PDA

View Full Version : Structural Failure IS modeled in??



Gunner_361st
03-26-2004, 05:27 PM
I was doing some testing earlier today.

Crimea map, starting altitude of 5,000 meters.

Diving nearly vertical, acquiring a bit over 750 km/h IAS (465 mph IAS) and then doing a very hard pull-up with positive elevator trim.

It seems that aircraft stress/failure when loaded with extreme G is modeled in.

KI-84 and A6M5a and A6M2 would lose a wing (sometimes two) during the manuever. P-80 also, at higher speeds.

The form in which this manifests itself appears different in some planes... Some actually detonate entirely! All of the P-51 series do, as well as the HE-162 and Gotha-229.

So, to be polite and politically correct, I ask, does this mean that structural failure due to extreme G, in a variety of forms, is indeed modeled into FB AEP 2.0?

If so, I am curious as to why some aircraft explode entirely while others lose wings/control surfaces. Thanks. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1039.jpg

Gunner_361st
03-26-2004, 05:27 PM
I was doing some testing earlier today.

Crimea map, starting altitude of 5,000 meters.

Diving nearly vertical, acquiring a bit over 750 km/h IAS (465 mph IAS) and then doing a very hard pull-up with positive elevator trim.

It seems that aircraft stress/failure when loaded with extreme G is modeled in.

KI-84 and A6M5a and A6M2 would lose a wing (sometimes two) during the manuever. P-80 also, at higher speeds.

The form in which this manifests itself appears different in some planes... Some actually detonate entirely! All of the P-51 series do, as well as the HE-162 and Gotha-229.

So, to be polite and politically correct, I ask, does this mean that structural failure due to extreme G, in a variety of forms, is indeed modeled into FB AEP 2.0?

If so, I am curious as to why some aircraft explode entirely while others lose wings/control surfaces. Thanks. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1039.jpg

Gunner_361st
03-26-2004, 05:32 PM
Oh yes, I forgot one. TA-152 also exploded in extreme G high speed pull-out.

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1039.jpg

KGr.HH-Sunburst
03-26-2004, 05:45 PM
well i dunno but alot of planes explode on high G pulls

it also happens on the Dora and the Ki-84 but only when using full trim and max pull out

but i find it a bit wierd bcus this is rather important stuff right ? but not a word about it in the manual

http://www.freewebs.com/fightingpumas/
http://img31.photobucket.com/albums/v94/sunburst/sig-97th.jpg

Dmitri9mm
03-27-2004, 05:29 AM
I must asy that I'm somewhat opposed to the plane just exploding in mid-air under high Gs. But this feature where you loose a wing is really great! BTW isn't this a new feature from AEP? I never saw it in FB.

http://www.kenston.k12.oh.us/khs/tplookalike/dude.jpg
"...Nothing is f**ked man."
"Nothing is f**ked?!!!?! The godd**ned plane has crashed into the mountain!"

Angelus897
03-27-2004, 08:36 AM
Umm, I believe structural failure was modeled ever since the original IL2. I can't remember how many times my BI-1 turned into a real rocket by having it's wings ripped off (trying to break Mach).

Fennec_P
03-27-2004, 10:20 AM
Failure due to speed was always modelled.

What is new is failure due to G.

Pull 15+ G in a P-51, and it goes boom. Same with many other planes.

XyZspineZyX
03-27-2004, 10:22 AM
well, just on the face of it, planes "spontaneously exploding" due to speed or G is ludicrous.... it's worthy of a Monty Python joke... [old lady Eric Idle voice]"People spontaneously combust all the toime...."

Just another example of why this FM is full of holes, yellowed scotch tape and a few pages cut from old Russian doctrine...

Fennec_P
03-27-2004, 10:29 AM
Probably they don't advertise it because the feature isn't finished yet.

Some of the planes that should easily fail (like A6M) seem immune to this. Also, the silly blowing up thing, like Stiglr said, unfounded accusation of communist bias notwithstanding.

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/351.gif

I can't believe they allow this smilie...

Gunner_361st
03-27-2004, 04:28 PM
Yes Fennec, I noticed that failure due to speed was indeed modeled since version 1.0.

It would seem your idea that the feature of failure due to G not being advertised is correct. Its interesting, to say the least.

Captain Gunner of the 361st vFG

http://home.comcast.net/~smconlon/wsb/media/245357/site1039.jpg