Common defense maneouver in BoX

[102nd-YU-devill]

 

In all the sims I played before and similarly in all the books I've read about air combat, there is a common thing, that when you get bounced or even when you see the enemy bearing down on your 6, the standard and most effective defensive maneuver is a timely break turn (horizontal) or a split-S.

 

However, in BoX, it appears that the best defensive maneuver is to yank the stick all the way forward, then (eventually) back, or any crazy mix of the two, probably adding elevator trim in the process. During this maneuver some plane types in the sim really look like they are using thrust vectoring, and are even putting modern acrobatic props to shame with the level of control authority, not to mention looking like they pulled a parking brake in mid-flight. Even worse is the follow-up to this maneuver, where some plane types with excellent acceleration can compensate for the sudden "parking brake skid", and just catch up with the overshooting enemy, making the move extremely rewarding.  

 

My guess is that such a maneuver would be impossible to perform in a real WW2 plane, either because of stick forces preventing a sudden and complete deflection of the control surface, or/and because the flow would separate due to a sudden high deflection and induce a delay in actually producing a force in the intended direction. I am thinking of actually doing a simulation of what would happen if the elevator would be able to be deflected at such a rate in a real fluid, so if someone has something on that, let me know so that I don't bother.

 

Of course, the additional real-life reason is that no pilot would actually make his guts churn out of his mouth due to high negative G in the middle of a fight; especially when a high-G (positive) break turn is much less unpleasant and much more effective.

 

Again, I never saw people doing this in any other sim I played, and if they did, they would get shot down without much problem, but in BoX its basically a staple move as soon as a guy spots you in his close 6 or you start spraying bullets around him.  Its very rare to see a "break turn" in this game when playing online.

 

I don't know if there ever was a discussion on this (probably yes, because internet already discussed everything) but it seems to me an artefact of the flight model that seriously affects how real the general feel of BoX is, and what (bad, or better said unrealistic) habits it develops in the player community.

 

Does anyone have an opinion on this?

Did you use such maneuvers in old IL2 or in other sims?

What do you think would be the limiting factor in real life?

 

Thanks for reading.

Cheres!

Edited December 19, 2022 by 102nd-YU-devill
Corrected typo

[JohnHolmes]

 It's always the thing that puts me off playing multiplayer, where players learn to play to the weakest of the game for their advantage, (no blame on the players as it is a game after all) BUT does break the immersion seeing such insane, I believe physically impossible evasive maneuvers, while you overshoot and somehow the enemy still has the energy to pull the nose and get you on target. Que the troll comment "just get good"

At the same time I imagine building a flight model and game physics is a near impossible task to get perfection. I presume as computers/hardware get better, developers will be able to get closer to reality. Till then just have to enjoy everything else which is done so well.

[Mtnbiker1998]

Agreed. The edge of the envelope manuvering is one of the weaker areas of IL-2s flight model and people abusing it is one of the main reasons I avoid pvp. The control at low speeds and during stalls is definitely overmodelled.

 

My theory has always been that its an artifact of the game engine's ww1 heritage, given the slow nature of the old biplanes.

[102nd-YU-devill]

The trouble is that this part of the FM makes people do things that are quite unrealistic, yet I haven't seen such issues in any other sim.

In that very important aspect today's IL2 is much worse than the one of 20 years ago.

I think that should be concerning for everyone ans devs as well.

Unfortunately there doesnt seem to be interest in that from the community.

I guess people like gaming...

[SCG_motoadve]

On 12/19/2022 at 1:55 PM, 102nd-YU-devill said:

 

In all the sims I played before and similarly in all the books I've read about air combat, there is a common thing, that when you get bounced or even when you see the enemy bearing down on your 6, the standard and most effective defensive maneuver is a timely break turn (horizontal) or a split-S.

 

However, in BoX, it appears that the best defensive maneuver is to yank the stick all the way forward, then (eventually) back, or any crazy mix of the two, probably adding elevator trim in the process. During this maneuver some plane types in the sim really look like they are using thrust vectoring, and are even putting modern acrobatic props to shame with the level of control authority, not to mention looking like they pulled a parking brake in mid-flight. Even worse is the follow-up to this maneuver, where some plane types with excellent acceleration can compensate for the sudden "parking brake skid", and just catch up with the overshooting enemy, making the move extremely rewarding.  

