PDA

View Full Version : Pilot fatigue



CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-22-2006, 06:17 AM
Oleg, I think that most, if not all would like to have pilot fatigue in this game. With pilot fatigue, more important would be skills of pilot, not just a machine that he is flying with. I know that forces are modelled in this game, so why pilot isnt tired while pulling very heavy stick? It would be great if we could see this feature in PF as realism option, or in tBOB. This would improve realism a lot and cut the whinning about planeshttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

lowfighter
04-22-2006, 06:22 AM
Yes this would be fantastic!

FritzGryphon
04-22-2006, 06:23 AM
And increase the whining about pilot fatigue http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-22-2006, 06:28 AM
Endurance of pilots would be the same. Just planes known from hard controlls would get pilot tired faster, and these with easier would tire pilot slower. I dont see any reason why this shouldnt be implemented.

stansdds
04-22-2006, 07:08 AM
Pilot fatigue was an issue in WW II. In the Pacific, USMC pilots would be on station for six weeks, then rotated to a rear area for six weeks.

Takata_
04-22-2006, 07:26 AM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Endurance of pilots would be the same. Just planes known from hard controlls would get pilot tired faster, and these with easier would tire pilot slower. I dont see any reason why this shouldnt be implemented.
I can see a few reasons why this important factor hasn't been implemented yet:
- accurate real-life data are needed about relative difference in plane handling (light or heavy controls doesn't sound enough to get it right)
- this simmulation factor is needed for AI pilots as well as for players, which means a lot of computer ressource to manage this single feature.
- an obvious engineering focus rather than a "human" real interest.

Beside, IMO, this is the most important factor to model after physics in such simulation gender to achieve a closer accuracy to real life air combat.

Online endurance should be modeled the same for everybody, but it should be subject to variation for offline campaigns.
Fatigue level is influencing combat readiness. It was always a primary concern in military operations. For example, I read a medical report about how high alt patrols under oxygen were exhausting fighter crews and this influenced heavily their combat readiness after some time.
S~
Takata.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-22-2006, 07:37 AM
Isnt heaviness of stick implemented already? Like heavy controls of B109, where u cannot turn hard on high g. If my memory is right, simulated strenght of pilot is 25kg(50lbs), its really a lot to pull and push 25kg for few minutes.

Takata_
04-22-2006, 07:52 AM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Isnt heaviness of stick implemented already? Like heavy controls of B109, where u cannot turn hard on high g. If my memory is right, simulated strenght of pilot is 25kg(50lbs), its really a lot to pull and push 25kg for few minutes.
- Right, but itsn't something dynamic like modeling the pilot's fatigue state and recovering from it. You'll need another function to make it works as well as specific data for each plane.
S~
Takata.

WB_Outlaw
04-22-2006, 08:36 AM
Stick force is determined by the player, not the aircraft. The EFFECT of the stick is determined by the aircraft, but that data is already in the flight model. There is no additional aircraft data needed.

I don't think I like this idea b/c you would have to model each pilot the same and that is not the case. For example, an experienced 109 pilot would not have any trouble maintaining rudder pressure for long periods of time b/c he's been doing it for a long time. On the other hand, pilots of aircraft with trim on all 3 axes would not necessarily be conditioned to do that. A pilot's conditioning should vary depending on the aircraft he flies and that's hard to model. Also, the mechanical stops on our sticks do not correspond to the mechanical stops in the aircraft. Unless the game limits stick force to full deflection force, this will result in more than full deflection stick force being applied and thus improper fatigue modeling.

I'll shut-up now.

--Outlaw.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-22-2006, 09:05 AM
Outlaw - it will never be realistic in 100%, but u think that now its better? It changes the whole dogfight! Even if every pilot would be modeled the same, it will change whole fight in +. Humans possibilities arent varrying much, especially when they are trained in the same way. Now all pilots are modelled the same, so i dont get ur point.

JG4_Helofly
04-22-2006, 11:31 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

This would make the dogfight much more realistic. Not longer 2 hours hard dogfights and flying the airplane to their limits. The plane performance would not longer be the only important thing. Aircrafts which are not under the top fighters would be able to kill whatever they want if the other pilot is tired cause he pulled high G's to long. Planes like p 40, hurrican,... would profit of this. It would make these planes more attractive.

It would be a great step forward in Realisme.

BfHeFwMe
04-22-2006, 12:04 PM
LoL, pilot fatigue has never been measured by stick forces applied, but by total G force exposure on the posterior. So you'll get it completely opposite of your wish, the turn and burners will, and should, expire first.

Still want pilot fatigue than? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Brain32
04-22-2006, 12:19 PM
LoL, pilot fatigue has never been measured by stick forces applied, but by total G force exposure on the posterior. So you'll get it completely opposite of your wish, the turn and burners will, and should, expire first.

Still want pilot fatigue than?
Especially because of that fact...

WWMaxGunz
04-22-2006, 12:27 PM
You pull the stick, you get the G's unless you go into stall. Your wingtips will show trails
then, it's like skidmarks on the road of the sky. So they are related but G's is the more
accurate or only single measure needed? It is the main fight besides also not in, the cold.

There were a lot of studies and released info from the 60's space medicine times from NASA
and colleges. It can imagine that the same was gathered in the USSR but not disseminated
as openly. And I dunno what locks have been put on since but there was enough in general
terms to put numbers in the ballpark of real.

Is any of the old Air Forces (any countries) studies available?

WWMaxGunz
04-22-2006, 12:33 PM
Turn and burn fly slower and can turn inside a faster plane at less G's than the faster plane.
It's about the radius.

JG4_Helofly
04-22-2006, 12:54 PM
In the book about Hartmann you can read that turnfights was very hard work. That's why he alway flew boom and zoom.
Beside pilot fatigue it would be good to have more effects on the vision. Not only at 6 G black screen but it should appear a bit before with vision troubles like in the first person shooter were you see hazy after a grenade hit you ( call of duty ). Mostly the negative G's should be bad for pilots vision. Hartmann said that negative G's made shooting nearly impossible.

RegRag1977
04-22-2006, 12:55 PM
It would be cool for realism to have pilot fatigue!

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-22-2006, 01:28 PM
Hey, its not only G!! Arent u tired when u train with 25kg for 5 minutes? Its really hard work to pull/push ur stick. Like in Spitfire, it elevator wasnt so hard, but ailerons were were hard to move on high speeds. So there are two types of fatigue:
-G fatigue(dunno what is tiring here, i guess whole body)
-physics fatigue(ur muscles getting tired)

JG4_Helofly
04-22-2006, 02:37 PM
Yes these two factors would be enough for the beginning. After that we could speak about high alt flights with it's oxygene problem and such things, but these two things would be a good start.

I realy realy hop that Oleg implant this in tbob

rosaenrico
04-22-2006, 03:01 PM
Hi all,
I think that fatigue should definitely be introduced in this sim, which is already so advanced in flight modeling. The pilot fatigue should be the main limiting factor at least in turnfights, for the reasons explained above and in other threads on this argument.
I sincerely would like to listen Oleg's opinion about the pro - and contrary aspects in(hypotetical) introduction of fatigue in the sim.

RegRag1977
04-22-2006, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by JG4_Helofly:
In the book about Hartmann you can read that turnfights was very hard work. That's why he alway flew boom and zoom.
Beside pilot fatigue it would be good to have more effects on the vision. Not only at 6 G black screen but it should appear a bit before with vision troubles like in the first person shooter were you see hazy after a grenade hit you ( call of duty ). Mostly the negative G's should be bad for pilots vision. Hartmann said that negative G's made shooting nearly impossible.

It would be fair because it would forbid to a pilot who did a mistake entering a Black veil, to have right after his mistake, the opportunity to have an accurate aiming, (what is totally unrealistic)...

WWMaxGunz
04-22-2006, 05:00 PM
Originally posted by JG4_Helofly:
In the book about Hartmann you can read that turnfights was very hard work. That's why he alway flew boom and zoom.
Beside pilot fatigue it would be good to have more effects on the vision. Not only at 6 G black screen but it should appear a bit before with vision troubles like in the first person shooter were you see hazy after a grenade hit you ( call of duty ). Mostly the negative G's should be bad for pilots vision. Hartmann said that negative G's made shooting nearly impossible.

Funny but my copies of the whole IL2 series there is greying before the blackout. Not grey
so much as a crosshatch pattern that moves to take over with more G's.

JG4_Helofly
04-22-2006, 05:49 PM
Yes a bit grey just before total blackout. But it's not very effective in my opinion to decrease the vision capacity.

WB_Outlaw
04-22-2006, 08:45 PM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Outlaw - it will never be realistic in 100%, but u think that now its better? It changes the whole dogfight! Even if every pilot would be modeled the same, it will change whole fight in +. Humans possibilities arent varrying much, especially when they are trained in the same way. Now all pilots are modelled the same, so i dont get ur point.

109s, for example, require constant rudder input for coordinated flight. If you implement the same fatigue model across the board based on control forces exerted, a 109 pilot will be dead tired before he even gets to the fight. This is not the case however b/c 109 pilots were used to this. From what I've read, there was a joke among LW pilots that 109 drivers were easy to spot b/c they could only walk in circles.

I don't disagree that pilot fatigue would be cool, I just don't think that it can ever be accurately represented. To answer your question, yes, I think the current method of no fatigue modeling is better b/c it doesn't subjectively penalize anyone.

It would be cool if black/red out recovery was similar to the effects of close explosions in COD 2 with blurred vision and reduced hearing (although IIRC hearing is the last thing to go during GLOC).

--Outlaw.

AKA_TAGERT
04-23-2006, 12:26 AM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Oleg, I think that most, if not all would like to have pilot fatigue in this game. Think again

Von_Rat
04-23-2006, 01:02 AM
i vote for pilot fatigue.

it would really increase the realism and cut down on the unrealistic low level tnb fests.

a tnb plane after a bunch of hard turns will not only be low and slow, but low slow and tired, thus easy pickings for a fresh bnz plane diving in.

the tnb crowd will really hate this idea.

im sure allowences can be figured in for planes like 109.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-23-2006, 02:10 AM
I had hope that trolls wont come here.... i was wrong http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

JG4_Helofly
04-23-2006, 02:57 AM
There are probably reports to know how the contorle forces were, light or havy. Also the constuction plans could give indications.

The problem with the rudder of the 109 is that if the pilot get tired generally you can not pull at the stick with full power even if only your leg is tired. It would be necessary to have arms and legs modeled separatly.

Lodovik
04-23-2006, 04:41 AM
This is a very interesting idea and well worth implementing in sims, I think.
It also has a effective byproduct on the AI, as AI aces can be modelled with greater strenght and G resistance. No more need for artificial cheats for the AI!

Might also make a job for archive researcher types who would have to go looking for pilots medical records http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

RegRag1977
04-23-2006, 04:42 AM
What is amazing with fatigue is that it shows us how the performance figures of aircrafts are not that objective.
Turners were not so easy to fly in reality: a great aircraft on the "paper" could be an average fighter only, if considering pilot fatigue.
With fatigue, überness won't mean the same because for a human beeing there's only a thin margin exploitable in a WW2 a/c.
It would give the importance to the pilot's sensitiveness and to his experience(like it was during WW2), more than to the performance figures <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">abstraction</span>.

I never read accounts saying " we went out and the fight was piece of cake, cause we had über A/C"...Such accounts were very rare (due to ennemy lack of XP) and didn't last for long.

Piloting is not a science that would be only related with a/c performance figures, it's an ART that like all arts demands XP and sensitiveness...

That's my point of view...

lowfighter
04-23-2006, 04:52 AM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
What is amazing with fatigue is that it shows us how the performance figures of aircrafts are not that objective.


Yes, very good point!

RegRag1977
04-23-2006, 04:53 AM
Originally posted by Lodovik:
This is a very interesting idea and well worth implementing in sims, I think.
It also has a effective byproduct on the AI, as AI aces can be modelled with greater strenght and G resistance. No more need for artificial cheats for the AI!

Might also make a job for archive researcher types who would have to go looking for pilots medical records http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Your vision of what would be AI with fatigue is very, very interesting, sir!!!

Takata_
04-23-2006, 05:30 AM
Originally posted by WB_Outlaw:
Stick force is determined by the player, not the aircraft. The EFFECT of the stick is determined by the aircraft, but that data is already in the flight model. There is no additional aircraft data needed.
- The effect of the stick SHOULD be determined by the aircraft and that data SHOULD already be in the flight model. But I don't think it's true in the current model: if you think about that, any stick effect should be related to a certain amount of force needed to move the flight controls, which is different from one aircraft to another aircraft at one given speed. But the amount of force needed to move controls affect as well the time it takes to achieve a desired effect, because it doesn't take the same ammount of time (effort) to move controls vs a 50 lbs force or vs a 10 lbs at one given speed.

However, this particular factor (time) may be adjusted by the player by stick settings, which modify the reaction time needed to move the stick vs a particular force. Then, you can actually change the flight model thru your stick settings.
From my understanding, you should not be able to modify (overboost) your stick settings because this control reaction time should be part of each flight model thru a fixed "virtual joystick".

I don't think I like this idea b/c you would have to model each pilot the same and that is not the case. For example, an experienced 109 pilot would not have any trouble maintaining rudder pressure for long periods of time b/c he's been doing it for a long time. On the other hand, pilots of aircraft with trim on all 3 axes would not necessarily be conditioned to do that. A pilot's conditioning should vary depending on the aircraft he flies and that's hard to model.
- What you say is true but you don't need to go that far whith such feature (modeling each muscle fatigue!). What should be exhausting for a pilot is to pull high Gs' maneuvers one after the other. Applying a constant force on the rudder during a long period is somehow a bit tiring, even if you are trained to do it for a longer time than someone else, but it's not such an exhausting factor. That said, it should not affect a pilot endurance until he's flying a very long flight, which would never happen in an aircraft like the Bf.109.

Also, the mechanical stops on our sticks do not correspond to the mechanical stops in the aircraft. Unless the game limits stick force to full deflection force, this will result in more than full deflection stick force being applied and thus improper fatigue modeling.
Fatigue should be computed using the virtual plane joystick's model and the virtual pilot's model, no matter how hard someone is overstressing his hardware (which may be exhausting too!).

In fact, fatigue is a factor that will influence every aspect of the game. Not only the turn and burners / or the boom and zoomer crowd, rather both of them. It's like managing Energy. Those who knows well how to do it will certainly keep their pilot less tired, no matter what kind of tactics they are using.
S~
Takata.

JG4_Helofly
04-23-2006, 05:41 AM
Rudder forces will maybe be a secondary factor but if you pull at maximum the stick at 700km/h in low level dive it should affect the arm of the pilot quite a lot.
The greatest thing would be that you will enjoy flying planes like 109 g6 early or p40 or... because you have all your chances to win against better aircrafts. It would be like in pilot anecdotes like "I outturned a 109 in my p 51" and this will happen with pilot fatigue.


Just a question, is it possible to send this idea to Oleg via e-mail? Or does he already know about this?

Lodovik
04-23-2006, 06:30 AM
Just a question, is it possible to send this idea to Oleg via e-mail? Or does he already know about this?

For all we know, Oleg & the other devs may well be thinking this on their own. Still, it would not hurt getting this proposition properly written down, translated to Russian and mailed to Oleg. He's a busy guy and hasn't got the time to browse through the forums daily. Perhaps Ivan knows whats the best way to forward propositions like this. At least we can put this into the Improvements sticky thread in this forum section. As I said, a little extra work never hurts. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

lowfighter
04-23-2006, 07:26 AM
Perhaps a poll would be good too. Someone who can state the idea very clearly?

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-23-2006, 08:23 AM
Ivan, please help ushttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

LStarosta
04-23-2006, 08:31 AM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
I had hope that trolls wont come here.... i was wrong http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're a troll.

Von_Rat
04-23-2006, 08:44 AM
i doubt very much it'll ever be in pf.

it would be great if oleg would put it in bob.

RegRag1977
04-23-2006, 09:22 AM
Originally posted by LStarosta:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
I had hope that trolls wont come here.... i was wrong http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif

Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're a troll. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I though Trolls were people "sniping" unconstructive remarks, without developping their points of view...
I'm not native speaker so i'm not sure what a troll really is????

But i'm sure it's not someone that disagrees fairly,...
And i'm sure Rikimaru knows that well...

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-23-2006, 09:39 AM
Ofcourse ^^

JG4_Helofly
04-23-2006, 11:35 AM
We have discused it so let's act now. Who can write an e-mail to Oleg with the Idea and the forum link?

Should we do a poll in the forum to see how many people are for it and how many against?

AKA_TAGERT
04-23-2006, 10:42 PM
Originally posted by LStarosta:
Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're a troll. Exactally.. Only a troll would call someone a troll that disagreed with them.. but I digress.

As for pilot fatigue.. it has been tried in the past in other sims.. not very imersive really.. espically in a DF server where you can die and respon and engage the guy who just shot you down.. only now your fresh as a dasiy and he is still fatigued from shooting you down the 1st time.

So, before things like pilot fatigue get implimented, more realistic settings and missions need to be implimented.. but in light of the resent trend in flights sim.. ie F the offline play and focus on the online play I dont see this happening.. Thus I dont want to have to be hindered with pilot fatigue so I *can* shoot that same guy down twice.. or as many times as he does respon and come after me.

If I had my choice, it would be more detailed DMs.. The FMs are about as good as they can get.. but the DMs have a long way to go.. endless really.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-24-2006, 01:12 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Oleg, I think that most, if not all would like to have pilot fatigue in this game. Think again </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

And this was constructive opinion? So better u think again before call someone troll.

I disagree with you. I said it could be a realism option so u could turn it off on dogfight servers. But a lot ppl fly on virtual fronts, or dogfight servers with full realism.

