder to actually pass out. This makes me wonder: is that mainly the effect of the better G suits which no doubt an F18 pilot has, or is the Il-2 physiology somewhat too extreme.

...

 

Keep in mind that modern jet pilots wear G-Suits, which are fitted with inflatable leg compression balloons that tighten against one's legs during hard maneuvers.  These enable today's fighter jocks to pull up to 9gs for prolonged periods without taking an ill timed in-flight nap.

 

Back in the big war, there were no such things. Pilots then often had to come up with their own little tricks to manage coping with anything more than 5gs. 

 

There were things like the "hick maneuver", (that staccatto breathing method of rapidly sucking in air and locking it down in your lungs with your throat swallowing muscles, audibly featured in this sim) or even more obscure individual techniques as one pilot in the Battle of Britain (forgot whom) mentioned, of tilting his neck sideways in a tight angle to prevent blood leaving his brain in too much of a hurry.

 

These practices could help a pilot build up his tolerance to around 6~7Gs. Yet I don't think they were really part of most pilot's flight training back then, at least not in the early years, and especially not in the eastern front. (perhaps the americans had it, later on?) Those were things pilots generally "picked up" on their own or from their buddies, rather than anything covered in "basic". [Citation Needed]

 

 

In any case, I wouldn't expect a pilot trained as succinctly as those of WW2 to hold more than 6gs for any longer than he could hold his breath.  Those guys didn't face the real possibility of becoming a "scrub out" in the centrifuge before even being allowed near a jet, not like they do today.

 

 

There are also many other factors that affect a pilot's G tolerance, all widely varied and diverse, including even what one had to eat (or not) that morning.

 

 

So I don't think the effects in the sim are overdone, though perhaps the tunnel-vision overlay is a bit too heavy in contrast, and could perhaps be made to darken a bit more gradually out from the center.

 

 

Remember also:   Gs = acceleration, which means, you're losing speed and energy.  Not wise in a dogfight.  Avoid passing out, and you automatically do yourself a favor in energy management

 

 

Edited by 19//Moach

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mauf said:

You can try something (be careful about it though) : When in the shower, squat down for 2-3 minutes in the warm water (which relaxes your muscles), then stand up quickly. You'll actually feel the effect of muscles not counteracting the sudden movement of blood going down. Do the same outside of the shower and you won't feel the same effect (cause your muscles aren't as relaxed). Don't overdo it though, people actually managed to knock themselves out by doing this in the shower:)

This happened to me quite a number of times, but never so far that I was actually 'out', only so far that I was 'dizzy', let's say. But I take the point. Standing up quickly is also something that's done in under a second.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, WheelwrightPL said:

Yes, they should tone physiology down across the board: it punishes good pilots because they can no longer fly their planes on the limit.

This also means that turn-fighters like Yak family are now at severe disadvantage compared to energy-fighters like FW190.

They do not punish good pilots. They punish gamers not at all interested in aerodynamics and physics. And exploit manouvers not possible in real life

  • Upvote 21

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, [_FLAPS_]Diggun said:

Smoothly pulling 5 g's will enable you to stay conscious for much longer than an instant 'twitch' application of 5 g's. 

 

No disrespect, but I don't agree with that. If you are not ready for the application of a higher g load, then an instantaneous 5 g would probably (highly probable or absolutely) lead to a faster GLOC. But even with a smooth g onset, pilots (passengers) that are not prepared/anticipating can go to sleep. There are YouTube videos of F-16 studs that do this (to be saved by their IP). Back in the day, when performing an FCF in the F-16, one of the checks was making sure the jet would pull 9 g. The parameters were airspeed above 450 KIAS (.9 Mach), roll into 90 degrees of bank and aggressively pull (think instantaneous) to the limit. If you tried to smoothly pull you might allow the jet to decelerate too quickly to achieve 9 g. It only takes one botched attempt (of only reaching 8.9 g) to get you to pull aggressively. This was the one part of the FCF that I did not enjoy...9 g hurts.

