Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => Aces High General Discussion => Topic started by: DREDIOCK on March 29, 2009, 11:47:22 AM

Title: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: DREDIOCK on March 29, 2009, 11:47:22 AM
Ok its no big secret how much I positively LOATHE the way pilot wounds are modeled.

But if we have something for that.
What about the flying torches that continue to fight as though everything is hunky dory for several minutes after the engine catches fire.
Surely something  like plane becoming a flying torch would be somewhat disturbing, if not downright distracting to the pilot of the plane considering fire is supposed to be one of, if not the most horrible and painful ways to die. Not to mention the nervousness that would be created at the thought that the plane was likely to explode at any moment.

I mean how many pilots once their plane caught fire continued fighting in spite of their plane becomming a flying meteor?

Surely  if pilot wounds can and should  be modeled to absurdity. The same can be said for the flying fighting torch.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Tr1gg22 on March 29, 2009, 12:38:07 PM
well maybe the fire should move into the cockpit and start to burn the pilot causing a complete red out after about 15 seconds... :salute
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Beefcake on March 29, 2009, 12:54:18 PM
Although I agree with you DREDIOCK that the pilot probably wouldn't stick around once he turned into a torch, but some times I'll get hit and I won't realize I'm on fire until I look back and see the flame trail due to the way the game renders smoke and fire effects. It is possible that some people catch on fire and never realize it until the wing snaps off or the plane explodes.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: hlbly on March 29, 2009, 12:56:32 PM
I agree flying torches calmly fighting on is stupid .
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Murdr on March 29, 2009, 01:44:46 PM
It's the fuel tanks that catch fire in AH btw.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: StokesAk on March 29, 2009, 02:02:01 PM
I was in a Ta152 and one of the tanks that had no feul in it lit on fire.  :huh
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: A8TOOL on March 29, 2009, 02:03:12 PM
The fire in some planes looks like it's coming from the wing and others it's closer to the wing root or even the engine itself.

Red outs is a good idea...... that has been mentioned over and over for 8- 9 years
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Masherbrum on March 29, 2009, 02:11:24 PM
I was in a Ta152 and one of the tanks that had no feul in it lit on fire.  :huh

Vapor is a biotch.   It hides in every nook and cranny.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: B4Buster on March 29, 2009, 02:25:52 PM
Vapor is a biotch.   It hides in every nook and cranny.

Yup. The vapor is more flammable than the gasoline itself

I was once starting a gas stove when I caught on fire ad the flame worked its way up my arm. Funny thing is I didn't even realize it for about 5 seconds
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Masherbrum on March 29, 2009, 02:31:02 PM
Yup. The vapor is more flammable than the gasoline itself

I was once starting a gas stove when I caught on fire ad the flame worked its way up my arm. Funny thing is I didn't even realize it for about 5 seconds

I'll bet my life savings you weren't laughing at the time.   :D
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: B4Buster on March 29, 2009, 02:32:14 PM
I'll bet my life savings you weren't laughing at the time.   :D

LOL! You are correct  :lol
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: trigger2 on March 29, 2009, 08:23:42 PM
I'll bet my life savings you weren't laughing at the time.   :D

Well, did you continue to attack the p-47 on your 6?

I agree, something needs done about the damage modeling, now how to get around doing it is a different story...
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Saxman on March 29, 2009, 09:15:47 PM
If they can vary the location of the fire, they could have the cockpit fill with smoke so you can't see.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Chalenge on March 29, 2009, 11:01:41 PM
How about a slow and gradual blackout of the canopy as if soot is building up there? Disgusting but...
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Larry on March 29, 2009, 11:02:17 PM
Yup. The vapor is more flammable than the gasoline itself

Yeah but vapor doesn't burn for very long if the tank is empty. Empty fuel tanks that catch fire should only burn for a few seconds then they would burn themselves out.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Yeager on March 29, 2009, 11:12:48 PM
a plane that is engulfed in flames will not be involved in ACM.  HT should have built in a performance limiter that kicks in any time a plane is on fire. 

Fire = Game over.  Bail out or die.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: FiLtH on March 29, 2009, 11:35:21 PM
  I think a burning plane should instantly eject the pilot. We'd still see the cool flame effect of a plane dive to earth ablaze, and wouldnt have to worry about him anymore.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: frank3 on March 30, 2009, 05:26:22 AM
What about anti-fire? :)

Some flames could be put out by diving really fast/steep? Would be nice to have that modelled too.
Or even fire-extinghuishers in the engines!
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: TexMurphy on March 30, 2009, 06:53:07 AM
Id like to be able to put out the fire.

Either through diving or through use of extinguishers (spelling?).