TheGozr
04-24-2006, 01:33 AM
NO

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 03:16 AM
As for pilot fatigue.. it has been tried in the past in other sims.. not very imersive really.. espically in a DF server where you can die and respon and engage the guy who just shot you down.. only now your fresh as a dasiy and he is still fatigued from shooting you down the 1st time.



when someone reapawns he represents a new pilot, at least in my opinion. anyway the simply cure is don't spawn camp, unless your bnzing. which is more realistic imo for airfield attack anyway.

im sure the recovery times won't be real long, so if the enemy isn't spawn camping he'll be recovered by the time your back in fight.

lowfighter
04-24-2006, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:

As for pilot fatigue.. it has been tried in the past in other sims.. not very imersive really.. espically in a DF server where you can die and respon and engage the guy who just shot you down.. only now your fresh as a dasiy and he is still fatigued from shooting you down the 1st time.

So, before things like pilot fatigue get implimented, more realistic settings and missions need to be implimented.. but in light of the resent trend in flights sim.. ie F the offline play and focus on the online play I dont see this happening.. Thus I dont want to have to be hindered with pilot fatigue so I *can* shoot that same guy down twice.. or as many times as he does respon and come after me.

If I had my choice, it would be more detailed DMs.. The FMs are about as good as they can get.. but the DMs have a long way to go.. endless really.

Tagert you have your own vision of how to enjoy the best the game (and possibly many or most of the others), still some others have some other ways of having fun with il2. Now if this would be a toggle option like icons on/off, etc. would it disturb you? You would fly the servers with this option off. Some others will be flying it with option on just like it happens now right with different settings?

Ah, ANYWAY this will most probably not happen in FB, and your point about improving the DM as priority is well taken. My hope is for BoB or subsequent. It might be anyway not that easy to implement.

tagTaken2
04-24-2006, 03:36 AM
NO.

Can you imagine the whining? The msutang pilot is porked...
And it would take a lot of work, I think. I seriously doubt that the staff at Maddox games are hitting PgUp/PgDn whenever Oleg bustles past.

If I want pilot fatigue, I'll hammer down a 6pack.

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 03:38 AM
actually i think mustang would greatly benifet from pilot fatigue being modeled, especially when fighting 109s.

i think it should be in bob. its to late for fb.

Takata_
04-24-2006, 03:41 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
As for pilot fatigue.. it has been tried in the past in other sims.. not very imersive really.. espically in a DF server where you can die and respon and engage the guy who just shot you down.. only now your fresh as a dasiy and he is still fatigued from shooting you down the 1st time.

So, before things like pilot fatigue get implimented, more realistic settings and missions need to be implimented.. but in light of the resent trend in flights sim.. ie F the offline play and focus on the online play I dont see this happening.. Thus I dont want to have to be hindered with pilot fatigue so I *can* shoot that same guy down twice.. or as many times as he does respon and come after me.

If I had my choice, it would be more detailed DMs.. The FMs are about as good as they can get.. but the DMs have a long way to go.. endless really.
It's somehow odd to talk about "immersion" and dogfight servers: If you wan't to shoot someone "as many times he does respon", you'll need an unlimited ammo and fuel load. Then, you may switch off this fatigue setting as well.

Now, if you wan't to make the dogfight arena a bit more "immersive", think that this guy taking off after being shot down by you is a reinforcement (even if it's the same jockey) and you'll have to leave that place quick if you want to survive after the first fight.

And yes, I agree with Von_Rat, we don't need to bother Oleg with that as there is barely zero chance to see that implemented in PF. I just hope he'll think about that for the next sim.
S~
Takata.

Takata_
04-24-2006, 03:46 AM
Originally posted by tagTaken2:
Can you imagine the whining? The msutang pilot is porked...
- LOL, yes, I can imagine the whining... but making sims is an hard job for a designer and you have to deal with that part too.
S~
Takata.

WWMaxGunz
04-24-2006, 04:33 AM
We have people who can't tell the difference between the pilot modelling we have got and
straight sick movements = control surface movements... **Still**. They make claims of
'proof' and 'facts' based on 'stick all the way back' and equate stick settings changes
with FM changes. So throw in pilot fatigue where backforces and mach effects are too
much and see the whining that gets.

Any time a player can't do something he's read about regardless of how many differences
between his attempt and what may have actually happened (how to know, it's not all written
down so that means *anything* you think is reasonable must be, right?) is grounds for a
thread and a following creating an all new trueism despite whatever gets shown wrong or
flawed in the original surmise and those following it.

Kick in pilot fatigue where you have a crowd that can't figure out that thrust to weight
makes a huge difference in sustained turns or sustained vertical climbs and the chaos goes
to the next level.

We also have a bunch who feel that G-forces are not correctly or evenly modelled and will
occasionally swear to it as the other guy didn't black out and should have, or his wings
did not rip off.

Where is the realism toggle on the players themselves? If you had to pass a test to get a
particular toggle switched then there would be crib sheets posted, no time to learn the
basics but plenty to misread old stories and work up new head angles for changes.

Other than that, fatigue would be a good one given the right feedback.
We have a small measure of it in the greyout and blackout.

Funny but I can stay in the grey a good while (spiral down works) without blacking out and
see the whole tunneling of vision work from just the edges to very small view and yet I am
informed reliably that there's just a little bit of grey just before the blackout. So much
for any ideas I might have based on game experience.

Yeah, fatigue for SOW, great idea. Make it an unrealism option so it's not ego-mandatory
though. Or label it as an extra option just so they can switch it off without resigning
the chance to grow up later.

Just so people have an idea what they ask for... when you pull the stick it will not in
general mean the same as most other times. You hold your joystick steady and find that the
virtual stick is steadily loosening, will you have a problem? Fresh pilot and the response
will be from zero to 100kg? How long into a turn before it is zero to 50kg, then 30, 20, 10?
Better think that through. In virtual combat will you have time or attention to monitor
the pilot state that is yet another thing you have no feel for? I doubt it very much.

CyC_AnD
04-24-2006, 04:37 AM
Smartly added would change a sim drasticly, for a plus IMHO.

I'm not agree with Tagart, couse when you kill someone now, he have more chances to kill you after respawn. Why? You are lower on ammo, fuel, and engine hot and he has a totally new and fresh aircraft. Not to mention, that he can choose other plane, more suitable for a fight with you. Pilot endurance wouldnt change much in that regard. It would change drasticaly if the fresh pilot would start, and again burn his pilot to death beocouse of manouvers (evasive f.e.). You can kill him then again.

Im sure it will be more whining etc. But at least it would add a human factor to a sim, not just raw data planes fight.

Cheers.

Takata_
04-24-2006, 05:19 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Fresh pilot and the response will be from zero to 100kg? How long into a turn before it is zero to 50kg, then 30, 20, 10?
Better think that through. In virtual combat will you have time or attention to monitor the pilot state that is yet another thing you have no feel for? I doubt it very much.
- Every kind of Sport Institute in the world is studying fatigue's models including effort and rest. Beside, it should not be that hard to find real data about combat fatigue, even from military sources related to air combat.
- A very simple way to display fatigue level would be thru a non displayed gauge, like "engine overheat". The game would display "pilot overloaded" every time you will cross the red-line, decreasing your endurance accordingly and making it easier to be "overloaded" again without rest. a short breath sound related to effort making may be played as well to inform the pilot of it's current fatigue load. After all, it's pretty close to your "biological" engine management.
S~
Takata.

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 05:55 AM
ww2 online had a bar on lower left side of screen for pilot fatigue. the bar would get shorter as pilot fatigued.

it wasn't very hard to keep eye on it , even in combat.

their fatigue system wasn't the best, but it was better than nothing. which is what we have now.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-24-2006, 06:46 AM
If physics cannot be modelled in 100%, why Oleg should make any physics? If AC data arent known in 100% why he should try to make AC as rl as possible? If we cannot model pilot faitgue in 100%, we shouldnt do this? Why ppl love IL2? Because its most realistic game, none said its realistic in 100%, but why cannot we try to make it even more realistic?

WOLFMondo
04-24-2006, 07:01 AM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
What is amazing with fatigue is that it shows us how the performance figures of aircrafts are not that objective.


Very true. Anyone who saw the Capt Eric Brown interview and his take on this simulator can see that. His personal stick settings which where an approximation of what he felt flying to be like was very difference to what any of us use. He never had full deflection on any control surface, in fact none of them went past 20. Assuming he was very physically fit then it says allot. Fatigue is also something thats never taken into account when people talk about pilot annecdotal stories.

monty66
04-24-2006, 07:11 AM
Big fit lady, big fit man, little slim lady, little man .... do they all have the same level of fitness?

Surely this is the basis of this idea?

Some people only need 4 hours sleep per nite...some need 10 !!

How is the game able to know the fitness of the pilot?

Do we all have to go for fitness test before we play?

I can fly online for 12 hours without breaks,
others get tired after 3 hours... to many factors to put in the game.. that maybe could be better used on other aspects of the game, even tho i like the idea http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Viper2005_
04-24-2006, 07:13 AM
It is worth pointing out that piston engined WWII fighters can only pull around 4 g in a sustained turn. Therefore their ability to tire a fit pilot through g alone is somewhat limited.

Competition aerobatics pilots often pull 9 g for 4 minute sequences.

To put it bluntly, in the classic "dogfight server" scenario, you'd probably be dead before you ever got tired.

In addition, fatigue produces mental as well as physical incapacity, and more often than not in an aviation context it kills pilots by causing them to make bad decisions. This is quite difficult, if not impossible, to model.

Pulling lots of g isn't likely to even be the primary source of fatigue associated with throwing aeroplanes about the sky. Nor is heavy controls likely to be the culprit; after a few weeks of flying WWII fighters one would develop strong arms and whilst you'd work hard in a fight, since the average knife fight doesn't last long, you'd be likely to die before running out of physical strength.

In my view, the biggest cause of fatigue would be the cockpit environment itself. At low level, cockpits tend to be hot, resulting in dehydration. At high level they are apt to be cold. Cold hands and feet are less able to exert fine motor control.

Oxygen masks are tight fitting, and tend to pinch the nose somewhat which is rather uncomfortable. Above 30,000 feet or so, even 100% oxygen can't supply a partial pressure of oxygen equivalent to the atmosphere at 10,000 feet, and therefore hypoxia becomes a problem. Incipient hypoxia has effects similar to intoxication. Oxygen supplies don't last forever, and must be monitored. Failure or exhaustion of the supply at altitudes much above 18,000 feet is likely to have unpleasent consequences.

The air at high altitude is very clean, and the sky very empty, making it very difficult to focus the eyes beyond the cockpit transparency. To make matters worse, moisture in exhaled air is likely to freeze on the inside of the cockpit, obscuring vision. In the case of long duration flights, urine could cause similar problems.

Endless scanning the sky for other aircraft gives you a stiff neck. If, like many pilots towards the start of the war, you're forced to wear a shirt and tie, you can easily rub your neck red-raw. That silk scarf isn't there for fashion!

Paradoxically, despite the fact that it's freezing cold up there, because you're above much of the atmosphere, the sun is somewhat brighter, and anything in the cockpit which is painted black will tend to get extremely hot; sufficiently so to burn unprotected skin. This sort of problem generally afflicts the metalwork on harnesses for example.

In addition to these general discomfort factors, there is mental workload to consider.

Flying is quite easy over short distances in good weather. In bad weather, over long distances when navigation is required, the workload is much higher. Getting to the target is hard work; you've got to find it first! But in a realistic scenario you not only have to get there, you've also got to get there on time.

Finally, you've got to correctly identify targets; friendly fire incidents are a constant risk.

From any number of combat reports it is evident that far more time is spent in level flight in transit to and from combat than is ever actually spent in combat itself. Therefore, those wishing to simulate fatigue have many of the capabilities required to do so available in their own hands.

i) Fly "full switch" in order to force you to navigate and identify targets. Print out a paper copy of the map, and stop using the computerised version; map folding adds another layers of complexity to the art of Navigation. Remember to mark your route to and from the target on it before takeoff...

ii) Approximate military uniform by wearing a shirt and tie under coveralls.

iii) Reduce manual dexterity by wearing a pair of flying gloves (it can make quite a difference, especially if you rely upon HOTAS sticks to get the job done.).

iv) Turn the heat down and open a window (or turn up the airconditioning) if you're flying above 10,000 feet or so; it's cold up there. Freezing in fact. You'll be glad of the gloves. If you're flying at low altitudes on a hot day in the tropics, the reverse is likely to be the case. You know what to do...

v) Accept missions in any weather.

vi) Fly missions of realistic distance and duration. No breaks. If you need to eat or drink, you're limited to what you can stash down the side of your seat. Obviously bathroom breaks present something of a problem. Glider pilots in extremis are known to use bottles. I'm sure you'll think of something. Obviously you can't get more than a few inches out of your seat without landing.

vi) Turn the sound up. Engines are loud. Guns are louder!

vii) Everytime you die, take out your wallet and place a suitably hefty note in a piggy-bank for donation to a charity of your choice. Say 10 or so ($20 for those of you across the pond).

After a 3 hour sortie you'll probably be quite tired. Now fly another couple. Somewhere along the line you'll probably start to notice a reduction in your performance. That's fatigue, and it doesn't really have very much to do with the ability of Spitfire pilots to T&B in dogfight servers.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-24-2006, 07:21 AM
Viper - this is true, but are pilots superhumans? Do u think that u will get extra muscles which never tire? You think that pilots could pull their sticks to their limits? It was really hard work, and u are talking like it would be "oh, lets pull my birdie in 9G for 5 minutes, i always loved to do that". Ohh and last one - they never pull 9G for 4 minutes! They can pull 9G for just few seconds. They wear also special uniforms, in which they can take more G.

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 07:29 AM
i dunno why you say you'd get killed before you get tired. alot of the time maybe, but ive seen quite a few tnb battles drag on four several minutes. what are max stick forces now, 50lbs right?

try constantly lifting 50lbs for several minutes straight, while your franticaly swinging head and working your legs back and forth and pulling mutiple gs. see how long you can keep it up. cause thats what i see happening in alot of tnb fights.

one bonus of pilot fatigue is that maybe well be allowed to exert greater than 50lbs force, at a cost of faster fatigue. 109 pilots will like that. it'll allow them exert greater force on elevator for a short time. maybe the 109 will actually be able to effectivly bnz with this modeled. it'll help spit pilots who fly fast with their roll to.

WOLFMondo
04-24-2006, 08:25 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:


Oxygen masks are tight fitting, and tend to pinch the nose somewhat which is rather uncomfortable. Above 30,000 feet or so, even 100% oxygen can't supply a partial pressure of oxygen equivalent to the atmosphere at 10,000 feet, and therefore hypoxia becomes a problem. Incipient hypoxia has effects similar to intoxication. Oxygen supplies don't last forever, and must be monitored. Failure or exhaustion of the supply at altitudes much above 18,000 feet is likely to have unpleasent consequences.


Hypoxia is really unpleasent even at 10,000ft. I've seen people suffer badly at that height. I did a course a few years ago which included dealing with altitude sickness and recently had to deal with someone who had it bad at 17,000ft, the guy was puking, acting like a 5 year old, exhuasted, couldn't breath at all and had very little control over what he was doing. He couldn't walk let along do something complicated like fly a plane, if he had too.

I cannot imagine flying a plane and then suddenly having to deal with hypoxia, at 25,000+ I'd expect it to kill you in an extremely painful manner if your oxygen suddenly stopped.

Just to go over altitude sickness:
Makes you a jibbering 5 year old.
At high altitude you burn of calories at an alarming rate, adding to the cold, exhuastion is a very real problem.
Your brain and internal organs cannot get rid of liquid so they swell violently giving you terrible headaches and potential brain damage.
Liquid gathers in your lungs, you can drown.
You puke allot.
The only cure is to go down immediately.
Adding to that, even at 15,000ft your almost always out of breath when performing even simple actions. At 20,000ft taking a sip of water will make you out of breath. Even putting one foot in front of the other is exhuasting.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 09:40 AM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
And this was constructive opinion? So better u think again before call someone troll. Nice try troll, but no sale. Go back and read it again.. you will see that my reply to you is in response to this statement by you..


Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
I think that most, if not all would like to have pilot fatigue in this game.
To which I simply said, "think again". As to point out that NOT most and NOT all *think* as you do. Now only a troll or a smacktard would have issues with that, which is it in your case?


Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
I disagree with you. I said it could be a realism option so u could turn it off on dogfight servers. But a lot ppl fly on virtual fronts, or dogfight servers with full realism. Problem with that is like all realism settings.. some smacktard server would just enalbe all the settings.. never considering the scenario I spelled out, thus unknowingly Fing us over with pilot fatigue in a DF server. Long story short I can name hundreds of things that are more immersive to this sim than pilot fatigue would be, I would rather see the limited time and money spent on them. But, as a troll/smacktard your mileage may vary. Enjoy.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 09:42 AM
Originally posted by tagTaken2:
NO.

Can you imagine the whining? The msutang pilot is porked...
And it would take a lot of work, I think. I seriously doubt that the staff at Maddox games are hitting PgUp/PgDn whenever Oleg bustles past. Another good point.. it would open up a whole new type of whine.. Your pilot is better than my pilot.. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaa.


Originally posted by tagTaken2:
If I want pilot fatigue, I'll hammer down a 6pack. ROTFL

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-24-2006, 09:56 AM
Tagert - I will reply u last time, and i hope that u wont destroy whole topic.

Every pilots would be the same...

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 09:59 AM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Tagert - I will reply u last time, Promise?


Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
and i hope that u wont destroy whole topic. So.. let me get this straight.. in a public forum you expect only the people that agree with you to post in your thread?


Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Every pilots would be the same... Does not mater, it would not stop the whining about it, and as I pointed out the option to disable it would not get used like it should..

