Ditching in the field is now too sensitive.

[unreasonable]

8 minutes ago, jcomm-il2 said:

What does RNG mean ?

 

Random Number Generator.

[-250H-Ursus_]

1 hour ago, jcomm-il2 said:

What does RNG mean ?

Random Number Generator.

That means that the damage that you receive, could be randomly generated, and that is could be one of the reasons of why sometimes ditching outside the perimeter of any airfield, no matter your speed or what, might be lethal, no matter how good you do the ditching.

Also there is harder landings that one Krup did by example, and this guy left the plane walking. So no, is not realistic by a long shot.
 

 

Edited February 4, 2022 by -332FG-Ursus_

[messsucher]

25 minutes ago, -332FG-Ursus_ said:

Random Number Generator.

That means that the damage that you receive, could be randomly generated, and that is could be one of the reasons of why sometimes ditching outside the perimeter of any airfield, no matter your speed or what, might be lethal, no matter how good you do the ditching.

Also there is harder landings that one Krup did by example, and this guy left the plane walking. So no, is not realistic by a long shot.
 

 

 

That was a good landing.

[JG27*PapaFly]

I'm not convinced there is an issue here. I never died while landing outside airfields since the update on question, and I land in fields and on roads very often. What I see though it's that pilots who got away with sloppy landing routines now struggle a lot. Safe landing routines are key, as in RL. The choice of terrain is part of that.

[purK]

1 hour ago, JG27_PapaFly said:

I'm not convinced there is an issue here. I never died while landing outside airfields since the update on question, and I land in fields and on roads very often. What I see though it's that pilots who got away with sloppy landing routines now struggle a lot. Safe landing routines are key, as in RL. The choice of terrain is part of that.

Then you should watch the video I posted on the previous page. I purposely chose a road to ditch on because it's smoother than a random field, put flaps out, flared and touched down smoothly at the lowest speed possible before stalling. Pilot insta-dead.

[BCI-Nazgul]

 I died just landing on a dirt road.  It was a good landing too.  On an airfield I would have been fine.   Something is definitely not right at least with road landings.

[-250H-Ursus_]

3 hours ago, messsucher said:

 

That was a good landing.

So Krup landing was. And he insta died.

[357th_KW]

 

Edited February 4, 2022 by VBF-12_KW

[MeoW.Scharfi]

On 2/3/2022 at 8:31 PM, Krupnski said:

Ditching is definitely too sensitive in some situations...
 

 

 

I think that is the softest landing of them all. I have no idea how could someone die.

 

I read books about fighter pilots, in one of the books by Helmut Lipfert, the guy who bailed out and crashed his plane more than 15 times in his career.

He stalled out his plane and rammed himself into the ground and had back injuries, obv and we all would agree on that one. But he described so many crashes which is kinda like Luftwaffe blobbers 1943/44 edition, most without any injury. Also he shot down a russian Yak which crashed himself quickly on some field in a dogfight, the pilot jumped out and ran.

 

Some manuals on some planes even state that you have to do a gear up landing when landing in a field. Also its being discussed what is the best thing, flipping over is the worst case what could have happen and not landing and instantly dying by some punji traps sticking through your plane.

Edited February 4, 2022 by MeoW.Scharfi

[CUJO_1970]

Landing in the field as it is currently modeled is in need of some refinement. Do you think these guys were able to land properly into the crash?

 

1. P47 A crashed P-47D Thunderbolt (CP-X, serial number 42-75080) of the 367th Fighter Squadron, 358th Fighter Group, 9th Air Force. On it's way down the plane had hit several poles carrying the electricity supply to several properties nearby leaving them with no power for any New Year calibrations.

 

 

The pilot of the aircraft was Lieutenant Robert (Bob) H Fautt Jr.  He was hospitalised but OK.