Ofcourse it shouldnt be 100% but it should be possible.

Tex
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Kazaa on March 30, 2009, 07:09:45 AM
Ok its no big secret how much I positively LOATHE the way pilot wounds are modeled.

But if we have something for that.
What about the flying torches that continue to fight as though everything is hunky dory for several minutes after the engine catches fire.
Surely something  like plane becoming a flying torch would be somewhat disturbing, if not downright distracting to the pilot of the plane considering fire is supposed to be one of, if not the most horrible and painful ways to die. Not to mention the nervousness that would be created at the thought that the plane was likely to explode at any moment.

I mean how many pilots once their plane caught fire continued fighting in spite of their plane becomming a flying meteor?

Surely  if pilot wounds can and should  be modeled to absurdity. The same can be said for the flying fighting torch.

Sounds like you've been shot down by a burning zeke again. :D
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Rising41 on March 30, 2009, 07:17:27 AM
Zero's had a CO2 system that in theory discharged co2 into a burning fuel tank to smother the fire.

Guncam footage seems to prove it was not very effective. I'm unsure if any other aircraft had such a system in place. With self sealing tanks being the norm on allied aircraft. Diving to put out a fire would require lots of alt and speed. Sheding some control surfaces along the way in the dive. Basicaly still taking the flamer outa the action.


Riceball
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Crash Orange on March 30, 2009, 01:21:52 PM
What about anti-fire? :)

Some flames could be put out by diving really fast/steep? Would be nice to have that modelled too.

In multiengine planes, maybe. In a single-engine plane you should get maybe 2 seconds then a 2-3 second fade to redout. Even if the fire isn't actually in the cockpit I think the pilot would very quickly have nothing on his mind other than getting out of the cockpit as soon as humanly possible. Also, I suspect most fires that were successfully put out were less serious than the catastrophic fuel tank failures that would create the 50-foot flame trail we see from burning planes in AH2.

Zekes seem to have even more ridiculous ability than any other plane to fight on for a few minutes as roman candles.

I'm not sure which I hate more, unrealistic (lack of) consequences of fire or the awful pilot wound mechanics. IMHO pilot wounds would be better modeled by having all control inputs reduced by a random factor and a random (from moment to moment) extra damping on them, and lowering the threshold for blackout to 2 or 3 Gs.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: DREDIOCK on March 30, 2009, 08:24:59 PM
Sounds like you've been shot down by a burning zeke again. :D

Actually no. I came up with the thought as I was comming out of yet another total blackout and  saw a zeke on fire flying around as if nothing was wrong doing ACMs and shooting at people.
3 blackouts later he finally went boom. AFTER someone else finished him off.

As for me. I augered as I entered the very predictable final approach blackout and overshot the runway
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: DREDIOCK on March 30, 2009, 08:29:19 PM


I'm not sure which I hate more, unrealistic (lack of) consequences of fire or the awful pilot wound mechanics. IMHO pilot wounds would be better modeled by having all control inputs reduced by a random factor and a random (from moment to moment) extra damping on them, and lowering the threshold for blackout to 2 or 3 Gs.

Damn good constructive idea for addressing pilot wounds
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Boxboy on March 31, 2009, 12:27:22 PM
Yeah but vapor doesn't burn for very long if the tank is empty. Empty fuel tanks that catch fire should only burn for a few seconds then they would burn themselves out.

Normally when vapor goes it goes as an explosion, and the explosion should cause catostrophic damage ie plane goes down.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Masherbrum on March 31, 2009, 01:13:24 PM
Normally when vapor goes it goes as an explosion, and the explosion should cause catostrophic damage ie plane goes down.

Bingo.   

Larry, it isn't that simple.   A lot more factors come into play that can "prolong" the "burn out", per se.   

Regardless, something needs to be done.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: caldera on March 31, 2009, 01:24:25 PM
Bingo.   

Larry, it isn't that simple.   A lot more factors come into play that can "prolong" the "burn out", per se.   

Regardless, something needs to be done.


Doesn't a fire melt or at least structurally weaken aluminum?  I could imagine a plane flying around for a bit while on fire, but not doing maneuvers.  That puts a lot more stress on the plane than flying it straight and level. The japanese airframes, in particular, were'nt known for their robust construction.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Chilli on March 31, 2009, 01:50:11 PM
a plane that is engulfed in flames will not be involved in ACM.  HT should have built in a performance limiter that kicks in any time a plane is on fire. 

Fire = Game over.  Bail out or die.