But, on the bright side you now realise you were wrong from the get go in calling me a troll.. Glad to see my re-posting your orginal statment (where you ASSumed that MOST if not ALL think as you do, clearly from this thread it is not ALL, let alone MOST) followed by my reply helped you see the light. That I was simply disagreeing with you and your statement.

PS hate to toss a wrench into your wish list but all pilots should NOT be the same. The late war US aircraft had "g" suits, allowing them to pull more g without blacking out.. See.. the whining has allready started! Best to leave the the pilot thing as is.. no fatigue.

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 10:16 AM
just because some feature is liable to get whined about, is no reason to keep it out.

if we eliminated everything that gets whined about we wouldn't have a game.

if you don't like some servers settings go to another or start your own.

by my count most posters have been in favor, perhaps a poll is in order.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 10:20 AM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
just because some feature is liable to get whined about, is no reason to keep it out.

if we eliminated everything that gets whined about we wouldn't have a game. True, but note, I didnt say leave this feature out because it would be whinned about, I said leave it out because not MOST or ALL want it and that there are 100s of other things that would add more imersion to this sim than pilot fatigue.


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
if you don't like some servers settings start your own. This is such a dumb reply.. Let me show you how dumb it is.. It is the same as saying

If you dont like the fact that IL2 does not have pilot fatigue, MAKE your own flight sim!

See what I mean?

PS you guys seem to forget that IL2 is like 5 years old.. Totally new features are very Very VERY unlikly to happen. The only thing that makes it profitable to make addons is to use the game engine as is. Tweak existig features, but totally new ones? Not likly!

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 10:30 AM
Yes and it would be like the other options we have: you can decide if you want it or not...
So what's the problem really?

For once we have a very important idea to improve the game and make it more realistic, doesn't simers want more realism (as possible option)?

I find that wanting fatigue as another realism option is perfecly legitim for players who want to get closer from what WW2 air combat was.
I can't see any differences with other options.

I've the impression that this option in particular, will greatly improve our skills...

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 10:38 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
just because some feature is liable to get whined about, is no reason to keep it out.

if we eliminated everything that gets whined about we wouldn't have a game. True, but note, I didnt say leave this feature out because it would be whinned about, I said leave it out because not MOST or ALL want it and that there are 100s of other things that would add more imersion to this sim than pilot fatigue.
________________________________________________


i was addressing the people who seemed concerned that this feature would lead to whining,, not you. but i guess your so full of yourself you can;t tell differance.

others have differant prioritys than you. and by my count in this thread MOST are in favor, thats why i proposed a poll.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
if you don't like some servers settings start your own. This is such a dumb reply.. Let me show you how dumb it is.. It is the same as saying

If you dont like the fact that IL2 does not have pilot fatigue, MAKE your own flight sim!

See what I mean?

PS you guys seem to forget that IL2 is like 5 years old.. Totally new features are very Very VERY unlikly to happen. The only thing that makes it profitable to make addons is to use the game engine as is. Tweak existig features, but totally new ones? Not likly! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

anybody can make a server, it doesn't require anything like the knowledge it takes to create a new feature for a new sim, like bob. but i guess even the limited knowledge it takes to create a server is beyond your limited capacity.

oh if your going to quote me, don't change the quote and leave key words out of a sentence. but i guess nothings beneath you.

talk about dumb replys, learn to read, i posted already that its to late for fb, that this feature should be in bob. and i wasn't the only one to say it.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-24-2006, 10:44 AM
Dont feed the troll, just ignore himhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Im still curious what is opinion of Oleg about that...

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 10:51 AM
maybe we should do a poll first, he might be right and most players don't want it.

after all alot of players do fly with alot of relaxed realism settings as it is.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 10:51 AM
True, but note, I didnt say leave this feature out because it would be whinned about, I said leave it out because not MOST or ALL want it and that there are 100s of other things that would add more imersion to this sim than pilot fatigue.

Maybe, but fatigue is not sensed to improve immersion but REALISM, which is something crucial, much more important, in my point of view, to get closer from what WW2 air combat was...

As far as i am concerned i'd prefer to play a game where my pilot is realistically modelled after the weakest pilot during WW2, than a sim where the physical potential of the pilot is the same as an unlimited überBionic Andro¯d, able to turn and pull hard to avo¯d the pass, and pull hard to get in position, and pull hard to recover, and pull to avo¯d the pass, etc... etc... and then believe to be a good virtual pilot.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 11:02 AM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
maybe we should do a poll first, the troll might be right and most players don't want it.

after all alot of players do fly with alot of relaxed realism settings as it is.

Many people play this game... This game is the most realistic sim on the market, and that's why i like it. Why play this game and and being totally against another realism option? I'm to weak to understand....

rosaenrico
04-24-2006, 11:06 AM
I think that a poll tells nothing, since to me the real argument is fatigue as a very important factor to take count of in such kind of sims; the possibility that a fatigue model would be not so popular would not change the original fact itself. As said in a previous post, many people play in low realism settings, but not for this we don't have stalls, etc.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by rosaenrico:
I think that a poll tells nothing, since to me the real argument is fatigue as a very important factor to take count of in such kind of sims; the possibility that a fatigue model would be not so popular would not change the original fact itself. As said in a previous post, many people play in low realism settings, but not for this we don't have stalls, etc.

Exactly!

Imagine a poll for the stall/spin option. ah, ah, ah...

Chosing this sim, we wanted more, we wanted realism, limitations to get closer to reality...
Why playing this sim without all options set to hard when the market is so full of arcade like sim? It's like wanting to be an ace without paying the price for it! Whithout working to improve!

The main thing that make this sim unrealistic is Pilot fatigue, fatigue which shows that A/C performance figures are not so objective... Maybe this is annoying the Objective Aces round here...
Pfff... Wanting to be the aces of an arcade game (what IL2 is not, for sure), in order not to have to improve their skills... I can't agree with such a philosophy.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 11:21 AM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i was addressing the people who seemed concerned that this feature would lead to whining,, not you. but i guess your so full of yourself you can;t tell differance. Guess again


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
others have differant prioritys than you. Is why I voiced my opinion


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
and by my count in this thread MOST are in favor, thats why i proposed a poll. There are lies and there statistics


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
anybody can make a server, it doesn't require anything like the knowledge it takes to create a new feature for a new sim, like bob. but i guess even the limited knowledge it takes to create a server is beyond your limited capacity. What part of my analogy did you not understand?


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
oh if your going to quote me, don't change the quote and leave key words out of a sentence. but i guess nothings beneath you. Roger, your beneath me.


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
talk about dumb replys, learn to read, i posted already that its to late for fb, that this feature should be in bob. and i wasn't the only one to say it. Good for you, but tell me what part of YOU GUYS SEEM TO FORGET did you think was specific to you? Guess you are too full of yourself you can;t tell differance.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-24-2006, 11:30 AM
Tell me which ace fly on keyboard...

But can u answer me in a clear way: why dont u wont to IL2 be more realistic? Are u afraid about ur skills and La7?

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 11:32 AM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Tell me which ace fly on keyboard...

But can u answer me in a clear way: why dont u wont to IL2 be more realistic? Are u afraid about ur skills and La7? I noticed you avoided the g suit thing and thus the pilots would NOT be the same

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 11:33 AM
@TAGERT


quote:
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
if you don't like some servers settings start your own.
This is such a dumb reply.. Let me show you how dumb it is.. It is the same as saying

If you dont like the fact that IL2 does not have pilot fatigue, MAKE your own flight sim!

See what I mean?

The difference is that when someone says to you that you can do another server, he doesn't want you to go away: you're always in the IL2 series community.
But when you tell someone to do it's own sim, not only you know it's not such simple, (you're not fair), but it means that you want him to leave the community (like banning him), what is not really the same... I hope you see why!

Your analogy is not a true analogy, the two parts of it are not equal in the consequences.

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 11:34 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i was addressing the people who seemed concerned that this feature would lead to whining,, not you. but i guess your so full of yourself you can;t tell differance. Guess again
________________________________________________


ok, i guess that your a idiot.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
others have differant prioritys than you. Is why I voiced my opinion
__________________________________________________

and i voiced mine.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
and by my count in this thread MOST are in favor, thats why i proposed a poll. There are lies and there statistics
__________________________________________________

by the way you misquote people i bet you favor lies.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
anybody can make a server, it doesn't require anything like the knowledge it takes to create a new feature for a new sim, like bob. but i guess even the limited knowledge it takes to create a server is beyond your limited capacity. What part of my analogy did you not understand?
__________________________________________________ __



the part about how you must be to stupid to not be able set up a server.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
oh if your going to quote me, don't change the quote and leave key words out of a sentence. but i guess nothings beneath you. Roger, your beneath me.
__________________________________________________ ________


as i said nothings beneath you.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
talk about dumb replys, learn to read, i posted already that its to late for fb, that this feature should be in bob. and i wasn't the only one to say it. Good for you, but tell me what part of YOU GUYS SEEM TO FORGET did you think was specific to you? Guess you are too full of yourself to realise that was not about you and only you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

oh im not one of the guys huh.

Viper2005_
04-24-2006, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Viper - this is true, but are pilots superhumans? Do u think that u will get extra muscles which never tire? You think that pilots could pull their sticks to their limits? It was really hard work, and u are talking like it would be "oh, lets pull my birdie in 9G for 5 minutes, i always loved to do that". Ohh and last one - they never pull 9G for 4 minutes! They can pull 9G for just few seconds. They wear also special uniforms, in which they can take more G.

They don't pull 9 g sustained because going round in circles is pretty boring to watch. But they do push to -9g. The combination of positive and negative g is particularly hard on human physiology since the anti-g strain tends to make negative g worse, whilst relaxing, which is the best way to fight negative g tends to make positive g worse.

The point that I'm making is that in the vast majority of cases, once you get into a knife fight, death, glory or disengagement tend to follow in pretty short order, during which it's reasonable to expect adrenaline to take over. Apart from anything else, WWII piston engined fighters simply lack the power to sustain much more than 4 g for any length of time.

The mighty +25 psi Spitfire, king of knife fighters, can't even manage 5 g sustained under favourable circumstances at sea level. Go higher and you lose sustained turn performance.

If it could, it wouldn't matter much, since IL2 models blackout at 6 g sustained AFAIK.

It's a pretty reasonable assumption that the intrepid Spitfire pilot, whilst engaged in death or glory exploits, is probably using 100% oxygen, which potentially offers a pretty worthwhile increase in g tolerance.

Even if he isn't, he's still not pulling very hard; 4.7 g if memory serves. You can keep that up for quite a while assuming a reasonable degree of physical fitness, even without a hefty dose of adrenaline. However, the chances are that if you're playing that sort of game, you're going to get shot in the near future.

As for stick forces, there's a simple experiment you can carry out. Take the aeroplane up and stall it in level flight. Note the stick position, and the position of the control surfaces. The stall should require full elevator deflection. Now fly faster, and see if you can still enter an accelerated stall by tightening up in a turn.

If the aeroplane will still stall then you've still got full elevator deflection, and therefore the elevator force to attain full deflection must be less than Oleg's limit, whatever it is; your pilot therefore isn't working as hard as he could.

Now try flying rolls. NACA proved decades ago that if you can attain full aileron deflection then roll rate is just going to be a function of airspeed. Therefore, fly rolls at various speeds, starting nice and slow. Once the roll rate stops increasing with speed, your pilot must have run out of strength to apply aileron. Therefore it follows that full control deflection below this speed isn't demanding his full strength.

The point here is that you're likely to find, when flying at the speed for best sustained turn rate, that your pilot isn't working to full physical capacity in pitch or roll. Therefore he may reasonably be expected to have stamina. High control forces are generally the preserve of the high-speed B&Z artist, to the knife fighter; in all probability the aeroplane in which tired arms would be the biggest problem would be the Bf-109G and K.

Look at reno. Most air racing pilots are rather older than the avererage WWII fighter pilot. Unlimited air races typically take 7-9 minutes and sustain 3.5 g on average. Taking the middle of that figure, 8 minutes is some 480 seconds. That's a long time.

Next time you get into a fight with a Spitfire, count it out. Most of the time, the fighting is over in 2 minutes or less.

Hence it is my considered opinion that fatigue isn't really an issue as regards typical Spitfire dogfight server behaviour. Of course if you throw in the Luft46 stuff then fatigue associated with g becomes a much bigger issue at low level, but at altitude, things stay pretty benign. In this respect, aircraft performance didn't really start to leave the pilot behind until F-15 and F-16 arrived on the scene.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-24-2006, 11:51 AM
You are talking very interesting things but: in this game power of pilot is 50lbs. If he isnt deflecting stick more, this mean 50 lbs isnt enough. But he can pull 25kg as long as he can, and nothing happens. Its not only G, its also tire of ur muscles, ur stamina, u think that modern control surfaces are as heavy as WWII one? not only G matters!

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 11:51 AM
But to have the programme deliberately deteriorate your abilities the longer you played would "in my opinion" turn a lot of people off through frustration. Read bad for GAME sales no matter how "realistic" it gets.

We don't know now how the programm would be. But it doesn't have to be like like that. For instance, imagine a pilot's energy gauge that would go empty when you pull or push hard manoeuvers, and go full when you rest or do smoother movements with the stick. Imagine it would be a gauge returning progressively to it's initial position after a while... It would forbid too much unrealistic hard manoeuvers, without forbiding you to dogfight for hours if you like it, since the gauge would after a reasonnable time, reach its initial position (allowing you to do hard manouevers again).

This could be great, no?

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:02 PM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
ok, i guess that your a idiot. Nope, try again troll


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
and i voiced mine. copy cat


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
by the way you misquote people i bet you favor lies. Fact is I have not misquoted anyone and you can not reference any, but as a troll you just accuse people of doing it in the hopes that noone will notice


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
the part about how you must be to stupid to not be able set up a server. Dont be so hard on yourself, if you dont understand, just ask.


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
as i said nothings beneath you. Roger, you are beneath me.


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
oh im not one of the guys huh. Your a guy? Sorry, my bad

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
You are talking very interesting things but: in this game power of pilot is 50lbs. If he isnt deflecting stick more, this mean 50 lbs isnt enough. But he can pull 25kg as long as he can, and nothing happens. Its not only G, its also tire of ur muscles, ur stamina, u think that modern control surfaces are as heavy as WWII one? not only G matters!

Yes, in WW2 there's not only a fatigue due to gees like today where pilots have assisted servo-mechanisms.
No servo mechanisms during WW2; only "elbow grease", this is why, even the (lucky) P51 pilot with G suit was concerned with FATIGUE.

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
ok, i guess that your a idiot. Nope, try again troll
_________________________________________________

i learned from you oh master troll.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
and i voiced mine. copy cat


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
by the way you misquote people i bet you favor lies. Fact is I have not misquoted anyone and you can not reference any, but as a troll you just accuse people of doing it in the hopes that noone will notice.
__________________________________________________ ____

you left words out of my post about,,,, GOING TO ANOTHER SERVER or setting up your own. go look or are you blind too.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
the part about how you must be to stupid to not be able set up a server. Dont be so hard on yourself, if you dont understand, just ask.
__________________________________________________ _____

i'll be glad to teach you how to set up a server, im used to helping the mentally disadvantaged like yourself.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
as i said nothings beneath you. Roger, you are beneath me.
__________________________________________________ __

talk about copycat. lol
anyway the only thing beneath you is the sewer.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
oh im not one of the guys huh. Your a guy? Sorry, my bad </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

at least am a guy, and not a fairy.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:14 PM
Just encase you all missed it...

if Oleg gave us a wish list with 1,000 features he could add to Il2, but, Oleg told us we have to pick only "1" on the list, because he only has time and money to add "1" of the 1,000, and we took a vote/poll on these 1,000 features, I can assure you pilot fatigue would not be anywhere near the top of the list.

Nuff said

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:17 PM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i learned from the master troll. Leave your boyfriend out of this


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
you left words out of my post about,,,, GOING TO ANOTHER SERVER or setting up your own. go look or are you blind too. Not true, you edited your post and added that after my post, I am not responsable for keeping up with your changes.. Nice try though troll, gold star for effort!


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i'll be glad to teach you how to set up a server, im used to helping the mentally disadvantaged like yourself. You boyfriend is mentally disadvantaged? Is it legal for you to be dating him?


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
talk about copycat. lol
anyway the only thing beneath you is the sewer. Roger, you are beneath me


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
at least am a guy, and not a fairy. So your the pitcher and not the catcher in the relationship? Sorry, but that still qulaifys as a fairy.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 12:18 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Tell me which ace fly on keyboard...

But can u answer me in a clear way: why dont u wont to IL2 be more realistic? Are u afraid about ur skills and La7? I noticed you avoided the g suit thing and thus the pilots would NOT be the same </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes but the G suit is not the only one problem: it's not the ultimate advantage...

Remember the body position in german fighters could allow german pilots to pull more gees.

It would be cool to have the g suit for P51 mustang pilots, it would be realistic, i agree.

But it wouldn't affect The fatigue due to hard manoeuvers (that good p51 pilots won't do anyway)...

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:21 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Yes but the G suit is not the only one problem: it's not the ultimate advantage...

Remember the body position in german fighters could allow german pilots to pull more gees.

It would be cool to have the g suit for P51 mustang pilots, it would be realistic, i agree.

But it wouldn't affect The fatigue due to hard manoeuvers (that good p51 pilots won't do anyway)... Agreed 100%, this is just opening up a big can of worms.. They have troulbe modling aircraft flight.. and now you want them to simulate the human body fatigue?

just encase you missed it

if Oleg gave us a wish list with 1,000 features he could add to Il2, but, Oleg told us we have to pick only "1" on the list, because he only has time and money to add "1" of the 1,000, and we took a vote/poll on these 1,000 features, I can assure you pilot fatigue would not be anywhere near the top of the list.

Nuff said?