 

My guess is that such a maneuver would be impossible to perform in a real WW2 plane, either because of stick forces preventing a sudden and complete deflection of the control surface, or/and because the flow would separate due to a sudden high deflection and induce a delay in actually producing a force in the intended direction. I am thinking of actually doing a simulation of what would happen if the elevator would be able to be deflected at such a rate in a real fluid, so if someone has something on that, let me know so that I don't bother.

 

Of course, the additional real-life reason is that no pilot would actually make his guts churn out of his mouth due to high negative G in the middle of a fight; especially when a high-G (positive) break turn is much less unpleasant and much more effective.

 

Again, I never saw people doing this in any other sim I played, and if they did, they would get shot down without much problem, but in BoX its basically a staple move as soon as a guy spots you in his close 6 or you start spraying bullets around him.  Its very rare to see a "break turn" in this game when playing online.

 

I don't know if there ever was a discussion on this (probably yes, because internet already discussed everything) but it seems to me an artefact of the flight model that seriously affects how real the general feel of BoX is, and what (bad, or better said unrealistic) habits it develops in the player community.

 

Does anyone have an opinion on this?

Did you use such maneuvers in old IL2 or in other sims?

What do you think would be the limiting factor in real life?

 

Thanks for reading.

Cheres!

As a real pilot who does simulated dogfights in warbirds, and then goes home and play IL2 a few hrs later, I agree with you about the views you have of the flight modeling  specially on the edge of the envelope, add to that the lack of torque modeling, and you go from 0 throttle to 100% like nothing.

Or control authority at low speeds, and pilot modeling, pulling 5 Gs , but you easily can check your six at the same time, and all this while deploying flaps.

 

[Thorne]

When I saddle up on someone and they start spasmodically waggling their elevator up and down I feel a weird mixture of disgust and excitement. Disgust because everyone knows on some level, even the offenders, that the defensive waggle is the refuge of bottom percentile pilots, and excitement because we both get to experience the offender getting ripped up while looking like a dunce.

Edited December 21, 2022 by Thorne

[danielprates]

33 minutes ago, Thorne said:

When I saddle up on someone and they start spasmodically waggling their elevator up and down I feel a weird mixture of disgust and excitement. Disgust because everyone knows on some level, even the offenders, that the defensive waggle is the refuge of bottom percentile pilots, and excitement because we both get to experience the offender getting ripped up while looking like a dunce.

 

Dude

[ShamrockOneFive]

9 hours ago, 102nd-YU-devill said:

The trouble is that this part of the FM makes people do things that are quite unrealistic, yet I haven't seen such issues in any other sim.

In that very important aspect today's IL2 is much worse than the one of 20 years ago.

I think that should be concerning for everyone ans devs as well.

Unfortunately there doesnt seem to be interest in that from the community.

I guess people like gaming...

There's always an artifice to this sort of gaming. Yes a lot of the stuff is pretty realistic but we can't make everyone care about their virtual pilot and that means that we get int some pretty unrealistic situations and its not confined to this sim/game combo or even to this genre.

[[CPT]Crunch]

Double edged sword, you can't get to the envelope when your protected against it with a stick force limiter that prevents departures.  You wanted it, you demanded it, learn to live with it, cause this is what you get.  You won't fall and get hurt with training wheels.

[102nd-YU-devill]

On 12/21/2022 at 11:58 PM, SCG_motoadve said:

As a real pilot who does simulated dogfights in warbirds, and then goes home and play IL2 a few hrs later, I agree with you about the views you have of the flight modeling  specially on the edge of the envelope, add to that the lack of torque modeling, and you go from 0 throttle to 100% like nothing.

Or control authority at low speeds, and pilot modeling, pulling 5 Gs , but you easily can check your six at the same time, and all this while deploying flaps.