Depending on the area flamed, maybe simulate damage to structures.  Wing tanks involved aileron control is lost.  Engine involved, loss of power to that engine.  The longer the plane is ablaze, the more structures are damaged or destroyed:  flaps, wing portions, engine oil, pilot blacked out, etc.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: RoGenT on March 31, 2009, 02:38:11 PM
I know if the pony D catches fire; it only burns for about 10 seconds if that before the wing comes off  :mad:



As for Dred's idea, I agree  :aok
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Roundeye on March 31, 2009, 05:25:01 PM
This was brought up a couple of years ago and someone had a great idea:  Make the pilot flail about screaming and unable to fly correctly. :devil
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Nutzoid on March 31, 2009, 06:47:04 PM
All of these sound like good ideas, but I wonder how much work there would be in modeling some of these? Why not keep it simple, and say if you find your plane aflame, >ooh a rhyme< you have five seconds to bail or explode, period.   :t
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Larry on April 01, 2009, 12:03:06 PM
Normally when vapor goes it goes as an explosion, and the explosion should cause catostrophic damage ie plane goes down.

Not really. Most of the time theres an explotion is because there was was nowhere for that expanding gas to go. Since there would be some holes it that fuel tank the gas can escape and most likely not cause an explotion. But even before that the fuel air ratio would have to be just right for an ignition. But a plane that's been flying around with a fuel leak the tank shouldn't have any vapor left in it after a few minutes.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Boxboy on April 01, 2009, 12:15:45 PM
Not really. Most of the time theres an explotion is because there was was nowhere for that expanding gas to go. Since there would be some holes it that fuel tank the gas can escape and most likely not cause an explotion. But even before that the fuel air ratio would have to be just right for an ignition. But a plane that's been flying around with a fuel leak the tank shouldn't have any vapor left in it after a few minutes.

Oh really? ok try this take a can of gas (like a 5 gal bucket with open top) stand waaaay back and throw a lighted cig over it, trust me the vapor WILL explode.  I worked for Gulf Oil as company rep and one of the duties was to "stick" the tanks and the biggest fear was a "spark" of some kind around the opening while sticking the tank to check levels and also for water.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Larry on April 01, 2009, 12:35:54 PM
Oh really? ok try this take a can of gas (like a 5 gal bucket with open top) stand waaaay back and throw a lighted cig over it, trust me the vapor WILL explode.  I worked for Gulf Oil as company rep and one of the duties was to "stick" the tanks and the biggest fear was a "spark" of some kind around the opening while sticking the tank to check levels and also for water.

Funny you should say that because I used to do that a lot with my friends and not ONCE did it ever explode. The vapor would ignite and there would be a big jet of fire that would come out of the opening. We used a five gallon plastic gas container and the fumes didn't stay lite long enough for it to even melt the plastic. Only thing is that we used a lighter duct taped to a stick. And IIRC a cigarette wont ignite gasoline because its not hot enough. I suggest you try it some time since you clearly never have.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Chilli on April 01, 2009, 04:28:19 PM
 :O (In my best "Dad" voice), "You are playing with fire!"  :mad: 

Yes, in some models I have recalled the wing falling off.  Sometimes, other pilots have to tell me I am on fire, because there is no other clue until I see the tower or look back and see  :O the fireball.  Even then I have a split second thought of someone else is on fire.  :confused:
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Larry on April 01, 2009, 04:40:55 PM
:O (In my best "Dad" voice), "You are playing with fire!"  :mad: 


Yes in my younger days I was a real pyro. I loved making "napalm" then using it on my little sisters barbies. :D
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: DREDIOCK on April 01, 2009, 07:00:22 PM
Oh really? ok try this take a can of gas (like a 5 gal bucket with open top) stand waaaay back and throw a lighted cig over it, trust me the vapor WILL explode.  I worked for Gulf Oil as company rep and one of the duties was to "stick" the tanks and the biggest fear was a "spark" of some kind around the opening while sticking the tank to check levels and also for water.

I've thrown a lit cigarette in a can of gas at the time fully expecting (and wanting) it to ignite.
The biggest thing that happened is the cigarette went out.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Larry on April 01, 2009, 08:04:33 PM
I've thrown a lit cigarette in a can of gas at the time fully expecting (and wanting) it to ignite.
The biggest thing that happened is the cigarette went out.

Mythbusters did one on that. I think it was a "movie" special where the guy throws a cig in a pool of gas and lights it. I think it was busted wasn't it?
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: MachFly on April 01, 2009, 10:47:25 PM
When my fuel tank starts burning, I'm out of there. ether try to ditch it or bail.
So to me it really would not matter, just another thing that can burn, however it would make the game more realistic.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: hitech on April 02, 2009, 09:29:14 AM
The whole point of the fire is to give people a choice to possibly die at some random time or to bail out. The choice is the pilots.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Dano on April 02, 2009, 11:51:57 AM
Sorry, but I didn't take time to read the whole thread, so forgive me if its been suggested.
How about rerouting power back to the joystick that results in either the stick melting on your desk (plastic ones like MS FF or CH stuff) or turning red hot (Saitek, etc)?
 :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

Ok, maybe the idea needs to be refined a bit.  :D
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: A8TOOL on April 02, 2009, 12:00:47 PM
There is no doubt that some aircraft burn longer than others and all seem to be on a timer. Nothing random about it.

