Aircfaft Stress Resistance

[Condor44 0]

Hi,

 

 

I'm new to OFF and really like the game. Thanks to those who put the effort into the development. I don't have too much flight time in and have been experimenting with a few planes. I come to this from Aces High. It's a different world. So far I've been the shot downee a lot more than the shot downer (LOL). I expected that. I love the great graphics. It's a big jump from Red Baron.

 

 

I am puzzled by one thing. The planes seem much too durable to stress. I have my settings at full realism but can't seem to get planes to shed wings or other parts at max stress.

 

 

Here are some examples. I started in a Spad XIII at 15,000 ft and took it in a full throttle vertical dive. It reached 200 mph at which point I pulled the stick back all the way. I expected something to come off in the dive and especially when I pulled out. The plane survived it fine. I took a Spad to 150mph in a 45 degree dive and then went level and did a hard left turn with full aileron deflection and lots of rudder. Again the airplane held together. Well, I thought, the Spad had retty rugged airframe compared to many WWI aircraft, so I tried the same maneuvers with a Newport 11. In the case of the Newport max speed in both maneuvers was 150mph. (It wouldn't exceed 150mph in a vert dive.) Again the aircraft held together. I looked for what had to be the least stress tolerant allied aircraft and selected the RAF F. E 2b (It just looks flimsy). It also survived the same stress tests. I forget what my max speeds were but they were around 150mph.

 

 

I then tried a high speed outside loop in a Newport 11. I was sure it would shed a wing but it didn't.

 

 

I didn't experience any blackouts either although I did experience some redouts if I transitioned quickly from level flight to vertical dives.

 

 

I assume the g forces and stress are modeled in the game but I don't see it except for the occasional redout. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but don't know what.

 

 

Here are my settings because I know it will be the first question. Invincible is off. G effects and aircraft stress are both on. Flight model is realistic. The only point where I cut back on realism was pilot death. I have it at pilot never dies because I found myself having to create new pilots too frequently in the initial learning period. I wouldn't think that should matter. I was starting from quick combat.

 

 

Do others have there planes come apart at high stress or am I mistaken about this being modeled accurately in the game?

 

 

This is not intended as a complaint. I like the game. I, like many, have been waiting for a new WWI combat flight sim and I'm very pleased with OFF.

[Olham 164]

Well, if you want to loose wings, fly an Albatros!

 

I must say, that today I am really annoid by the fact that my wings broke TWO TIMES, when following Nieuport 17

in the SAME movements they did.

About the Nupe 17, I found in English Wikipedia:

"Unfortunately, the narrow lower wing, marking it as a "sesquiplane" design with literally "one-and-a-half wings",

was weak due to its single spar construction, and had a disconcerting tendency to disintegrate in flight."

 

When Nupe 17 and Albatros are the same there about the V-strut, I would really appreciate, if both would

show the same problem, or the Nupes not perform manoeuvers, that I can't risk to do.

I mean, not enough that we are ALWAYS outnumber 1:2 by them, it really goes over the top with these breaking wings,

whilst my French opponents happily zoom about.

Edited July 3, 2009 by Olham

[Wels 2]

Hello,

 

i also noticed this:

 

 

I was test-flying this one at 180 miles, and no wing damage .. landed without visible damage or any other problems.

 

and this:

 

 

This AI N11 flew on at that angle for minutes, until crashing.

 

 

As well i had an AI Nieuport follow my Albatros, but it flew inverted for more than 30 seconds and was firing at me all the time lol.

 

I noticed that AI planes can do a lot more than the manually flown ones, which is certainly frustrating ahem - but i wonder whether the OFF team could change the AI planes capabilities towards some more real stress damage WITHOUT spoiling the AI.. (?)

 

Greetings,

Catfish

Edited July 3, 2009 by Wels

[+Winder 32]

Hello,

 

i also noticed this:

 

 

I was test-flying this one at 180 miles, and no wing damage .. landed without visible damage or any other problems.

 

and this:

 

 

This AI N11 flew on at that angle for minutes, until crashing.

 

 

As well i had an AI Nieuport follow my Albatros, but it flew inverted for more than 30 seconds and was firing at me all the time lol.

 

I noticed that AI planes can do a lot more than the manually flown ones, which is certainly frustrating ahem - but i wonder whether the OFF team could change the AI planes capabilities towards some more real stress damage WITHOUT spoiling the AI.. (?)

 

Greetings,

Catfish

 

Both the N11 and N17 can lose wings - the AI is not affected by this - maybe P56 but don't hold your breath.