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i learned from the master troll. Leave your boyfriend out of this
__________________________________________________ ____

whatsa matter someone steal your boyfriend. go have a good cry now.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
you left words out of my post about,,,, GOING TO ANOTHER SERVER or setting up your own. go look or are you blind too. Not true, you edited your post and added that after my post, I am not responsable for keeping up with your changes.. Nice try though troll, gold star for effort!
__________________________________________________ ______

as i said you favor lies.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i'll be glad to teach you how to set up a server, im used to helping the mentally disadvantaged like yourself. You boyfriend is mentally disadvantaged? Is it legal for you to be dating him?
__________________________________________________ __

what was that,,, your a mentally disadvantaged smacktard fairy. you should seek immediate help.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
talk about copycat. lol
anyway the only thing beneath you is the sewer. Roger, you are beneath me
__________________________________________________ ____

i see your alhzhiemers kicking in.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
at least am a guy, and not a fairy. So your the picher and not the catcher in your relationship? Sorry, but that still qulaifys as a fairy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


you sound like a wide receiver to me.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:28 PM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i learned from the master troll. Leave your boyfriend out of this
__________________________________________________ ____

whatsa matter someone steal your boyfriend. go have a good cry now.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
you left words out of my post about,,,, GOING TO ANOTHER SERVER or setting up your own. go look or are you blind too. Not true, you edited your post and added that after my post, I am not responsable for keeping up with your changes.. Nice try though troll, gold star for effort!
__________________________________________________ ______

as i said you favor lies.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i'll be glad to teach you how to set up a server, im used to helping the mentally disadvantaged like yourself. You boyfriend is mentally disadvantaged? Is it legal for you to be dating him?
__________________________________________________ __

what was that,,, your a mentally disadvantaged smacktard fairy. you should seek immediate help.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
talk about copycat. lol
anyway the only thing beneath you is the sewer. Roger, you are beneath me
__________________________________________________ ____

i see your alhzhiemers kicking in.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
at least am a guy, and not a fairy. So your the picher and not the catcher in your relationship? Sorry, but that still qulaifys as a fairy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


you sound like a wide receiver to me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>and CMHQ_Rikimaru was worried about me wrecking the thread.. poor vol rat.. so sensitive

lowfighter
04-24-2006, 12:28 PM
How do you know how hard would this to implement? I really have no idea, it might be near to imposible or quite reasonable. It's Only the developers which can answer this question. I have a question and I don't know the answer: suppose Oleg implements initialy a very simple fatigue model, that is the same for all AC, would it be closer to real than no fatigue effects at all? What do you think? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

And please please let these quite unproductive duels out!

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:30 PM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
gotta go tagert. ill pickup the insult trading in a couple of hours.

its been fun. Roger, your pretty good at trolling.. glad your good at something.. PM me when you get back from the clinic

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 12:32 PM
me sensitive lol. that aint what my ex wife says.

how'd you know im going to the clinic,,,man those shots hurt,,,lol.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:36 PM
Just as a summary.. it all started here


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
i was addressing the people who seemed concerned that this feature would lead to whining,, not you. but i guess your so full of yourself you can;t tell differance. Guess again
________________________________________________


ok, i guess that your a idiot.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
others have differant prioritys than you. Is why I voiced my opinion
__________________________________________________

and i voiced mine.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
and by my count in this thread MOST are in favor, thats why i proposed a poll. There are lies and there statistics
__________________________________________________

by the way you misquote people i bet you favor lies.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
anybody can make a server, it doesn't require anything like the knowledge it takes to create a new feature for a new sim, like bob. but i guess even the limited knowledge it takes to create a server is beyond your limited capacity. What part of my analogy did you not understand?
__________________________________________________ __



the part about how you must be to stupid to not be able set up a server.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
oh if your going to quote me, don't change the quote and leave key words out of a sentence. but i guess nothings beneath you. Roger, your beneath me.
__________________________________________________ ________


as i said nothings beneath you.




Originally posted by Von_Rat:
talk about dumb replys, learn to read, i posted already that its to late for fb, that this feature should be in bob. and i wasn't the only one to say it. Good for you, but tell me what part of YOU GUYS SEEM TO FORGET did you think was specific to you? Guess you are too full of yourself to realise that was not about you and only you. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

oh im not one of the guys huh. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Note the total lack of me saying anything out of line with the forum rules, and note Rat calling me

a idiot (ok, i guess that your a idiot.)
a lier (i bet you favor lies.)
stupid (you must be to stupid to not be able set up a server)

Just to name a few.. Just to point out where the name calling started from.. from RAT not I

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Yes but the G suit is not the only one problem: it's not the ultimate advantage...

Remember the body position in german fighters could allow german pilots to pull more gees.

It would be cool to have the g suit for P51 mustang pilots, it would be realistic, i agree.

But it wouldn't affect The fatigue due to hard manoeuvers (that good p51 pilots won't do anyway)... Agreed 100%, this is just opening up a big can of worms.. They have troulbe modling aircraft flight.. and now you want them to simulate the human body fatigue?

Yes,

because with fatigue we know that the performance figures are not what's the most important in the fight. The figures relative to turns, for instance can hardly be reached in a real combat (due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again) where there's only a thin margin exploitable, this thin margin beeing the human beeing margin. If fatigue would be modelled i think the way A/C are now modelled will be enough. (remember any figures, any report have improved the game that much, and the relative turning/climbing abilities between all the planes have always be the center of the whine production).

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 12:39 PM
tagert wrote
______________________________________________
Note the total lack of me saying anything out of line with the forum rules, and note Rat calling me

a idiot (ok, i guess that your a idiot.)
a lier (i bet you favor lies.)
stupid (you must be to stupid to not be able set up a server)

Just to name a few.. Just to point out where the name calling started from.. from RAT not I
__________________________________________________ ______

hey im still here,,,,

hey tagert you better go back and edit where you called rikimaru a smacktard,,long before i said anything.


nice try.

JG4_Helofly
04-24-2006, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by lowfighter:
How do you know how hard would this to implement? I really have no idea, it might be near to imposible or quite reasonable. It's Only the developers which can answer this question. I have a question and I don't know the answer: suppose Oleg implements initialy a very simple fatigue model, that is the same for all AC, would it be closer to real than no fatigue effects at all? What do you think? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

And please please let these quite unproductive duels out!

Agree 100%

Also I want to say: Without risk we can not go ahead. No improvements without risks.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:41 PM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
hey im still here,,,, The parade has not started yet?


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
hey tagert you better go back and edit where you called rikimaru a smacktard,,long before i said anything.

nice try. Let me guess.. you think your superman and have to stick up for the weak?

Von_Rat
04-24-2006, 12:44 PM
Let me guess.. you think your superman and have to stick up for the weak?


try that again in english.

i really going this time. nows your chance to edit your posts and try to get me banned.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Yes,

because with fatigue we know that the performance figures are not what's the most important in the fight. The figures relative to turns, for instance can hardly be reached in a real combat (due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again) where there's only a thin margin exploitable, this thin margin beeing the human beeing margin. If fatigue would be modelled i think the way A/C are now modelled will be enough. (remember any figures, any report have improved the game that much, and the relative turning/climbing abilities between all the planes have always be the center of the whine production). Enh, pilot fatigue is more important in modern jet 9g stuff than WWII stuff imho, all in all if I belive that if Oleg gave us a wish list with 1,000 features he could add to Il2, but, Oleg told us we have to pick only "1" on the list, because he only has time and money to add "1" of the 1,000, and we took a vote/poll on these 1,000 features, I can assure you pilot fatigue would not be anywhere near the top of the list. The best we can hope for now is tweaking existing features.. if you want pilot fatigue, you will be lucky if you get it in BoB let alone this 5 year old sim engine

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 12:47 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
[QUOTE]Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Yes but the G suit is not the only one problem: it's not the ultimate advantage...

Remember the body position in german fighters could allow german pilots to pull more gees.

It would be cool to have the g suit for P51 mustang pilots, it would be realistic, i agree.

But it wouldn't affect The fatigue due to hard manoeuvers (that good p51 pilots won't do anyway)... Agreed 100%, this is just opening up a big can of worms.. They have troulbe modling aircraft flight.. and now you want them to simulate the human body fatigue?

Yes,

because with fatigue we know that the performance figures are not what's the most important in the fight. The figures relative to turns, for instance can hardly be reached in a real combat (due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again) where there's only a thin margin exploitable, this thin margin beeing the human beeing margin. If fatigue would be modelled i think the way A/C are now modelled will be enough. (remember any figures, any report have improved the game that much, and the relative turning/climbing abilities between all the planes have always be the center of the whine production). </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Come on Tagert! Please come in the discussion again seriously... We need your thoughs to know why people disagree with the fatigue idea.

Guys, the playtime is over! let's concentrate on the problem...

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 12:48 PM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Let me guess.. you think your superman and have to stick up for the weak?


try that again in english.

i really going this time. nows your chance to edit your posts and try to get me banned. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Look rat, I know your lonely and all.. but.. if you really want to try and pick me up.. try flowers or something, but most of all take it to PM so the rest of the good folks here dont have to get caught up in your breakdown

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 12:52 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Yes,

because with fatigue we know that the performance figures are not what's the most important in the fight. The figures relative to turns, for instance can hardly be reached in a real combat (due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again) where there's only a thin margin exploitable, this thin margin beeing the human beeing margin. If fatigue would be modelled i think the way A/C are now modelled will be enough. (remember any figures, any report have improved the game that much, and the relative turning/climbing abilities between all the planes have always be the center of the whine production). Enh, pilot fatigue is more important in modern jet 9g stuff than WWII stuff imho, all in all if I belive that if Oleg gave us a wish list with 1,000 features he could add to Il2, but, Oleg told us we have to pick only "1" on the list, because he only has time and money to add "1" of the 1,000, and we took a vote/poll on these 1,000 features, I can assure you pilot fatigue would not be anywhere near the top of the list. The best we can hope for now is tweaking existing features.. if you want pilot fatigue, you will be lucky if you get it in BoB let alone this 5 year old sim engine </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes but the fatigue is not only due to gee. It's in WW2 mainly a muscular fatigue
due to the effort to move the controls

I can requote myself too Tagert:

Yes, in WW2 there's not only a fatigue due to gees like today where pilots have assisted servo-mechanisms.
No servo mechanisms during WW2; only "elbow grease", this is why, even the (lucky) P51 pilot with G suit was concerned with FATIGUE.

AND

Yes, in WW2 there's not only a fatigue due to gees like today where pilots have assisted servo-mechanisms.
No servo mechanisms during WW2; only "elbow grease", this is why, even the (lucky) P51 pilot with G suit was concerned with FATIGUE.

Irish_Rogues
04-24-2006, 01:07 PM
(due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again)

I disagree with this statement, all you have to do is watch football, American football, or even better automobile and motorcycle racing. I'm not even an athlete and I race 5hr off-road events or ride all day on a Sunday practice ride.

In the case of football the players will exert physical activity through the whole game with spurts of extreme activity along with physical pounding and the American variety you take even more physical punishment by being constantly hit. I'd say F1 racing is the closest to dogfight conditions taking positive and negative G's for an entire several hour race, tracking your pray and being tracked by others. In the course of an enduro I'll ride 4 - 5 hours pushing my body to my limit off and on all day long with only a few breaks and recovery periods.

Viper2005_
04-24-2006, 01:09 PM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
You are talking very interesting things but: in this game power of pilot is 50lbs. If he isnt deflecting stick more, this mean 50 lbs isnt enough. But he can pull 25kg as long as he can, and nothing happens. Its not only G, its also tire of ur muscles, ur stamina, u think that modern control surfaces are as heavy as WWII one? not only G matters!

To quote myself:

As for stick forces, there's a simple experiment you can carry out. Take the aeroplane up and stall it in level flight. Note the stick position, and the position of the control surfaces. The stall should require full elevator deflection. Now fly faster, and see if you can still enter an accelerated stall by tightening up in a turn.

If the aeroplane will still stall then you've still got full elevator deflection, and therefore the elevator force to attain full deflection must be less than Oleg's limit, whatever it is; your pilot therefore isn't working as hard as he could.

Now try flying rolls. NACA proved decades ago that if you can attain full aileron deflection then roll rate is just going to be a function of airspeed. Therefore, fly rolls at various speeds, starting nice and slow. Once the roll rate stops increasing with speed, your pilot must have run out of strength to apply aileron. Therefore it follows that full control deflection below this speed isn't demanding his full strength.

The point here is that you're likely to find, when flying at the speed for best sustained turn rate, that your pilot isn't working to full physical capacity in pitch or roll.

Stick forces may be an issue, but in a sustained turning contest you're almost always flying slowly enough that control deflections are limited by the stops rather than by pilot strength, at least in IL2.

WWII aeroplanes are heavy, but generally they are only heavy in high-speed flight, mainly as a primative approach to carefree handling. The control hinge moments were generally left heavy deliberately in order to prevent the pilot from pulling the wings off, especially in roll.

If you think about it, 25 kgf isn't really all that much pull force for a fit young man even discounting the effects of fear.

The biggest problem would likely be encountered in roll, but even then I would suggest that if you're in a knife fight at sustained corner then you'll be slow enough that the control forces will be pretty reasonable.

From NACA868 for example the Spitfire attains its peak roll rate at 200 mph. The mighty +25 psi Spitfire reaches its maximum sustained turn rate at 346 km/h, or 214 mph. The +18 psi version has a sustained corner speed of 326 km/h or 202 mph according to IL2C.

As such it seems reasonable to state that within 10% error, 50 lbf may be expected to give full aileron deflection at sustained corner speed, supporting the general thrust of my argument.

lowfighter
04-24-2006, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by JG4_Helofly:


Also I want to say: Without risk we can not go ahead. No improvements without risks.

Yes yes! Besides we don't ask for this feature to be implemented over night! It can be introduced as a test feature somewhere in BoB or the following developments. Anyway I feel that everyone will love it in the end.

lowfighter
04-24-2006, 01:21 PM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again)

I disagree with this statement, all you have to do is watch football, American football, or even better automobile and motorcycle racing. I'm not even an athlete and I race 5hr off-road events or ride all day on a Sunday practice ride.

In the case of football the players will exert physical activity through the whole game with spurts of extreme activity along with physical pounding and the American variety you take even more physical punishment by being constantly hit. I'd say F1 racing is the closest to dogfight conditions taking positive and negative G's for an entire several hour race, tracking your pray and being tracked by others. In the course of an enduro I'll ride 4 - 5 hours pushing my body to my limit off and on all day long with only a few breaks and recovery periods. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

It's hard to compare because of extremely different psychological conditions and motivations. Many WWII pilots have most probably this BACKGROUND thought : "will these be my lost hours of living?", on the airfield waiting for the signal and in flight, and anywhere else. Can you imagine that, oh man. They didn't know when "competition" would take place and seldom on which terms, they had to do it when they were ordered. THIS drains energy no matter how fit you are at the beginning. Your point is good though. If Oleg would try to simulate this it must be a kind of average fatigue, not that of the first pilots which just landed on Guadalcanal and also not that of those who leaved (which survived) the island.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 01:46 PM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again)

I disagree with this statement, all you have to do is watch football, American football, or even better automobile and motorcycle racing. I'm not even an athlete and I race 5hr off-road events or ride all day on a Sunday practice ride.

In the case of football the players will exert physical activity through the whole game with spurts of extreme activity along with physical pounding and the American variety you take even more physical punishment by being constantly hit. I'd say F1 racing is the closest to dogfight conditions taking positive and negative G's for an entire several hour race, tracking your pray and being tracked by others. In the course of an enduro I'll ride 4 - 5 hours pushing my body to my limit off and on all day long with only a few breaks and recovery periods. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with what you say about sport. But i feel like war is not sport, alas.
Today the F1 driver will since the age of 10 train with the purpose of beeing the best in a competion where all opponenens will train the same way, knowing how to train.
In the 30 ies many air forces didn't believe that it would be possible for the Human body to reach the limits of air combat, i think this is why some countries didn't develop their air forces. They didn't know how to train correctly.

Remember all the pilots, wearied after so many missions (years of restless war), coldness, low oxigen, excessive, concentration, with the stress of fight, the low moral after a good friend's death, the quality of food, the nights without sleeping, alcohol sometimes...
It is well known that WW2 pilots lost,after a certain amount of time in operation, weight, strength, and moral...
Even modern air combat can not be compared with such situation.

If you think about that, you'll understand why i stated that the human body in those conditions cannot do hard movements again and again.

Look at the WW2 pilots: physically, you won't see so many athletes. Some of them aces were so skinny...with fatigue under their eyes...

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-24-2006, 01:47 PM
Viper - and u brought again ur table data.... I didnt said that u cannot pull 25kg, but u cannot pull it all the time, even if u are young man! And no, even on corner speeds it wasnt easy. Just go to the gym, train a bit, and then go to run a maraton - i wanna see how u will say "it was easy, i could pull 25kg all the time". Very often pilots had muscles and streches broken because of intense fighting.

lowfighter
04-24-2006, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again)

I disagree with this statement, all you have to do is watch football, American football, or even better automobile and motorcycle racing. I'm not even an athlete and I race 5hr off-road events or ride all day on a Sunday practice ride.

In the case of football the players will exert physical activity through the whole game with spurts of extreme activity along with physical pounding and the American variety you take even more physical punishment by being constantly hit. I'd say F1 racing is the closest to dogfight conditions taking positive and negative G's for an entire several hour race, tracking your pray and being tracked by others. In the course of an enduro I'll ride 4 - 5 hours pushing my body to my limit off and on all day long with only a few breaks and recovery periods. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with what you say about sport. But i feel like war is not sport, alas.
Today the F1 driver will since the age of 10 train with the purpose of beeing the best in a competion where all opponenens will train the same way, knowing how to train.
In the 30 ies many air forces didn't believe that it would be possible for the Human body to reach the limits of air combat, i think this is why some countries didn't develop their air forces. They didn't know how to train correctly.