 

2. 355th Fighter Group P-51 The pilot escaped with only scratches:

 

 

Next:

3. A crashed P-38 Lightning (CL-X_) of the 338th Fighter Squadron, 55th Fighter Group. Likely P-38J-10-LO, s/n 42-68107 that was written off in a crash landing 18 April 1944 at Wormingford, Essex, England. The pilot was Lt. Chester A. Biedul. Survived Post war: Remained in USAF, rising to Lieutenant Colonel.

 

 

 

4. Assigned to 63FS, 56FG, 8AF USAAF. 1Lt Comstock secured 2 victories and 3 x damaged in this A/C. Written off following crash-landing at Mutford due to running out of gas on return from mission. Pilot 1Lt Harold Comstock uninjured and returned to base.

 

 

Next:

5. Lt Noel Breen ran out of fuel 9 Feb '45.' This is P-51-D "Baby Jo" - Serial 44-14884 of 357th Fighter Group / 364th Fighter Squadron. Freeman's "The Mighty Eighth War Diary" : "Orbiting the field after return from the 9 February (1945) escort, one 357FG Mustang ran out of fuel. Lt Noel Breen managed to crash-land, ending up in a farmyard with the tail of his broken fighter resting against the house."
**After his service as a fighter pilot in the U.S. Air Force during WWII, he was a Systems Analyst and worked for Control Data, Inc. for 20 years before retiring.**

 

 

Anyone who says these are exceptions: I can do this all day ?

I have more of these, and for Luftwaffe as well...

 

Now, sadly of course there are fatalities:

 

Assigned to 359FS, 356FG, 8AF USAAF. Personal aircraft of Capt William C Brearley and named "Princess Jocelyn". Written off after crash landing at Martlesham Heath, 26-02-44, pilot William W Cotter killed.

 

 

 

So, in some cases though like with the P-47 crash blunt force trauma can kill the pilots...or things like not having harness properly fastened can kill the pilot just like not wearing a seat belt in a car can be fatal.

 

But, what this clearly shows also - is in real life it was quite common for pilots to survive even really bad crashes - and after hitting uneven ground, hitting trees, power lines and power poles and running into buildings...so it is easy to see that landing in the field could use some improvement.

 

 

 

Edited February 5, 2022 by CUJO_1970

[Angry_Kitten]

On 1/20/2022 at 8:27 PM, -332FG-Ursus_ said:

Well today i was dogfighting in Berloga with @dogefighter and i crashlanded with the wingtip at 350km/h almost, plane didn't flipped but did a very violent move before stop. Pilot wasn't injured a bit. Even a scratch. 
But then, he landed in front of me, in a slow approach controlling the speed and vertical speed as well, he died in a ditching waaaay softer than mine, in fact, my fuel tanks exploded due to the violence of the crash, while he died because just ditching.

Sadly i wasn't recording but is not the first time.

And i was able to replicate this, in order to post

With the current softness of the pilot to the "violent" this would be impossible to survive.
 

 

 I used to land like that first clip... usually with an airspeed of 200Km or higher... i would slide around and skid and skip. It was fun especially in the winter maps. NEVER died.   

  Yet now it is instant death at any speed

 

i did this alot,,, always lived. 

 

Now, it just kills you. 

its a model airplane landing, however when i was trying my take off routine in a spitfire vb,, i was doing that hop and skip on intitial lift off.. well that kills the pilot. 

    But dropping a apair of bombs underneath the plane set for contact, will not hurt the plane or pilot when they blow..

 

 

 

yet doing some rocket attacks in an il2, i did a short belly skid on the ground, NEVER hurt the props or the plane, the pilot lived. But i still was moving at a speed of 186km. and the bounce got me airborn. and i never actually realized i was hitting the ground when it happened.

[jdoe33]

At this point there's no need for further discussion. The current implementation is WORSE than before because there is 0 consistency. I get that before it was too forgiving with 400kp/h flip over crashes with 0 injury but now we have the opposite as prooven many times by Krup and others that the most PERFECT ditches are pilot deaths which are absolute nonsense. 

