Crash effects?

[BAW0343]

[quote]Because it

[Woodlouse2002]

There have always been damage effects in FS. At least since FS2000. Str1ker pointed out how it's done. In every aircrafts .cfg file there is the line:

[fltsim.0]  
visual_damage=1

As always, 0 is off, 1 is on. Turn it on and you can lose any part of your aeroplane and crash in a realistic fashion.

So really, it's not a question of adding crashes. It's a question of keeping them. Which, as it's already in the software from FS2000, 2002, FS2004, is highly likely.

[Daube]

Yeah I knew that feature, unfortunatelly this one was also like an ON/OFF crash, excepted that the plane would fall to the ground instead of stopping in the air.

The collisions were not precise at all, and the effects neither (not visual effects, the effects on the flight model).

A damage model comparable to the IL-2 series would already be fine for me I liked to fly the Me-262, because I really had to be carrefull in the way I used the throttle...else the plane engines could get on fire, but eventually estinguish, allowing me to land in an emergency...

THIS kind of damage is not in FS right now. You can of course simulate an engine failure in the poorest possible way, but that's all, nothing comparable to the stress offered by IL-2 damage model.

[Daube]

Something I could not see on the videos of FSX were the vibrations in VC mode, for example during overspeed or turbulence. I guess this won't be included in the final version ?
In FS9 (and all the previous releases), I really miss an indicator for aircraft stress. Actually, nothing happens at all until you see the "too much stress" message...
There alo, IL-2 series have some nice stuff

[Katahu]

Even though you get awsome damage effects in the IL-2 series, you will still have trouble with the spin outs because it's almost impossible to get out of one in IL-2. Not to mention the fact that there almost no addons available for this sim except for skins.

[Daube]

Even though you get awsome damage effects in the IL-2 series, you will still have trouble with the spin outs because it's almost impossible to get out of one in IL-2. Not to mention the fact that there almost no addons available for this sim except for skins.

Spins ? I usually get out of a spin (when I enter, which is quite rare) in two or three rotations max
At least you can feel the spin is coming, not like in FS, where you don't feel or hear or see anything until it happens...MS should include a new red message in the bottom of the screen, written "Surpriiiiiiise "

Finally, I was making a comparison with the flight/damage model, not with the features of the sims. The fact that IL2 does not allow addons doesn't alter its qualities (or flaws) regarding flying.

I would love to feel that I used the flaps at too high speed, or the gears, or hear that this turn was on the limit for the structure of my plane etc... things FS doesn't offer right now. This is feeling, and this is an important part of the realism for me.

[Ashton Lawson]

That reminds me, once I was flying around Hong Kong (above Chep Lap Cok) in Kirk Ollson's F-16 Viper, and I decided I was bored.

So, I went full throttle and straight up!  I was still bored.

I flew to the F-16's operating ceiling, and did the same, full throttle, staight up!

Contrails started forming, and then I was going down, flying backwards, until I went into a spin-out.  What was weird tho, was that my realism settings were all on HARD, and even when I went past my aircraft stress speed (whilst spinning) nothing happened.  And I couldn't even come out of the spin.

This was much like Novalogic's MiG-29 Fulcrum.  I went straight up and I went into a spin out, but in that I managed to pull out of.

I don't think you can trust simulations to tell you how, or when your plane will spin, I think you'd have to ask a real pilot who was once in a spin-out.

If this post pretty much didn't mean anything to you, please say so.

[Daube]

There are just bugs in the flight model that goes crazy if you exit the normal flight domain of a given plane. With some planes you can manage to do a spin (sort of), especially with the CFS2 planes.

But most of the times, if your aircraft flies backward for too long, it will just adopt sensless rotations and will eventually gain some altitude from time to time

[Woodlouse2002]

If real planes flew like they do in IL2 then there never would have been an air campaign in WWII due to every fighter going into a flat spin and crashing everytime he dared pull a manuver.

I like the M$ flight dynamics much better.

[Daube]

If real planes flew like they do in IL2 then there never would have been an air campaign in WWII due to every fighter going into a flat spin and crashing everytime he dared pull a manuver.

I already read that somewhere. I doubt real pilots were handling their commands as we handle ours. Sure it's easy to bring the joystick at maximum position anytime, but the real pilots could not do that. This explains why the exit of the flight domain seems so easy to us.

I like the M$ flight dynamics much better.