Remember all the pilots, wearied after so many missions (years of restless war), coldness, low oxigen, excessive, concentration, with the stress of fight, the low moral after a good friend's death, the quality of food, the nights without sleeping, alcohol sometimes...
It is well known that WW2 pilots lost,after a certain amount of time, weight, strength, and moral...
Even modern air combat can not be compared with such situation.

If you think about that, you'll understand why i stated that the human body in those conditions cannot do hard movements again and again.

Look at the WW2 pilots: physically, you won't see so many athletes. Some of them aces were so skinny...with fatigue under their eyes... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hehe RegRag, telephaty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Pinker15
04-24-2006, 01:55 PM
I cant agree with that pilot fatigue in wwII was less inportant than it is now. Now forces on stick are much less than it was in the past and G forces was similar to this what is today and was no anti high G suits for pilots as we have today.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 01:57 PM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Viper - and u brought again ur table data.... I didnt said that u cannot pull 25kg, but u cannot pull it all the time, even if u are young man! And no, even on corner speeds it wasnt easy. Just go to the gym, train a bit, and then go to run a maraton - i wanna see how u will say "it was easy, i could pull 25kg all the time". Very often pilots had muscles and streches broken because of intense fighting.

Yes, but even if a superman could do that it would affect his piloting quality:
Doing hard manoeuvers in reality, means panic, fright, hard controls and because of that poor piloting (not like in IL2 where we can have über precision after hard manoeuvers...

It's like you asked a weight lifter to play the piano (a Rachmaninov concerto) right after the effort...

the consequences are easy to guess...

lowfighter
04-24-2006, 01:59 PM
Man, after so many beers, I'm so fatigued that it's hard to raise even the next one http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 02:02 PM
Originally posted by lowfighter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RegRag1977:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again)

I disagree with this statement, all you have to do is watch football, American football, or even better automobile and motorcycle racing. I'm not even an athlete and I race 5hr off-road events or ride all day on a Sunday practice ride.

In the case of football the players will exert physical activity through the whole game with spurts of extreme activity along with physical pounding and the American variety you take even more physical punishment by being constantly hit. I'd say F1 racing is the closest to dogfight conditions taking positive and negative G's for an entire several hour race, tracking your pray and being tracked by others. In the course of an enduro I'll ride 4 - 5 hours pushing my body to my limit off and on all day long with only a few breaks and recovery periods. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with what you say about sport. But i feel like war is not sport, alas.
Today the F1 driver will since the age of 10 train with the purpose of beeing the best in a competion where all opponenens will train the same way, knowing how to train.
In the 30 ies many air forces didn't believe that it would be possible for the Human body to reach the limits of air combat, i think this is why some countries didn't develop their air forces. They didn't know how to train correctly.

Remember all the pilots, wearied after so many missions (years of restless war), coldness, low oxigen, excessive, concentration, with the stress of fight, the low moral after a good friend's death, the quality of food, the nights without sleeping, alcohol sometimes...
It is well known that WW2 pilots lost,after a certain amount of time, weight, strength, and moral...
Even modern air combat can not be compared with such situation.

If you think about that, you'll understand why i stated that the human body in those conditions cannot do hard movements again and again.

Look at the WW2 pilots: physically, you won't see so many athletes. Some of them aces were so skinny...with fatigue under their eyes... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hehe RegRag, telephaty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I knew it was too right to come from my wearied brain http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif Sh..t!

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Viper2005_
04-24-2006, 02:05 PM
I've never been the running type.

A marathon takes hours. Imagine I'm a world class marathon runner and can run 26 miles in 2 hours flat. Dogfights don't generally last anything like 2 hours; apart from anything else you'd run out of fuel. No comparison. Sorry.

The central question is "how long do dogfights last?"

I would suggest that once you get to the death or glory knife fighting stage, the duration of the fight is generally short enough that physical fatigue isn't a major issue. I'm not suggesting that it's easy; I'm simply suggesting that in the vast majority of instances, the fight ends either through gunfire, disorientation or the "intervention of the ground" before the physical reserves of the average fighter pilot are exhausted.

lowfighter
04-24-2006, 02:05 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by lowfighter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RegRag1977:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(due to the incapacity of the human beeing to do heavy effort again and again)

I disagree with this statement, all you have to do is watch football, American football, or even better automobile and motorcycle racing. I'm not even an athlete and I race 5hr off-road events or ride all day on a Sunday practice ride.

In the case of football the players will exert physical activity through the whole game with spurts of extreme activity along with physical pounding and the American variety you take even more physical punishment by being constantly hit. I'd say F1 racing is the closest to dogfight conditions taking positive and negative G's for an entire several hour race, tracking your pray and being tracked by others. In the course of an enduro I'll ride 4 - 5 hours pushing my body to my limit off and on all day long with only a few breaks and recovery periods. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with what you say about sport. But i feel like war is not sport, alas.
Today the F1 driver will since the age of 10 train with the purpose of beeing the best in a competion where all opponenens will train the same way, knowing how to train.
In the 30 ies many air forces didn't believe that it would be possible for the Human body to reach the limits of air combat, i think this is why some countries didn't develop their air forces. They didn't know how to train correctly.

Remember all the pilots, wearied after so many missions (years of restless war), coldness, low oxigen, excessive, concentration, with the stress of fight, the low moral after a good friend's death, the quality of food, the nights without sleeping, alcohol sometimes...
It is well known that WW2 pilots lost,after a certain amount of time, weight, strength, and moral...
Even modern air combat can not be compared with such situation.

If you think about that, you'll understand why i stated that the human body in those conditions cannot do hard movements again and again.

Look at the WW2 pilots: physically, you won't see so many athletes. Some of them aces were so skinny...with fatigue under their eyes... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hehe RegRag, telephaty http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I knew it was too right to come from my wearied brain http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif Sh..t!

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

bah you said it much much better! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Irish_Rogues
04-24-2006, 02:12 PM
But the pilots IRL wre in all various stages, noobs, some experience, experienced, very experienced, AND the war weary you talk about.

Those war weary you talk of are mostly German pilots, maybe some Russian or British and very few American pilots as they were quite new and "fresh" into the war. Also the allies in general were fresher due to numbers with leave and pilot rotation.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 02:15 PM
Imagine in what state would be you arms after 3 or 4 minutes, pulling 25kg, then moving them hard to the right then to the left, then pulling hard again...
Effort and precision do not go together as well as in IL2... Too much effort would mean less precision in the way you pilot (imagine the movements of you head to follow the contact!), and of course less precision in you aiming: I think this is why this type of movement were mainly desperate evasive manoeuvers...

lowfighter
04-24-2006, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
But the pilots IRL wre in all various stages, noobs, some experience, experienced, very experienced, AND the war weary you talk about.

Those war weary you talk of are mostly German pilots, maybe some Russian or British and very few American pilots as they were quite new and "fresh" into the war. Also the allies in general were fresher due to numbers with leave and pilot rotation.


Yes you are right, so prehaps we need kind of average weariness, or if I'm allowed to dream different degrees of weariness, high, normal and low(the rambos http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif), if I'm alowed to dream more, I join a server and I can chose my weariness, what do you think about that? Ok, see you guys tomorrow, it's a nice thread!

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-24-2006, 02:34 PM
Its too complicated guys, why cannot we just have simple fatigue bar, that wouldnt let pilot to pull stick too much. Just imagine when pursued in FW190 by Spitfire, 400km/h, 1-2-3 barrel rolls - if he tries to follow - he have no more power to fighthttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Irish_Rogues
04-24-2006, 02:39 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Imagine in what state would be you arms after 3 or 4 minutes, pulling 25kg, then moving them hard to the right then to the left, then pulling hard again...
Effort and precision do not go together as well as in IL2... Too much effort would mean less precision in the way you pilot (imagine the movements of you head to follow the contact!), and of course less precision in you aiming: I think this is why this type of movement were mainly desperate evasive manoeuvers...

Aye, I know what your saying M8 as this is very similar to my enduro races. You very rarely get into trouble or crash when your fresh, when your tired this is where you lose concentration and make mistakes. But, after some experience you learn how to lessen the effects and or get accustomed to it .

Pinker15
04-24-2006, 02:39 PM
In situation when fw 190 has too easy stall those high speed barrel rols could be a bit overdone.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
But the pilots IRL wre in all various stages, noobs, some experience, experienced, very experienced, AND the war weary you talk about.

Those war weary you talk of are mostly German pilots, maybe some Russian or British and very few American pilots as they were quite new and "fresh" into the war. Also the allies in general were fresher due to numbers with leave and pilot rotation.

True.

I always wonder when i saw guncam footage why those poor pilots (of all nations) let themselves killed so easily, flying straight, giving their six for free... Maybe they were dead already, or wounded, paniqued or

exhausted...

American pilots could sometimes fly a lot of mission without seeing ennemy, so strong they had the local air domination. It was thus harder for them to learn the ropes of Air combat. Maybe only experienced pilots can/had experience war weary...I think having no or few period of rest had given (that means practicing) the possibility of thoses german, top aces...

Air combat doesn't differ from other art: you have to practice a lot in real situation to improve. But too few resting period (what is the most common situation) or no rest at all means death, like so many aces from all nations, encountered.

Experience can help you not to enter a situation where you would be obliged to use physical strength. And i think this is why many experienced simmers want to have pilot fatigue modelled.

Beeing fresh is useless if you do not encounter ennemy, or if you have no combat experience...
But even for a fresh pilot pulling hard is exhausting, if not it should affect his piloting, his aiming capacities, and of course make his wingmen job impossible...


Maybe i'm wrong...

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 02:53 PM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Imagine in what state would be you arms after 3 or 4 minutes, pulling 25kg, then moving them hard to the right then to the left, then pulling hard again...
Effort and precision do not go together as well as in IL2... Too much effort would mean less precision in the way you pilot (imagine the movements of you head to follow the contact!), and of course less precision in you aiming: I think this is why this type of movement were mainly desperate evasive manoeuvers...

Aye, I know what your saying M8 as this is very similar to my enduro races. You very rarely get into trouble or crash when your fresh, when your tired this is where you lose concentration and make mistakes. But, after some experience you learn how to lessen the effects and or get accustomed to it . </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you seem to be an EXPERIENCED (military, it would be veteran or elite) enduro racer!

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 02:58 PM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Its too complicated guys, why cannot we just have simple fatigue bar, that wouldnt let pilot to pull stick too much. Just imagine when pursued in FW190 by Spitfire, 400km/h, 1-2-3 barrel rolls - if he tries to follow - he have no more power to fighthttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I think you're right! We want the same thing, it seems.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Yes but the fatigue is not only due to gee. It's in WW2 mainly a muscular fatigue due to the effort to move the controls Well, first things first, I never said it was only due to g. As for fatigue.. the real fatigue in the ETO was on the Allied side.. they had to fly for some 4+ hours to get to the fight to meet some 109 pilot that just scrambled about 15min ago to join the fight.. Then once the fight was over, the allied pilot had to fly 4+ hours back home. So.. you going to model that too? Note, it is the kind of fatigue not due to g.. So, let me guess, all allied pilots start off 4 hours more tired than axis pilots in the ETO to make it more realistic? Thanks but no thanks!


Originally posted by RegRag1977:
I can requote myself too Tagert: So?


Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Yes, in WW2 there's not only a fatigue due to gees like today where pilots have assisted servo-mechanisms.
No servo mechanisms during WW2; only "elbow grease", this is why, even the (lucky) P51 pilot with G suit was concerned with FATIGUE. Not true, the P38 had servo assisted alerions


Originally posted by RegRag1977:
AND

Yes, in WW2 there's not only a fatigue due to gees like today where pilots have assisted servo-mechanisms.
No servo mechanisms during WW2; only "elbow grease", this is why, even the (lucky) P51 pilot with G suit was concerned with FATIGUE. AND Still not true, the P38 had servo assisted alerions

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 03:12 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Yes but the fatigue is not only due to gee. It's in WW2 mainly a muscular fatigue due to the effort to move the controls Well, first things first, I never said it was only due to g. As for fatigue.. the real fatigue in the ETO was on the Allied side.. they had to fly for some 4+ hours to get to the fight to meet some 109 pilot that just scrambled about 15min ago to join the fight.. Then once the fight was over, the allied pilot had to fly 4+ hours back home. So.. you going to model that too? Note, it is the kind of fatigue not due to g.. So, let me guess, all allied pilots start off 4 hours more tired than axis pilots in the ETO to make it more realistic? Thanks but no thanks!


Originally posted by RegRag1977:
I can requote myself too Tagert: So?


Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Yes, in WW2 there's not only a fatigue due to gees like today where pilots have assisted servo-mechanisms.
No servo mechanisms during WW2; only "elbow grease", this is why, even the (lucky) P51 pilot with G suit was concerned with FATIGUE. Not true, the P38 had servo assisted alerions


Originally posted by RegRag1977:
AND

Yes, in WW2 there's not only a fatigue due to gees like today where pilots have assisted servo-mechanisms.
No servo mechanisms during WW2; only "elbow grease", this is why, even the (lucky) P51 pilot with G suit was concerned with FATIGUE. AND Still not true, the P38 had servo assisted alerions </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Apologizes,

Thanks for correcting me Tagert!

Somebody just told me by E mail that Tempest also had servo assisted ailerons: but do you know if it was the general situation with fighters, or if it only was on very heavy fighters , during WW2?

And what about the elevator authority?

Viper2005_
04-24-2006, 03:14 PM
The faster you fly, the higher the stick forces. Therefore the slow Spitfire flying T&B on the deck is likely to expend his stamina more frugally than the B&Z pilot flying faster.

Tuning this system to provide balanced results is likely to be extremely difficult.

Irish_Rogues
04-24-2006, 03:16 PM
you seem to be an EXPERIENCED (military, it would be veteran or elite) enduro racer!

Experienced, aye. Talented not particularly. I hold my own, but I do have fun though.

While none of us know for sure, what / if any, the effects were I devine from my own experience that the actual physical effects weren't that significant. The mental stress of going out to hunt for prey or worse becoming prey, then fighting for your life would be dramatic. Which in this discussion wouldn't really factor in. I saw it mentioned earlier in the discussion that in reality dogfights only lasted minutes, and most pilot accounts would back that up. I'm sure even a thin, war weary veteran could handle a 10 minute bout.

I'd vote for leaving things simple as they are because everyone is on the same exact footing.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 03:16 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Apologizes,

Thanks for correcting me Tagert! NP, on the average your right.. most did not, and your also correct to note that g is not the only source of fatigue.. but.. 1C has troulbe simulating flight.. imagine trying to simulate something as complcated as pilot fatigue.. what test data exists to say one way or another how much the strengh in your right arm should be reduced by pulling 2gs for 30seconds? Forget it, big old can of worms.. Now in the near future.. if they could simulate pilot fatigue that is based on your own personl medical history.. heck I would be all over that idea.. in that 90% of the fat slobs sitting at the joystick can not walk up a flight of stairs let alone pull 4gs.. But that is some years away if ever.


Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Somebody just told me by E mail that Tempest also had servo assisted ailerons: but do you know if it was the general situation with fighters, or if it only was on very heavy fighters, during WW2? Not sure, I only know that most didnt, and a few did.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
The faster you fly, the higher the stick forces. Therefore the slow Spitfire flying T&B on the deck is likely to expend his stamina more frugally than the B&Z pilot flying faster.

Tuning this system to provide balanced results is likely to be extremely difficult.

Indeed, but while turning, the pilot e bleeds, and will only have the solution to turn and turn again... If he does that, he loses speed.
Speed is life.
Without his speed the spitfire jock can no longer be a threat for the high speed FW190 pilot, he lost the possibility of having advantage.
Even if he turns he won't have enough speed for a good shot, becoming at the same moment a target. In this situation no fatigue for him is useless.

At high speed, it's true the controls forces, but the possibilities to have higher angles of attack is also reduced (for both planes, if their pilots try to pull more angle, both will suffer fatigue), (remember at high speeds Fw190 turns better), at this moment it's about elevator authority.
But turners no longer have all advantages. It's the same in a case with P47 vs BF109.

RegRag1977
04-24-2006, 03:41 PM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Apologizes,

Thanks for correcting me Tagert! NP, on the average your right.. most did not, and your also correct to note that g is not the only source of fatigue.. but.. 1C has troulbe simulating flight.. imagine trying to simulate something as complcated as pilot fatigue.. what test data exists to say one way or another how much the strengh in your right arm should be reduced by pulling 2gs for 30seconds? Forget it, big old can of worms.. Now in the near future.. if they could simulate pilot fatigue that is based on your own personl medical history.. heck I would be all over that idea.. in that 90% of the fat slobs sitting at the joystick can not walk up a flight of stairs let alone pull 4gs.. But that is some years away if ever.


Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Somebody just told me by E mail that Tempest also had servo assisted ailerons: but do you know if it was the general situation with fighters, or if it only was on very heavy fighters, during WW2? Not sure, I only know that most didnt, and a few did. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, i'm not as pessimistic as you are about Pilot Fatigue... But i understand your point of view, and it make sense.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 05:22 PM
Originally posted by RegRag1977:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Apologizes,

Thanks for correcting me Tagert! NP, on the average your right.. most did not, and your also correct to note that g is not the only source of fatigue.. but.. 1C has troulbe simulating flight.. imagine trying to simulate something as complcated as pilot fatigue.. what test data exists to say one way or another how much the strengh in your right arm should be reduced by pulling 2gs for 30seconds? Forget it, big old can of worms.. Now in the near future.. if they could simulate pilot fatigue that is based on your own personl medical history.. heck I would be all over that idea.. in that 90% of the fat slobs sitting at the joystick can not walk up a flight of stairs let alone pull 4gs.. But that is some years away if ever.