 

Have you got the latest Patch? - because the low level handling of some of the craft by AI was addressed in that and especially the N11

 

HTH

 

WM

[+Winder 32]

Hi,

 

 

 

I'm new to OFF and really like the game. Thanks to those who put the effort into the development. I don't have too much flight time in and have been experimenting with a few planes. I come to this from Aces High. It's a different world. So far I've been the shot downee a lot more than the shot downer (LOL). I expected that. I love the great graphics. It's a big jump from Red Baron.

 

 

 

I am puzzled by one thing. The planes seem much too durable to stress. I have my settings at full realism but can't seem to get planes to shed wings or other parts at max stress.

 

 

 

Here are some examples. I started in a Spad XIII at 15,000 ft and took it in a full throttle vertical dive. It reached 200 mph at which point I pulled the stick back all the way. I expected something to come off in the dive and especially when I pulled out. The plane survived it fine. I took a Spad to 150mph in a 45 degree dive and then went level and did a hard left turn with full aileron deflection and lots of rudder. Again the airplane held together. Well, I thought, the Spad had retty rugged airframe compared to many WWI aircraft, so I tried the same maneuvers with a Newport 11. In the case of the Newport max speed in both maneuvers was 150mph. (It wouldn't exceed 150mph in a vert dive.) Again the aircraft held together. I looked for what had to be the least stress tolerant allied aircraft and selected the RAF F. E 2b (It just looks flimsy). It also survived the same stress tests. I forget what my max speeds were but they were around 150mph.

 

 

 

I then tried a high speed outside loop in a Newport 11. I was sure it would shed a wing but it didn't.

 

 

 

I didn't experience any blackouts either although I did experience some redouts if I transitioned quickly from level flight to vertical dives.

 

 

 

I assume the g forces and stress are modeled in the game but I don't see it except for the occasional redout. Maybe I'm doing something wrong but don't know what.

 

 

 

Here are my settings because I know it will be the first question. Invincible is off. G effects and aircraft stress are both on. Flight model is realistic. The only point where I cut back on realism was pilot death. I have it at pilot never dies because I found myself having to create new pilots too frequently in the initial learning period. I wouldn't think that should matter. I was starting from quick combat.

 

 

 

Do others have there planes come apart at high stress or am I mistaken about this being modeled accurately in the game?

 

 

 

This is not intended as a complaint. I like the game. I, like many, have been waiting for a new WWI combat flight sim and I'm very pleased with OFF.

 

The wings on the Noops as well as some of the Albs are susceptible to being ripped off.

 

When we released P3 we had a poll and we adjusted the wings based on that ( I cannot remember if we made them harder or softer) - if you like start another one and lets see what the consensus is now.

We might take a view on it as we are consolidating DM right now for an upcoming update so if wings need tweaking (by majority) and we can concur we will adjust.

 

HTH

 

WM

[Condor44 0]

Well, if you want to loose wings, fly an Albatros!

 

I must say, that today I am really annoid by the fact that my wings broke TWO TIMES, when following Nieuport 17

in the SAME movements they did.

About the Nupe 17, I found in English Wikipedia:

"Unfortunately, the narrow lower wing, marking it as a "sesquiplane" design with literally "one-and-a-half wings",

was weak due to its single spar construction, and had a disconcerting tendency to disintegrate in flight."

 

When Nupe 17 and Albatros are the same there about the V-strut, I would really appreciate, if both would

show the same problem, or the Nupes not perform manoeuvers, that I can't risk to do.

I mean, not enough that we are ALWAYS outnumber 1:2 by them, it really goes over the top with these breaking wings,

whilst my French opponents happily zoom about.

 

 

Olham,

 

I tried the same manuevers in an Albatross DII. It didn't shed it's wings either in a 200mph dive or pulling out abruptly from the dive. And yses, I hve the latest patches. I just installed the game and the patches a few days ago.

[Wels 2]

Hello WM,

 

thanks for replying, to be honest the last pcture may have been taken before the last patch - sorry. However the first picture with the vertically diving Nieuport is only a few days old, all patches applied - and it took no visible or else damage even at higher speeds.

 

P4/5 ... well .. - if there is i 'll be there

 

edit @ Condor: The Alb. D.II did not lose its lower wings at higher speeds due to the more sturdy (but heavier) construction, and the outer "H" struts rather than "V" ones. The "H" prevented the lower wing from vibrating, which it did around the later lower "V" tip, leading to "harmonical vibration", a self-amplifying wobble, or vibration that again led to the known problems of the later "V" strut types from the D.III on.

 

Thanks and greetings,

Catfish

Edited July 3, 2009 by Wels

[+Winder 32]

Hello WM,

 

thanks for replying, to be honest the last pcture may have been taken before the last patch - sorry. However the first picture with the vertically diving Nieuport is only a few days old, all patches applied - and it took no visible or else damage even at higher speeds.

 

P4/5 ... well ..- if there is i 'll be there

 

Thanks and greetings,

Catfish

 

 

No problem we spent considerable time sorting the low level behaviour in latest patch esp for N11...

