Author Topic: Lets talk about G-Loc  (Read 2142 times)

Offline Zigrat

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
Lets talk about G-Loc
« on: March 24, 2000, 10:47:00 PM »
Hi guys i know this has been talked about before, but ive only been playing for two weeks and wasnt here to participate in previous discussions  

I think G-Loc is really bad right now. It will get MUCH worse when the mustang gets combat flaps. I would like to fly teh mustang as it was meast to be flown, as a fast dogfighter, where it was very manouverable, but with the 4.5g limit, this just isnt possible.

Some have said this artifically low number was imposed because we have no restriction on moving our head oin combat. Fine, if you wanna leave the g-limits like they are in non-forward views, i dont agree 100% but i can see your point.

But trust me, you do NOT black out at 4.5Gs in a real plane. Is it uncomfortable? Kinda. Do you feel reeeal heavy? Yep. But do you black out? No way. Pilots today can withstand 9 gs with the help of G suits and strain manouvers. These were not in practice in WW2, but from accounts I've read 5.5Gs to 6 Gs would be a MUCH more reasonable limit. This isn't asking for no blackouts like some other arcadey sims, or 9 Gs which pilots didn't really pull back then. Just seems funny to me how all the mustang drivers want combat flaps when they will be pretty much useless since they were used at (relatively) high speeds where manouvering would cause blackout in AH.

-Zig



Offline Torque

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2091
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #1 on: March 24, 2000, 10:50:00 PM »
Did I hear two weeks plus a day?  

Offline eagl

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6769
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #2 on: March 25, 2000, 09:46:00 PM »
I'm not griping about the current blackout modelling, this is simply my RL experience.  This is the last time I'll mention all of this on the BBS.  

Lately I've had a lot of chances to fly a plane without a G-suit, and 4 G's is trivial to maintain.  This is in the T-37.  Most instructors have to fake an anti-G strain at 4 G's just to get their students to practice their own anti G strain.

Above about 5 G's, some sort of strain is required, and at 6 or above, most people (myself included) need to put some effort into the anti-G strain without the G suit.

FWIW guys, G limits and icon ranges can be discussed all you want, but in the end the settings are going to be whatever the game designers think they should be.  This is an area of the game design where there is no firm tech data.  "That looks right" is the way these 2 issues have been set, and that's how they're going to remain.  Even USAF G force studies include samples from very tall and thin people and people who are grossly out of shape, plus people who are shaped like fire hydrants who can take 9 G's without any strain at all.  The results are averaged out which is why the lines on the charts are so thick and often the G tolerance instructional material is missing numbers on the G load scale.  There are simply no firm answers on how many G's any given person can take.  Therefore what the designer thinks is right goes.  

Unfortunately, Pyro probably doesn't have the time or money to go get a few hundred hours in high-g capable aircraft    You'd be amazed at how quickly the average person adapts to pulling G's.  A typical student in UPT will gets used to pulling G's after only a half dozen or so sorties.  The G tolerance goes from initially 3 or so G's being comfortable, to around 5 being reasonably comfortable.  If a pilot challenges himself by pulling lots of G's every sortie, his tolerance will go even higher.  4 G's is just a wakeup call telling your body to get ready for some real manuvering.

And that's all I have to say about that.


------------------
eagl <squealing Pigs> BYA
Oink Oink To War!!!
Everyone I know, goes away, in the end.

Offline Zigrat

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 792
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2000, 12:35:00 AM »
what you said is pretty much what I was thinking, that for a WW2 who isn't as well conditioned and trained as today's pilots a 5.5G-6G tolerance would be appropriate. Its not a HUGE issue, but it seems like it would be one relatively easy to fix if data was presented that showed that the current model was slightly inaccurate.

Hans

  • Guest
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2000, 08:27:00 PM »
Let me add to the fire.  Rollercoasters run up to 4-Gs in some of their turns.

It isn't that you've suddenly hit 4-Gs that makes you pass out, it should be hitting 4-Gs and holding over time that causes you to pass out.  Your blood doesn't drain from your noggin instantly you know.

European Air War seems to do a better job of G-loc.  It sets on slow, and leaves slow.  It lags behind the G-meter by about 2 seconds.  That 'feels' more accurate to me.

Hans.

