Will the Modelling of Destroyed Aircraft in BoB be Improved Compared to il2?

[ImMoreBetter]

Originally Posted by MB_Avro_UK

Hi all,

Maybe my observation is too late to matter?

In il2, if an aircraft has it's tail shot away, it tumbles. In real life an aircraft in this situation would dive towards the ground vertically.

The change in the Centre of Gravity of the aircraft would have caused the aircraft to point towards mother earth and no control inputs would have changed this.

This is correct. The aircraft's nose would swing downward, as the center of gravity shifts forward. It would fall similar to a thrown object, as it still carries inertia.

[Feuerfalke]

Originally Posted by proton45

I don't have an answer but here is a cool video clip of B17's getting the biz from the Luftwaffe...

I wonder if the size and speed of the aeroplane might play a factor in how it responds to loosing a tail...

I had considered posting a link to that video, too. I also remember a scene from the original Memphis Belle video, where a B17 turned into such a violent spin from losing an elevator, that the crew was unable to escape. IMHO the thing IL2 does wrong, is rather the fact that the vast minority of bombers shot in the tailsection actually lost half or the fuselage from that.

As a kid I've done a lot of "crash-simulations" with my lawn-dart-toy-plane. Originally designed to stay in the air for 30 minutes, the time in the air was dramatically reduced by removing the rudder or stabilizer. When I removed the tail-section, it tumbled very much like the planes in IL2.

[DK-nme]

when loosing the tail, there's no directionally stability and the plane ought to raise or lower the nose and then tumble/rotate and plummeting towards the ground - almost like in il-2.
The wings will make the plane rotate around the new axis level to the wings, going from wingtip to wingtip, because of loss of stability and lift...
Dont know wether this gives any meaning to U, but i havent got the time to write more...

DK-nme

[Feuerfalke]

Originally Posted by DK-nme

when loosing the tail, there's no directionally stability and the plane ought to raise or lower the nose and then tumble/rotate and plummeting towards the ground - almost like in il-2.
The wings will make the plane rotate around the new axis level to the wings, going from wingtip to wingtip, because of loss of stability and lift...
Dont know wether this gives any meaning to U, but i havent got the time to write more...

DK-nme

That was exactly what I saw in the model-plane and what I think would be logical. If a plane would fly straight without the tailsection, why install it in the first place?

[MB_Avro_UK]

Hi all,

Ok here's an example. UK members may remember a 'Time Team' investigation into two B-17s that crashed in England after a mission in 1944.

In cloud, one B-17 cut off the tail of another B-17. The B-17 with no tail fell vertically. There were vertical penetrations of the engines, fuselage and wing into the ground.

An aircraft without a tail section will dive towards the ground until it meets mother earth.

This is because the new centre of gravity of the aircraft precludes any variation.


Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

[robtek]

but it might be that the tailless b17 was in the vertical, nose-down position only just at the time of the impact, maybe?

[Oktoberfest]

Originally Posted by robtek

but it might be that the tailless b17 was in the vertical, nose-down position only just at the time of the impact, maybe?

+1

[MB_Avro_UK]

Originally Posted by Oktoberfest

+1

Sorry, I don't agree. If an aircraft looses it's tail section, the aerodynamic configuration of the aircraft is drastically changed.

It becomes 'nose heavy' to the extreme. And there is no elevator response possible.

The B-17 example I gave was witnessed by those on the ground. It was seen to fall vertically.

In other words, the aircraft in this situation becomes an 'arrow'.


Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

[Arrow]

Originally Posted by MB_Avro_UK

Sorry, I don't agree. If an aircraft looses it's tail section, the aerodynamic configuration of the aircraft is drastically changed.

It becomes 'nose heavy' to the extreme. And there is no elevator response possible.

The B-17 example I gave was witnessed by those on the ground. It was seen to fall vertically.

In other words, the aircraft in this situation becomes an 'arrow'.


Best Regards,
MB_Avro.

This is just one point of view, if you don't consider the loss of stability. In some instance the object may remain stable and shoot into the ground - or a small disturbance can throw the aircraft into non-stable regime and crash just as it is simulated in Il2 and just as physical simulations show..