Pilot wounds are different. They really do seem to be random.

The most blackouts I've had was 10 or 11 before i popped...can't remember exactly. The least was 3.
 Usually the first B/O comes fast... somewhere between from 3  and 9 seconds it feels. From there it's hard to say exactly how long till the next one or how many till you pop.


Gas does not ignite with a cigarette. I wonder if it would if you flicked one hard against a wall with gas under it?

Cars do not explode like in the movies either. 
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: DREDIOCK on April 02, 2009, 01:56:25 PM
The whole point of the fire is to give people a choice to possibly die at some random time or to bail out. The choice is the pilots.

And the whole point of the pilot wound modeling is??

One would think that a plane on fire. would be slightly more then just a minor distraction. (which basically is what it is now) Not to mention upsetting to most pilots who's plane is on fire. Just as a pilot wound would be.

But I dunno. Im not a pilot.
Curious as to how much of a distraction you think it would be is suddenly (God forbid) your plane suddenly became a flying torch?

Would you say it would be at least as distracting as say..going into total blackout every 30 seconds or so?
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Bizman on April 03, 2009, 12:33:50 PM
Last summer I had the privilege to meet one of our Finnish aces, Mauno Frantila, who told he was in his Me109-G2 in 1943 chasing an enemy bomber near the Estonian coast, when his engine started sounding not so funny. On his way home it burst into flames in the middle of the Gulf of Finland at 2000 metres. He contacted the Malmi airport that he would try to reach the continent before jumping, since bailing in the empty sea would have resulted a certain death. He told he was literally sitting on the wing trying to get the plane crash in uninhabited area before he jumped at about 200 metres, bailing at a short walking distance to the airport. The total distance was about 100 km, half of which in a burning plane.
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: B4Buster on April 03, 2009, 02:45:34 PM
hitech - if the player is high enough he can continue fighting and THEN when his plane breaks apart he can bail. Maybe when your plane catches on fire...the screen slowly is engulfed in red...when it's completely red you have no more control and you die...you can't even bail out?
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: DREDIOCK on April 04, 2009, 12:56:19 AM
hitech - if the player is high enough he can continue fighting and THEN when his plane breaks apart he can bail. Maybe when your plane catches on fire...the screen slowly is engulfed in red...when it's completely red you have no more control and you die...you can't even bail out?

See thats the thing.
If I remember correctly. the reason why PW are modeled the way they are is because people would just keep flying around and fighting
This was supposed to give em a reason to disengage.
Just seems to me that if that type of logic is used for pilot wounds. the same logic should apply to burning aircraft.
Because most of the people I see in burning aircraft. Just keep fighting  as though nothing were wrong.

dont get me wrong. I like the idea of the pilot wound. I just think there is a better way to deal with it
Same goes for burning aircraft.
Filling the cockpit up with smoke isnt even a half bad idea
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: hlbly on April 19, 2009, 03:46:25 PM
I really like it when a hurri burns and fights on .
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Badboy on April 19, 2009, 04:01:48 PM
It's the fuel tanks that catch fire in AH btw.

Would be good if the pilots could catch fire too... Specially if they bail and they burn all the way down.

And if the pilot doesn't catch fire it would also be good if their chutes could catch fire as they bail out.

HTC, add this to your to do list please :)

Badboy

 

 
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Crash Orange on April 19, 2009, 05:07:10 PM
The whole point of the fire is to give people a choice to possibly die at some random time or to bail out. The choice is the pilots.

The problem there is that the difference in game terms between dying and bailing out is almost negligible. Either way you get a death, the other guy gets a kill, and you lose any perk points for the plane you were in - but if you keep fighting, you might get another kill that you won't get if you bail out. Why *not* keep fighting and risk blowing up?
Title: Re: Ok if we're goig to have Pw blackouts. How about the flying torches?
Post by: Roscoroo on April 20, 2009, 09:58:13 AM
Yeah but vapor doesn't burn for very long if the tank is empty. Empty fuel tanks that catch fire should only burn for a few seconds then they would burn themselves out.

A near empty fuel tank is 1000 times more explosive then a full tank . its the oxygenated Fuel molecules  in a closed tank.  (15 parts Air to 1 part fuel)