------------------
Hey, Frans....Yo tink dees guys are gut enouff to shooot us down?  Ya! Dats right.  Vie aw 'ere to shoot....you down!

Offline Citabria

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5149
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2000, 09:43:00 PM »
well if you are pulling 4.5 g's its cuz you screwed up  
Fester was my in game name until September 2013

Offline Rocket

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 403
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #6 on: March 27, 2000, 10:03:00 AM »
I am not a pilot but just a sim player.  But I wanted to comment that in AH I have never blacked completely out with no response.  I have tunneled down to not being able to see but backing off the stick brought vision back.  But never once have I been out to where I woke up in the tower from pulling so many Gs that I crashed while unconscious.  I have heard of a couple doing this before but few and far between.  Whether or not we should tunnel down so early is entirely up to HTC to decide and currently no squeakes here about it  

S!
Rocket

------------------
 
The Red Dragons
Fierce and Bold
With Honour and Courage
_______________________

 www.reddragons.de

[This message has been edited by Rocket (edited 03-27-2000).]

Offline Stiglr

  • Persona non grata
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #7 on: March 27, 2000, 05:04:00 PM »
The low G-LOC threshhold in AH is one of the main reasons I've removed it from my drive. It's simply too penal.

Flying the 109 series, as I'm wont to do, I need to be able to pull up out of dives to keep an energy advantage over a bogie in the event he starts maneuvering. In AH, as "careful" as I tried to be, I would always get the tunnel vision, even when I thought I was using very moderate pull-ups; not jerking the stick up, but moving it slowly and firmly up.

Seemed to me that many folks were using a simple vertical pull up (or barrel roll) as a defensive maneuver. Even if bogie wasn't moved off your tail, he wasn't gonna shoot you thru G-LOC. Now, a barrel roll is pretty effective, done properly. But it really wasn't necessary to complete the roll. Just pull up hard and you know the guy on your tail wouldn't be able to duplicate it AND shoot you. Pick an egress direction and you're home free, unless bogie gets lucky and picks the same route.

AH seems to assume that we're all cadets who have not built up anit-G-LOC tactics.

snpr

  • Guest
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #8 on: March 27, 2000, 07:40:00 PM »
*yawn*

Offline Duckwing6

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 324
      • http://www.pink.at
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #9 on: March 28, 2000, 02:45:00 AM »
jeeezz . what some guys kind of over look when they talk about low G tolerance is that they  are pulling hard for a very prolonged time .. if you pull into tunnel vision for very long and often in short time, your tolerance goes down a little due to the strain on your system (a real pilot can't manouver around like we do here without getting tired) -> thus if you really black it will take you longer to recover and on the next pull even less G will black you out.

As far as i know i lot of good pilots got shot down in dogfights just because they were so exhausted that they couldn't manouver around like that any longer

-> my experience from Basic aerobatics

Offline Maniac

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3817
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #10 on: March 28, 2000, 03:05:00 AM »
Gentle on the stick folks   my first few sorties in AH i noticed that the blackout/tunnel vision effect was quite strong but now i dont even think about it, djust ease off an bit. . .



------------------
AH : Maniac
WB : -nr-1-


   
http://www.rsaf.org/osf/
Warbirds handle : nr-1 //// -nr-1- //// Maniac

Offline -lynx-

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 340
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2000, 07:49:00 AM »
Funnily enough - watched a program on Discovery about G-loc just yesterday.

Americans are the only airforce to admit to having lost pilots to effects of G-loc and are conducting extensive research into protective equipment, suits etc, Russians are the only airforce that actually trains and pre-selects pilots to withstand the effects. As a result - Luftwaffe is the only airforce that benefits from both sides having inherited Russian-built training facilities and using US-designed G-suits

It was very interesting as they showed the actual footage at different Gs and explained what happens to pilots.

In order to fly a particular plane pilots have to pass a test - A10 requires 7.5G, F16 - 9G etc sustained for 15 seconds. But if you do black out - there is no "in/out" thing like we have - it takes awhile to recover... A couple of pilots in the film were having difficulties withstanding 7.5Gs and were physically exhausted after leaving the centrifuge...

All in all - it looks like we have it very easy in AH...