Originally posted by RegRag1977:
Somebody just told me by E mail that Tempest also had servo assisted ailerons: but do you know if it was the general situation with fighters, or if it only was on very heavy fighters, during WW2? Not sure, I only know that most didnt, and a few did. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, i'm not as pessimistic as you are about Pilot Fatigue... But i understand your point of view, and it make sense. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>Well don€t confuse pessimism with being realistic. In that we are not likely to see any new features in the IL2 engine.. tweaks of existing features, but not new ones. And if Oleg gave us a wish list with 1,000 features he could add to Il2, but, Oleg told us we have to pick only "1" on the list, because he only has time and money to add "1" of the 1,000, and we took a vote/poll on these 1,000 features, I can assure you pilot fatigue would not be anywhere near the top of the list.

Now I know that does not sit well with CMHQ_Rikimaru, in that he thinks he had a great idea here and that he was the first one to ever think of it, but the fact is simulating pilot fatigue is about as old as flight simming itself, if I have seen it mentioned once in my past 20 years of flight simming I have seen it mentioned a thousand times at hundreds of different sights, from the usenet to specialized forums like this pilot fatigue has been talk about.. and it always comes up short on the list of important things to do. Some sims in the past have tried to simulate it.. but it never really worked out well.. and on the few that it did it is such a small factor that it goes practically un-noticed.. So why bother? On that note I believe LockOn claims to simulated pilot fatigue.. but.. I would see that being a bigger factor in a high g jet sim.

LEXX_Luthor
04-24-2006, 06:16 PM
Tagert::
I have seen it mentioned a thousand times
For good reason -- and the asked for effect is always restricted to the popular Online computer gamer concept of "Gee-Force."

If all reasons for Pilot Fatigue were modelled -- true mission duration, freezing, heating, oxygen, vibration, control forces, lack of trim, gee-forces, etc..., then simulating some basics of Aviation Medicine would make a realistic contribution to flight simming.

* true mission duration means if Online P-51Dora simmers want Online Bf-109 simmers to suffer leg fatigue from too much rudder, then the Dora simmers will have to start on the dogfight map with pilot half asleep after flying 4 hours from England at 25,000 feet. Modelling of Aviation Medicine is not what computer gamers are looking for when they ask for strictly geeforce induced "Pilot Fatigue."

WWMaxGunz
04-24-2006, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by Takata_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Fresh pilot and the response will be from zero to 100kg? How long into a turn before it is zero to 50kg, then 30, 20, 10?
Better think that through. In virtual combat will you have time or attention to monitor the pilot state that is yet another thing you have no feel for? I doubt it very much.
- Every kind of Sport Institute in the world is studying fatigue's models including effort and rest. Beside, it should not be that hard to find real data about combat fatigue, even from military sources related to air combat.
- A very simple way to display fatigue level would be thru a non displayed gauge, like "engine overheat". The game would display "pilot overloaded" every time you will cross the red-line, decreasing your endurance accordingly and making it easier to be "overloaded" again without rest. a short breath sound related to effort making may be played as well to inform the pilot of it's current fatigue load. After all, it's pretty close to your "biological" engine management.
S~
Takata. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That is none of the point of what you quoted.

We have joystick throw to input strength used by the pilot on his stick that controls the plane.
We are used to a fixed amount of pull, those who are even aware of strength modelling (and the
rest still think that all the way back on their joystick is the same on the plane stick) at
least. With fatigue, the pilot now has full strength until tired. And you talk of sports,
maybe you do sports as well and you know that performance does not fall off linear to time
and effort. So for a good while your joystick will be force zero to what, 50kg modified by
G-forces as they change? And then the range changes but you don't feel a thing and please
tell me that a number or bar onscreen that is changing will help you control stick? If you
loosen the pull, the amount of strength increases after a while -- will that cause you to
back off on your joystick? Maybe if you are bright enough and pay attention. Many are not
as they don't seem to be able to keep an eye on speed and notice when they are riding into
the edge of a stall.

Here is another factor: the AI. We have AI that are simply not up to the kind of planning
that pilot fatigue will entail. They are already far less. Do they get fatigue anyway?
Would you fly against AI that do not while you do?

WWMaxGunz
04-24-2006, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
It is worth pointing out that piston engined WWII fighters can only pull around 4 g in a sustained turn. Therefore their ability to tire a fit pilot through g alone is somewhat limited.

Competition aerobatics pilots often pull 9 g for 4 minute sequences.

Could I point out that the aerobatics pilots are flying lighter planes with I assume much
lighter controls and at I also assume much lower speeds?

Still, fighters with lower control forces at the speeds of combat should get some advantage.
The advantage should also shift with speed in a way, the Zero that would tire a pilot out
trying to roll at 400kph gets very manueverable at 300kph for much less effort while the
P-40 pilot may be pulling harder and still getting less result.


To put it bluntly, in the classic "dogfight server" scenario, you'd probably be dead before you ever got tired.

In addition, fatigue produces mental as well as physical incapacity, and more often than not in an aviation context it kills pilots by causing them to make bad decisions. This is quite difficult, if not impossible, to model.

Perhaps a special gas mask for players that cuts O2 a bit and increases CO2 triple? Hehehe.


Pulling lots of g isn't likely to even be the primary source of fatigue associated with throwing aeroplanes about the sky. Nor is heavy controls likely to be the culprit; after a few weeks of flying WWII fighters one would develop strong arms and whilst you'd work hard in a fight, since the average knife fight doesn't last long, you'd be likely to die before running out of physical strength.

Negative on that as I have read full accounts from pilots where the deciding factor after a
fight dragged down low was who tired first or at least partly. In one particular the winner
was down to shaking at the end, the other had lost the ability to hold the turn only seconds
before, less than a minute.


In my view, the biggest cause of fatigue would be the cockpit environment itself.

I'll leave ya here and hope that people get the idea of missing factors that will render the
desired realism as something very partial.

Still it does seem a way to force out some of the worst online and offline unrealistic play.

WWMaxGunz
04-24-2006, 07:17 PM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
The point that I'm making is that in the vast majority of cases, once you get into a knife fight, death, glory or disengagement tend to follow in pretty short order, during which it's reasonable to expect adrenaline to take over. Apart from anything else, WWII piston engined fighters simply lack the power to sustain much more than 4 g for any length of time.


I'd like to know what WWII prop fighters could sustain a full 3G's in flat turning.

However you do seem to have discounted an all too often fought battle where higher G turns
were sustained by those fighters, the descending spiral fight. And there I do think that
the 4G's you mention was a rule of thumb. Even later on, getting into a 4 G turn and seeing
who could hold on was used by at least one F-86 Ace who counted on boosted controls making
his wingmates and his own job easier, and it worked.

Yeah, 109 players could get the extra deflection. They can also scream when Spit pilots
who have lower stick forces don't tire out near as quickly.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is nice topic, pilot fatigue. And lots of people write how great it would be. Big IF on
that is IF it works close like they imagine.

I would like trim to somehow work like real, I can hold the stick and feel the pressure
lessen as I dial in trim. But it will not happen with my hardware.

The hardware limits and what they do to how anything about controls modelling are not going
to make this kind of thing so clean or intuitive at all. Such a thing to put in a sim will
take work, study and inspiration or OTOH it can be an exploitable half mess never quite
right. It will be a lot of work either way and a gamble as to results which for imagination
there is neither.

I am sure that Team Maddox has looked into this and if they are ready then we will see it.
I am just as sure that if they are not then it's a waste pushing for it.

Chivas
04-24-2006, 07:23 PM
I have no problem with fatique being an option, but I would not fly with it or on a server that has it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

TheGozr
04-24-2006, 08:02 PM
Imagine to have a fatigue setup + your own real fatigue... it make me yawn just to think about it. I hope not to have it at all. SOme of us have 2 hours ( easly ) + of hard fight so we are already tired so i imagine with the fatigue designed into the sim and ofcourse we will have to add an other gauges for Adrenaline pumping and about the scared gauge ho about a hard smell fuel gauge or a vomit G force setup ? .....better give up on the sim then.

I forgot about a NOOB setting like in Real life, not enough hours of training too much G's than you faint and crashed unconcient.

Instead to worry about this , try to adjust yourself to the no icon cituation, some good clouds and turbulences or air mass etc..

Pilot fatigue you must be kidding...
If you are not naturaly tired after some flight times it's because you don't fly strong enough http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 08:49 PM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
For good reason -- and the asked for effect is always restricted to the popular Online computer gamer concept of "Gee-Force." Exactally


Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
If all reasons for Pilot Fatigue were modelled -- true mission duration, freezing, heating, oxygen, vibration, control forces, lack of trim, gee-forces, etc..., then simulating some basics of Aviation Medicine would make a realistic contribution to flight simming.

* true mission duration means if Online P-51Dora simmers want Online Bf-109 simmers to suffer leg fatigue from too much rudder, then the Dora simmers will have to start on the dogfight map with pilot half asleep after flying 4 hours from England at 25,000 feet. Modelling of Aviation Medicine is not what computer gamers are looking for when they ask for strictly geeforce induced "Pilot Fatigue." Bingo!

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 08:51 PM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
Imagine to have a fatigue setup + your own real fatigue... it make me yawn just to think about it. I hope not to have it at all. SOme of us have 2 hours ( easly ) + of hard fight so we are already tired so i imagine with the fatigue designed into the sim and ofcourse we will have to add an other gauges for Adrenaline pumping and about the scared gauge ho about a hard smell fuel gauge or a vomit G force setup ? .....better give up on the sim then.

I forgot about a NOOB setting like in Real life, not enough hours of training too much G's than you faint and crashed unconcient.

Instead to worry about this , try to adjust yourself to the no icon cituation, some good clouds and turbulences or air mass etc..

Pilot fatigue you must be kidding...
If you are not naturaly tired after some flight times it's because you don't fly strong enough http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif Agreed 100%

BfHeFwMe
04-24-2006, 09:04 PM
I remember a time when it was common to see the greyish partial G screen and ride the edge of it for a while controlling it with stick. Don't see that much now days, either a rare full blackout caused by an instance of pull at extreme speed, or the built in training wheels of your ride are protecting you.

I remember fights where others out of speed and altitude manouvering hard would lose it in a viscious stall and drop in, not with todays training wheels, can fight all day anywhere as long as they don't take a hit.

I remember a time when I could pull most planes into a stall, not with dumbed down training wheels on them, sadly.

Why do we need a restricting fatigue model when there's already a set of flight model limiting training wheels built in?

If anyone thinks it's going to add to the fidelity of the sim, think again. Stick force training wheels are already a disaster.

http://www.gothicrevue.com/Devo.jpg
Slap that stick.

AKA_TAGERT
04-24-2006, 09:32 PM
time for a poll yet? seems the average is shifting? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

LEXX_Luthor
04-24-2006, 09:32 PM
BF::
I remember fights where others out of speed and altitude manouvering hard would lose it in a viscious stall and drop in, not with todays training wheels, can fight all day anywhere as long as they don't take a hit.
Alot of the computer gamer reasoning in these debates missies the point that if you want to play BnZ Online Hartmann your opponent will want to play TnB Online Saburo, who was one of many lone Japanese pilots who survived multiple team attacks by much faster aircraft.


Gozr::
Pilot fatigue you must be kidding...
If you are not naturaly tired after some flight times it's because you don't fly strong enough http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
There is enormous room for positive gee induced Loss of Pilot Stamina (lOPS)(*) within the subject of Aviation Medicine, and so could be among many physiology effects modded in flight sims.

Turbulence is another one -- there are so many. Its possible that turbulence would fall under gee-force, but....

Gee Force caused by control movement is certanly the most intense cause of Loss of Pilot Stamina but is certainly the least in time duration -- lOPS due to positive gee forces from control use only happens during The Dogfight which is a brief "exciting" gaming experience. This high intensity effect in very short times could explain the interest of Online computer gamers; an interest favouring positive gee force alone it would seem. Turbulence would offer a Balance of positive and negative gee forces over a far greater period of time although of less intensity, and I think the Pilot Body has less tolerance for negative gee forces. Aviation Medicine is a fascinating topic once discussion is taken beyond the concept of Online computer dogfight shooting.

* Its usually called Pilot Stamina, or loss of, on the competitive dogfight webboards.

Loss of Pilot Essence, or "lPOE"

TheGozr
04-24-2006, 09:55 PM
LEXX_Luthor
Elaborate plz, sry lost me a bit there.

LEXX_Luthor
04-24-2006, 10:33 PM
Gozr::
Elaborate plz, sry lost me a bit there.
There is plenty of room under Aviation Medicine to model "pilot fatigue" caused by pulling "gees." And I do find it interesting as a theoretical discussion, but rather unrealistic if other factors that cause pilot exhaustion and loss of combat effectiveness are ignored because the other effects happen in a timespan longer than the Online Dogfight shooting death match. One exception timewise may be loss of "stamina" from climbing without oxygen.

And that's another thing, with no oxygen, you have less "stamina" at higher altitudes. You see, it can be an interesting discussion.

What I would like to see more is methods to simulate pilot experience -- this can be useful in dynamic campaign where you are killed/captured and start again as Newbie pilot fighting for your same side. Some methods to simulate Newbie pilot may be restricting pilot vision (field of view) and oversensitive joystick and rudder controls. These restrictions are slowly lifted as you fly more missions as Newbie pilot. This shows that you are most vulnerable as a Newbie, having less effectiveness until you gain experience.

Gee tolerance is one I could go for. Experienced pilots felt the same "gees" as Newbie pilots, but they were experienced where the Newbies were not. So, I could go for restricting Newbie pilot tolerance to gee forces.

The good thing about this is that there are already simplistic "skill levels" of AI pilots, so its not like the overall effect is restricted to player only.

TheGozr
04-24-2006, 11:07 PM
It can be a very interesting discussion and i'm quite experimented on that matter http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The_Gog
04-25-2006, 01:15 AM
One of the most ridiculous requests in this games history.

How do you model one pilot being extrememly fit while another is just average?

Personnally, I am quite fit and should be after 11 years doing what I do, I would be pretty pizzed off to all of a sudden find my controls harder to work because the computer says I'm tired!!!

Hey Oleg, maybe we can model adrenalin too! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/compsmash.gif

AKA_TAGERT
04-25-2006, 01:29 AM
the tide has tunred.. time for a poll! LOL!

IIJG69_Kartofe
04-25-2006, 02:17 AM
You are loosing your time, oleg has crearly said he will model pilot fatigue for BOB, and he doesn't listen to polls or others whining from this forum.

Dont' forget he said that BOB will be totally innovative comparing to everything made t'ill today, so arguing pro or against pilot fatigue with examples from other sims is RIDICULOUS.

lowfighter
04-25-2006, 03:16 AM
Originally posted by IIJG69_Kartofe:
You are loosing your time, oleg has crearly sait he will model pilot fatighe for BOB, and he doesn't listen to polls or others whining from this forum.

Dont' forget he said that BOB will be totally innovative comparing to everything made t'ill today, so arguing for or against pilot fatigue with examples from other sims ir RIDICULOUS.

Kartofe can you please make that animal stop, I can't think, I'm fascinated http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif

Takata_
04-25-2006, 03:49 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:
I've never been the running type.

A marathon takes hours. Imagine I'm a world class marathon runner and can run 26 miles in 2 hours flat. Dogfights don't generally last anything like 2 hours; apart from anything else you'd run out of fuel. No comparison. Sorry.

The central question is "how long do dogfights last?"
Concerning fatigue, a better analogy is with mechanical engine:

One given engine may run at 95% for hours, in fact it's so long that you can say: it would run indefinitly without breaking.

However, between 96% and 110%, it's not the same anymore and anything above 95% would be a concern with cooling. More time you'll stay here and higher will be your temp, means, your chances to cook your engine are greater.

In game, being carefull, you are allowed to go up to 110% for a limited time. Now after reaching a certain temperature, you'll have to cool down your engine, and it's longer depending on what level of high temp reached.

Being myself in the past an endurance sport performer, I can tell you it's pretty the same for a biological engine.

The idea behind modeling fatigue, is to allow people to execute 96-110% strength manoeuvers, but at some expense (endurance level). Then, you'll have to manage your pilot cooling as well as your engine, which may imply to develop new skills in more accurate combat flying.

S~
Takata.
(edited typos)

Bartolomeo_ita
04-25-2006, 04:09 AM
i wanna see fatigue and weapon/engine problems http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

+ sim
- arcade

Takata_
04-25-2006, 04:34 AM
Originally posted by The_Gog:
One of the most ridiculous requests in this games history.

How do you model one pilot being extrememly fit while another is just average?

Personnally, I am quite fit and should be after 11 years doing what I do, I would be pretty pizzed off to all of a sudden find my controls harder to work because the computer says I'm tired!!!
- As a matter of fact, as a person, you are not actually affected by any effect from the game suffered by your "virtual pilot". For being able to fly this sim behind your computer, you didn't have to follow the physical pilot course. Anybody can fly the game, well fit or not so well, it doesn't matter at all.

Consequently, your "virtual pilot" is someone selected amongst the people able to do it, and trained to do it. What force he can pull at any one time is not related with you, it's already modeled in the sim.

However, at the moment, this guy is never getting tired. No matter what he's doing, only G force will limit his ability to pull on controls. That's the point to improve, and it won't change your concern as your "vitural pilot" is not you, but someone actually better trained than you are to do this job.
S~
Takata.

IIJG69_Kartofe
04-25-2006, 05:53 AM
Originally posted by lowfighter:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by IIJG69_Kartofe:
You are loosing your time, oleg has crearly sait he will model pilot fatighe for BOB, and he doesn't listen to polls or others whining from this forum.

Dont' forget he said that BOB will be totally innovative comparing to everything made t'ill today, so arguing for or against pilot fatigue with examples from other sims ir RIDICULOUS.

Kartofe can you please make that animal stop, I can't think, I'm fascinated http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_confused.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry i can't ... But if you are fast enough and if yo aim well .. Shoot between the eyes ... It's te only way!

