Negative-G push? or "stick stir"?

[Anaxogoras]

Aircraft (both real and cartoon) are capable of pretty high negative G but physical damage is unlikely unless you're bouncing off the interior of the cockpit like a pinball.  Typical aerobatic pilots (with good restraint systems) regularly do -3g with spikes over -5g during outside loops and we don't see eyeballs falling from the sky during airshows.  It sure as hell isn't comfortable but you get used to G's (both positive and negative).

Actually, let me add to that last sentence.  Negative G is never comfortable but once you're used to positive G it can be exilerating and it feels great.  Like another physical activity I can think of, you get sweaty, exhausted, and sassified.    

All of that is great.  Does it mean that you disagree that current red-outs are lenient?

[Mace2004]

All of that is great.  Does it mean that you disagree that current red-outs are lenient?

From the physiology stand point related to vision I'd say no, they're not too lenient.  The redout is a fairly accurate representation of what happens to vision due to the effects of negative G on blood flow but that's only part of the issue.  To be fully accurate, AH would have to simulate the discomfort involved (which means pilots don't really like to do it) and also the physical issues of negative G flight like the inability to keep your feet on the rudder pedals or slamming your head against the canopy in a violent maneuver.  I don't really know how you'd simulate these effects in a realistic fashion in a game.  The flight models could be changed to limit negative G to something like -2G.  Although this would probably be more accurate regarding what a typical pilot will usually do it would not accurately model the aircraft capabilities and wouldn't take into account what a paniced pilot might do.  An algorithm similar to the one that keeps you from moving your controls too fast might help, particularly, if it had a time component in it that would prevent you from cycling from extreme positive to negative G 3 or 4 or more times or for an extended period of time.  You could get a good solid -G push the first or second attempt but then start reducing control input so that subsequent pushes in a short period of time aren't as effective.  Overall, I think it would be difficult to do well and may cause more heartburn that it would fix.

All that said, I'm personally against any such changes.  I don't think negative G is overused or unrealistically used all that much to be a problem at all and the redout, to me, works fine.  On the other hand, if HT wanted to devote some time to things like this I'd suggest relooking at things like Lancstukas which are by far more prevalent and unrealistic.  The big bombers were never designed to be as agile as they are in AH.  I'm just guessing but I think that things like stick-force-per-G is way out of wack for the big boys.  Dive bombing in a lanc or B17 with a four or five G pullout or even just hard reversals of turns would require lots and lots of muscle I don't think it's correctly modeled but then I never flew a big bomber.

[RufusLeaking]

All of that is great.  Does it mean that you disagree that current red-outs are lenient?

First off -  Mace for sharing your real life experience.  The panel coming off had to be interesting.  Did you press it back on with chewing gum?

Navy and Marine maintenance seemed to be more 'flexible' than the Air Force.  I saw an F-14 on static display at an air show.  The slab had 'No Step' stenciled on it.  There were also boot prints up and down.  A high school friend worked on ejection seats in the Marines.  He had several anecdotes involving a red 'X' becoming a red '/' as the mission dictated.

Back on topic, my memories of negative G's were that my feet were on the rudder pedals, my hand on the stick, and my head on the canopy.  If there is an adverse effect to be modeled, maybe shake the screen, or, as suggested earlier, mess with the head position.

[jd]

I'm dizzy just thinkin of it. Cant wait to try it.

[Anaxogoras]

Ok, thanks for your reply.  It was very thoughtful and well argued.

[bcadoo]

lol Wish I filmed bcadoo... he was in a trainer and jerking all over. Sad to have to do that in a bird like that.
My granddaughter could probably teach him a few things.... but alas from his flying I take it he's never been to the TA. 

Looks likes its your lucky day shuffler....I was filming. 

http://www.mediafire.com/file/0miymmi4inq/film1.ahf

[BnZs]

I remember attacking Bcadoo recently He used clean, realistic, non-gamey ACM. I never saw him jerking about in his spixteen, rather he gave the "profile" and jinked (in the positive G by rolling inverted, no less) with impeccable timing.  He ended up fighting against greater odds than I intended, , yet flew well IMO.  

[Old Sport]

You'd be surprised at what's hiding in the cockpit even when FOD is a huge priority for aviation squadrons.  Sometimes it's a good idea to roll inverted and fly along so you can grab all the junk in the top of the canopy.  Screws, pens, tools, dirt, approach plates.  Once for me my radio control panel came out of the console as one of our maintainers failed to properly latch it in.  Luckily the cables weren't long enough to let it fly around but it did get my attention.

Once had a seat-shop guy tell me that they'd spilled a sack of washers in the back seat. The plane was going out on a flight so they asked to aircrew to fly inverted for a few minutes and collect the washers off the canopy. 