 

Without a doubt! But these limitations you are mentioning have been present in PC sims since the beginning and will be there probably until we get a holodeck.

The point I am bugged with really ia that this particular issue has not been an issue in earlier sims. Somehow in this sim I do not manage to punish this kind of behavior as I could previously. Maybe its my age which is the culprit! 

But the main thing is feeling as if this is a step back in simming experience, which is really sad.

[VR_Dogfighter]

TBH I think the maneuvre mentioned in the original post is a result of what seems to be more and more unrealistic behaviour gifted to planes in the BOX series.

Whilst not being a real life pilot, the capability of planes I am seeing out there in the PVP battles is becoming more and more arcade game like an less of the sim I remember this to be.  

[JG27*PapaFly]

2 hours ago, 102nd-YU-devill said:

The point I am bugged with really ia that this particular issue has not been an issue in earlier sims. Somehow in this sim I do not manage to

In IL-2 46, negative gs were very important for most competitive pilots. They were also important defensive maneuvers for actual aces like Hartmann. IMO the introduction of pilot physiology has defused the situation quite a bit. With the exception of 2 planes, I see mostly plausible levels of negative g defensive maneuvering.  The two exceptions are pretty crass though.  I can apply such harsh gs in push-pull maneuvers that I was able to jnsta-kill myself in both planes. The maximum  negative load that I survived was -8 g, which I find quite unrealistic. Most planes have asymmetric airfoils which generate more lift at positive Aoa than at the same negative AoA. Pilots find negative gs extremely painful (there's no AGSM-like maneuver against negative g). Together, these factors lead to asymmetric load limits for the planes,  e.g. +8 / -3. I doubt WWII fighters were able to withstand -8 g without any issues. I also doubt that their oil systems were able to keep up the oil pressure necessary to prevent engine damage at -8 g. There's a reason why today's warbird pilots never fly ANY negative loads.

 

There are antidotes to players who overdo their negative g monkey dance. One is to shoot early in order to force them to the limit of their maneuvering abilities, where energy bleed and blackouts are real issues.  As you approach,  don't press the attack until you almost ram your opponent. Instead break off in a manner that will maximize your track-crossing angle (TCA) right after you overshoot. If e.g. the bandit is breaking right,  you should do a hard 90 degree left turn, followed by an unloaded extension. If done right, this exit will force your opponent to turn almost 180 degrees to match your course. By that time you should be well outside his guns range.

Edited December 28, 2022 by JG27_PapaFly

[BlitzPig_EL]

"Stick stirring" has been a thing for ages, it is nothing new in flight simulation.  There will always be people that "game the game" no matter what you, or the devs, try to do to stop it.  The only way to avoid it is to play single player.

[Lusekofte]

On 12/19/2022 at 10:55 PM, 102nd-YU-devill said:

My guess is that such a maneuver would be impossible to perform in a real WW2 plane

No I saw them red Tuskegee pilots do it in a movie, they learned it of that evil scarface German demon pilot

Edited December 28, 2022 by Lusekofte

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

I can get that FW190s and BF109s with extreme control inputs should be able to (IRL) do some crazy stuff.  Nothing like we see on the "gamer" level we see, however.  

What bothers me more is when I see BF110s do almost the same moves at the same response rate.  I especially love how some pilots can make them "cobra / tail slide" for upwards of 15-20 seconds and hold the nose up at a high angle while dumping speed then, staying under perfect control as the hit the stall envelope - just to level out and accelerate to high speed as quickly as they do or climb up well enough to snipe anything that's passed above them and is still within 1500 meters gun range.  

[Crocogator]

I'm going to repost a video something Roland_HUNter originally posted in "Flight and damage models physics." Note in the comments someone mentions this thread.
 

Aside from the tempest FM, is this what we're talking about? 

NB this is being done at 500+ kph.

[[CPT]Crunch]

Unfortunately putting in artificial stick limiters allows the wanton throwing of the stick to the maximum's, knowing the built in limiter will protect you from exceeding any flight limit and you'll never get damaged.  Can't have the cake and eat it too.