People manage to die inside their cockpit with LANDING GEAR AND AIRFRAME INTACT (force absorption where?). This is something that needs to be improved immediately or changed back to how it was. Current implementation is astonishingly horribly done. 

Edited February 5, 2022 by jdoe33

[Angry_Kitten]

i think i may have noticed the flaw in the programming for the damage model that kills us non stop. 

 

two things,   i had a flight in a hurricane that i tried a belly landing.   I had my airspeed under 80 when i hit the ground.  the funny thing is i survived just fine, i had flaps fully down, i was descending in a manner using aileron and rudder that had me land on the back half of the plane.   behind the wings hit first. i twisted around and survived. 

 

Did a repeat, and the propeller and section under the motor hit first,,, with same almost gentle drop the pilot died. 

 

It feels as if they may have extended the pilot hit box to be right under the seat 

[Guest deleted@50488]

Well, one thing I have noticed is that if I try to use my RW out-land techniques ( vacadas for those who can understand the use of the word ? ) I will not succeed in IL-2 now.

 

The best option for me to land out  in any of the aircraft, although lately I fly pretty much only the P51d, is to land with:

 

- Full Flaps ( if not damaged, specially if not asymmetric )

- Gear Up !

- In a sideslip, after bleeding as much speed as I can flying in Ground Effect, and sometimes with full crossed-controls

 

Together the 3 items abve have, so far, guaranteed successful out landings / crash landings in IL-2.

 

I find IL-2 ground physics 2nd to no other civil or combat flight simulator I have used so far. This applies not only to crash landings but also to simply taxiing, taking off or landing at an airfield.

Edited February 5, 2022 by jcomm-il2
typos

[Missionbug]

Even the AI are dying as they crash land, not just us pilots.

 

Once safely on the ground the other night I watched as another damaged Spitfire in a Kuban campaign came in to land just at the side of the runway, way so slowly, must have been slower than the normal expected for a landing, put down oh so smoothly then died, this feature really is a mess now,.

 

Is it factual?  Maybe, I guess the neck could take quite a shake and snap but it just seems way over done now.  The pilot might have been dying already from wounds I guess although the cockpit itself appeared sound enough, the wings seemed to have absorbed the bullets.

 

Health issues mean I rarely fly now but each time for all the improvements in other things many have gone backwards, wings shredding in F.C., the above, and other things that it distracts from any real enjoyment.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Well,

 

it appears to me something is probably wrong, but I believe it's not random but rather tied to some form of calculating forces applied to the pilot during dtching.

 

Please try to dicth using the technique I described above, namely, gear up, flaps full down if possible, and sideways into the ground. The more the sideforce ( in a sideslip ) the less the chance of dying.

 

I can ditch in a row, n times with success provided I sometimes have my controls almost fully crossed as I contact the surface.

 

OFC this does not apply to water landings - those appear to always kill the crew ...

[Ala13_UnopaUno_VR]

Honestly, I think you're going crazy, what's wrong with dying in a ditch? and above all outside a track NOT ENABLED for it? I say I'm going to see if I land better than Krupinski xd and if it seems the gods have been with me I only needed one attempt to see that I survived, but I really wouldn't have cared if I died, isn't this about simulating? Well, let's simulate, ditchear may or may not kill you! You might die hitting a column at 20 km/h, why wouldn't you kill yourself at 150 km/h?
I see the corral with many roosters, all of them praying not to lose their stats xd if you don't want to die, parachute or land on a base, as it should be, and if you want to ditch, then be aware that you can die or not.
Simulate go.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Exactly as the video in the post above shows, the user is landing with considerable sideslip - hence the success.

 

When the axial component is big enough, pilot seldom dies.

 

If you flip, then you always die now. Previously you could survive even the hardest flips, which didn't look quite realistic.