------------------
-lynx-
13 Sqn RAF

Offline Duckwing6

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 324
      • http://www.pink.at
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #12 on: March 28, 2000, 08:16:00 AM »
anybody who walzed through a aerobatic routine about 4 minutes long will tell you that it IS physicall exhausting even tho the highest sustained G are only about +4.5 with peaks going to +5.5 and -1.5 (BASIC .. not nlimited folks  )

Offline Stiglr

  • Persona non grata
  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 112
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #13 on: March 28, 2000, 11:38:00 AM »
I hear ya, duckwing. But I'm talking about initial onset of G-LOC here. It should get worse over time (good antidote to stick stirring too, I might add). But as it was last time I played, it seemed to want to come on the *instant* you pulled the stick back to correct a dive. And you had to correct a dive quick, because a terminal "right roll lawndart" was your reward if you didn't.

Offline eagl

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6769
Lets talk about G-Loc
« Reply #14 on: March 28, 2000, 07:41:00 PM »
Ok, remember I'm just "shooting the s**t" here, not griping about the game.  The game is fine and it's not my call anyhow    I lied when I said I wasn't going to talk about G tolerances anymore, 'cause this discussion seems general enough.  Anyhow...

My inflight G tolerance is approximately 1-2 G's greater than my centrifuge tolerance.  The centrifuge induces so much disorientation and stress on the victim that it's difficult to really get a true measure of G tolerance without multiple 'fuge rides to desensitize the victim.  People can get accustomed to the centrifuge induced disorientation, but since I only have had 2 'fuge sessions, they both left me very tired and feeling ill even though the G loads were less than I experienced during actual flights.

During actual flight the pilot tends to have the added advantage of an already elevated pulse, elevated blood pressure, and often a healthy shot of adrenaline working for him.  In the "heat of battle" doing low altitude threat reactions, it's common to pull in excess of 6 G's over and over for several minutes without immediately feeling fatigued or suffering from greyout.  After the sortie is a different matter of course.  

One of the most tiring types of sorties we did in the F-15E was a dedicated trip to the bombing range.  A typical "pop" pattern calls for nearly continuous turns at around 5 G's because the attack geometry calls for 4 to 5 G turns.  We could carry 18 practice bombs, and we would often split the attacks evenly between the pilots and WSO's.  Half the bombs involved precision radar bombing and relatively low G manuvers (generally no more than 4 G's), and the rest were more aggressive visual bombing attacks done entirely by the pilot.  The net result is up to an entire hour of fairly aggressive manuvering on the deck because you just HAVE to throw in some simulated threat reactions in there for practice, especially if the range has those cool little styrofoam smoke-trail rockets and sparkly fireworks to shoot at you  

Again, it's a matter of getting used to them.  Although the F-15E wasn't exactly a G monster at medium to high altitudes, my tolerance was high enough that after my upgrade training, I never really suffered significantly degraded performance due to G force induced fatigue even during dedicated BFM sorties.

WWII pilots didn't have the benefit of the training of course, and if I recall correctly, the only decent sized group of guys with G-suits were late war 'stang drivers.

The trick to sustaining high G's or multiple high G loads is to develop an appropriate level of effort that is just barely required to prevent greyout.  An unnecessarily hard anti-G strain will tire the pilot out sooner.  The more experience the pilot gets, the better he is able to only put the required amount of effort into the strain.  That's the biggest improvement in anti-G equipment we've seen, endurance instead of just tolerance of increased G loads.  

The WWII equivalent of course is excessive smoking, drinking, and the resulting high resting blood pressure.  You guys didn't think fighter pilots partied like that just because it's fun eh?  It's all about increasing combat effectiveness.  Yea, that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Added one more comment - 2 guys in an F-15E aborted a blown bombing pass and pulled about 13 G's in the dive recovery.  Neither the pilot or WSO blacked out, but both pulled most of the muscles in their upper backs pretty bad.  The plane was essentially undamaged except for some exhaust vent grills, and it flew a few days later after an extremely thorough inspection teardown.  The aircraft is only rated to 9 G's and the bomb dispensers it was carrying were rated to about 7 G's, but the actual aircraft limits have (AFAIK) never really been tested.  Just some trivia for you guys  

------------------
eagl <squealing Pigs> BYA
Oink Oink To War!!!

[This message has been edited by eagl (edited 03-28-2000).]
Everyone I know, goes away, in the end.