109 wing breaking

[SCG_motoadve]

As with pilot kills its happening way to often.

 

Look at all the minute 2:29 all hits to the wing and cockpit area, no wing breaking and no insta pilot kill.

 

 

 

[dbuile]

3 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

no insta pilot kill.

 

Wait, so, the attacker's gun camera should've blacked out on target pilot kill?  Confused.

[Rjel]

I’ve watched the mentioned clip probably hundreds of times through the years. Watching the bullets march up the wing and then pepper the cockpit area, I’m not certain the pilot survived. Especially when you see the cockpit frame peel away from the aircraft. 

[firdimigdi]

Slightly disappointed; read "109 wind breaking" and came here expecting a diatribe on the particulars of tight cockpits.

[MeoW.Scharfi]

Those are Airplanes and not IFV's or APC's, and even they are getting easily penetrated by 50 cals. And no way a small plane like a 109, 190, 51, 39 or yak1 would survive a wall of 50s. 

 

+ call it "109 wing break" and complaining about pilot kills.

 

Again what quality post. ?‍♀️

Edited January 13, 2023 by MeoW.Scharfi

[FuriousMeow]

[Barnacles]

2 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

As with pilot kills its happening way to often.

 

Look at all the minute 2:29 all hits to the wing and cockpit area, no wing breaking and no insta pilot kill.

 

 

 

I know that the thread title is to do with wing loss, but seeing as you brought it (pilot kills) up.


https://youtu.be/S3cpkQT4Njw?t=153
T=2:33

Any explanation why this guy flew into the deck? Because it can't have been a pilot kill? Right?

https://youtu.be/S3cpkQT4Njw?t=304
T=5:04

Same again, seems to lose control suddenly for some reason

5:30 Blatant pilot kill
7:31 Blatant pilot kill
8:22 Blatant pilot kill

and there may well be more but I stopped looking.

 

[Leftenant_Soap]

something something single spar wing construction something something dead horse

[PainGod85]

4 minutes ago, Barnacles said:

I know that the thread title is to do with wing loss, but seeing as you brought it (pilot kills) up.


https://youtu.be/S3cpkQT4Njw?t=153
T=2:33

Any explanation why this guy flew into the deck? Because it can't have been a pilot kill? Right?

https://youtu.be/S3cpkQT4Njw?t=304
T=5:04

Same again, seems to lose control suddenly for some reason

5:30 Blatant pilot kill
7:31 Blatant pilot kill
8:22 Blatant pilot kill

and there may well be more but I stopped looking.

 

 

Spoiler

 

Edited January 13, 2023 by PainGod85

[-250H-Ursus_]

2 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

 

 

Look at all the minute 2:29 all hits to the wing and cockpit area, no wing breaking and no insta pilot kill.

 

 

Really?
Is that the ultimate argument? A single footage? In a 14 min length video where there is a lot of pilot kills based on how the planes are reacting to the shots? 

Edited January 13, 2023 by -332FG-Ursus_

[ITAF_Airone1989]

Min 3:07
When the Devs will properly fix collisions with trees?

[[CPT]Crunch]

2 hours ago, DD_Soapy said:

something something single spar wing construction something something dead horse

As the Spitfires, which should also be suffering similar damages.

[Lusekofte]

Glad to see so many think status quo is perfect. 

[FuriousMeow]

Or maybe, just maybe, the OP has evidenced nothing at all.

Edited January 14, 2023 by Wardog5711
Replaced profanity

[357th_KW]

This film was shot from a P-51B.
Thornell’s AAR: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/combat-reports/352-thornell-8may44.jpg

 

In this case he describes this saying “ he fell apart in the air”.  I’ve seen a few other AARs specifically describing wings being torn off, as well as many others describing large pieces falling off the aircraft.  It’s still hard to say how common it was overall.  In this case it appears to have only taken a hit or so on the spar to produce this result.  
 

I think the most puzzling thing we see in game are the cases where the wing is damaged, and the player then rips their own wing off - this may be related the the reduction in control forces on the 109.  In the past, it was very important to use elevator trim, where now almost none is required in most flight regimes, which seems hard to believe when you read pilot reports of flying the plane.

