Engine Out Landings

[RTHolmes]

rtb with no kills or damage done and your reward is no kill against you (and no loss of perks for a perk plane.)

having said that the scoring system does favour ditching in range of your base rather than landing properly if you got nothing on that sortie, which doesnt seem right.

[RTHolmes]

I wouldnt say no to a tug.

[EVZ]

Anyone else catchin' my idea here? Tug = no other type of added incentive to what we already have, no need to change current landing areas, just a small vehicle capable of moving damaged a/c. Just a good wingman concept

It's not an unreasonable idea ... but given the priorities of many people posting here, I suspect it's perceived as trivial ? Personally, I think a RTB ditch is just a better luck next time thing ... If you can't afford to LOOSE the perk points? DON'T put them at risk.

[Ack-Ack]

All in All...I think it is stupid that you have to be on the pavement at your own base to land your kills successfully. If I crash land or just land anywhere inside the base perimeter, I think we should get a 'successful landing'. I do believe that during WW2, or any war for that matter, that if you were shot up and flew back to friendly lines and made it back to your home base, it was a successful flight. I know alot will b*tch about this, but, i just hate the fact that if i have one wheel off the pavement on my landing, or slid off runway on crash landing, i lose out on perks and performance rating. IMHO

Landing on the runway with a damaged plane isn't very hard to do.

ack-ack

[fuzeman]

Only read the first few posts so apologies if this has been stated. There has to be a line drawn. If you massage that line and adjust it, someone else will come along asking for that massage to extend just a little bit more. That could go on and on and on.

My opinion, keep the line where it is.

[colmbo]

Landing on the runway with a damaged plane isn't very hard to do.

I agree, have done so many times.  But to manage to get all the way back, land on the runway then slide off the side or something and not get landing credit is silly.  You have demonstrated the skill needed, real life you would be good to go, here in game you are penalized.  Silly to make the game stricter than real life.

[icepac]

Since the only score involved was their only life and they didn't care about perk points or their name in lights, they were more than happy to crash land in such a manner.

This was a "successful landing":
(Image removed from quote.)

So much for the "one wheel off the pavement/airplane barely off" = ditch theory.

Maybe the other wing is back on the pavement somewhere.....

wrongway

If your gear had been down, you could have been 5 feet closer to the runway and gotten a ditch.

A gear up plane can be further "off" the runway than one with gear down.

[RTHolmes]

I agree, have done so many times.  But to manage to get all the way back, land on the runway then slide off the side or something and not get landing credit is silly.  You have demonstrated the skill needed, real life you would be good to go, here in game you are penalized.  Silly to make the game stricter than real life.

going by a raft of WWII movies, you'd get a bollocking from your squadron leader and be picking up the night's bar tab for a sloppy landing

[Krusty]

If you spend perks, that's what you're doing. SPENDING them. Just imagine they are a 1-time payment and are GONE as soona s you leave the hangar. GONE, no more, never to be seen again. IF you happen to land safely that just means you get a refund and can try again.

Otherwise you can't keep the mindset that you still have those perks, or that you are owed any kind of refund.

I've made more damaged landings than you or I or Lusche can even count. I've missed the runway, I've died on touchdown, I've blacked out and veered off after a perfect landing, etc. The challenge is: Land it ON the runway. That's the MA game mechanic.

Now if you all want to propose some sort of "entire airfield" rule then I'd be all for it ASSUMING it's only used in historic setups such as FSOs, scenarios, and so forth. As far as MA flight goes, you NEED a little challenge. As stated, you ask for 10 feet now, 10 feet tomorrow, 20 feet the next, soon you never lose perks for anything and you gain points just for sitting in the tower.

The runway/cement limit is a good one for now.

[USAF2010]

I'm cool with that Krusty, I'm just proposing the tug idea now, just for those cases of "ah crap all that work for nothin" situation

[FLS]

I agree, have done so many times.  But to manage to get all the way back, land on the runway then slide off the side or something and not get landing credit is silly.  You have demonstrated the skill needed, real life you would be good to go, here in game you are penalized.  Silly to make the game stricter than real life.

Staying on the runway is a better demonstration of skill. You don't want to see that rewarded?

[Krusty]

The "tug" is just a rewording of the same complaint.


Look, AH cuts some corners as compared to real life... When you land it doesn't show all the things that happened in real life. A swarm of people come out, clean the plane, reload, refuel it, etc, wheel it back to the hangar for repairs, etc.

But that sortie is OVER. You didn't make it to the end of the runway. End of story. You're out of bounds. Sortie over, scores computed, no matter what you suggest, what deus ex machina you invent to get you BACK to that runway, you've failed the "challenge" and should not be rewarded for skirting the rules.

The rule: End sortie on the cement, or get less points. Simple logic: Can you make it to the cement? If yes, tower. If no, keep trying. Give up? Tower off the runway.

Don't complicate it with tow tugs, jeeps with gas cans, instant repair crews, or anything like that. That's just getting around the issue of: You didn't end sortie on the cement. That's the end of the argument right there.

[USAF2010]

Well I'm still saying I think we should get a tug. I'm not asking for all those other things you listed. Valid points, but I believe what I'm asking for is pretty simple, and hell obviously if the plane is too wrecked, it probably wont be moving much.

Change isn't always a bad thing you know 

[Ack-Ack]

Change isn't always a bad thing you know 

A change isn't always needed either.

ack-ack

[colmbo]

going by a raft of WWII movies, you'd get a bollocking from your squadron leader and be picking up the night's bar tab for a sloppy landing

Once had to deal with a complete hydraulic failure (occured on the ground post landing) in the B-24.  I was happy just to get the airplane stopped...wasn't particular about where it stopped.