Bringing the 'Disabled' effect to Fixed-Wing Aircraft

[gazzthompson]

Jets pilots (as I know, don't quote me on this) usually eject BEFORE the missile hits them, not after

im pretty much 100% sure thats not true.

[Hietaa]

But that wouldn't really be realistic, something as small as a jet would surly glide for a little bit after going so fast.

If i rememeber correctly someone has commented in some interview when Gripen was new that its gliding possibilities about the same as rock has. It is the raw power that keeps it on the sky. I guess this is the case with all modern fighter jets.

[Celestial1]

If i rememeber correctly someone has commented in some interview when Gripen was new that its gliding possibilities about the same as rock has. It is the raw power that keeps it on the sky. I guess this is the case with all modern fighter jets.

Well, it obviously won't maintain the same speed... It will drop speed rather quickly...

However, physics will tell you that when a force has been exerted on an object, only other forces combined equalling the strength of the original force can cancel this out. In a vacuum, the jet would glide continuously simply because there is no air resistance etc to stop it.

But when it comes to, you know, Real Life, the jet would keep up to speed for a short time (if it wasn't forced out of stable, steady flight like a wing being torn of and sending it into a spiral), before losing speed due to air resistance. So it would glide. A bit.

[wookimonsta]

i've never flown a jet, but i can tell you that the amount of air resistance is huge at those speeds.
also keep in mind how a jet works. basically (very basically here) you have fire propelling it forward. fire requires air. the faster a jet travels the more air is pumped into the fire the better it burns.
now suddenly this fire is gone (engine broken). this means that you have 0 forward push and the only forces acting on you are (maybe the blastwave, but even that only for a short amount of time) gravity and air resistance.
also keep in mind that a hit jet will loose alot of its aerodynamic properties (its wings will be shredded) slowing it down even more.

most importantly is the fact that a damaged jet can probably not generate much lift. im imagining an aa hit here that would probably heavily damage the wings.
shredded wings means air is no longer pushed down by the wings means the aircraft is no longer pushed up. if the wings are damaged to the extent that little or no lift is generated, then no matter how well the engine works and how fast you are going, you are going down very quickly

[Hietaa]

Well, it obviously won't maintain the same speed... It will drop speed rather quickly...

However, physics will tell you that when a force has been exerted on an object, only other forces combined equalling the strength of the original force can cancel this out. In a vacuum, the jet would glide continuously simply because there is no air resistance etc to stop it.

But when it comes to, you know, Real Life, the jet would keep up to speed for a short time (if it wasn't forced out of stable, steady flight like a wing being torn of and sending it into a spiral), before losing speed due to air resistance. So it would glide. A bit.

Yes i know bit of physics and in vacuum yes it would glide. But however it won't be flying in vacuum. Why do you think jets have such a huge engines in them? Maybe to keep up the speed? Jets are aerodynamic and all but when the speeds are close to the speed of sound the wind resistance is quite strong force.

And when you're hit some of the computers might not work properly which would make it impossible to fly the plane because all of the modern fighters are controlled by computers because they are so unsteady, to make them more agile, that noone could fly them without computer assistance.

[smart_boy00]

Except Jet Fuel+Missile=



I mean yeah theoretically it works, but its very unrealistic, and I think that pilot being worth the tickets is a better one

Agree. SOmthing moving that fast will rip it's self appart. Yes you do have special cases that the jet hit this jet and both made it back or what ever. In real life and not the "special" cases the jet will almost alwaysend in a fireball when hit by a missle.

[nickshehan]

Sounds like a great idea to me. Whenever I fly in training I'll hear the lock-on tone, start evasive maneuvers, deploy flares....then I instantly explode

[McBumLuv]

I could see this happening, but I'd make it so that when it reaches that point the entire plane becomes engulfed in flames, that CA's momentum is introduced, (so that it at least reduces the abrupt loss of speed, or at least so that it doesn't simply float down to the ground), and that it lasts barely three or four seconds in the air.

[Celestial1]

In regards to the physics issues with the jet gliding:

Yes, the wind resistance is great at those speeds, but they don't match the speed of the jet (otherwise the jet could literally hang still in the air), so it's safe to assume that it wouldn't immediately drop to 0mph. It would glide (if hit without destroying components used for level flight) for a short while before reaching a critical speed (which I would figure would occur within 10-15 seconds due to everything else involved). However, since level flight is near impossible when even a small bit of the wing is destroyed, the plane would usually spin wildly or tumble, reducing forward speed dramatically (5 seconds between being hit and losing significant speed forward.