[-250H-Ursus_]

14 minutes ago, jcomm-il2 said:

Exactly as the video in the post above shows, the user is landing with considerable sideslip - hence the success.

 

When the axial component is big enough, pilot seldom dies.

 

If you flip, then you always die now. Previously you could survive even the hardest flips, which didn't look quite realistic.

Flipings are dangerous but some planes by design are prepared for that. Like the Bf-109s by example, and one of the best proofs i can give you is the Bf-109G-2 Black 6 Accident, pilot survived, thanks to the canopy design to.

 

Even this Spitfire XIV accident wasn't fatal, pilot was injured but not fatal. 

[Ala13_UnopaUno_VR]

I just did 5 tests in a row, on different maps with different planes, I've survived all of them.
Where is the ditching problem? I do not see it.
The same is that you do not know how to land some and if you cry.
Jokes aside, I think the ditching is correct, much better than the old one, in which if you could land with a 262 at 800km or with any plane at +450kmh and get out alive.
Now I feel that if I land off the runway, maybe I die or maybe not, in this case of 5 attempts I have survived in all, like on other occasions I die all 5 it would seem fair to me, it is a risky maneuver on land not prepared for it,
LUCKY

Edited February 5, 2022 by Ala13_UnopaUno_VR

[purK]

4 minutes ago, Ala13_UnopaUno_VR said:

I just did 5 tests in a row, on different maps with different planes, I've survived all of them.
Where is the ditching problem? I do not see it.
The same is that you do not know how to land some and if you cry.
Jokes aside, I think the ditching is correct, much better than the old one, in which if you could land with a 262 at 800km or with any plane at +450kmh and get out alive.
Now I feel that if I land off the runway, maybe I die or maybe not, in this case of 5 attempts I have survived in all, like on other occasions I die all 5 it would seem fair to me, it is a risky maneuver on land not prepared for it,
LUCKY

Have some common sense, while it's great the ditching mechanic becomes more realistic, a plausible explanation could be a bug causing deaths where there shouldn't be. My landing was with full or close to full flaps with almost neutral descent rate, yet pilot still died. Showing clips of your pilot surviving even faster landings gives me all the more evidence that there's a bug causing the pilot to die randomly, which as a tester I'm obligated to acknowledge and not simply brush it aside like you can.

[CUJO_1970]

Theses guys survived their flipping crashes too ?

 

'57366 AC- Europe- Note unexploded bombs on this Republic P-47 that flipped over taking off; slightly hurt pilot had to be dug out US Air Force photo.'

 

P-51 Mustang (OS-L) nicknamed "Baby Bet" of the 357th Fighter Squadron, 355th Fighter Group after a landing accident, 5 April 1945. '5/4/45. Pilot lightly wounded.

 

 

Landing in the field needs to be looked at. Because you can use some special technique to survive a landing in the sim does not make it realistic.

[Ala13_UnopaUno_VR]

6 minutes ago, Krupnski said:

 

I don't understand why you don't like the LUCK factor?
In life there are countless ways to die, some absurd, why not die in the dumbest way, while landing at 150km/h? on many occasions the pilots would survive and on many other occasions the pilots still left their backs, or embedded themselves inside the revi? that doesn't look good to you?
I repeat, if you don't want to lose your Stats, jump in a parachute, because there you will surely not die, if you jump on a clean plane, but if you risk trying to land off the runway, then stop thinking that you are juggernouts, the meat is soft, I'm leaving this thread, I don't think it's worth it.

Edited February 5, 2022 by Ala13_UnopaUno_VR

[purK]

There's a difference between a bug, and a luck factor. I guarantee you the devs weren't going for the latter.

Others have already said it, skill should be the primary factor, so if you still die randomly after a skillful landing what's even the point of trying?

Edited February 5, 2022 by Krupnski

[Ala13_UnopaUno_VR]

6 minutes ago, Krupnski said:

Hay una diferencia entre un error y un factor de suerte. Te garantizo que los desarrolladores no iban por lo último.