 

That's not to say your intent/message is completely wrong. With my skinny Tour de France physique, I would pump my feet (think standing on toes) and tense my calf muscles prior to snatching on the stick. In the centrifuge this technique allowed me to go to 6 g without the grunting and groaning of an anti-g straining maneuver. Some squatty body (minature sumo wrestler) with high blood pressure might not require that effort. 

Edited by busdriver
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prepared, that's the key word here, isn't it?

 

Tolerance to G forces has lots to do with being ready for when they come, as to properly resist them.

 

Yet, in a simulator, how on earth ever can you do that?  Even if there were a "push to squirm" key binding, it'd be no trivial thing to get it implemented in any way that didn't feel off in one or many ways.  A sim has to balance out the unbridgeable gaps between Virtual and Reality somehow...

 

And once again one must remember: This is a historical sim. Pilots did not get G tolerance training back then like they do today. In some parts of the war pilot training was little more than "Is airplane, flies. Is propeller, makes go forward. Is gun, point enemy, pull trigger, win war. Avoid ground.  Congrats: Is pilot now."

Edited by 19//Moach
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 19//Moach said:

Prepared, that's the key word here, isn't it?

 

Absolutely.

 

8 minutes ago, 19//Moach said:

And once again one must remember: This is a historical sim. Pilots did not get G tolerance training back then like they do today.

 

That's for sure. I was always well fed, slept in air conditioned comfort, never hung over, never got shot at, didn't see friends die in combat (lost a few when they hit the ground or another airplane), and had hours of training on the topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, No.322_LuseKofte said:

They do not punish good pilots. They punish gamers not at all interested in aerodynamics and physics. And exploit manouvers not possible in real life

 

False:  if you wanted to fly "on the edge" before physiology changes you needed to be keenly aware of the aerodynamics and physics. Much more so than now because now you simply black out before you get anywhere near physical limits of your airframe.

And besides IL2 is not "real life" because it straddles the line between realism and fun/accessability (for example the rudders are much more effective on takeoff compared to realife).

But I see your point of view too so I think there should be 3 settings in physiology: off, moderate and realistic.

  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@busdriver didn't the straight-winged T-37 even have a faster g-onset rate than the F-16? I seem to remember somebody saying/ writing it somewhere...

 

People don't realize how quickly one can bang on the Gs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation with the pilot physiology is a bit of a weird one. There's not really a perfect method of representing the effects of G-force.

Do I think the model is overdone? No. A lot of research has gone into producing what we currently have in game and trust its accuracy.

 

There's this whole toxic thing where you always get the same leading questions. "Are you a pilot?" "Were you there during WW2??" "Where is your proof?"

In reality we all experience G-force - When you're on a roller coaster, or simply just making a quick sharp turn in the car. It's a pretty common feeling and we don't really acknowledge it.

 

We CAN feel increases in G's without losing eyesight or having to clench our teeth. This starts to become complicated with IL-2 where our only indications of G effects on the pilot are blacking out or the groaning.

 

In game, the first pilot related indication of pulling G's is when we hear the pilot groan. Pull a little tighter and then you're on the verge of being unconscious.

Shouldn't we have more indication of the G's we're pulling?

Which brings us to finding a way around the problem. Maybe more sound effects? A G-force indicator in the HUD? Ideally a solution which doesn't break immersion.

 

I wish threads had less trash talking and were instead more constructive. :salute:

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 19//Moach said:

Remember also:   Gs = acceleration, which means, you're losing speed and energy.  Not wise in a dogfight.  Avoid passing out, and you automatically do yourself a favor in energy management

 

I generally fly in a very energy conserving way, always converting speed into altitude, pulling very smoothly, flying in a vertical kind of way, classic boom and zoom. I.e. I usually don't have a problem keeping the upper hand in conserving energy for quite a while. I prefer flying the slick energy conserving plane like the P51 over planes which have better accelleration or better climb or better turn.

 

But all that is for the purpose of getting the shot in the end, after having bled the opponent of energy. That moment where you're approaching fast, the opponent is breaking, and you have to pull lead in order to get the deflection shot. And getting the shot is the thing I've not been terribly good at, and which is now pretty much out of the window. Worse, when I do it anyway, the nose may still be pointing slightly downward, and passing out for a number of seconds means sticking the plane in the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Loss of consciousness to the wound is too exaggerated IMHO, not much variety on that.

