Jump to content

pilot tiredness throughout the length of the flight


Recommended Posts

11 hours ago, [CPT]Crunch said:

Realistic is the wrong term, call it a super good simulation of some of the effects of G.  Nothing real about a simulation, its by nature all smoke and mirrors.  Try simulating smell, than convince someone its real.

When we say realistic here...we mean as close to RL as possible without having to play an arcadish flight sim. Ofcourse its far away from RL. Imagine ppl only uses limited radios and not TS all the time or image they really care for their virtual life like they did in SEOW COOPS in old IL2. Never gonna happen again. That is "close to realistic".

Edited by =VARP=Tvrdi
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, =VARP=Tvrdi said:

Completely agree with you. Now ppl can make (again) some crazy maneuvers basicaly without real punishment and super speedy low turn and burn circus is back in MP.

All they needed is to tone down g effects and not to go in the other extreme. They did the same thing with visibility before (from extreme to extreme), but last fix with "middle solution" made a good compromise.


The data shows there is a very high tolerance for the initial maneuver in a fresh state.  Up to 9 seconds at 7G-8G-9G. For high instantaneous Gs the limit is on the airframe rather than the pilot. After this initial happens then the pilot starts getting affected by the high G and get exhausted, that's when you see the following black out / G-loc at lower G levels.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this topic is slowly turning in to a similar post way back when the folks were asking about modelling the engine failures due to manufacturing defects and the state of the local mechanics serving the aircraft at the AF next to the front lines. :)  Too much of uncertainty and lack of any empirical data other than some basic anecdotal evidence.

 

I'm with you guys and I think my quest for the WWII authenticity should take a completely different path.

 

cheers

dw.

 

edit: granma

Edited by 69th_Didney_World
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, 69th_Didney_World said:

 

I'm with you guys and I think my quest for the WWII authenticity should take a completely different path.

 

 

The quest for total accuracy in a sim ultimately devolves into a nitpick fest by trying to quantify real-world limitations into game-world data. The end result to absolute realism would, I imagine, be equally unfun for players as well as developers.

 

What I've often dreamt of instead, is a WWII role playing game that psychologically puts you in the shoes of a pilot or soldier, mainly by presenting you with difficult choices in and out of combat. This would allow for a truer exploration of how it feels to be in that situation, without having to express those feelings in cold data representations as you would in a sim.

 

Like, for example, the old Telltale games. There wouldn't be sim-style combat in such a game, but there could be on-the-rails depictions of combat with plenty of realism on display.

 

*edit: I'm not demeaning sims (even though it sounds like I just did). What I'm saying is that I play sims for one experience, and I'd want an RPG for another facet of the war experience. In a fantasy world, we'd have one gigantic, sprawling epic game that combined roleplay elements with sim elements. But in reality, hybrid attempts like that rarely work, both for development reasons as well as simple budget limitations.

Edited by oc2209
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/7/2020 at 6:18 PM, 216th_LuseKofte said:

I liked the new g effect. But ai Stukas now dive into ground for no reason in qmb. 
Anyone else noticed? 
 

 

Yes. I've observed a lot more crashes in SP in the last days. Complete groups of bombers went down simultanously.

Link to post
Share on other sites

if things are too "gamey" for you, then go and a fly a damned real plane, ffs. 

 

This is a damned game, not a 100% real life simulator used by real life military to test their future pilots.

 

As other said, extreme realism kill fun.

 

Luckily, devs won't do this anyway

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2020 at 9:37 PM, Mollotin said:

I have no experience of flying a plane so i base my statements on the info in the DD regarding the G force update.

 

If u read the DD they explain very well the reasons behind certain G effects and there is multiple actual tests that the new model is based on.

 

If u trust that the research data is correct, then i see no way how someone could claim that current model is not realistic.

 

 

Can everyone please take a step back and appreciate this post.

 

I find it astounding that people can berate others with their own ideas with absolutely no evidence, life experience, or scientific data to back up their arguments.

 

The sim has been striving to use scientific data to get the closest realistic experience as possible.

 

Of course share your own opinions on the matter, but don't chastise each other over it.

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

I find it astounding that people can berate others with their own ideas with absolutely no evidence, life experience, or scientific data to back up their arguments.

 

I'm guessing you don't know many people nor have been on the internet for very long. :)

  • Haha 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Just dropping this here.

 

Devs got the current G system pretty well done, the pilots in here, who is test pilots, struggles quite allot in his G's. Very similar to our current itereation of G's. 

 

I don't say this often, but good work, Il2 Team :good:

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it is fine right now, taking care of tiredness while flying sounds more like a chore than an interesting gameplay addition. Maybe I would like to see tiredness in campain and career modes to model the strain that soviet pilots had at the beggining of the war like in Moscu and german pilots at the end like in Bodenplate that could make them less resistent to the current G model and physiological effects, but that would be all. Nothing to add in single player missing of multiplayer.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of us suffer from fatigue in every day life and every time we get into a virtual cockpit is a challenge to stay aware of what is going on and not to fall asleep from exhaustion on a long flight - adding more artificially would be just plain sadistic!

 

edit: you have to remember that it is in the end a game, sold for entertainment and not to train future fighter pilots.

Edited by Johnny_Dioxin
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Johnny_Dioxin said:

Some of us suffer from fatigue in every day life and every time we get into a virtual cockpit is a challenge to stay aware of what is going on and not to fall asleep from exhaustion on a long flight - adding more artificially would be just plain sadistic!