Basically what I'm implying is that a hit that caused relatively no damage to flight instruments would likely slow to a critical speed in 15 seconds or less. This of course is EXTREMELY unlikely and more often than not the plane would tumble and lose significantly more speed. This can be represented in-game by the immediate loss of speed and dipping towards the ground. It's not very feasible to make the jets tumble and spin out of control, so it would be best to stick with that.

@McLuv, the disabled effect would start when you'd get hit, you'd begin freefalling and the plane would erupt in 5 seconds or less. It'd be that critical time when you'd have to act quickly and eject asap to survive.

[Viper5]

The amount of unevidenced, seat of the pants guessing declarations regarding physics and fire in this is mind boggling even by political debate standards.

With regard to the original thread, I think the real issue is frankly what's the chance of getting a pickup in the middle of nowhere. Even if a chopper coems, whatever shot you down would likely camp your body. If the tickets are on the pilot I could see this, but that brings in a whole new lot of issues. With the current system I'd rather just die and respawn.

[Celestial1]

The amount of unevidenced, seat of the pants guessing declarations regarding physics and fire in this is mind boggling even by political debate standards.

With regard to the original thread, I think the real issue is frankly what's the chance of getting a pickup in the middle of nowhere. Even if a chopper coems, whatever shot you down would likely camp your body. If the tickets are on the pilot I could see this, but that brings in a whole new lot of issues. With the current system I'd rather just die and respawn.

You can still die and respawn. It just gives you the option to bail instead.

There's no more of a penalty if you go down with the ship, this only gives the ability to bail out and survive. Even with the pilot=tickets bit, there's no extra penalty, there's only a bonus for bailing out and being rescued.

If the rescue is far too risky, the pilot can either hoof it to a safe area, he can wait it out where he is until fighting subsides, or he can give up and get himself killed. There's still no extra penalty for him dying.

[Riffraffselbow]

So, I did some ad hoc testing of the "fighter planes fall fast without power" theory. Here's the testing conditions:

X-Plane 9. X-Plane is probably the best consumer flight-sim on the market. It is actually licensed for FAA-approved flight simulators.
F-4 Phantom (stock model, came with X-Plane 9). This seems to be a fairly accurate model of an F-4.
No Weather (<1 kt wind, clear skies, etc)
Flat land
0.9 Mach (actually below F-4 cruise, but I didn't know at the time)
15000 ft ASL (ground was something like ~1500-3000 ft ASL)
I triggered a catastrophic engine failure (no restart, didn't even attempt). This does not entirely simulate the effects of a missile hit; there was no deformation of the wings and no disruption of momentum.
I was able to glide for, at most 3 minutes and 30 seconds. The glide time before I would have needed to bail out safely is probably closer to 2:30.

In short, Fighters fall pretty hard, but not hard enough to immediately drop dead. At 1000 ft AGL, I'd probably get a minute at most of glide.

edit: Now, if something drastic happened (say, losing a wing to a missile), I'd probably get 5-10 seconds at 1000 ft AGL, and maybe 30-45 at 12000 AGL)

[Celestial1]

I triggered a catastrophic engine failure (no restart, didn't even attempt). This does not entirely simulate the effects of a missile hit; there was no deformation of the wings and no disruption of momentum.
I was able to glide for, at most 3 minutes and 30 seconds. The glide time before I would have needed to bail out safely is probably closer to 2:30.

In short, Fighters fall pretty hard, but not hard enough to immediately drop dead. At 1000 ft AGL, I'd probably get a minute at most of glide.

edit: Now, if something drastic happened (say, losing a wing to a missile), I'd probably get 5-10 seconds at 1000 ft AGL, and maybe 30-45 at 12000 AGL)

'Drastic' things happen in just about any missile impact. I'm glad that you simulated the test, though, again, it doesn't accurately simulate the effects of a missile hit.

A deformation of any piece of the plane by missile is likely to tear through flight instruments in a jet. If an aileron is destroyed, the wing will likely shake and throw the plane into a 'slow' roll. If an elevator is destroyed, then the plane will slowly pitch and present more of a surface for air to impact with, slowing it down further since the engines are not providing thrust to offset this. And that's just saying that the flap would be, basically, removed, and no other damage to the aircraft would occur.

