Force G Allies X AXIS

[JG300_Faucon 528]

37 minutes ago, 334th_Hartmann said:

Those pilots who use the stabilizer in a way that wasn't implemented in real life, assigning it to the joystick or other control to gain obscene elevator authority, performing high speed "slice backs" etc without blacking out ofcourse 😉, 

 

High speed slice back? what is it?

Be more precise about what you are describing please. It is normal to adjust your stab during combat. 

[334th_Hartmann 9]

2 hours ago, JG300_Faucon said:

 

High speed slice back? what is it?

Be more precise about what you are describing please. It is normal to adjust your stab during combat. 

Google will explain to you what a "slice back" is Faucon, 

Initiating the climbs before wing overs or stall turns at high speed are other maneuvers seen done by 109 pilots who exploit the stabilizer, 

Whilst I agree it is normal to adjust the stab during combat, it isn't normal to have it assigned to your joystick and adjusted on the fly the same your elevator is. 

The result in game is a sharp climb or turn achieved at high speed which can't be followed by anything allied. 

[JG300_Faucon 528]

5 hours ago, 334th_Hartmann said:

The result in game is a sharp climb or turn achieved at high speed which can't be followed by anything allied. 

 

Did you actually tried it by yourself, before talking about that -supposedly- super advantage?

Edited February 6 by JG300_Faucon

[ITAF_Lynx11 22]

9 hours ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Pilot behavior to Gs are independent of plane type (the one connection is what Gs one plane can do other can't for example I can do max 4G in camel but 11 in Tempest), only pilot is , which dependents to pilot fatigue and if pilot is using  G suit , that's all. If any mistake is in code it has to be in pilot not  in the plane. 

 

Sorry but it is not true.

Plane type can make huge difference. how? with G onset rate. aircraft design and aerodinamics make the difference in G onset rate. also seat position and inclination can make the difference.

The symptoms that result from high G exposure are dependent on the rate of onset of the acceleration. When the onset is gradual (about 0.1 G per sec.), visual symptoms precede GLOC. If the onset is rapid (1 G per second or more), GLOC can occur without visual warning.

 

The problem I'm having with this game is that you can not manage the visual warnings. sometimes even if you have some gray vision and you stop or even unload the pull you get anyway the GLOC... this is not "realistic".

Edited February 6 by Lynx11

[1PL-Husar-1Esk 1136]

22 minutes ago, Lynx11 said:

 

Sorry but it is not true.

Plane type can make huge difference. how? with G onset rate. aircraft design and aerodinamics make the difference in G onset rate. also seat position and inclination can make the difference.

The symptoms that result from high G exposure are dependent on the rate of onset of the acceleration. When the onset is gradual (about 0.1 G per sec.), visual symptoms precede GLOC. If the onset is rapid (1 G per second or more), GLOC can occur without visual warning.

 

The problem I'm having with this game is that you can not manage the visual warnings. sometimes even if you have some gray vision and you stop or even unload the pull you get anyway the GLOC... this is not "realistic".

I was referring how it is in the game not how it outside simulation  ,btw first hear of "g onset rate" . 

[ITAF_Lynx11 22]

In game there is difference in G onset rate. Spit is different than 109. Try to dive and at same speed pull full back stick. You will see a difference in GLOC between the aircraft G onset rate. I'm pretty sure there is a difference in G onset rates in all aircrafts (at least I hope, otherwise it is far from simulation...).

We should have this info from Devs.

Anyway the GLOC is not properly replicated since in RL if you experience gray vision you can always ease the pull and manage the symptoms. 

The real risk in RL is with high G onset rates where you do not pass to gray vision and you lose immediately consciousness.

[JG7_X-Man 288]

12 hours ago, kendo said:

..This could be completely wide of the mark, and i'm not pushing for one side or another in this discussion, but i find it fascinating to contemplate the possibly deeper issues behind what initially seems to be just a strange, unexplained discrepancy in a flight-sim. (and it may still be just that)       

 

I think this video sums it it perfectly - everyone theirs is the best LOL

 

https://youtu.be/BpTrygZfC-g?list=RDBpTrygZfC-g

[kendo 423]

Interesting that right at the start of that video, the consensus is that the Spitfire was much more benign when getting near the stall, and so Spitfire pilots would feel able to push the limits  more than 109 pilots - exactly the opposite conclusion of the pilot in the link i posted yesterday.

 

 

[AndyJWest 1805]

8 minutes ago, kendo said:

Interesting that right at the start of that video, the consensus is that the Spitfire was much more benign when getting near the stall, and so Spitfire pilots would feel able to push the limits  more than 109 pilots - exactly the opposite conclusion of the pilot in the link i posted yesterday.

 

 

 

There is quite enough anecdotal evidence to conclusively prove that every aircraft can outperform all the others.

[JG7_X-Man 288]

12 hours ago, AndyJWest said:

 

There is quite enough anecdotal evidence to conclusively prove that every aircraft can outperform all the others.

 

I agree 100%!

Every aircraft has flaws/deficiencies that can be exploited in combat.The aircraft with the fewer number of these issues compared to aircraft it meets in combat in the same role is the one that can outperform the other - IMHO

 

Here is a major one in my book (affecting the Spitfire I/II and Hurricane I/II) - It is actually a Hurricane in the video, but the Spitfire I andII had the same issue:

 

Edited February 7 by JG7_X-Man