Because it's harder to get in a spin ? Try Ace Combat, or Crismon Skies even better then...

[Woodlouse2002]

[quote]
I already read that somewhere. I doubt real pilots were handling their commands as we handle ours. Sure it's easy to bring the joystick at maximum position anytime, but the real pilots could not do that. This explains why the exit of the flight domain seems so easy to us.

Because it's harder to get in a spin ? Try Ace Combat, or Crismon Skies even better then...

[Daube]

As regards IL2, you should read what the 1% boys have to say about it's flight dynamics. It makes you realise why they use CFS3 as a platform for all their airfiles.

Sure IL-2 had a lot of inconsistencies in its flight data, like roll rates, top speeds, powers etc... It was discussed, they were some corrections and some things remained just wrong, that's true.

But still, even if the flight model is not fully correct, the general behaviour of the airplanes was more pleasant than in FS series.

Concerning 1% planes, they are done on CFS because CFS is the only platform that is open enough to let them realize and tweak the planes exactely as they want. If IL-2 would have been more open-platform like FS/CFS to allow addons, I'm sure some 1% guys would have tried to do some tweaking there as well.

I'm not trying to say that IL-2 or FS is better. In fact I have stopped playing IL2 since a long time now, because of several reasons:
- no addons
- no clickable cockpits
- view system (don't like the control of the view)
- no complete world, solo flight is quite limited.
- etc...

I'm just trying to tell that IL-2 has several elements that FS should adopt to increase the quality of the flight feeling. Exact top speeds, ceiling and rol rates are not enough... this is what I am trying to say

[Katahu]

Exact top speeds, ceiling and rol rates are not enough...

Well, it's enough for me. Normally, I don't like spin outs. Been there, done that, didn't appreciate it in IL-2 nor in CFS. Why? Simple: I just don't want to get into a spin. I'm the kind of person who avoids situations like this whether it's in real life or in a simulator.

I like X-Plane because of its rendering of the flight models. However, I don't use it as often as the FS series due to the following:

1. Joystick input is always twitchy regardless of settings.

2. Water landings are never pleasant regardless of weather conditions. Flying boats hop like drunk bunnies upon landing and flying boats are usually my personal favorites.

3. I just don't understand the SDK that came with X-Plane.

The FS series is equally as good, but I normally spend more time modeling than flying. IL-2 is nice, but I quit using using it since it became a bigger resource hog than FS9.

[Daube]

Well, it's enough for me. Normally, I don't like spin outs. Been there, done that, didn't appreciate it in IL-2 nor in CFS. Why? Simple: I just don't want to get into a spin. I'm the kind of person who avoids situations like this whether it's in real life or in a simulator.

I can understand that, and I think FS is good for simulating the normal flight conditions of normal aircrafts. I was just complaining a little bit about the lack of "feeling" stuff, meaning that there is still room for updates on this area
But on the other hand, some of us want to explore the other side of the flight, pushing the limits, and even going beyond. Aerobatics and stuff like that, that FS will not allow...

I like X-Plane because of its rendering of the flight models. However, I don't use it as often as the FS series due to the following:

1. Joystick input is always twitchy regardless of settings.

2. Water landings are never pleasant regardless of weather conditions. Flying boats hop like drunk bunnies upon landing and flying boats are usually my personal favorites.

I agree, the only XPlane I tried was the version 6 (bought it ) and it was just a waste of money.
But nevertheless, I could recongnize all the advantages that XPlane has over FS, just like the rendering of the flight model as you said (real vectors are good ) and some other functionnalities. So I understood that I really had to keep a close eye on the evolution of this one.

XPlane now almost everything FS has, plus some addtionnal stuff. Graphic are below but evolving very quickly, and I think Xplane will be worth the try in a few releases...

[vololiberista]

On the subject of spins. No simulator can or will come close to the the real thing. It's probably the most disorientating experience a human will ever experience.
For pilot qualification the CAA now only require incipient spins  (that is the approach to the flight condition that leads to a spin) In my day we had to actually do it during the General flight test with a recovery of within 10 degrees of the original heading before the upset!!!!!!!!
Things happen very very fast.  3 rotations and one has already lost almost 5000 feet.  Touch the aelerons and you're  dead!!!!! Rudder pedal hard over to stop the rotation pull up without bending the a/c and if your heading is within 10deg of your course you have passed the exercise!!!!
Definately NOT a manoeuvre for adrenalin junkies!!!
Vololiberista