Otros ya lo han dicho, la habilidad debería ser el factor principal, así que si todavía mueres al azar después de un aterrizaje hábil, ¿cuál es el punto de intentarlo?

Are you saying that my landings are not skillful??? well I hope that the devs if they have to do a review they do it, but I also hope that it is not a preference, there are more important things in my opinion.
Enjoy flying!

[Talisman]

3 hours ago, Krupnski said:

There's a difference between a bug, and a luck factor. I guarantee you the devs weren't going for the latter.

Others have already said it, skill should be the primary factor, so if you still die randomly after a skillful landing what's even the point of trying?

 

In my experiences I am finding that skill actually is a primary factor.  Skill in the actual landing and skill in choosing the terrain is a thing.  I can also ditch some aircraft (Tempest for example) dead stick wheels down in fields and still make a good landing with no damage (not always but often).  Folks who fly WWI ac in Flying Circus get used to ditching with wheels down, lol.  Ditching is much harder in WWI Flying Circus, but it seems to me that most of the complaints about ditching are coming from WW2 ac flyers.  I find this strange.  Yes FC pilots have complained too, but not so much as in the WW2 threads it seems to me. 

 

P.S.  I looked at your landing in the vid you posted Krupnski and did not think it was a good landing.  I recommend that you try and hold your nose up a bit higher; perhaps more like a 3 point landing when the wheels are down.  Perhaps try and think about floating in a lot slower and just drag the tail a little first.  Try not to thump the aircraft down so much at speeds that are high and higher than the stall speed.  Good luck and let me know if you are able to improve. 

 

Folks should be able to improve and better their chances I would have thought. 

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

Edited February 5, 2022 by ACG_Talisman

[Denum]

46 minutes ago, ACG_Talisman said:

Folks who fly WWI ac in Flying Circus get used to ditching with wheels down, lol.  Ditching is much harder in WWI Flying Circus, but it seems to me that most of the complaints about ditching are coming from WW2 ac flyers.  I find this strange.  Yes FC pilots have complained too, but not so much as in the WW2 threads it seems to me

Yeah it's almost like the WW1 planes land at less then 100KPH or something....

 

 

Krups landing was pretty gentle. There is absolutely no reason that should have killed the pilot. 

[No.23_Gaylion]

Re: FC ditching- there's less complaints because we've simply stopped ditching as it's a death sentence.

 

Contrary to piles of anecdotal evidence stating WWI era pilots ditched or landed in fields all the time. There are many many accounts of ditching in a field, fixing the engine, then taking of again without issue-something you literally cannot do in IL2.

[purK]

1 hour ago, ACG_Talisman said:

I recommend that you try and hold your nose up a bit higher; perhaps more like a 3 point landing when the wheels are down.  Perhaps try and think about floating in a lot slower and just drag the tail a little first.  Try not to thump the aircraft down so much at speeds that are high and higher than the stall speed.  Good luck and let me know if you are able to improve.

Are you sure it was my landing you are referring to? Because I did some simple measurements, here you can see the distance from my nose to the horizon at touchdown is nearly identical to a P51 sitting in the same location on all 3 wheels. In the ditching scenario my nose is ever so slightly higher, perhaps dragging the tail a little as you say? Secondly I took a screenshot of the indicated stall speeds of a P51B from the specifications card, which you can easily test yourself to find accurate. This is also nearly identical to my ditching speed. So tell me again, aside from the slight bank angle which shouldn't make much difference considering the fuselage still hit the ground first, how was my landing bad?