[dbuile]

13 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

Glad to see so many think status quo is perfect. 

 

That's not what I'm saying at all, but that clip is underwhelming evidence.  My "read" on that clip has always been the pilot was likely incapacitated during the burst, hence his going straight in.  Also, going straight, there's no heavy g forces on the wings.  The clip just doesn't work in the argument's favor, and I consider myself, believe it or not, sympathetic to the claims.  I won't be surprised if the pilot damage model needs subtle adjustments, as well as spars inappropriately taking full impact damage from glancing angles that would not put a full piercing hole.

 

Check out this clip.  What happened with the splash of hits at :20?   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZTZuKH6pgY

 

I watched a few vids this week, freshly posted; maybe Krupinski, DerSherrif and Jaydog...?  All 3 were hit with one being shot down.  Some were hit multiple times.  At least 2 were wounded, not insta-killed; wing damage without shearing off in the fight.  Meaning:  without realizing it, folks are posting videos countering the claims.

 

[Lusekofte]

To me this game is utter nonsense with the gunners and almost 100 % instant kill of the pilot on first pass. Both in sp and mp. If your not pk the plane explode. 
I get it that fighter jockeys love that effect. But telling me it is realistic is another thing. 
I am not the most intelligent man, but take offence being called stupid. 
As soon as something is disfavouring 109’s it is a sh** storm here. I was going to reinstall this game today for an inter squad coop tomorrow. But I cannot get myself doing it. 
so much potential with so little effort is blocked by selfish fighter fps players

[SCG_motoadve]

19 minutes ago, Lusekofte said:

To me this game is utter nonsense with the gunners and almost 100 % instant kill of the pilot on first pass. Both in sp and mp. If your not pk the plane explode. 
I get it that fighter jockeys love that effect. But telling me it is realistic is another thing. 
I am not the most intelligent man, but take offence being called stupid. 
As soon as something is disfavouring 109’s it is a sh** storm here. I was going to reinstall this game today for an inter squad coop tomorrow. But I cannot get myself doing it. 
so much potential with so little effort is blocked by selfish fighter fps players

Its always the small toxic crowd , rude , loud, with no respect , only worried about their stats, who are afraid anything more challenging will ruin their fun.

 

I like the effect of the 109 wing breaking, but I feel it happens a bit too much, I posted the video that shows it does not has to break every time.

As for insta pilot kills , that is ruining this game IMHO.

Making it boring.

 

No need to be rude disrespectful or get excited , this is the reason some this very same people have been banned from life from some servers, their way is the only way.

Hope developers have realized this by now.

[FTC_DerSheriff]

19 hours ago, dbuile said:

 

Wait, so, the attacker's gun camera should've blacked out on target pilot kill?  Confused.

Red hitmarker ez

 

https://youtu.be/LQlyXCsgY14

 

Edited January 14, 2023 by FTC_DerSheriff

[MeoW.Scharfi]

1 hour ago, SCG_motoadve said:

No need to be rude disrespectful or get excited , this is the reason some this very same people have been banned from life from some servers, their way is the only way.

Hope developers have realized this by now.

 

Who are "these people" that are "banned for life" from "SOME" servers?

=> All the people who discover your ridiculous claims still can play on all servers.

As always pathetic overexegerating claims..

 

"rude disrespectful or get exicted"

Should i post screenshots of you being toxic? I have more than enough collected.

 

"small toxic crowd"

Oh don't get me started, everyone who opens your Forum profile and reads the messages, sees your rant raid in the "activity section" and the majority of people disagree with YOU the whole time, you have like 2 people who back you up.

 

And once again, for the protocol that EVEN YOU understand it and maybe some people won't fall for your hilarious claims.

 

The one and only who is banned for lifetime on a (1)server is ME and this is from TAW, no one else is banned SOMEWHERE.

Don't make it look like other people are banned on "some servers", false claims and exeggerations over and over again but we are used to it from you.

 

[Wardog5711]

OK. Enough.

As demonstrated in multiple, ongoing threads, people have different expectations from the SIM.