If the elevator was mangled, and provided a surface for air to hit, then the plane would much more quickly pitch and lose speed due to the same principle as above. If the aileron was mangled and provided a surface, then the plane would be sent into a violent spin which would slowly reduce airspeed.

If the jets engine was destroyed cleanly (and symetrically; two-turbined jets will be less likely to stay steady), there is a chance for the plane to glide for quite a long time, like you said before it loses significant airspeed.


Since you have access to X-Plane, I assume, could you perhaps simulate the same test, but while doing a constant barrel roll (no need to go stomach-turningly fast, just a decent speed... one revolution maybe around 5 seconds for fairness?) and also pitching the plane slightly (20 degrees-ish?) up just before cutting the engine (and continuing to pull up on the throttle slightly)?

I believe these results will be a bit more accurate to your 'average' missile hit, damaged components and all.

[Riffraffselbow]

'Drastic' things happen in just about any missile impact. I'm glad that you simulated the test, though, again, it doesn't accurately simulate the effects of a missile hit.

A deformation of any piece of the plane by missile is likely to tear through flight instruments in a jet. If an aileron is destroyed, the wing will likely shake and throw the plane into a 'slow' roll. If an elevator is destroyed, then the plane will slowly pitch and present more of a surface for air to impact with, slowing it down further since the engines are not providing thrust to offset this. And that's just saying that the flap would be, basically, removed, and no other damage to the aircraft would occur.

If the elevator was mangled, and provided a surface for air to hit, then the plane would much more quickly pitch and lose speed due to the same principle as above. If the aileron was mangled and provided a surface, then the plane would be sent into a violent spin which would slowly reduce airspeed.

If the jets engine was destroyed cleanly (and symetrically; two-turbined jets will be less likely to stay steady), there is a chance for the plane to glide for quite a long time, like you said before it loses significant airspeed.


Since you have access to X-Plane, I assume, could you perhaps simulate the same test, but while doing a constant barrel roll (no need to go stomach-turningly fast, just a decent speed... one revolution maybe around 5 seconds for fairness?) and also pitching the plane slightly (20 degrees-ish?) up just before cutting the engine (and continuing to pull up on the throttle slightly)?

I believe these results will be a bit more accurate to your 'average' missile hit, damaged components and all.

I just remembered, I can disable any/all flight control surfaces as well, and perhaps even force the speed brakes down. When I get home, I'll try your suggestions along with killing the left aileron, the rudder, and the left elevator. I'll poke around for other options that'll siimulate a catastrophic explosion, as well. I could even "try" to mangle the flight model of a copy of the jet (in the aircraft designer distributed with X-Plane), then slew it in to position/speed. By the way, I can't recommend X-Plane highly enough, it's absolutely, hands down, the best flight sim there is. Simulation is based on a real-time simulation of airflow over the airfoil, not a bunch of numbers in a spreadsheet. Add to all of that that it's cheaper, more stable, comes with higher resolution scenery (Game comes on 6 dual layer DVDs, 5 of them entirely scenery; it claims over 60gb of scenery), and more computer resource efficient than MSFS (not to mention cross-platform; works on Mac OS).

[Celestial1]

I just remembered, I can disable any/all flight control surfaces as well, and perhaps even force the speed brakes down. When I get home, I'll try your suggestions along with killing the left aileron, the rudder, and the left elevator. I'll poke around for other options that'll siimulate a catastrophic explosion, as well. I could even "try" to mangle the flight model of a copy of the jet (in the aircraft designer distributed with X-Plane), then slew it in to position/speed.

Cool, can't wait for the results.

By the way, I can't recommend X-Plane highly enough, it's absolutely, hands down, the best flight sim there is. Simulation is based on a real-time simulation of airflow over the airfoil, not a bunch of numbers in a spreadsheet. Add to all of that that it's cheaper, more stable, comes with higher resolution scenery (Game comes on 6 dual layer DVDs, 5 of them entirely scenery; it claims over 60gb of scenery), and more computer resource efficient than MSFS (not to mention cross-platform; works on Mac OS).