Quote from: Anaxogoras on August 17, 2008, 09:38:27 AM
It's the negative G's that need to addressed.  Right now, you can go full redout and fully recover in a second.
----------------
I would agree that the current very mild effect of Neg Gs should be toughened up. Maybe after the first second or so you see "stars" for 5 seconds after you recover. Then each time following it gets progressively-exponentially worse.

But it is not an invalid tactic per se.

J.F."Stocky" Edwards - DAF
I look and I see this big red nose and he’s not very far away and he’s just slightly high like that [Stocky again illustrates the relative aircraft positions with his hands]. He probably went up higher. And I saw his nose drop and he wasn’t more than a hundred yards out again. And I felt all this happen and I saw his nose coming down, and I thought beautiful... intercept, so I just jammed the stick forward. When I did that all the dust and sand in the airplane went flying up in my face. I put it right forward and I’m going down more or less spiraling almost out of control because when you push it that hard at that speed you lose control of your aircraft.

Lt. Douglass Golding
I was flying Red 2 down sun when the call "Duck!" came over the R/T. I immediately followed my No 1 round in a sharp left-hand turn, and looking back, I saw an aircraft coming out of the sun dead astern steeply onto my tail. I put the stick left and forward with left rudder which seemed to nonplus the attacking pilot. He banked steeply, trying to get inside me...

Robert Johnson 56th FG
He’s too close. I shove the stick forward down to the right, swerving the Thunderbolt beneath the Focke-Wulf.

Joe Rosbert - AVG
Looking back I saw two of his mates trying to train their sights on me. I pushed the stick forward so hard I almost catapulted through the canopy. As I hurtled downward, I crouched down expecting at any moment the thud of bullets on the armor plate behind.

All the best.

[Ghastly]

a viable last-ditch option

As a last ditch option, it's not something I fret about.  But where it definitely crosses the line to gaming the game (IMHO of course) is that there is at least 1 pilot who appears to base his entire ACM on remaining at tree top level, forcing the overshoot through this or a very similar maneuver, and then tailstanding his cannon armed Russian ground attack aircraft to one ping kill his attacker. 

It's his fifteen of course, but it doesn't lend much to any kind of a sense of realistic engagements.

<S>

[dedalos]

As a last ditch option, it's not something I fret about.  But where it definitely crosses the line to gaming the game (IMHO of course) is that there is at least 1 pilot who appears to base his entire ACM on remaining at tree top level, forcing the overshoot through this or a very similar maneuver, and then tailstanding his cannon armed Russian ground attack aircraft to one ping kill his attacker. 

It's his fifteen of course, but it doesn't lend much to any kind of a sense of realistic engagements.

<S>

Ohhhh, someone got shot an a cherry pick attempt?

[CAP1]

i've used the maneuver in the op a few times. it has had varied results. the best, was that i actually got into a fihgt, before dying....the worst, was that i hadn't banked far enough, and flew myself right into the trees. that one was funny as hell.....i almost fell outta my chair laughing at myself for that move.

 it does seem to confuse some pile-its though. i've had guys go right on by me, and blow their speed, 'cause rather than go back up and look for me, they're rollin back n forth.....i've had others that seemed as if they expected it, and went vertical almost immediatly.

 i had one well known stick, missed on two attempts, thanks to this move........but it let another catch up, and he got me. 

[Ghastly]

Ohhhh, someone got shot an a cherry pick attempt?

Nope, I killed him at least once if not twice (I'm pretty sure he successfully ditched the second time though), without him getting a shot on me.  I was simply responding to the OP with an instance where I do see the maneuver as being gamey.

And with that, I'll return you to any agenda you might have.

<S>

[dedalos]

And with that, I'll return you to any agenda you might have.

<S>

  I was going to related to global warming but you figured me out 

[Ack-Ack]

As a last ditch option, it's not something I fret about.  But where it definitely crosses the line to gaming the game (IMHO of course) is that there is at least 1 pilot who appears to base his entire ACM on remaining at tree top level, forcing the overshoot through this or a very similar maneuver, and then tailstanding his cannon armed Russian ground attack aircraft to one ping kill his attacker. 

It's his fifteen of course, but it doesn't lend much to any kind of a sense of realistic engagements.

<S>

sounds more like he's getting you by using a hard, slightly nose down breaking turn into you and then into a vertical barrel roll for the kill as you over shoot rather than 'stick stirring'.  Nothing gamey at all about that maneuver.

ack-ack

[Ghastly]

No, he's not. He never turns (except to try to keep trees between himself and an attacker) and never rolls.  It appears to be solely max/min elevator deflections.  I'll try to remember to get a film of what I'm talking about if I see him up again. <S>