Nobody is going to be happy with everything, and it is a constantly moving target that the DEV team are expected to hit.

But grown men continually getting into heated arguments over a video game is beyond sad.

Tone it down, or this one is done.

 

 

 

 

[Irishratticus72]

3 hours ago, Wardog5711 said:

OK. Enough.

As demonstrated in multiple, ongoing threads, people have different expectations from the SIM.

Nobody is going to be happy with everything, and it is a constantly moving target that the DEV team are expected to hit.

But grown men continually getting into heated arguments over a video game is beyond sad.

Tone it down, or this one is done.

 

 

 

 

Brave of you to consider us grown men.... ?

[Wardog5711]

Quote

Brave of you to consider us grown men...

I'm giving some of you credit as such.

Others have proven themselves to be anything but. 

 

[ROCKET_KNUT]

The first 60 years of one´s childhood are the hardest, then the troubles usually stabilize... ?

[[CPT]milopugdog]

51 minutes ago, Wardog5711 said:

I'm giving some of you credit as such.

Others have proven themselves to be anything but.

I'm sorry you've had to put up with all this, I guess the community decided to make you work for your pay (you are paid, right? )

This one to me just seems like deliberate trolling to stir the pot. It's low.

[Wardog5711]

Oh yeah, I'm paid to be here as part of the job.

My attendance is pretty much mandatory. 

Unlike everyone else who is here voluntarily, and 100% optional.

No sane person would do this for nothing. ?

[Guest deleted@83466]

I’d be demanding a raise.

[Noisemaker]

37 minutes ago, Wardog5711 said:

Oh yeah, I'm paid to be here as part of the job.

My attendance is pretty much mandatory. 

Unlike everyone else who is here voluntarily, and 100% optional.

No sane person would do this for nothing. ?

I'm here doing it for nothing, but I'm not sure that I'm sane...

[JG1_Vonrd]

2 hours ago, Wardog5711 said:

I'm giving some of you credit as such.

Others have proven themselves to be anything but. 

 

I believe there are some women posting as well but being obnoxious is not mutually exclusive to gender. 

[Denum]

I find it somewhat interesting you felt the pilots dying so often on landing acceptable because "realism" but the wing breaking and pilots kills are unacceptable? 

 

Most of the aircraft will easily penetrate the armored seat at our engagement ranges? 

 

Maybe the aircraft are too stable or there isn't enough environmental factors. 

 

Also the 109s have a very weak internal wing structure. Pulling big Gs with it damaged and experiencing structural failure seems pretty reasonable. 

 

It's a single I beam after all. 

Edited January 15, 2023 by Denum

[Kurfurst]

9 hours ago, Denum said:

 

Also the 109s have a very weak internal wing structure. Pulling big Gs with it damaged and experiencing structural failure seems pretty reasonable. 

 

It's a single I beam after all. 

If the 109 would have had a ‘very weak’ wing spar structure as you suggest it would have a lower g-limit than other similar fighters (it did not) and you would have tons of pilot complains about spar lacking strenght (which again you do not).

 

In any case the wing structure and load bearing elements are not limited to the single I-beam on your picture, but essentially the whole wing is a load bearing structure with the wing skin being thicker than usual and acting a single large structure.

[SCG_motoadve]

11 hours ago, Denum said:

I find it somewhat interesting you felt the pilots dying so often on landing acceptable because "realism" but the wing breaking and pilots kills are unacceptable? 

I showed many videos that if done properly , like in a real life situation an emergency landing had 100% survival rate, which is more than real life

scenarios.

 

Some people just want to jump on a plane and start shooting, no matter the glide speed, stall speed or procedures, then when an emergency landing came they hit hard and pilot died.

 

109 wing, I don't have a problem that it breaks, its a great effect, looks real,but in IL2 is overdone happens way too often , that is all.

it definitely happened IRL

If we compare it to real WWII footage , we see it , but most of the time they dont break.

in game most of the time the 109 wing breaks.

 

So if this effect was toned down a bit , it will feel more realistic, right now feels like the wing of a Zero, where you see in gun cam footage, they break all the time.