Honestly sounds like you should be sleeping/resting rather than playing video games if you are getting to that point. 😵

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/16/2020 at 6:36 AM, Cpt_Siddy said:

 

 

Just dropping this here.

 

Devs got the current G system pretty well done, the pilots in here, who is test pilots, struggles quite allot in his G's. Very similar to our current itereation of G's. 

 

I don't say this often, but good work, Il2 Team :good:

Then I am doing something wrong apparently, because my 190 pilot blacks out really quickly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, D3adCZE said:

Then I am doing something wrong apparently, because my 190 pilot blacks out really quickly.

 

Don't want to advertise anything here, but maybe you should try and get a Jetseat. This helped me a lot, even before the G system was implemented in our sim.

With this device you will have many cues that will help you fly much more coordinated and you will feel things like stalls, g-load etc., things you won't notice in

front of a monitor or VR early enough. Besides of immersion, this form of "tactile" input you get is great. Have a look here:

 

 

Cheers

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Johnny_Dioxin said:

You have no idea of my health situation

 

Yes he does.....you told us here;

 

On 11/17/2020 at 1:50 PM, Johnny_Dioxin said:

Some of us suffer from fatigue in every day life and every time we get into a virtual cockpit is a challenge to stay aware of what is going on and not to fall asleep from exhaustion on a long flight

 

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, D3adCZE said:

Then I am doing something wrong apparently, because my 190 pilot blacks out really quickly.

 

Modern fighter pilots have much better equipment, like g-suits, better gas masks and especial training like having excellent phusical condition and tense the stomach. Without those things, I think most people would black out at 5-6 g, and couch potatos like me, probably at 3 or 4. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/19/2020 at 1:57 AM, BinakZaino said:

 

...Without those things, I think most people would black out at 5-6 g, and couch potatos like me, probably at 3 or 4. 

 

Are you kidding? I black out at just 1G... usually every Friday night!

 

Edited by Stoopy
  • Haha 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2020 at 9:10 PM, 69th_Didney_World said:

My goal is after the authenticity. The models can be realistic but can also convey very little of authenticity. This isn't directed at a G force modeling, but at the overall representation of the pilot's physical and psychological state during the mission, dog fight, etc.

I'm convinced that the new physiology model is a huge step in the right direction. IMO, the effects of most of the other factors you mentioned (length of mission, open canopy, exhaust fumes etc.) would be overshadowed by the effects of fatigue induced by the applied stick forces over time. It's not critical to develop every minute aspect of flying a warbird. Covering the key aspects is what makes a sim shine.

 

IMO, the next big leaps forward in the physiology department are the implementation of fatigue due to stick forces, and a more realistic pilot damage model. I've submitted requests for both models years ago.

The former can be achieved by integrating stick forces (which are already modeled in-game) over time, and coupling that to the recently added pilot stamina calculation. The stamina, however, would not only dictate the g tolerance, but also the available stick forces.

The pilot damage model improvement would call for the calculation of fluid dynamics. The effects of blood loss (total amount as well as loss rate) on human physiology are well established. A simplified yet plausible model, which would also be connected to the stamina, g tolerance, and stick forces models, would be unique in the realm of flight simming.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly, I believe the current g modeling or pilot tiredness is B.S.!  Go into single player and if you kill the enemy real quickly you might stay coherent.  Chase the A.I. plane and you will find you can't stay with it and blackout - Yak 1b 127 vs. G6.  I am talking about turn fighting, not BnZ.  You have taken away the only offense the Yak has against the BF109 or Focke-Wolfe, to get on his tail and not let him loose, and now you just fade into an unrealistic unconscious state and you call that real and ok?  Check some of the real footage of how the Eastern Allied fought the Germans...I-16 was a turn fighter...All Yaks were turn fighters...You have made this "game" not fun anymore...Cut some slack...If the fight went on for more than ten minutes I could believe the pilot would have fatigue, and maybe some blurred sight, but the man is fighting for his life and country, and will be using everything he was taught to stay coherent.  The game is just not any fun like it is...you are too stringent with this!! 

  • Haha 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Thorns1 said:

Frankly, I believe the current g modeling or pilot tiredness is B.S.!  Go into single player and if you kill the enemy real quickly you might stay coherent.  Chase the A.I. plane and you will find you can't stay with it and blackout - Yak 1b 127 vs. G6.  I am talking about turn fighting, not BnZ.  You have taken away the only offense the Yak has against the BF109 or Focke-Wolfe, to get on his tail and not let him loose, and now you just fade into an unrealistic unconscious state and you call that real and ok?  Check some of the real footage of how the Eastern Allied fought the Germans...I-16 was a turn fighter...All Yaks were turn fighters...You have made this "game" not fun anymore...Cut some slack...If the fight went on for more than ten minutes I could believe the pilot would have fatigue, and maybe some blurred sight, but the man is fighting for his life and country, and will be using everything he was taught to stay coherent.  The game is just not any fun like it is...you are too stringent with this!! 

There is an option for simplified G modelling, turn it ON and problem solved for you.

  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2020 at 11:18 AM, [CPT]Crunch said:

G modeling is a universal thing, basically everyone responds in a similar way.  Fatigue to environmental stimuli ain't, never was, never will.  I could take a 12 hour continuous sortie in a C-141 without batting an eye, ready to run on landing, but a half hour in a Huey would literally be pissing blood with deep fatigue ready to crawl into bed.  How do you model a state for the nuances of every airframe, because they're all different.

As a former Huey pilot, I can say you're doing something wrong if you are pissing blood after half an hour... 

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...