Edited by 1PL-Husar-1Esk
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here we go again.

 

The data quite clearly indicates that blackout at +6gz is on the low end for an experienced pilot.

 

The issue is the following: the data we have today for human g tolerance limits is mostly for novice, recruits. A question we have to ask ourselves at the outset of this discussion is: what type of pilot do we want our in-game pilot to represent. The average recruit or a seasoned pilot. I would argue that combat performs expedient natural selection. Especially in air-combat where success probably depends heavily on your ability to perform the aircraft at its absolute limit. But that's a subjective discussion that has no right answer and we can circle jerk about "well booze this, no sleep that" etc. 

 

I will say one thing. Using relaxed g-tolerance data in these discussions is silly. If you're going to argue that a pilot doesn't know when the g's hit, aka the pilot doesn't know when he's going to maneuver hard - well, I don't know what to say. What's important is to understand how the M-1 (the predecessor to the hick- maneuver) or just straining / tensing leg muscles does to tolerance. It's been well documented that these maneuvers were part of the training for both axis and allies. 

 

I've posted a couple times in these discussions -  here's all my data if you're curious on reading yourself.

 

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a235181.pdf
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a170441.pdf
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/751397.pdf
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a196171.pdf

 

I'm going to post all the data I think is relevant from the documents above and draw some conclusion with it all combined at the end. 

 

To start, here's the average relaxed tolerance curve that is used in this game as well.

Capture.PNG.8d4d6326df97dfdc5a7c89221a480d62.PNG

Now, the effect of any g-tolerance exercise (including g-suits) affects the curve in the figure above by shifting it up as follows

Capture2.PNG.fc04f18e93e3001f7ee858eaac993d22.PNG

Hopefully, to this point, we're all on the same page. Now the remaining question is - well how much should we shift this curve up for the "average ww2 pilot." 

 

Well this becomes more difficult to do. Let's start with the first figure. The lowest blackout tolerance is somewhere in the range of 10 seconds. Let's say that's 4 g for the sake of discussion. The gradual blackout threshold is somewhere around 5.5g. 

  capture_m1_1.png.0f9e0d7fb42b1fb0a35b00f9bbe30c0e.pngcapture_m1_2.thumb.png.774985345d645f39302e72f3fb121849.png

 

So, just judicious tensing of legs and abs produces an increased  tolerance of +2Gz. Aka we need to shift that entire curve up 2 G. So know, the rapid onset  rate (ROR) gloc threshold is somewhere around 6 Gz. The gradual onset rate (GOR) tolerance should be around 7.5Gz.  Continuing onto the next excerpt, the H-1(M-1) maneuver can provide a pretty substantial +4Gz tolerance increase. In this simulator, the devs have decided that the pilots do know about the M-1. You can hear them hick when the g's hit. This shifts the curve up even higher. Specifically to a staggering +8Gz. I would assume that's probably on the top end of the g-tolerance spectrum so a +3Gz is probably reasonable. Add a g-suit to that and that gets you back to +8Gz. Add a reclined seat (like the F-16 style seat - much like what the FW190 had) that gives about another +1Gz.

Capture5.PNG.20c6a06705cc3a7b45b7605f761b9cd3.PNG

That gets you to the modern F-16 +9Gz limit. All the data that's provided in the documents above, from which these excerpts are taken, are on recruits. This is important since continued exposure to high g elicits adaptation.

Capture4.PNG.75c3a75dfeee577b373544323be75610.PNG

Unfortunately, there is no quantitative study of how much tolerance this adaptation can provide. 

 

Let me conclude now with a few videos that I made. Here are the tolerances of the pilot in the current physio model.

 

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1jmQO_dOuTkRjYBSJTTX-HLMs43SZMAxu

 

The data is collected from the game in real time. There's an output for motion support that outputs pitch, roll, yaw, Gz, Gy, Gx in real time. I used this data to track the Gs. 