 

[Lusekofte]

In my point of view, or rather what I suspect. Last month’s been weird. No information , very late deliverance on collector planes. 
I think any improvements on this game will not be done, they are busy getting finance to their new project. And new employees.  
If that go well they still won’t spend money on improvements few people want. 
They gonna spend it on collector planes, getting money. 
IAR is a good example on how things are going. Very slow. 
I am not entirely sure about the whole thing. So for me the complaining is done, rightfully or not, I think we has a bigger picture to consider

[CountZero]

2 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

If the 109 would have had a ‘very weak’ wing spar structure as you suggest it would have a lower g-limit than other similar fighters (it did not) and you would have tons of pilot complains about spar lacking strenght (which again you do not).

 

In any case the wing structure and load bearing elements are not limited to the single I-beam on your picture, but essentially the whole wing is a load bearing structure with the wing skin being thicker than usual and acting a single large structure.

Like all thouse pilots complaining abot Tempests losing wings at high speeds... and be able to over G airframe just by moving small finger slightly...

 

 

[Trooper117]

1 hour ago, Lusekofte said:

Last month’s been weird. No information , very late deliverance on collector planes. 

 

I guess it makes sense to keep a good interval between collector planes, if they came out faster what then will there be to look forward to for the fans.

I'm sure they will keep holding out on any info going forward, at least until all the collector planes promised have been released... hopefully by then they will have solved whatever it is stopping them from doing it sooner...

 

[357th_KW]

“Owing to continually recurring accidents caused by wing breakages in Me109 aircraft …”

[blockheadgreen_]

The 109 was notorious for wing and tailplane failures, let alone wings folding up due to combat damage.

[Denum]

16 hours ago, VO101Kurfurst said:

If the 109 would have had a ‘very weak’ wing spar structure as you suggest it would have a lower g-limit than other similar fighters (it did not) and you would have tons of pilot complains about spar lacking strenght (which again you do not).

 

In any case the wing structure and load bearing elements are not limited to the single I-beam on your picture, but essentially the whole wing is a load bearing structure with the wing skin being thicker than usual and acting a single large structure.

There's several real life examples posted, AARs and data to support it. 

 

There's a reason you don't see spitfires shedding wings as easily either. 

 

Once that main beam becomes compromised it's going to drastically weaken the wing. 

 

I've lost a few wings here and there but nothing like people here are claiming. But I also know to take it easy heading home with any damage there. 

 

14 hours ago, SCG_motoadve said:

I showed many videos that if done properly , like in a real life situation an emergency landing had 100% survival rate, which is more than real life

scenarios.

I can do the same flying online for getting PKd. It happens pretty rarely. If all we need is a few videos to prove our point I suppose I could save a few of them. 

[RossMarBow]

I think its great. Cinematic dynamic, makes you really feel alive.
Losing 109s before was pretty boring. The most exciting thing that would happen is you would catch alight. 

Edited January 20, 2023 by RossMarBow

[Bilbo_Baggins]

On 1/14/2023 at 8:42 PM, 357th_KW said:

This film was shot from a P-51B.
Thornell’s AAR: http://www.spitfireperformance.com/mustang/combat-reports/352-thornell-8may44.jpg

 

In this case he describes this saying “ he fell apart in the air”.  I’ve seen a few other AARs specifically describing wings being torn off, as well as many others describing large pieces falling off the aircraft.  It’s still hard to say how common it was overall.  In this case it appears to have only taken a hit or so on the spar to produce this result.  
 

I think the most puzzling thing we see in game are the cases where the wing is damaged, and the player then rips their own wing off - this may be related the the reduction in control forces on the 109.  In the past, it was very important to use elevator trim, where now almost none is required in most flight regimes, which seems hard to believe when you read pilot reports of flying the plane.

 

That footage absolutely insane, thanks for linking this. @7:20 is that 2 guys free falling to their death or trying to pull their parachutes whilst still getting shot at by a diving P51? I see 2 impacts on one of the dudes. Am I really seeing that scene correctly? 

Edited January 20, 2023 by Bilbo_Baggins