P51 sitting flat on all 3 wheels:


Ditching scenario:

Edited February 5, 2022 by Krupnski

[MeoW.Scharfi]

3 hours ago, ACG_Talisman said:

In my experiences I am finding that skill actually is a primary factor.  Skill in the actual landing and skill in choosing the terrain is a thing.  I can also ditch some aircraft (Tempest for example) dead stick wheels down in fields and still make a good landing with no damage (not always but often).  Folks who fly WWI ac in Flying Circus get used to ditching with wheels down, lol.  Ditching is much harder in WWI Flying Circus, but it seems to me that most of the complaints about ditching are coming from WW2 ac flyers.  I find this strange.  Yes FC pilots have complained too, but not so much as in the WW2 threads it seems to me. 

 

In his video he posted his ditch landing where he died his variometer showed a descent of 100 ft/min. That's really smooth, it doesn't get better.

 

So i saw you people landing much worse and surviving that, even the so badass real life pilot couldn't done it better. I think there might be some bug behind this.

 

Edited February 5, 2022 by MeoW.Scharfi

[Bremspropeller]

That's 100ft/min, which is 1.67 ft/s.

[MeoW.Scharfi]

9 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

That's 100ft/min, which is 1.67 ft/s.

 

My bad, still the smoothest one.

[purK]

For some context, the average descent speed of a person in a parachute is 10-20 ft/s or 1,000+ ft/min.

[=RS=Haart]

Hi all, just adding some data from my own flights today as Pocketshaver sent me a message asking me to test some things after posts in a different unrelated post and I came up with some very weird results. A lot of the data I use for the last bit I took from TacView telemetry.

 

All aircraft were landed at around 145km/h using the landing speeds referenced here
https://aergistal.github.io/il2/
145km/h was chosen as it seemed to be the most common speed in all airframes in the middle of the landing/take-off stall speeds with full flaps extended as in the video he linked as an example.

In all 3 Spitfires (5/9/14) I managed to land tail first without killing the pilots, every nose impact resulted in a pilot death. Now using his example above (80% replica spitfire crash) with flaps out at stall speed, which is a typical emergency landing situation with gear failure, the pilot lived. 

I then tested the VVS airframes, the i-16 and La-5 Series 8/FN, and the Ya-9T. In the i-16 I was not able to successfully land the airframe with flaps out on the tail wheel without it pitching the nose forward and killing the pilot on landing.

However, in both models of La-5 and the Yak-9T, despite not having a fixed tail wheel, the pilot survived the impacts at the same landing speed of 145km/h. Finally I tested the 109e7 as it's the most fragile 109 in the game in my experience. At the same speed as the other tests, the pilot lives when landing on the tail first but dies if there's any nose over.

Here's the interesting part, in his message to me, Pocketshaver claimed to be able to make:

"ground impacts with place with flaps fully retracted, hit at that spitfires impact angle or nose first going at HUD speeds of 400+km and my plane would skid distance longer then that field he was landing in. and even if a wing got ripped off the pilot would live"

I tested this in the Mk9 spit going 380-400km/h, and landing belly flat at 380km/h the pilot is injured but not dead (AoA of 1.1 degrees, VS of 145m/min or roughly 2.4m/s the pilot lives), landing at 421km/h favouring a nose down approach (AoA of 0.9 degrees, VS of -197m/min or roughly 3m/s) the pilot dies. 

I don't claim to be a good sim pilot, and didn't test the American airframes as that wasn't in his request/in his claims, but it does strike me weird that I'm surviving landings without gear that you're not with gear.
Entire stream here
https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1288767489

Mk9 landing at 380ish KM/H and pilot living
https://www.twitch.tv/rs_hart/clip/AbnegateViscousCatTBTacoLeft-s01OaMOvM8wC9Waz

Mk9 Landing at 423km/h nose strike pilot dies
https://clips.twitch.tv/PlayfulGentleKangarooFloof-04juUcVWNFqcmoUb

 

[Guest deleted@50488]

Excellent post @=RS=Haart ! and videos !

 

Thank you for sharing. And it actually brought to live more evidence regarding that it's indeed possible to succeed landing out in IL-2 even with the new algorithm that calculates pilot survival.