 

Blackout seems to occur at about +6Gz during a GOR  pull without a g-suit, and +7Gz with suit.

 

Considering the data above indicates +2Gz tolerance increase just from tensing, I would expect the average GOR blackout limit to be quite a bit higher.  I personally think that the way the current model is set, the tolerances are certainly realistic, but seem a bit on the low end if we assume our "virtual pilot" isn't green.

 

There is also a delay in symptom onset in the game. By that I mean, if you pull really hard, for a second or two, the data shows that g-loc should not occur. However, in the current model (this happens a lot in the spit) if your pilot experiences an aggressive short pull (like the left most profile in the first figure, denoted by transient rapid) - I still notice blackouts. I think this is not correct. 

 

Second, the the current physio model does not model the tolerance decrease when switching from -Gz to +Gz. There's well documented and dangerous decrease in +Gz tolerance when oscillating between a bunt and a pull. This killed a blue angles pilot a few years back. Right now, shoving the stick forward  hard to clear your vision is almost necessary. I think this tolerance decrease should be included in the model.

 

Lastly, the arguably equally important component of human g-tolerance is fatigue. Since tolerance is strictly a function of how well you can "strain" against the acceleration. I don't know enough about fatigue due to isometric contraction to have any data for this unfortunately. I will say though, that there was a ninja tolerance change that seemed to make the pilot fatigue less quickly. So maybe that's okay where it is right now. I haven't done enough research about it. Maybe someone here knows more. 

 

Cheers

 

 

Edited by Floppy_Sock
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Floppy_Sock said:

Here we go again.

 

The data quite clearly indicates that blackout at +6gz is on the low end for an experienced pilot.

 

I'm sorry, but you keep referencing "experienced" pilot. What is an experienced pilot? If it's measured by hours/sorties flown, that does not mean that the pilot was exposed to high Gs. Do you take into account that probably most battles were not Hi-G battles and that there was no training for high G? If you measure experience by counting aerial kills, that does not mean that the pilot was exposed to high Gs. Most kills were done by surprising the opposing pilot, not by turn and burn tactics. Do you take into account the average food that troops ate at the front?

 

Just a few questions, because it seems to me that you are analyzing the model in a void, without any relation to the real situation at the front.

 

Always using turn and burn is a symptom of dogfight servers.

Edited by Raven109
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I avoided blackouts every time. Even in a Tempest dive recovery. 
It is not hard to avoid. If it is too sencitive or not is theoretic. We would not know, but we can learn to live with it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tyggz said:

There's this whole toxic thing where you always get the same leading questions. "Are you a pilot?" "Were you there during WW2??" "Where is your proof?"

 

That is because of a very good reason. On the old 2000s Il-2 "Ubizoo" forums, a lot of misinformation was being spread. And this was just so some could get their ego stroked or just for a minimal advantage on the dogfight servers. It's funny that some of the topics being discussed on this forum, have already been beaten to death on the former forums and i'm getting a "deja-vu" moment.

 

Actually, a good thing that came out of these forums was the saying "track, or it didn't happen".

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Raven109

 

We have no quantitative data about the tolerances of ww2 pilots on the front. This is the specific purpose of my second paragraph. 

 

I'm not analyzing it in a void. I'm bringing as much data as I can to the discussion. No one else is?  

 

My point with "experienced pilot" is in line with first few lines of the following closing remark from one of the documents I posted:

 

british_phys.PNG.a7ef8e18092831859f6915531c096313.PNG

 

We, (as in the devs / and or the community) need to decide what population the pilot model is representative of:  the average human or the average fighter pilot during WW2. 

 

I fully agree that the food, booze, drugs, stress, etc take their toll on g-tolerance. But I would also argue that those pilots who succeeded in ww2 air combat, were naturally capable of pushing their aircraft to the absolute limit if necessary. In other-words, if you sampled the g-tolerances of pilots who survived a fair number of sorties during the war, I would reckon that the mean g-tolerance was probably much higher than the average human. Whether that is due to their biology, to adaptation to the stress, or their ability to perform AGSM, or other reason I am not aware of. 