 

I'd love it if the entire tail or wings snapped off instead of this garbage, with full stick range always present, it would force some to learn how to fly.  At a minimum at least spins and stalls, going into uncontrolled flight you need to recover from.  When was the last time you ever saw anyone do any sort of high speed stall, never, it doesn't happen, it can't happen.  It a weakness and flaw in the flight modeling, no one has any fear or difficulty with high alpha nose maneuver, basically there is no edge to the envelope.  Why we need a new rebuild with some sort of balance between the two.  Better damage modeling for air frame abuse and a tougher edge of the envelope bringing back the stall.

[Dragon1-1]

Mind you, the real pilot won't always have access to the full stick range, the reason being his own muscles. The further you pull, the harder it becomes to pull even further. At some point, at high speed, you have to haul on the stick with all your might in order to get any sort of response out of the plane. You can pull only as much as your hands will let you, most pilots were reasonably fit, but not hugely muscled (indeed, they tended to be of smaller stature). So I think that's the rationale, although I'd like to know whether the devs actually estimated how much could an average pilot of the era pull, or if that's either "game balance" or just plain WAG.

[[CPT]Crunch]

Yes, all true, they suffer and pay a physical price, at the risk of fatal damages, but Johnny stick wanker doesn't feel a thing or pay any price for this kind of malarkey.  And he can abuse it faster with best efficiency already built in.  And some still wonder how there's so many 10 kill per sortie online aces.

[354thFG_Drewm3i-VR]

9 hours ago, Crocogator said:

I'm going to repost a video something Roland_HUNter originally posted in "Flight and damage models physics." Note in the comments someone mentions this thread.
 

Aside from the tempest FM, is this what we're talking about? 

NB this is being done at 500+ kph.

???

 

Such BS...I am...speechless, but in stitches over that!

[ITAF_Airone1989]

Please guys, stop to complain.

The actual FM has nothing wrong.

 

Wait a minute... ?

 

 

 

[RossMarBow]

On 12/22/2022 at 8:17 AM, 102nd-YU-devill said:

The trouble is that this part of the FM makes people do things that are quite unrealistic, yet I haven't seen such issues in any other sim.

In that very important aspect today's IL2 is much worse than the one of 20 years ago.

I think that should be concerning for everyone ans devs as well.

Unfortunately there doesnt seem to be interest in that from the community.

I guess people like gaming...

Clearly you don't spend any time with the community.

[dbuile]

On 12/21/2022 at 11:58 AM, SCG_motoadve said:

edge of the envelope, add to that the lack of torque modeling, and you go from 0 throttle to 100% like nothing.

Or control authority at low speeds

 

An ancient thread, who knows what credence there is, hypothesized that blown surfaces are overdone.

 

On 12/21/2022 at 11:58 AM, SCG_motoadve said:

and pilot modeling, pulling 5 Gs , but you easily can check your six at the same time, and all this while deploying flaps.

Yep, that's an area I wonder about:

• freedom of movement (heads, arms) when pulling high Gs
• taking one hand off the stick to manipulate other controls reducing max force input

[RyanR]

On 12/21/2022 at 2:58 PM, SCG_motoadve said:

As a real pilot who does simulated dogfights in warbirds, and then goes home and play IL2 a few hrs later, I agree with you about the views you have of the flight modeling  specially on the edge of the envelope, add to that the lack of torque modeling, and you go from 0 throttle to 100% like nothing.

Or control authority at low speeds, and pilot modeling, pulling 5 Gs , but you easily can check your six at the same time, and all this while deploying flaps.

 

 

 

I was wondering about the torque modeling lately. Thanks for confirming. The planes do seem a bit docile when you throw the throttle to the firewall.

 

As for this thread, I don't do MP, but used to do it 25 years ago in other sims. What you're describing is nothing new. It's the age old "gaming the game". Find a loophole in the system. Back in the old dial-up days, people supposedly found ways to "blip" their internet connection. There was a cat and mouse game between developers trying to plug the holes faster than the cheaters could exploit them. A lot of the "fixes" became a detriment to everyone. 