 

Strangely your landings almost all exhibit no sideslip on touchdown which, in my case, has been the main key for success. I usually "deny ground" until the last possible moment and then ditch using cross controls, sometimes full cross controls. This way I always keep alive. But in most of your sequences you managed to survive with pretty much straight / coordinated "touchdowns", so, there must be other factors.

 

Would be great if developers came here and explained how they're calculating it ....

Edited February 6, 2022 by jcomm-il2

[=RS=Haart]

"Would be great if developers came here and explained how they're calculating it ...."

 

Yeah @jcomm-il2 I'm wondering if it's got to do with the nose of the aircraft or the algorithm takes into account height, speed, angle of landing and aircraft damage to determine if the pilot survives.

 

Initially I thought it was the tail wheel saving the pilot, but then when the mk14, La-5 and Yak had retractable tail wheels and proved that incorrect I started wondering if there's a "kill switch" in the engine for the pilot, that if you take impact damage to X area whether the pilot is injured on landing

[Talisman]

16 hours ago, US103_Talbot said:

Re: FC ditching- there's less complaints because we've simply stopped ditching as it's a death sentence.

 

Contrary to piles of anecdotal evidence stating WWI era pilots ditched or landed in fields all the time. There are many many accounts of ditching in a field, fixing the engine, then taking of again without issue-something you literally cannot do in IL2.

 

It seems a bit of a sweeping statement to me as I literally have done what you said cannot (apart from the fixing the engine bit, lol).  So I am stumped.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

[jdoe33]

I mean, the P-51  historically is a bad plane for ditching (is that actually modeled?). 


However, the discussion is not whether Krupnski should've died, he shouldn't and anyone with 2 working braincells would agree. He landed on a road... If it was some upwards mountain field i'd maybe dare debate but the sheer incosistency of ditches right now need to be changed. You can literally die with your full airframe having no damage standing on it's wheels and i doubt there is even the SLIGHTEST chance that a pilot could die from a landing in real life where the gear doesen't break first, unless he chose to unbuckled is seatbelt lmfao. Impact absorption is a thing you know. 

[No.23_Gaylion]

3 hours ago, ACG_Talisman said:

 

It seems a bit of a sweeping statement to me as I literally have done what you said cannot (apart from the fixing the engine bit, lol).  So I am stumped.

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

60% of the time, works every time...

 

 

Literally my second attempt at ditching while compiling videos of this bug. And before SkiLl IsSuE, I've been strictly playing ROF/FC since 2016 and this has only been a thing since the last patch. Well there was that one phase where your plane would explode the second the wheels came in contact with the ground.

 

I could gather more skill issue clips if you need more.

Edited February 6, 2022 by US103_Talbot

[CUJO_1970]

I wonder if some of you are capable to look at actual examples in photos and read the actual reports of pilots surviving really bad landings that resulted in the complete destruction of their aircraft.

 

OF WHICH THERE ARE MANY

2nd Lt John G Lancaster flying YJ-Z (a/c 44-14610) requested a homing while over the Thames Estuary. He was brought in over land, but his engine cut out and he was forced to belly land the aircraft at Church Farm, Stockbury, Kent. Pilot got out and walked away:

 

 

Mosquito Ground looped. USAAF Sta 376 / former RAF Watton, 19/4/45. John Merrill Carter 2nd tour as pilot of weather reconnaissance mission Mosquito's, assigned to 654BS, 25BG, 8AF USAAF. Pilot walked away:

 

 

42-7866 P-47 Assigned to 62FS, 56FG, 8AF USAAF. Lost due to Prop failure, crashed into trees off runway Cat 5 damage pilot Lt Warren M Chapman suffered head injuries but survived 9-May-43.

 

 

Wonder what Lt. Ford's rate of descent was in what used to be a P-38L (Yes that's him in the picture):

 

 

I guess all these guys should have checked their rate of descent first, made sure they didn't land on uneven ground or plow through trees and maybe they would have survived better.