Sounds like it, and I do know that it is pretty highly regarded... they even have apps for the iPhone, which IMO look pretty great for a mobile flight simulator. There is a standard 'X-Plane' app, as well as others: airliner simulator, helicopter simulator, and two others named 'Extreme' and 'Racing'. Each are $10, which is a bargain for what each individual app gives you, I think.



Good luck with the tests.

[Sniperdog]

I say make a jet pilot kit (as has been suggested many times before) and make it only request-able off jets, limit it to the number of jets on the map, and make the kit worth 10 tickets. This would cause two things. 1. It would encourage pilots to try and survive when they can. 2. It would encourage pilots to be a little bit more cautious with their jets. The ticket system in game simulates both the loss of resources and attrition. While the loss of a fighter jet represents a very large economic loss for a country, the loss of the fighter pilot simulates the negative social impact it has on a countries war effort. Especially now a days when combat is very localized the loss of a fighter pilot is a fairly big deal when it comes to the pr side of waging war. I think making a theoretical "jet pilot" kit worth a good deal more tickets would simulate that fact. Also why not?

[goguapsy]

I say make a jet pilot kit (as has been suggested many times before) and make it only request-able off jets, limit it to the number of jets on the map, and make the kit worth 10 tickets. This would cause two things. 1. It would encourage pilots to try and survive when they can. 2. It would encourage pilots to be a little bit more cautious with their jets. The ticket system in game simulates both the loss of resources and attrition. While the loss of a fighter jet represents a very large economic loss for a country, the loss of the fighter pilot simulates the negative social impact it has on a countries war effort. Especially now a days when combat is very localized the loss of a fighter pilot is a fairly big deal when it comes to the pr side of waging war. I think making a theoretical "jet pilot" kit worth a good deal more tickets would simulate that fact. Also why not?

agreed. But I don't see why not make all pilots kits worth 10 tickets.

also, limiting pilot kits would be an issue, it isn't as a sniper kit (which isn't an "asset"), but more of the vehicle itself. so make unlimited pilot kits BUT encourage admins to do their part on kicking people that don't respect the assets...

[Sniperdog]

agreed. But I don't see why not make all pilots kits worth 10 tickets.

b/c it would destroy maps like muttrah and barracuda for the US. Also helos are more susseptable to destruction by noob. Jets are not immune to such behavior but it is certainly less common.

also, limiting pilot kits would be an issue, it isn't as a sniper kit (which isn't an "asset"), but more of the vehicle itself. so make unlimited pilot kits BUT encourage admins to do their part on kicking people that don't respect the assets...

Skilled fighter pilots are most certainly an "asset" in modern warfare.

[Riffraffselbow]

So, i tried effectively blowing 1 wing off of the F-4, and it went in to freefall virtually instantly. Most I could keep in up was ~1 minute from 15000 ft ASL.

[Dev1200]

Going by the same concept that causes the helicopters to currently become 'disabled', just applying the same effect to Jets.

If the jet is hit and triggers the 'disabled' effect, it would work similarly to the helicopter's counterpart, just that it is not used so that the jet can 'land', but so that the pilot has a moment to bail out with dignity, instead of either bailing out in fear during a situation he could have survived through and continued flying, or going down with the ship, as it were. The plane would erupt soon afterwards, but would be a bit of time before doing so to allow a window of 'bail out' time for the pilot.

This would allow the possibility for more pilots to bail without feeling like it was a silly move; when the jet is disabled, there is no way to fix it. Bailing out can only be a positive thing, and would encourage small rescue teams to rescue safe pilots (often, helicopters can be seen on deck during muttrah, barracuda, etc when not running supply runs, and this could give some mid-round moments where the pilots have a small mission to run).



(This is being used part of a larger suggestion that uses this idea, but I thought it deserved it's own thread first, as it is an independant suggestion, that can be applied without the other.)

This, except having a manditory ~5 second "bail out" time.

Lets say your F16 gets hit by 5 AA missiles (for my point) all at the same time. Your jet would cut all it's power, maybe have some sort of "warning! System failures! Eject!" message play during this ~5 second "bail out" time, telling you that you have to bail or else you die. Although the jet will die, this will add some neat retrieving of the pilot scenarios.

Mix this with.. forgot his name.. it's a post about the jet pilot / helo pilot surviving a crash only loses half the tickets, instead of losing all the ticket's worth.