Takata_
04-25-2006, 06:00 AM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
Imagine to have a fatigue setup + your own real fatigue... it make me yawn just to think about it. I hope not to have it at all. SOme of us have 2 hours ( easly ) + of hard fight so we are already tired so i imagine with the fatigue designed into the sim...
Gozr, there is different kind of fatigue. what you are talking about is nervous fatigue that will affect on-line players (as well as off-liners if they are flying at such intensity level for a long time). Eyes fatigue is another one when you stay dedicated in front of your screen for hours, etc.

Consequently, it doesn't mean that modeling the virtual pilot physical fatigue will change anything about that. It's not supposed to be related to "how long you are playing" but, what your virtual pilot is actually doing above his own physical stamina.

Now, Land, pick a new plane and you'll get a perfectly fresh pilot as well... and if your nerves or eyes are getting tired, take a break, make some coffee or do some cool Yoga stuff instead.

What you said is like if someone playing the sim and overheating his engine would say: it's bullsh*t, I can't overheat as I put a $1,000 helium liquid cooling system to run my CPU.
S~
Takata.

Von_Rat
04-25-2006, 06:54 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
the tide has tunred.. time for a poll! LOL!


Looks like the tide has gone out for you tagert...lol.

______________________________________________
oleg has crearly said he will model pilot fatigue for BOB, and he doesn't listen to polls or others whining from this forum.
________________________________________________

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-25-2006, 07:11 AM
Oleg is really going to implement this in BOB? Sounds great for me and other fans of realism http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Irish_Rogues
04-25-2006, 08:16 AM
What ever we get, is what we'll have. Will it really be "realistic" to some maybe others never. Hopefully it will be enjoyable. No matter if it ends up being a good feature or poor, one thing is certain it will create a new class of whiners. I can see it now, "The fatigue on the 190 is porked", "C'mon this plane has servo assited aielerons and should have less", "The O2 system on that plane used to freeze up and those guys can still fly all day in this sim". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

AKA_TAGERT
04-25-2006, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
Looks like the tide has gone out for you tagert...lol.

______________________________________________
oleg has crearly said he will model pilot fatigue for BOB, and he doesn't listen to polls or others whining from this forum.
________________________________________________ What's the mater, did you forget your floaties?

What part of me saying "adding pilot fatigue to Il2 is not likly" and "we will be lucky if we get pilot fatigue in BoB" did you NOT understand?

AKA_TAGERT
04-25-2006, 08:22 AM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
What ever we get, is what we'll have. Will it really be "realistic" to some maybe others never. Hopefully it will be enjoyable. No matter if it ends up being a good feature or poor, one thing is certain it will create a new class of whiners. I can see it now, "The fatigue on the 190 is porked", "C'mon this plane has servo assited aielerons and should have less", "The O2 system on that plane used to freeze up and those guys can still fly all day in this sim". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif Exactally

IIJG69_Kartofe
04-25-2006, 09:26 AM
Originally posted by Irish_Rogues:
What ever we get, is what we'll have. Will it really be "realistic" to some maybe others never. Hopefully it will be enjoyable. No matter if it ends up being a good feature or poor, one thing is certain it will create a new class of whiners. I can see it now, "The fatigue on the 190 is porked", "C'mon this plane has servo assited aielerons and should have less", "The O2 system on that plane used to freeze up and those guys can still fly all day in this sim". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

C'mooonnnn http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/touche.gif

Now, because of some <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">SPECULATIONS</span> on future wining, new features developement must be stoped or introduced carefully???

This forum has become "la meque" of the wining or what ???
Probability of wining must be the main preocupation of the developpers??? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

If you don't like new features in BOB, switch them off (like we do with padlock, remember).

WWMaxGunz
04-25-2006, 09:30 AM
Originally posted by BfHeFwMe:
I remember a time when it was common to see the greyish partial G screen and ride the edge of it for a while controlling it with stick. Don't see that much now days, either a rare full blackout caused by an instance of pull at extreme speed, or the built in training wheels of your ride are protecting you.

Strange. I was flying a 109G-6 early yesterday to check a claim I read out and knock some rust
off and I was able to get the full range of grey and hold it without blackout. I could have
pulled more stick but I wanted to find the edge not cross right over it.


I remember fights where others out of speed and altitude manouvering hard would lose it in a viscious stall and drop in, not with todays training wheels, can fight all day anywhere as long as they don't take a hit.

Here I do see a point although not in such exaggerated terms. Recovery of speed in this sim is
not what it is in earlier ones where you do play the dweeb like a fish until he has not the speed
to maneuver far enough out of the way to escape easy shooting. IL2 original definitely had that
even for the AI. You still had to stay on him but accel and climb were much less. IMHO that
changed as of FB 1.0, gets cut some in the patches and returns for the new pay-for releases
only to get cut again in patches.

But will I say this sim is wrong based on earlier sims matching expectations?


I remember a time when I could pull most planes into a stall, not with dumbed down training wheels on them, sadly.

Errrrrr. I have a very old friend who flew in WWII and afterwards even to delivering planes
from makers like Luscomb to customers all over the country. He liked the all metal Luscombs.
I used to maintain his PC and flying gear. He liked his MSFS sims and I would try and get him
into first RB2-3 and then EAW. I spent time with him about stalls and spins which I thought
that MSCFS which I had was like you say, on training wheels and when I took him up on it he
spun the plane by pulling up to stall and tromping the rudder, not by twitching the stick a
hair too far. He told me that the CFS spins and entries were more real than the others though
yeah none of them were real. EAW spins he just threw up his hands but short of the spins he
did like the way it flew and the ballooning of ground effect on landings, but only so much.
It was 1999 and that's what we had, the CFS stalls and spins were by him closer to real and I
had to swallow that what I took as too relaxed was not as badly relaxed as I thought.

The stalls and spins I see in PF 4.04 are less relaxed than I remember CFS having.

We can get into stalls easily. Post after post about speed bleed when trying to turn are as
much proof as anyone should need that these models do stall. They just don't drop into spins
in a canned manner like the old sims or even in the pre-disposed manner of prior to 4.0.

Since I do not have stall and spin training, I have to go off what real pilots who do say.
Louie has 1000's of hours flying fixed wing props so I remember his lessons.


Why do we need a restricting fatigue model when there's already a set of flight model limiting training wheels built in?

If anyone thinks it's going to add to the fidelity of the sim, think again. Stick force training wheels are already a disaster.

http://www.gothicrevue.com/Devo.jpg
Slap that stick.

Please, just what are the training wheels and how do you demonstrate them?
What sims show more real behaviour to compare this one to? I am sure there is at least one
non-combat sim with at least one common plane that can be used as an example.

Von_Rat
04-25-2006, 09:35 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
Looks like the tide has gone out for you tagert...lol.

______________________________________________
oleg has crearly said he will model pilot fatigue for BOB, and he doesn't listen to polls or others whining from this forum.
________________________________________________ What's the mater, did you forget your floaties?

What part of me saying "adding pilot fatigue to Il2 is not likly" and "we will be lucky if we get pilot fatigue in BoB" did you NOT understand? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

you act like somthing i left floating this morning.

backpedal a little faster there ace.

Irish_Rogues
04-25-2006, 09:49 AM
C'mooonnnn

Now, because of some SPECULATIONS on future wining, new features developement must be stoped or introduced carefully???

This forum has become "la meque" of the wining or what ???
Probability of wining must be the main preocupation of the developpers???

If you don't like new features in BOB, switch them off (like we do with padlock, remember).

Never meant to imply anything of the sort. If developers of anything worried about those things nothing new would ever evolve. No worries M8. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I merely predicated the future based on the past. I also predict that many of those who are in full favor of this feature will be disappointed no matter how it's implemented. That's just human nature and expectations.

My OWN personal opinion is that the feature will be to hard to model and implement in a believable, realistic fashion. This in no way means it shouldn't be tried or that I know what I'm talking about. I'd honestly love to be proven wrong and have it be the greatest thing to ever hit simulations. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

WWMaxGunz
04-25-2006, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by Takata_:
However, at the moment, this guy is never getting tired. No matter what he's doing, only G force will limit his ability to pull on controls. That's the point to improve, and it won't change your concern as your "vitural pilot" is not you, but someone actually better trained than you are to do this job.
S~
Takata.

At the moment his strength output to the stick is limited to what can reasonably be used for
reasonable durations by a trained physically fit combat pilot.

He just cannot pull more although in reality he could for limited periods.

Don't underestimate the fitness of the soldiers of that era. The average recruit was better
than the next generation at least in the US as shown by fitness test results. Kids did less
running around and working here post WWII than before just in the 50's and 60's. Nowadays
it's really bad if what I see on TV news health reports is even partly true. TV, console
and PC games and fast food consumption, not to mention having to ride everywhere instead of
walk (oh geez, walking is a special exercise past what, puberty?) have dragged the average
way down.

So we get trained however some of us do and we raise ourselves but that generation I can tell
you is tough on average from living harder lives, period. In places around the world today
it is the same where they are not also starving.

You train and while your strength goes up, your endurance goes farther. Far more. You tire
less easily and you learn to pull more out of yourself than you ever thought possible. Way
more when training routinely takes you to where you can taste the lactic acid on your breath
and you start to lose the ability to hold your pi$$ while seeing yellow and purple spots,
and you keep on going as in my case the alternative would be worse.

Nobody less should be sent into combat, IMO. It did happen to countries being overrun and
still does. I know a Bosnian here who is nothing special but not a wimp and he had to be
a soldier for his people when he was a teenager. Did Russia ever send less than strong and
fit men up in fighters? I think not. Germany? Pretty sure at the end they had to.

Still I read from a Pole who had to drag a 109 down to under 1000ft in a hard spiral to
stay alive and watched another Hurri beat another 109 that quit turning hard that he was
shaking before the end of the fight so hard body or not, a very extended bout of G's at
the stick can do just about anyone in.

If the pilots are all matched in capability then the historic "who is the stronger" will
not play into it. It will in the game be a matter of who manages their pilot better and
hopefully whose plane requires less work as a real factor, which we have now in the gets
more authority at higher speeds way. Players who cannot now figure out that they mismanage
CEM, stick and gunnery to mention a few will go off even crazier when fatigue is modelled
you betcha. No reason to say don't do it except just be ready for the storm.

The standard pilot, will he be able to hold on and give 110%? When his adrenaline finally
burns out then how long to recover and will the shaking near collapse tiredness be modelled?
And as pointed out before, the player will have a clear mind that the pilot would not so
the model will be how done... player loses control for at least 30 secs to a minute? We
wait and see, won't we?

TheGozr
04-25-2006, 10:21 AM
Well takata, trust me on that i know a lots about all the differences of fatigues as you i know fatigue due to a hard activity, to computer fatigue and also unlike many i know the fatigue spending a lots of hours in a ww2 fighter doing some interesting stuff, i even sleped in one of them. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif regarding cooling well, some aircrafts were even over cooled.

A green to a red head S~

RegRag1977
04-25-2006, 12:16 PM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Oleg is really going to implement this in BOB? Sounds great for me and other fans of realism http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

What a great news!!!

Is it true or just a speculation? I want proofs!

Yes and i hope for others that it will be an option so everyone will be as happy as i am!

RegRag1977
04-25-2006, 12:38 PM
By the way,

Target rightly corrected me saying P38 had servo assisted ailerons... A friend of mine told me yesterday Tempest had such assisted controls too...

My question is was these servo assisted controls created to repair a default (controls too hard, normal after the servo boost) or created to improve an intrinsic lightness of controls, giving this way "über" controls (like in modern A/C)
In other words is servo assistance in P38 or in tempest (note i don't know if i'm right: so Tempest ailerons costing less muscular energy than 190?) giving fatigue advantage over other aircrafts in the same category?

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-25-2006, 01:27 PM
But if im right, elevator was rather hard to move in P38, so not such big advantage:P

RegRag1977
04-25-2006, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
But if im right, elevator was rather hard to move in P38, so not such big advantage:P

That's what i wanted someone to sayhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

rosaenrico
04-25-2006, 05:32 PM
1) Don't introduce fatigue because of whining induced by the new characteristic:

if this was the problem, then you have to tell to Oleg: in your next sim, don't give aircraft any speed, don't give them any manouverability, don't give them any damage model, don't give them any FM since we had thousands threads of whining about those characteristics (low alt speed whaaaa, high alt ones whaaaa, my plane porked whaaaa, i can't shoot down that enemy plane made of concrete whaaaa, etc etc etc... ) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

2) better not to include fatigue, since it can't be modelled properly (can't take count of hours flying, vibrations, stress and some other "advanced" medical parameters):

given that, to me, it would be great just to have an engine overheat-like model (where heating is force exerted by the pilot, recoverable in some seconds/minutes) as Takata exactly said; then we have to admit that flap efficiency should not be modelled, and control surfaces effectiveness too, and stalls and spins and torque and engine management as well, because none of them can be modeled exactly as the real ones. Obvious response: better to have stalls, spins, ailerons etc 90% correctly modeled than to have nothing, since this would signify 0% correctly modelled. The same applies to fatigue: now we have the human part of the planes that is uneffected by hour of flying, vibrations, oxygen, combat stress etc, nor by pulling/pushing 25 kg for the eternity, nor by having experienced ten blackouts in 30 seconds. Having (roughly) modeled one of these fatigues is undoubtedly a step forward, better 20% human part than 100% Superman part of the plane, don't you think?

3) Conclusions:
a) after discussing this argument in this and previous threads, I think that some virtual pilots enjoy the mechanical constraints of the plane if pushed at the limit (its max speed, its turn rate, its roll rate, its rate of climb), as it was a radio-controlled plane; if another physical factor (the human body) limited in some degree the performance of exclusively the mechanical part of the plane, sorry no room for these new requests

b) This post has resulted very long, well beyond my intentions; this because English is not my first language, and so many words to say something simple. I hope it's still intelligible.
Bye

WWMaxGunz
04-25-2006, 05:48 PM
Some people pushed for P-51 easier response and we all got the bit too easy elevators.

But we get no compensation for 0% refraction of armor glass on FW-190 gunsight view.
Maybe better we don't know what the fix might be anyway.

What this will be I hope is an option and I can tell the Zoo will become even noisier
no matter how good it is done.

AKA_TAGERT
04-25-2006, 09:30 PM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
you act like somthing i left floating this morning. Ouch.. my old girl friend use to think she could flush those things too.. Until she clogged up toilet so bad I had to call a plumber. I highly recommend you don€t flush those, do like your mom showed you and wrap them in paper and put them in the trash. I know it is allot to ask, but trust me your boyfriend will thank you for it!


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
backpedal a little faster there ace. Back pedal? What part of me saying "adding pilot fatigue to Il2 is not likely" and "we will be lucky if we get pilot fatigue in BoB" did you NOT understand?

WTE_Galway
04-26-2006, 12:47 AM
i remember reading somewhere about the huge amount of physical taining german pilots undertook (often voluntarily) to make sure they were fit and strong enough to fly in combat reliably .. i am sure it was the same across all airforces

what would be rather amusing is if, as an online pilot, you had to enter in your current real life fitness level including blood pressure, distance you can run and weight you can lift before flying online ..and your ability to sustain high G or simply pull out of a high speed dive depended on your actual fitness and strength

Von_Rat
04-26-2006, 03:24 AM
Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
you act like somthing i left floating this morning. Ouch.. my old girl friend use to think she could flush those things too.. Until she clogged up toilet so bad I had to call a plumber. I highly recommend you don€t flush those, do like your mom showed you and wrap them in paper and put them in the trash. I know it is allot to ask, but trust me your boyfriend will thank you for it!


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
backpedal a little faster there ace. Back pedal? What part of me saying "adding pilot fatigue to Il2 is not likely" and "we will be lucky if we get pilot fatigue in BoB" did you NOT understand? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

better get your boyfriend to wipe your a** for you. i think you missed something.

no its "we", who'd be lucky to get it. you didn't want it.
thats it pedal faster and faster there ace. lol

SeaFireLIV
04-26-2006, 05:42 AM
Originally posted by CMHQ_Rikimaru:
Oleg, I think that most, if not all would like to have pilot fatigue in this game. With pilot fatigue, more important would be skills of pilot, not just a machine that he is flying with. I know that forces are modelled in this game, so why pilot isnt tired while pulling very heavy stick? It would be great if we could see this feature in PF as realism option, or in tBOB. This would improve realism a lot and cut the whinning about planeshttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


I think a `natural` pilot fatigue already exists: The PLAYER PILOT HIMSELF.

Ok, this won`t be noticable on those dogfight airquake servers, but if you do a CO-OP or virtual war, like EIF, each mission can easily go from 30-50 minutes. In a mission where you spend 10 minutes flying to target, then 10-15 minutes dogfighting, then another 15 minutes RB, to only find hovering enemy aircraft you have to take on, then the player fatigue starts to take its toll.

I cannot be absolutely certain, but I`m sure at the end of a long mission (say 40 minutes) and in a dogfight, I`ve seen the player `give up` as if too tired and then he becomes an easy target.

I myself have felt this `fatigue` sometimes after a long flight. So there is a fatigue of a sort, but you have to play long coop missions for it to happen.

Sorry, if I repeated someone else, as I can`t be bothered to read 9 pages.

CMHQ_Rikimaru
04-26-2006, 06:44 AM
I think that this fatigue is nothing compared to the physical fatiguehttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

P.S. I was never fatigued after flying any virtual front missionhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

WWMaxGunz
04-26-2006, 08:00 AM
Maybe we get the fatigue of shot-up structural parts that fail in G maneuver as well.
From MGM BoB movie that had the tech experts including Adolph Galland I would expect that
most planes shot up wind up burning not too long after presumably from internal gas leaked.
Not every movie made is unreal.

p1ngu666
04-26-2006, 01:08 PM
i agree with seafire, i can get burned out at times. when i was learning to drive i could do a hour or so, but after that i would make lots of mistakes.

guess u could sim that by making the movements on the controls lazy and laggy

jjtasker
04-26-2006, 02:08 PM
In the book about Hartmann you can read that turnfights was very hard work. That's why he alway flew boom and zoom.