 

If the N17 etc is not having wing failures - (we will look) start that poll and lets see if its isolated or generally an issue.

 

We do want sesquiplanes to mimic the behavior of wing shredding as it is a factor on many of them and it is modeled in.

 

Try this:

 

Dive steeply and then at high speed pull up very sharply exerting max G on the wings - they should depart from you....

 

Ta

 

WM

[Olham 164]

Condor - it's not the DII. It's the DIII and the DV models.

 

Winder - I understand, that the AI would never suffer from these problems?

Then it must be accepted as it is, as I think, it can't be programmed? But it doesn't feel fair, of course.

[Condor44 0]

Condor - it's not the DII. It's the DIII and the DV models.

 

Winder - I understand, that the AI would never suffer from these problems?

Then it must be accepted as it is, as I think, it can't be programmed? But it doesn't feel fair, of course.

 

 

Thanks for the responses.

 

Olham, Wels,

 

I tried the full power vertical dive from 15,000 ft in an Albotross DIII. Speed was in excess of 250mph when I pulled out at about 1,000 ft. The wings stayed on.

 

Uncleal,

 

I've tried the full powere vertical dive from 15,000 ft with several birds including the SE5a. In every case I was able to pull out of the dive between 1,000 and 2,000 feet without any structural failure.

 

I'm puzzeled that the observations by the three of you are different.

 

I'll post the poll when and if I figure out how. I may try a few more airplanes first.

[+Polovski 456]

Make sure you are updated to V1.30 patch and then 1.30c mini patch Condor44

[Olham 164]

That was pure luck, Condor. Try that in a campaign fight, after just shooting down three opponents.

If you then dare to loose these victories. The wings will break almost every time, when you try that.

[Hasse Wind 46]

Interesting that you have encountered such strong Nupes and Albatrosses. I know I've lost a wing or two many times when flying the N.17, and even without performing any extremely quick dives - a too harsh turn is usually all it takes in my case to lose wings in the Nupe. And I've occasionally lost the lower wing in the Alb. D.V, which seemed very realistic to me, considering I was doing some hard moves with my plane in combat. If these planes had any weaker wings, I wouldn't be able to use them in battle!

[Olham 164]

So the Nupe, when flown by a "real" pilot ingame, breaks up easily too?

 

Then it may all be done right; they where fragile at their lower wings.

It's only so annoying and unfair, that the AI Nupe and Albatros don't seem to have that problem,

and so they always happily escape me with moves, they shouldn't be able to make.

 

But I assume, it is impossible to change that for AI craft - otherwise they would have done so.

[Olham 164]

Good morning, Unc - must be about 9.30 your side of the ocean.

Yes, I see; so it happens to the "real pilots" easily. I want to repeat here: I'm not complaining

about my Albatros wings breaking, when that is historically correct.

I was only annoyed by the AI's wings NOT breaking in the same craft.

[RAF_Louvert 101]

Olham, I've noticed the same thing from time-to-time with the AI, but I just assume they actually KNOW how to fly these planes. I on the other hand, can shed wings as if I owned controlling interest in a major wing replacement facility.

 

"And another one gone, and another one gone, and another one bites the dust. HEY! I just passed my wings, another one bites the dust." (done in my best Queen impersonation)

 

Cheers!

 

Lou

[Olham 164]

I just assume they (the AI) actually KNOW how to fly these planes.

 

No, Lou, I thought I had mentioned it: Them and I where performing the SAME movements (as I was chasing him, I had to).

[HomeBoy 1]

I have tested Condor's findings and confirm exactly what he is saying to be true.

 

I put the N17 through the most violent maneuvers I possibly could and it pulled right through with no damage. In RB3D, that plane would have popped a wing in short order. I have ripped apart similar radio control models in much less stressful dives than what I put the N17 through. I have to say this is pretty disappointing.

[+Polovski 456]

Woo hold on Homeboy, it's very odd as earlier phases the wings came off very easily in Noop 11,16,17 and Albs - quite easily. Worked a lot on getting that right. We slightly strengthened them in in P3, and then re weakened them in the last patches when people said they no longer came off. Looks like something odd going on. Yeah please check aircraft stress is turned on as Uncleal says.

 

Also what DM ?

 

(I remember recently Oldham was complaining the Alb wings came off all the time lol, but now he is a little more careful).

[Olham 164]

Hrmbbllmpf! Yes, zatt's lookink like sabotage - I have to let der Nupes dive away, cauz my wings

would leave me ozzerwise! You ssink, ze Nupes wings will break too? Noo!! Zey don't!!!

Butt it does not help zem - I always find zem again and make a sieve of zem vizz my twin Spandaus!

Mmuahahahahahahaaaaa!!!