 

This is the circle jerk I pointed out in my second paragraph. We can debate in circles till we die about this factor or that factor that influences g-tolerances during the war. It's not constructive because it is subjective, in the sense that we have no quantitative data for g-tolerances of pilots during the war. 

 

The best we have is modern(ish) data, for certain techniques and certain situations which we can, hopefully, with some confidence extrapolate backward in time to get something close.  

 

 

 

 

Edited by Floppy_Sock
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, No.322_LuseKofte said:

Personally I avoided blackouts every time. Even in a Tempest dive recovery. 
It is not hard to avoid. If it is too sencitive or not is theoretic. We would not know, but we can learn to live with it

 

Only that some crucial information is not available to us, namely: How much G are we incurring on the pilot. The real pilots felt it quite directly and they probably had a good feeling for how far they could push themselves. 1G comfy chair doesn't do that. Without any form of feedback of how much G is being incurred (I'm not counting the pilot huffing here because it's not a measure of amount) nor what the pilots stamina is like, there is nothing to learn by frankly. So it's not a "git gud" issue in this case. There's info missing.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I simply cannot relate to your point of view. 
The accuracy you ask for simply do not exist in the rest of the sim. Parameters on all aspect of this game is based on a level of complexity not meant for a real simulator. It is meant as a combat simulator for ww2 aviation. 
Expectations are set too high for the money you are willing to pay

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Floppy_Sock said:

@Raven109

 

We have no quantitative data about the tolerances of ww2 pilots on the front. This is the specific purpose of my second paragraph. 

 

I'm not analyzing it in a void. I'm bringing as much data as I can to the discussion. No one else is?  

 

My point with "experienced pilot" is in line with first few lines of the following closing remark from one of the documents I posted:

 

british_phys.PNG.a7ef8e18092831859f6915531c096313.PNG

 

We, (as in the devs / and or the community) need to decide what population the pilot model is representative of:  the average human or the average fighter pilot during WW2. 

 

I fully agree that the food, booze, drugs, stress, etc take their toll on g-tolerance. But I would also argue that those pilots who succeeded in ww2 air combat, were naturally capable of pushing their aircraft to the absolute limit if necessary. In other-words, if you sampled the g-tolerances of pilots who survived a fair number of sorties during the war, I would reckon that the mean g-tolerance was probably much higher than the average human. Whether that is due to their biology, to adaptation to the stress, or their ability to perform AGSM, or other reason I am not aware of. 

 

This is the circle jerk I pointed out in my second paragraph. We can debate in circles till we die about this factor or that factor that influences g-tolerances during the war. It's not constructive because it is subjective, in the sense that we have no quantitative data for g-tolerances of pilots during the war. 

 

The best we have is modern(ish) data, for certain techniques and certain situations which we can, hopefully, with some confidence extrapolate backward in time to get something close.  

 

 

 

 

 

I agree with you that we don't have enough data. There are too many factors going into analyzing this, factors for which we don't have data. (e.g. average pilot physical condition, average calories intake - and I'm not talking here about the occasional missed meal - food quality on the front was not the best, how much G tolerance training a pilot received, average Gs a pilot sustained in his career - e.g. average combat style).


If we want to model the most resilient pilot, then we might as well get rid of G limits in game.

 

The question is what issue are we trying to solve here? Is it just to solve TnB tactics on a server? Can we confidently say that the prevalent tactic in war was TnB at high speed and high Gs?

 

Are we trying to solve a realism issue, or a game play issue? Can the issue be solved just by some of the players changing their play style?

 

I also agree with @Mauf, that there's not much of an indication about how many Gs the pilot is experiencing.

Edited by Raven109
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

@busdriver didn't the straight-winged T-37 even have a faster g-onset rate than the F-16? I seem to remember somebody saying/ writing it somewhere...

 

 

Doesn't sound like anything I'd heard or read...but my Tweet days were 40 years ago. I remember no G-suit, but nothing stands out about the threat of GLOC. Here's an interesting PDF that summarizes T-37 Class A Mishaps from 1972 to 2005

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just posted something and deleted it. Gonna say it in a different way...

