Author Topic: pilot health (Read 553 times)

Kweassa · « **Reply #15 on:** July 10, 2002, 08:18:21 PM »

Lol Math

Seriously, if it's simplified a bit to game standards, I think it's ok. It might add some interesting situations to the game. Simplify the pilot's body to four parts - Head/Torso/Arms/Legs.

Head damage will no doubt give out the instant pilot kill

Torso damage will lead to the 'fainting' we currently see, with a bit longer interval than we currently experience

Arm damage will reduce aileron/elevator authority by maybe 30%

Leg damage will reduce rudders and wheel break authority by 30%

Multiple damages will have all the indicated effects plus an increased chance of fainting(current standards) during certain time interval, and an increased chance that the next faint out will be 'death'.

We could maybe add this small icon below the CTRL+D damge screen..

(Edit: Woops, forgot to post image)

Kweassa · « **Reply #16 on:** July 10, 2002, 08:22:52 PM »

New damage screen, with human icon indicating damage to left arm and leg... (

)??

wulfie · « **Reply #17 on:** July 10, 2002, 09:07:24 PM »

Actually - Sakai (as in Saburo, R.I.P.) related how he was becoming very fatigued in his epic escape from 16+ F6Fs.

This isn't an exact quote (don't have the book in front of me) but in his book he basically relates/says something like this:

"My rudder control began to get sloppy and I was skidding all over the place as I conducted evasive maneuver after evasive maneuver. My breaks were becoming less crisp and taking longer to develop. I knew if I didn't get away soon I would evade too late and that would be the end."

He was specifically speaking about the effect of fatigue - and pre WW2 IJN fighter pilots were trained to a far superior level of physical conditioning when compared to any other Nation's pre (or post, for that matter) WW2 fighter pilot training program (probably Imperial Japanese military/martial tradition at work there - read Sakai's book to see what I'm talking about).

Another case I will never forget - one of the greatest air combat stories I ever read. It was long ago in Air and Space and it was an Israeli jet fighter pilot telling the story of how he and his wingman caught some Egyptian (?, I think the enemy was Egyptian - could have been Syrian, etc., etc.) opponent in a Mirage at low altitude. The Egyptian pilot was obviously low on gas and had no missiles left and was trying to get home. The 2 Israelis dropped down on him in a large valley, understandably expecting an easy kill (Israeli combat pilots have such a reputation)...and they both barely got away with their lives.

To give you an idea of how good this unknown/unsung Egyptian fighter jock was - this Israeli ace spoke of him with great reverence during the story and claimed he was 'the best fighter pilot I have ever seen'.

To make a long story short - the Israeli alludes that if this enemy pilot had 2 missiles he would have landed at home with 2 (more) Israeli kills to his credit. He didn't have any missiles, and still almost killed both of the Israelis more than once.

The Israeli basically states that as the Egyptian had finally gained some decent separation, he bolted and began to climb over the cliffs at the edge of the valley (he'd been at very low altitude over the floor of the valley until then). This gave the Israeli ace one last shot - with a missile and an actual chance to hit this time because the enemy wasn't lost in the clutter of the valley floor. He says he saw the Egyptian pilot begin to evade and then 'wash out' of his maneuever. The missile hit the enemy. The Israeli was certain that the enemy was too exhausted to keep up the pace of maneuver he had been keeping.

Pilot fatigue would be very very cool, especially fatigue and cumulative G forces linked with stick forces required for maneuver. You'd see an until now unmodeled reason why it would have been a terror to fight a bunch of F4Us while flying an A6M, or why some pilots disliked the Bf 109 (very tiring to maneuver at high speeds, and not alot of cockpit room to apply force to the stick, etc.). I'll never forget the interview with the LW pilot who explained that the Bf 109K-4, unless trimmed for such prior to takeoff, required full rudder against torque to 'skid' in a straight line when at full power + boost at very high altitudes.

This would tire out one leg pretty fast I think. 8)

Mike/wulfie

Gryffin · « **Reply #18 on:** July 10, 2002, 09:14:01 PM »

lol Mathman, I used to love that game

senna · « **Reply #19 on:** July 10, 2002, 09:18:26 PM »

Kweassa, LOL.

AKSWulfe · « **Reply #20 on:** July 10, 2002, 09:27:16 PM »

Wulfie, "Pilot fatigue would be very very cool, especially fatigue and cumulative G forces linked with stick forces required for maneuver. You'd see an until now unmodeled reason why it would have been a terror to fight a bunch of F4Us while flying an A6M, or why some pilots disliked the Bf 109 (very tiring to maneuver at high speeds, and not alot of cockpit room to apply force to the stick, etc.)."

You're kidding right? I wouldn't want to fly an A6M against a bunch of F4Us anyway. Eventually they'd be able to BnZ you to death, you simply can't avoid 3 or 4 coordinated F4Us in a zero for ever.