[Hasse Wind 46]

I just did a similar test with the Nupe - a steep dive followed by some crazy turns. The results were pretty obvious - I lost all kinds of parts from my plane, and the lower wings were the first to go. I'm at maximum realism and currently using the intermediate damage model. I've had similar experience also with normal and hardcore damage models, the Nupe just isn't built to tolerate that kind of stress and loses its wings very easily. Seemed quite realistic to me.

[HomeBoy 1]

Woo hold on Homeboy, it's very odd as earlier phases the wings came off very easily in Noop 11,16,17 and Albs - quite easily. Worked a lot on getting that right. We slightly strengthened them in in P3, and then re weakened them in the last patches when people said they no longer came off. Looks like something odd going on. Yeah please check aircraft stress is turned on as Uncleal says.

 

Also what DM ?

 

(I remember recently Oldham was complaining the Alb wings came off all the time lol, but now he is a little more careful).

 

Pol,

Sorry if I have sounded negative or complaining. Please don't misread my passion as nitpicking or grumbling. I'm just testing and reporting. Nothing more.

 

The fact that stalls, spins, max speeds, mixture effects, etc. appear so excellently modeled, I find this stress modeling issue both surprising and disappointing. This thread going into the second page since Condor originally posted basically unchallenged was what made me do my own tests as I just didn't want to believe his finding. Now, if you say the tests are flawed, nothing would make me happier! That's part of the reason I wanted to post here. Condor stated that perhaps he was doing something wrong and I certainly hope that same thing. I just can't for the life of me see what that might be!

 

Yes, having the "model stress" setting turned on was the FIRST thing I verified after taking the N17 in a full-power vertical dive from 10,000 feet and pulling out at 1,000 feet with absolutely no damage at all to the aircraft! I am using v1.30c with no additional DM at all. Everything is stock. Should I be using one of the other DMs? I certainly didn't think so.

 

I'm very suspicious that Condor and I both must be doing something really bone-headed as this is such an obvious thing! I implore anybody and everybody to do the N17 test I just mentioned and report their results. It's easy to do. Hopefully EVERYBODY will come back here and show Condor and I how wrong we are.

 

I have been doing these tests in CFS3 QC (because of the full availability of the entire plane set). I can't imagine why there would be two FMs for these two aspects of the game. Could it be that "aircraft stress" is somehow disabled in CFS3-QC but not in campaign? I seem to recall though that Condor also tried this in the campaign and had the same results. ??

 

Trust me, I'm teachable here. Please show me the error of my ways.

 

<S>!

[HomeBoy 1]

I just did a similar test with the Nupe - a steep dive followed by some crazy turns. The results were pretty obvious - I lost all kinds of parts from my plane, and the lower wings were the first to go. I'm at maximum realism and currently using the intermediate damage model. I've had similar experience also with normal and hardcore damage models,

...

Seemed quite realistic to me.

 

Thank you for that Hasse Wind. That's what I was hoping to hear. Now I've got to figure out why my game doesn't work like that. I have never installed any of these damage models. Maybe it's time to try some of them and see what difference it makes.

 

...

the Nupe just isn't built to tolerate that kind of stress and loses its wings very easily.

 

Actually, there is not an aircraft on the face of the earth (modern or otherwise) that can survive a full-power vertical dive from 10,000 ft and not fly to pieces.

Edited July 6, 2009 by HomeBoy

[+Polovski 456]

No problem, but given the quadzillion options it's easy for people to see different things. So we need all the details before we say it's broken or not. Obviously people are seeing dramatically different things. In my last tests I could lose wings all day, and it does take some time go re re test stuff. Many are slightly stronger still than in P1 and P2, but maybe they need to be even weaker.

 

So I think we need to know slider settings, which craft, what settings in worskshop, settings in QC, or was it a mission or campaign, height, speed of dive, angle etc. Also there is some give and take. For example in testing Albs I might do a dive to 160 and pull up fine. Maybe 5 or 6 times before snap.. so sometimes 5 sometimes 6. However if doing 180mph into a dive same angle, it might break 1 or I may get lucky and it breaks on the 2nd go.

 

Try the N11 it is weaker than the N17. N11 will receive damage to the wings in a sustained dive even at 160+ but it could take a few dives before the wings leave. Some craft won't achieve a huge speed in a dive - think N11 is around 170 mph max.

[Hasse Wind 46]

I tested it in quick combat and started the dive at 15k feet. The speed never went above 200 mph as I was already losing parts after pulling the stick only a little. When I twisted it hard, that was the end of my Nupe. Oh, and I have the effects slider at maximum in order to see as much damage as possible.

 

But what I can't understand is why we're seeing such huge difference between these results. The Nupe shouldn't be so tough with any settings, except maybe aircraft stress off. Strange.