 

People, you really need a G force indicator?

 

I never blacked out in the game, just two times: and it was on purpose, I pulled the stick very, very, hard at high speed to achieve that. But never blacked out in a normal situation.

 

I cant understand how you can black out, I mean, really. Stop pulling hard and that's it, heck, its not that difficult.

 

Actually, it's not difficult at all.

 

Actually... its really easy.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Floppy_Sock said:

A question we have to ask ourselves at the outset of this discussion is: what type of pilot do we want our in-game pilot to represent. The average recruit or a seasoned pilot.

Exactly! That's why I wish we could have some RPG-like elements in single-player career mode, where the selection of a certain character at the beginning of said career would determine, among other things, you're physiological abilities, which from should further improve with your actual misson count.

 

I'm sure that for some people here such a feature might be too "gamy", but to me it would make perfect sense.

 

One other thing I like to see is that the AI should also get more influenced by the physiological effects. Personally I'm quite happy with the way the player itself is effected, but when flying against the AI, I often feel that while I'm struggling with staying awake during a turn, the AI just happily keeps pulling G's. Or am I missing something here?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ME-BFMasserME262 said:

I just posted something and deleted it. Gonna say it in a different way...

 

People, you really need a G force indicator?

 

I never blacked out in the game, just two times: and it was on purpose, I pulled the stick very, very, hard at high speed to achieve that. But never blacked out in a normal situation.

 

I cant understand how you can black out, I mean, really. Stop pulling hard and that's it, heck, its not that difficult.

 

Actually, it's not difficult at all.

 

Actually... its really easy.

Indeed! You can easily balance on the edge of a blackout. Just need to ease off on the stick as soon as it starts to  affect your vision. You can stay in the tunnel vision stage for a while. Just don't tighten your turn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

F-18 is limited to 7.5G (even less if carrying weapons and external fuel tanks) and has modern G-suit. WW2 planes have no G limitations so of course it's easier to gloc with WW2 planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sure adds a new wrinkle to game play and one that can’t just be ignored!!! I’ve hit the ground quite hard from time to time ...the saving grace that I was out cold at the time!

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"I cant stand the G's to stay on his six, so i'll level out a bit knowing I can get back on him with my next move" is the mantra that solved my G problems (at least vs AI.)

Since it involved revisiting yoyos and other maneuvers, I suspect it applies to meat pilots too.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

It sure adds a new wrinkle to game play and one that can’t just be ignored!!!

 

It's a very interesting topic about G spots and stuff and I'm loving the conversation. So if I can sum up, one needs to fly within ones limits to avoid blackouts at all times otherwise one gets wrinkles! …. which cannot be ignored! My God! NOT THE FACE!

 

I'm gonna fly real careful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, von_Michelstamm said:

"I cant stand the G's to stay on his six, so i'll level out a bit knowing I can get back on him with my next move" is the mantra that solved my G problems (at least vs AI.)

Since it involved revisiting yoyos and other maneuvers, I suspect it applies to meat pilots too.
 


oh it applies very well to meat pilots too. It requires some patience and discipline not to pull that last little bit close to the blackout when you fight the feeling of „just a tad more and i got him“. Stay fast, you will force him to avoid your guns, he bleeds more energy until he can‘t get away at all. Sometimes takes 5 approaches but you conserved energy anyway. Also going up and around gives you that time to check SA, as dogfights attract other people ;)

and if in doubt: disengage, let him go

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, WheelwrightPL said:

Yes, they should tone physiology down across the board: it punishes good pilots because they can no longer fly their planes on the limit.

This also means that turn-fighters like Yak family are now at severe disadvantage compared to energy-fighters like FW190.

You can still be a good gamer/pilot. Just fly to planes to their limits as they are instead of trying to move the limits. In the end it doesnt matter since everyone has the same limits. Right?
I myself enjoy the limits very much as they are. No more extreme hardcore stick in stomach turns. As the limits are IMHO they increase the amount of skill you need instead of just having to pull the stick quicker.

S!

Edited by Winger
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...