Most people already don't fly 109s as their ride of choice, the stats show it. The G10 sees the most use, because it can carry a 30mm and has uber-WEP.

In the case of the Egyptian pilot, they assumed he was tired. In the case of Saburo, he was tired... but he didn't quit.... of course he had one problem we don't have to deal with, he could only break to one side due to having vision in only one eye.
-SW

wulfie · « **Reply #21 on:** July 10, 2002, 11:30:23 PM »

No I'm not kidding at all. When stick forces and fatigue are not modeled, you are removing the disadvantages that some aircraft really had, and removing the advantages that other aircraft really had.

I believe you don't want to fight 4 F4Us in an A6M. Neither do I. 8)

But look at it this way - in real life, with 'cloned' pilots, who have the same musculature, endurance, etc. - it's going to require greater energy for pilot A to maneuver an A6M thru 4 hard turns at 300+ MPH than it is going to be required of pilot B in a F4U, P-47, etc.

Pilots did get 'worn out' from frequent and heavy ACM in the same sortie - it was not a rare occurance. I can't recall his name but one of the top scoring LW aces had a repuatation among his peers as being so strong and fit that he literally 'wore down' an opponent because he could perform more strenuos ACM for a longer period of time.

Look at the positive side - certain aircraft types in AH, while being aerodynamically capable of retaining energy while maneuvering and thus being capable 'on paper' of conducting a near endless string of very impressive ACM/acrobatic maneuvers...would now by default be flown more 'realistically' - because there is a human body as part of the FM.

I don't think this will happen for some time - mainly because I think the HTC guys would do it right, which would require alot of research on ACM effects on endurance, etc.

But if it makes the matchup more realistic, I'm all for it. I love the Bf 109G-10 in AH. If I had to change the way I flew it in AH because I could get more 'tired', well that's part of the package if you fly a Bf 109G-10.

It would change how often certain aircraft were flown no doubt, but it should matter in an online WW2 air combat sim that it was immensely less tiring to maneuver a P-47 at 350 MPH as compared to an A6M, or a Bf 109, etc.

Mike/wulfie

Dead Man Flying · « **Reply #22 on:** July 10, 2002, 11:44:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by wulfie
But look at it this way - in real life, with 'cloned' pilots, who have the same musculature, endurance, etc. - it's going to require greater energy for pilot A to maneuver an A6M thru 4 hard turns at 300+ MPH than it is going to be required of pilot B in a F4U, P-47, etc.

Aces High already does this. All pilots are modelled after some guy named Clark Kent.

-- Todd/Leviathn

NOD2000 · « **Reply #23 on:** July 11, 2002, 12:46:38 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Mathman
Imagine hearing a wav file that says, "F6F pilot needs food badly,"

yah i can see it now.............. to feed ur pilots u have to get a flying coin that looks like a burger or mabey a pizza........

but then again when the pilot has to sh*t can u use that as a bomb? like be in a dog fight take a dump hits ur persewers window blinds him and makes him a lawn dart.........compleat with fertilizer

Glasses · « **Reply #24 on:** July 11, 2002, 12:48:43 AM »

Well according to some 109 pilots they could withstand Gs longer than their allied couunterparts due to the seat being inclined in the same Form as an F16 seat.

So I mean it could balance out a duel for example a Spitfire pilot can maneuver better but the 109 pilot could pull Gs a while longer without suffering black outs and it could in some cases even out a match. Or an La7 pulling more Gs than the 109 pilot would have to watch his Gs so he would be affected by Gs more so than the 109 pilot.

Toad · « **Reply #25 on:** July 11, 2002, 07:50:45 AM »

Anyone got some research on the length (time) of the average air-to-air engagement?

Didn't think so.

Vortex · « **Reply #26 on:** July 11, 2002, 08:24:50 AM »

Not a big fan of any idea that would shorten combat more in AH. The damage model already cuts things back a lot more than I'd like. Methinks this would just shorten flights even more.

Angus · « **Reply #27 on:** July 11, 2002, 08:35:37 AM »

The British were also into the G-suit business, and found the Spitfire MK XIII quite good at delivering enough sustained G's to make the suit do its job. BTW, in the spit one could have the legs in a higher position on the rudder bar to compensate a bit.
It was the 190 that had the seat tilted back.
Later in the war I belive the Germans also had some sort of G suits, and also tested various positions in the cockpit. The famous ace Gunther Rall once crashlanded a jet while in a prone position. Quite scary he said, for the line of sight was so low!

Nifty · « **Reply #28 on:** July 11, 2002, 09:45:25 AM »

I'd rather have a ground vehicle model overall than pilot fatigue. This is something they can think about adding in after other aspects of the simulation are upgraded (not to mention more planes, vehicles, boats, objects are added).