 

Sounds like in this case, folks are taking advantage of network lag. If your control inputs go faster than they can be transmitted to the guy on your six, you'll appear to be doing unworldly things. 

 

-Ryan

 

 

 

 

[Dragon1-1]

9 hours ago, dbuile said:

Yep, that's an area I wonder about:

• freedom of movement (heads, arms) when pulling high Gs
• taking one hand off the stick to manipulate other controls reducing max force input

Under high G, IRL your head would be locked in place against the seat. Modern training materials for the F-16 even warn pilots about trying to hold their head up in a high G turn using their necks. The only problem is, this would be a possible nausea inducer in VR, if a lock was implemented. Canopy glass restriction is already a problem for some.

 

Taking your hand off the stick will definitely reduce the force you can generate, although not necessarily G load you can pull. The Spitfire, for example, is known to be light on the controls, even when fast. The Bf-109, on the other hand, took a bit of pull to get it to turn at high speeds. So it depends on the aircraft.

[dbuile]

3 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

a possible nausea inducer in VR

 

Good catch. I only thought about that after posting...  

 

3 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

The Spitfire, for example, is known to be light on the controls, even when fast

 

Aileron forces/displacement data is available for some planes, probably a lot more now compared to when I last paid attention, so folks can reference how heavy controls get at high speed.  I'm sure it's modelled IL-2 already, but, whether they hedge towards single or double handed manipulation of the control column, I haven't tested; and that's the "question" is the simulation like you have two hands applying force to the stick, and also a hand manipulating the throttle, and another hand...  

 

[Crocogator]

6 hours ago, dbuile said:

two hands applying force to the stick, and also a hand manipulating the throttle, and another hand..

 

[RossMarBow]

Where did you find these elite pilots who do more than just pull back on the stick when they are getting shot?

 

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Some guys do jink the plane very hard and plane do obey, it's look so frickin unrealistic. But it was worst in the past. Some James Boyd defensive manuver are realistic maybe in jets but doubt in prop aircraft. We all know that prop wash lift is exaggerated by 2 to 3 times in current FM engine as Yak Panther calculated based on russian data sources....

[Lolrawr]

will it be fixed? no

its known for how long? a decade now?

world of helicopters

 

its barely 1 level above WT bull?ery

[Crocogator]

WT has wildly inaccurate specific ac characteristics (e.g., LA5 is just bizarre and the japanese planes are largely wishful thinking) and a very on-rails feeling about its FM. In this respect it is kind of like the opposite of BOX, which feels very floaty at times, and the specific plane characteristics feel pretty right. The biggest difference is the stalls, where in WT if you meet a condition you go into a half-minute long scripted stall behaviour, and in BOX you hardly ever depart for longer than a few seconds. In terms of feeling DCS feels like its between these extremes, but more on the BOX side of things.

I prefer BOX of course, but the lift (related to the weak stall effect I think) and permissible negative G's are very annoying.

[RossMarBow]

14 hours ago, Crocogator said:

WT has wildly inaccurate specific ac characteristics (e.g., LA5 is just bizarre and the japanese planes are largely wishful thinking) and a very on-rails feeling about its FM. In this respect it is kind of like the opposite of BOX, which feels very floaty at times, and the specific plane characteristics feel pretty right. The biggest difference is the stalls, where in WT if you meet a condition you go into a half-minute long scripted stall behaviour, and in BOX you hardly ever depart for longer than a few seconds. In terms of feeling DCS feels like its between these extremes, but more on the BOX side of things.

I prefer BOX of course, but the lift (related to the weak stall effect I think) and permissible negative G's are very annoying.

The model is 100% way to floaty.
If you have seen the videos of the repair truck bug, you will understand just how floaty the planes are.
Basically the plane gets lifted up 5-50m in the air.
And they fall back down like they are polystyrene models. 
Its kinda amazing that the game works at all considering it.

Edited January 20, 2023 by RossMarBow

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

You didn't know that plans are glued to invisible spring stand,?