True, but it also explains that many of the pilots were FAR stronger than him and flew totally different because they could.

You guys are over thinking this. You are saying you want to make things "super realistic" well.. modeling a single pilot fatigue level won't be even CLOSE to realistic. Ever pilot has physiological differences, Coordination differences etc.

Lets model different visible ranges of enemy planes based on the various degrees of pilot visual ability. I have 20/10 vision.. I want enemy planes to appear earlier on my PC than on yours.

faelas
04-26-2006, 02:44 PM
There are more important factors than fatigue.

No engine maintenance/malfunction. Virtually every account of air warfare I've ever read from any air force has some accounting of aircraft RTB for engine trouble. Aparently all WW2 mechanics are as good as Scotty.

There is no modeling for oxygen. No bottles to get hit, no running out, no malfunctions, nothing at all. Fly all day at 30,000 ft in a plane without oxygen, it won't hurt you at all. Aparently your pilot doesn't need to breathe.

No cockpit conditions. No heat, no cold, no pressure, nothing. Not even a problem if you open the canopy at 30,000ft. Fly in an open cockpit or closed one, rain or shine, summer or winter, it's all identical in the cockpit. Your pilot won't feel a thing.

No weather! No icing in winter, no skidding on icy airstrips, no muddy airstrips in the rain, no sand in the desert, no barametric pressure, no humidity, no heat, no cold, no effect of rain on the aircraft or the pilot (in open cockpits) not even WIND is modeled!

Will BoB aircraft have radiators? IL2 aircraft don't. Be sure.

This isn't an exhaustive list, but I'd definitly say that most of the community would consider one or more of these to be more important than fatigue. I'm not saying that I'd be AGAINST fatigue being modeled, but I do think there is a correct priority for that.

RegRag1977
04-26-2006, 04:45 PM
@JJTASKER


Originally posted by jjtasker:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In the book about Hartmann you can read that turnfights was very hard work. That's why he alway flew boom and zoom.


True, but it also explains that many of the pilots were FAR stronger than him and flew totally different because they could.

You guys are over thinking this. You are saying you want to make things "super realistic" well.. modeling a single pilot fatigue level won't be even CLOSE to realistic. Ever pilot has physiological differences, Coordination differences etc.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes but it's not about beeing stronger or weaker than the other (same problem than Black veil: people does not black out at the same time, there's sometimes great differences, i know that):

IT'S ABOUT THE WAY YOU'RE ABLE TO<span class="ev_code_RED"> MANAGE</span> your virtual stamina in the combat situation, that in my sense will improve the realism...
You say truly that each pilot has it's own caracteristics (physiological differences, Coordination differences etc.) and because of that you don't want any sort of equality. It's paradoxical because not changing things we have the equality: all of us can play as überDrOds, like BionicRobots.

Fatigue will improve that, giving the advantage to experience, what, in my sense is the most important thing in combat (this is why Hartmann defeated many pilots that were far stronger than him)

Now the situation is that a noob with proper aircraft can have advantage over an Expert just because he can turn definitely: that would never happen in reality where turning cause fatigue...

Regards!

WWMaxGunz
04-26-2006, 08:43 PM
Expert player does not get into such a position that the new player can use any such advantage.

AKA_TAGERT
04-26-2006, 09:26 PM
Originally posted by Von_Rat:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AKA_TAGERT:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Von_Rat:
you act like somthing i left floating this morning. Ouch.. my old girl friend use to think she could flush those things too.. Until she clogged up toilet so bad I had to call a plumber. I highly recommend you don€t flush those, do like your mom showed you and wrap them in paper and put them in the trash. I know it is allot to ask, but trust me your boyfriend will thank you for it!


Originally posted by Von_Rat:
backpedal a little faster there ace. Back pedal? What part of me saying "adding pilot fatigue to Il2 is not likely" and "we will be lucky if we get pilot fatigue in BoB" did you NOT understand? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

better get your boyfriend to wipe your a** for you. i think you missed something.

no its "we", who'd be lucky to get it. you didn't want it.
thats it pedal faster and faster there ace. lol </div></BLOCKQUOTE>how orginal

LEXX_Luthor
04-26-2006, 09:32 PM
Max::
Expert player
hehe I saw that too. The more they want to play Online BnZ Expert Hartmann, and wear His skins as their own, the more they refuse to let their opponents play Online TnB Expert Saburo.

I see this as Online players wanting Oleg to model "pilot fatigue" for other players while not having any aspects of Aviation Medicine moddelled for themselves. I just thought -- it may be related to the crying for more "zoom climb", as these competitive Online players throw away their energy advantage by wanting to "stay in the dogfight," so they also ask for TnB Stamina based on positive gee force/stick force and nothing else. Its possible the two are related.

But then, especially the Online aspect of this sim with little Air War simulation offers no incentive to do anything but "stay in the dogfight" until a kill score is made against another dogfighter plane. TnB Stamina and unlimited zoom climb would allow players to "stay in the dogfight" (exciting!!) until they get the kill score after they blow their first offensive Bounce.

lowfighter
04-27-2006, 01:50 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Max:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Expert player
hehe I saw that too. The more they want to play Online BnZ Expert Hartmann, and wear His skins as their own, the more they refuse to let their opponents play Online TnB Expert Saburo.

I see this as Online players wanting Oleg to model "pilot fatigue" for other players while not having any aspects of Aviation Medicine moddelled for themselves. I just thought -- it may be related to the crying for more "zoom climb", as these competitive Online players throw away their energy advantage by wanting to "stay in the dogfight," so they also ask for TnB Stamina based on positive gee force/stick force and nothing else. Its possible the two are related.

But then, especially the Online aspect of this sim with little Air War simulation offers no incentive to do anything but "stay in the dogfight" until a kill score is made against another dogfighter plane. TnB Stamina and unlimited zoom climb would allow players to "stay in the dogfight" (exciting!!) until they get the kill score after they blow their first offensive Bounce. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I can't speak for others. But I can assure you that I'll be delighted to fly exactly those planes which have more fatigue potential.

WWMaxGunz
04-27-2006, 02:02 AM
Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Max:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Expert player
hehe I saw that too. The more they want to play Online BnZ Expert Hartmann, and wear His skins as their own, the more they refuse to let their opponents play Online TnB Expert Saburo.

I see this as Online players wanting Oleg to model "pilot fatigue" for other players while not having any aspects of Aviation Medicine moddelled for themselves. I just thought -- it may be related to the crying for more "zoom climb", as these competitive Online players throw away their energy advantage by wanting to "stay in the dogfight," so they also ask for TnB Stamina based on positive gee force/stick force and nothing else. Its possible the two are related.

But then, especially the Online aspect of this sim with little Air War simulation offers no incentive to do anything but "stay in the dogfight" until a kill score is made against another dogfighter plane. TnB Stamina and unlimited zoom climb would allow players to "stay in the dogfight" (exciting!!) until they get the kill score after they blow their first offensive Bounce. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well yah. I do see how hardware limits esp view angle do favor the saddle up and shoot
approach. I don't have TIR and it is pretty difficult to get an intercept for deflection
lined up the way I'd like. PL helps overcome the loss of FOV and the struts blocking
view which IRL you would simply look around but PL is somewhat crippled while at the same
time the default PL pickup range is too far. It takes a lot of look fwd in PL and let the
PL swing the view all the way in to get the feel of two planes converging how fast and
where but if you want to do Hartmann then it's the offset approach followed by the rude
turn and fire finished off with the exit across the rear of the target from what I've read
from him. That's at least for planes with gunners, you don't just go straight in.

E-fighting, you have to be moving faster than the target most all of the time. There will
be more G's, more work, but not steadily so... still more. The fatigue model will be
critical on the rebuild of pilot energy and where effects occur. Major whining no matter
what or how will ensue just as soon as there are onwhine losers, one hour from purchase
perhaps? For many it will be a new reason why they lost, players leaving in droves, etc.
As long as it's an option there will be a choice, if the players' ego can handle that a
switch is turned off. That's a big 'if'. I do hope that pilot endurance starts out high.

Unlimited zoom? How many can't keep a turn inside of stall? The same will transition to
zoom in stall and wonder where their E went. Or they want to ride up till the plane stops
and falls, straight up all the way. They need to practice and make tracks of failed tries
just to go back and find out what they did wrong and fix that.
If it's easier to transition to zoom at highspeed then it's much easier to turn at lowspeed.
If you can zoom so much better then another will be able to turn even more much better.

So called tests are too often run by people who don't fly properly (well, it worked in CFS!)
and don't take all factors into consideration when making their conclusions. They want
realism but the controls should be easy, far too easy. "This plane doesn't beat that plane,
this plane doesn't fly right"... the planes don't fly themselves. Now the pilots will also
be able to be mismanaged, oh joy.

p1ngu666
04-27-2006, 10:00 AM
faelas is entirely right, and luth0r, i like the idea of every pilot and crew member being equal btw. otherwise we will be argueing about how mexican pilots have rocket boost and other silly things.

but u need to model all the medical things, not just high g force.

i do hope he adds something so stick stir-ers will vomit over glass and not see a thing http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

LEXX_Luthor
04-27-2006, 06:06 PM
Yes, what you posted earlier is a good example...

pingu::
when i was learning to drive i could do a hour or so, but after that i would make lots of mistakes.
If other drivers were trying to shoot your car, the mistakes you made would have been fatal mistakes, from long driving, and you were not even pulling high gees...


Getting your hair wrapped around the steering wheel didn't help any. I remember that. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gifhttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

jjtasker
04-28-2006, 05:07 AM
(this is why Hartmann defeated many pilots that were far stronger than him)

No, he defeated them because they never saw him until it was over..

RegRag1977
04-28-2006, 05:09 AM
Originally posted by jjtasker:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">(this is why Hartmann defeated many pilots that were far stronger than him)

No, he defeated them because they never saw him until it was over.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

When they could not do the same?

RegRag1977
04-28-2006, 05:13 AM
Moral of the story: Hartmann had luck 352 times... And survived by luck more than 1000 war missions...

WWMaxGunz
04-28-2006, 10:50 AM
Yeah. Luck. Right.

p1ngu666
04-28-2006, 11:25 AM
nah he was lucky, no doubt. he was really good aswell..

i mean if he or anyone else happened across a plane flying straight and level, didnt move, and he parked up and shot it down, there isnt a huge amount of skill there.

RegRag1977
04-28-2006, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by p1ngu666:
nah he was lucky, no doubt. he was really good aswell..

i mean if he or anyone else happened across a plane flying straight and level, didnt move, and he parked up and shot it down, there isnt a huge amount of skill there.

I'm i wrong if i sum up your thought like that:

Hartmann: 352 kills against planes flying straight and level.

Very lucky indeed...http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

I bet all the Spits Priller shot down above western front were spits flying straight and level.

I can't agree, allied pilots weren't such noobs http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Are we far from the fatigue question! Is the "noob factor" with LW victims an argument to avo¯d the fatigue question?

LEXX_Luthor
04-28-2006, 05:31 PM
RegRag1977::

(this is why Hartmann defeated many pilots that were far stronger than him)
lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


jjtasker::
No, he defeated them because they never saw him until it was over..
That's what real life World War 2 air combat was all about. Thanks jjtasker!

Real life Online Text Icons make simulating Hartmann's strategery for victory impossible, and nobody can use FB/PF invisible dots, so what to do?

WWMaxGunz
04-28-2006, 05:43 PM
Hartmann developed very specific methods to make the kills. Even reading partially what he
wrote is very informative.

He did not engage where he did not hold the upper hand. An assassin, not a brawler.

One thing always was his Exit. Immediate and unfollowable whether he succeeded or not.
Live to strike again, he was not a dogfighter by choice.

What I don't know is if he was ever caught short and on the defensive..........

IMO he must have had very keen eyesight and trained well at finding targets.

p1ngu666
04-28-2006, 09:01 PM
regrag, im not saying that every plane he shot down or came across did that. but ppl often fap off about the unobservered bounce and all that jazz.

the skill, if there is any is in the preporation.

uve still got to make the bullets hit ofcourse. so in the actual attack its probably easier than TNB. which IRL makes it "better". us gamers often like a challenge.

imo, in that situation all u gotta do is not screw up.

amusing the victim of hero of the luftwaffe bounce is winning the fatigue battle probably.

asume equal pilots-

victim is lower, slower, day dreaming perhaps.

mr hero is higher, hes colder, subject to more sunglare, hes tenser, stalking his prey

he dives, pressure change, different angle, g force, maybe speed/accel all sap at his fatigue level abit.

luthor, the icons thing is funny, as its a 2 way thing.
if u cant see him, he probably cant see u either.

its harder to see planes against the ground, its more realistic, as planes would dive down to the deck to evade detection.

RegRag1977
05-02-2006, 01:54 PM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Hartmann developed very specific methods to make the kills. Even reading partially what he
wrote is very informative.

He did not engage where he did not hold the upper hand. An assassin, not a brawler.

One thing always was his Exit. Immediate and unfollowable whether he succeeded or not.
Live to strike again, he was not a dogfighter by choice.

What I don't know is if he was ever caught short and on the defensive..........

IMO he must have had very keen eyesight and trained well at finding targets.

Very interesting Max!

Yes, your last question is the most important question:

<span class="ev_code_RED">What I don't know is if he was ever caught short and on the defensive..........</span>

I can't imagine one pilot having advantage each and every sortie: Hartmann surely was in this situation more than once, but he survived and most of his wingmen too.

But that doesn't have many things to do with pilot fatigue....

IIJG69_Kartofe
05-02-2006, 03:55 PM
It depends of a lot of factors ad of what you mean by "fatigue" (blackout, muscular fatigue?)

TheGozr
05-02-2006, 03:55 PM
Hummmm! you can be a good pilot and can't support high G's and visversa.

TheGozr
05-02-2006, 03:55 PM
Touth pain with a lots of G load.

JG4_Helofly
05-02-2006, 03:55 PM
High G would be the simplest solution. If the pilot pull high G he can not longer pull as hard as before on the stick and he black out quicker.

Controle forces are problematic because we have nothing precise about that and speculations would bring a lot of whines, but it would be great.
Does any possibility exist to calculate the controle forces at different speeds? Maybe with charts or planes of the aircraft controles or such things.

Takata_
05-02-2006, 03:55 PM
Originally posted by TheGozr:
Hummmm! you can be a good pilot and can't support high G's and visversa.
The physiological ability to support G forces is one thing, the physical ability to pull on controls under high G-load is something else which is not related to the first one.
Instead, this ability is related to each pilot physical strength (shape and training) and his ability to manage his strength expenditure (endurance with training). However, the level of physiological resistance under high G-loads will alter the level of physical endurance as well.

Actually in game, both factors are pre-settled and do not suffer any variation as it should happen in real-life. Your ability to pull on controls is constantly 50 lbs, and your physiological limit to G-loads is constantly 6 Gs'.

Under a 5 Gs load, you will be able to pull a 10 lbs weight forever (5 x 10), no more, no less. Try yourself to move a 50 lbs weight with one (or two) hand(s) and count how many time, without any pause, you can do it. Now, just take a 30 seconds rest and try it again... be sure you won't be able to reach the same number.
S~
Takata.

Viper2005_
05-02-2006, 03:55 PM
In the context of the kind of "fatigue" most people seem to be in, which appears to be aimed at limiting T&B performance, several factors spring to mind.

i) Ability to withstand "g", which may itself be divided into short term and long term performance - think 100 m sprint vs a marathon.

ii) Strength - physical ability apply the forces required to operate the controls. Again, there's a big difference between the performance available on a "sprint" basis and that available in the long term.

iii) Dexterity - ability to manipulate the controls quickly and accurately.

Experience shows that these three factors are independent of one another.

The short answer to the initial question is that it depends on the individual.

danjama
05-02-2006, 03:55 PM
I briefly entertained an idea for pilot fatigue recently at another forum. Ill paste my posts here and see what people think.

Post1:

Id love to see fatigue/control weight modelled like the rest of you, but i admit im skeptic about it. How would it be possible to model such a variable thing? (which brems touched on above).

I could see it working as an offline system, where your pilots stats could improve over time and with experience (more like an RPG) but im not sure the same system could be shared for online play (or could it)?

It would be very interesting to see a developer take this on, but i am skepticle about it. It seems very difficult to approach.

Post2:

(XIV wrote:
WW2OL has a fatigue system... but it only applies to G load, and not control surfaces IIRC.... IE you will black out quicker if you don't rest for a short period.)


That seems like a simple yet more effective way to do it (less work for devs too, as an incentive).

Anyway last night i had a revelation b4 i slept. My idea above was a pretty good one IMO, but then i had a thought of how online could work.

3-6 basic models of pilot skill/ability could be used for online play, for example:

very poor, poor, average, good, very good and excellent. The hosts of games could apply a setting saying that all people have the same pilot model, (by selecting good, poor etc before game start) or they could select random and whatever your given your given when u hit fly. Of course then alot would be down to luck, but it adds a nice element of surprise.

I didnt think it was a bad idea anyway.....

Thats it. Just a thought really.

RegRag1977
05-02-2006, 04:35 PM
[QUOTE]Originally posted by JG4_Helofly:
High G would be the simplest solution. If the pilot pull high G he can not longer pull as hard as before on the stick and he black out quicker.

[QUOTE]

Yes, i agree! this would be the easiest way to model it!
Sounds logical and fair (and realistic).

Even Porco Rosso wants pilot fatigue to be modelled! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Call me Spitzbub http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif