4.12.2 de-bugging

[gaunt1]

"Highlander" Allison?

You have obviously never flown a P 40 in this sim.

It's the king of the rifle caliber one shot insta stop.

+1000

Please TD, make the P-40's engine tougher!

Also, I'd recommend altering the DM of all VK-107 engined aircrafts, this was maybe the most delicate engine of WW2, it was incredibly unreliable and terribly sensitive to damage. Yet, ingame aircraft with engines emitting black smoke are flying without any performance penalties for a long time.

[IceFire]

The older the aircraft, the less consistent the damage model seems to be. And by "older" I mean the time when it was implemented into the game.

[ElAurens]

I'm hoping the new P 40s, when they are implemented, will solve some of these nagging issues that date from the P 40's original implementation.

Of course the one's we have now are still way better than they were initially.

Remember when they would just blow up if you exceeded 400mph?

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Mabroc

The radial engines can survive hits and still work for long times, giving less power off course (less pistons working) if you are not loosing much oil or fuel (usually the fw190 get the fuel lines leaking on the cowling and even when the engine still works you loss all your fuel in 3m).

On small correction to your otherwise excellent post - the FW-190D was powered by an inline engine. The other versions were radial-powered.

Another issue that doesn't seem to be modeled in the game is that radial engines are not immortal. It is possible for a radial engine to seize up due to oil leaks, although it takes time. Also, a serious hit to the camshaft can make the engine fail instantly.

Two types of engine damage which the game doesn't model are throttle damage and runaway propellers.

Throttle damage either means that your throttle speed is stuck at the current level, or stuck within a limited range.

Runaway propellers can occur when the constant propeller speed mechanism fails, or where the prop on a failed engine can't be feathered (usually due to hydraulic failure). Unless oil is still pumping through the engine, the "windmilling" effect can heat the prop shaft up to the point that the shaft fails, possibly sending the propeller flying into the plane if the failure occurs to an inboard engine on a multi-engined plane. This takes a bit of time (minutes) and also creates drag.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Igo kyu

To me, the strangest thing is how different the engine damage models of the P39 and P40 are, despite the engines being the same.

Yep, and the P-38 engine damage model seems to be different from those two, and it also used the same engine.

What I'd really like TD to do is take a close look at engine damage models for all planes. Unless there is documented evidence that changes to radiator and/or coolant systems affected the engine's durability, or that a particular plane's engine was armored, the effects of engine damage should be based on the engine, not the plane.

That is, X amount of damage in Y location to an Allison V-1710 engine mounted in a P-38, P-39, P-40, or P-51A will make that engine fail in a more or less identical fashion. No more "immortal" P-39 engines and fragile P-40 engines.

There should also be some consistency in damage modeling for all nationalities. If the Yak series and LaGG-3 engines are tough to kill, then the Bf-109, Macchi MC.205, MS.406, Ki-61, Hurricane, Spitfire and P-51 engines should be just as tough. Conversely, if TD's research indicates that inline engines should be fragile, then all the Soviet inline fighters will have to be "nerfed" in terms of their ability to withstand engine damage.

My ignorant opinion is that "reality" lies between the current extremes. A "one shot kill" that instantly knocks out an inline engine should be impossible for a rifle-caliber bullet at all but the closest ranges, and very rare for 0.50 caliber bullets and cannon shells at any range. Such hits should only represent the sort of damage that makes the engine fall apart - like a crankshaft breaking or cylinders flying out of the engine block.

Instead, there should be some chance - based on angle of deflection and caliber of the bullet, that a bullet will penetrate the engine block and cause loss of coolant, oil and/or compression (for hits that penetrate the cylinder).

Depending on bullet caliber and number of hits, that should make the plane lose coolant and oil at a more or less fixed rate, with accompanying rise in engine temperature, which ultimately makes the plane's engine seize.

In no case should a plane's engine explode due to fire, and turning off the engine (but cutting off fuel to it) should give the pilot a chance of controlling a fire by letting it self-extinguish, unless there is a fuel or oil tank right next to the engine without an intervening firewall.

The problem is that while it's comparatively easy to model flight characteristics, there isn't nearly as much information available on ability of airframes and aircraft components to withstand damage, and the limitations of the game make it necessary to model certain types of damage in an unrealistic fashion (e.g., blowing off the wing of a B-17 or the rear fuselage of a Wellington).

[TexasJG]

Burma Map, low river bridges are just underwater, or flooded. Vehicles will cross the bridge, although it would be cool if the vehicles would leave a water wake as they crossed the bridge. Same anomaly could be other maps also, noticed it in Burma.

[ElAurens]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

runaway propellers.

Happens to the Spitfire and P 40 with some regularity, more so in the P40s.

The props never come off, but they will seize the engine fairly quickly.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

Happens to the Spitfire and P 40 with some regularity, more so in the P40s.

The props never come off, but they will seize the engine fairly quickly.

I assumed that was just a "special effect" of critical damage to the crankcase, since realistically it takes more than just a few seconds for the crankshaft to heat to the point that it fails. But, yeah, the "whine of death" is one of my least favorite sounds to hear when flying a P-40 or a Spit.

At least you get a warning with those planes. With the Bf-109, the first warning you get that your engine is dead is a shut-down propeller blade in front of you.

[Pursuivant]

Tonight's fighter abuse features the Hurricane Mk I vs. the Ace Wellington III squadron.

Notable features of craptastic damage modeling include both elevator and rudder control hits despite the fact that none of the bullets got anywhere near any part of the elevator and/or rudder controls! To hit any part of the elevator or rudder controls, the four bullets which hit the leading edges of the horizontal stabilizer assembly would have had to punch through several layers of aluminum and then wipe out the cables and pulleys for both elevators and the control rods and pulleys for the rudder. The only problem is that those assemblies are directly below the vertical stabilizer, where none of the bullets hit, and that the control rods for the rudder and the cables and pulleys for the elevators are in different places!

Just to clarify, we're talking about hits by .303 bullets at 150-250 m ranges; so no explosive effects, and a bullet that's not particularly likely to shatter or tumble.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1404019896

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1404020213

The serious oil and coolant leaks from just one bullet to the radiator and 3 bullets to to the engine are just bonuses.

In general, it seems to be far too easy to get control surface hits against just about any plane in IL2. Given that most early WW2 planes used metal cables to control the surfaces and only a close hit by explosives or a direct hit by a bullet could knock them out, it seems like sloppy damage modeling that they occur so often.

I also seems strange that direct damage to control surfaces doesn't reduce control authority, and that direct hits to control surface hinges don't have the ability to make individual control surfaces lock, move in just one direction, or flutter randomly.

There also doesn't seem to be any progressive loss of control authority due to hydraulic system damage to planes with hydraulic or hydraulic assisted controls.

Finally, AI crew seem far too ready to bail out of planes with any sort of control damage, despite the fact that losing rudder authority, and possibly even elevator authority, doesn't make a plane unflyable. At the very least, AI crews which lose rudder control, and possibly horizontal stabilizer control, should try to fly back to friendly territory before they bail out.

[Pursuivant]

Bonus tonight; two rounds of fighter abuse, with the second victim being the Yak-9UT. The damage is from that immortal Ace Wellington III squadron, with their crazy accurate tail gunners, shooting from 150-250 m.

Two things pop out for crappy damage modeling on this plane, bonus points if you can catch them both.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1404023815

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...1&d=1404023815

You win if you detected a distinct lack of engine damage to the notably fragile VK-107 engine despite it being filled with holes (Hint to TD: a P-40, Spitfire or Bf-109 would be a glider given the same amount of damage), and damage to the rudder controls despite any plausible hits to the joystick, cable runs or control cranks in the first screenshot.

In the second screenie, you win if you noticed damage to the pilot's leg despite a) the bullets that could have inflicted the damage having to penetrate the engine and forward firewall first, b) missing the pilot's leg!

The hit to the aileron controls in the second screenshot was just, conceivably, maybe possible, since two bullets hit the trailing edge of the starboard wing in approximately the same place where the aileron control cables would run. The idea of a bullet about 9mm in diameter perfectly intersecting with a braided metal cable of about the same diameter to sever it is highly unlikely, but in combat anything can happen!

Of course, it's only due to the magic of IL2's damage modeling that our unfortunate Yak pilot lost control to both ailerons despite cable hits to just one of them! Had this been a real Yak-9, he would have had one aileron cable that fluttered randomly, and another one that still responded to his control.