 

Edited January 20, 2023 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[BlitzPig_EL]

This is the one area where I take serious exception to the way aircraft are modeled in this title, and to the opinions of so many players that have never been at the controls of a real airplane, even if' it's as mundane as a Cessna 150...  The aircraft in this sim all seemingly have no weight, or very little.  They bob around like a cork on the surface of a pond on a windy day.  And if they don't then the cry from the uninformed is that they are "on rails".  Poppycock.

 

A WW2 aircraft that can weigh several tons, hurtling through the air in excess of 250mph does not flop about and "jiggle" as if mounted on a pin head with it's motions "dampened" by rubber bands.  They just don't.  It's a remnant of the early development of this game engine for WW1 kites, that was questionable then, and remains so today.

 

Frankly, I welcome the new title the devs have talked about, and hope that we can get past this antique we fly now, even if it is the best thing currently for WW2 air combat simulation.  We need to move on, the sooner the better.

Edited January 20, 2023 by BlitzPig_EL

[SCG_motoadve]

1 hour ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

This is the one area where I take serious exception to the way aircraft are modeled in this title, and to the opinions of so many players that have never been at the controls of a real airplane, even if' it's as mundane as a Cessna 150...  The aircraft in this sim all seemingly have no weight, or very little.  They bob around like a cork on the surface of a pond on a windy day.  And if they don't then the cry from the uninformed is that they are "on rails".  Poppycock.

 

A WW2 aircraft that can weigh several tons, hurtling through the air in excess of 250mph does not flop about and "jiggle" as if mounted on a pin head with it's motions "dampened" by rubber bands.  They just don't.  It's a remnant of the early development of this game engine for WW1 kites, that was questionable then, and remains so today.

 

Frankly, I welcome the new title the devs have talked about, and hope that we can get past this antique we fly now, even if it is the best thing currently for WW2 air combat simulation.  We need to move on, the sooner the better.

Microsoft is hiring real pilots as beta testers, in IL2 real pilots get insulted by IL2 gamers, when they express their opinion about realism.

An P was the only member in the team that is a real pilot, we discussed why some things are the way they are in IL2, sometimes it is for playability, I dont think there is a real pilot in the developers team anymore, so now my hope of fixing the FM is very low.

With that being said CLOD FM does not feel better than IL2 except for the landings and take offs, MS Flight Sim also feels very unrealistic, but they are trying to fix it, the hiring of pilots as  beta testers is happening right now, and work starts Feb 1st, so I think we will see an improvement in the next few months.

DCS does feel better but there are some very unrealistic behaviors, like landing and stopping the Yak 52 in 100meters.

 

Having real pilots as beta testers in a flight sim is a must IMHO.

[BlitzPig_EL]

One of the BlitzPigs is a former aerobatics instructor, has flown LOTS of pre WW2 aircraft including golden age racing planes, has owned various vintage aircraft, including a Stearman up engined with a 450bhp P&W Wasp.  His last job was with the air show section of the FAA.  He knows a thing or three about flying.  He tried to offer his experience back in Oleg's day and they would have none of it.

 

That trend continues, sadly.

[ITAF_Airone1989]

On 1/14/2023 at 8:48 AM, ITAF_Airone1989 said:

Please guys, stop to complain.

The actual FM has nothing wrong.

 

Wait a minute... ?

 

 

 

Here we have the German counterpart

 

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/82832-something-is-going-wrong-with-arados-and-more-aircrafts-flight-model/

[JG5_Schuck]

I know people didn't like it, but when the pilot physiology first came out it was a lot stricter than it is now, and violent stick manoeuvres were virtually impossible,
but people moaned, and now we have what we have.
And yes, for me ground handling, and take off and landing are a bit of a let down, but i guess people wouldn't play if it were to 'realistic'........
Maybe there could be a realism option for this?

[FTC_Zero]

Not to mention that is literally impossible to get into a flat spin and that you can turn with fully deployed flaps. In short, players get rewarded for flying wrong instead of being punished. ?
My flight leader says that in every session we have. To say it nicely..

Edited February 6, 2023 by FTC_Zero

[Sturmbock1]

I made a half wing fly with a FW 190 some time ago.