Of all the 'niggling' damge model issues, this one is my greatest irritation :(

[JG52Krupi]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...completed.html

Just to add some more info on this particular hurri break.



post image wordpress

The outer wing seems to be held in place by four bolts only, when they shear this is what you would see so it is modeled correctly.

[Mysticpuma]

Originally Posted by furbs

Krupi, i think were saying its fine for the hurri to break along the weak spot like you said.

the problem is there is no visual damage of the break. it looks like the wing has been laser cut.

i would guess any wing breaks from are from cannons breaking the spars, then the wing fails along the ribs as you say, but im sure there would be damage along the break.

Or the shells blew up the fuel tank, and then the wing....i dont think i have to say any more mate.

The wing break as in your pic looks unnatural and too clean, thats what we are saying.

Thanks furbs, at-least you understand what I am pointing out as do many others.

The break along the point of structural failure, and as has been pointed out, a bolted point too, would surely not just loo like it had cleaved apart with a laser?

I am not expecting entrails to be spewing forth from the aircraft, but I would assume a little inconsistancy in the area of failure rather than a nice smooth edge?

The pictures showing collision damage seem to be promising, but I wonder why that type of damage effect couldn't be added to wing tear or shot-off wings, so it looks less clinical.

I am not an expert and watching that gun-camera clip in the previous postings, only showed one example of a wing being lost, but even then it was catastrophic and to think it would be a perfectly clean edge would be very far-fetched?

So back to the original point, why can't Clod be tweaked to show the collision damage model on wing breaks from aerial attacks just to make it appear that it is a damage model that has progressed from the original 1946 software?

Also look at the two images attached. The Hurricane has lost the end of a wing and it is nowhere near as clean an edge as shown in Clod.

Second the Spitfire damage shows twisted metal in the fuselage. Now if that was in the air, the twisted metal would be dangling behind the fuselage as the tail fell away, neither would have a clinically clean edge?

Cheers, MP.

PS. There is no-need to get irate in your replies, it's a respectful post with examples of another simulation that shows imperfect damage effects and I wonder why CloD just doesn't implement the same visual damage as it has a far superior graphics and damage model?

[JG52Krupi]

Originally Posted by Mysticpuma

The break along the point of structural failure, and as has been pointed out, a bolted point too, would surely not just loo like it had cleaved apart with a laser?

I am not expecting entrails to be spewing forth from the aircraft, but I would assume a little inconsistancy in the area of failure rather than a nice smooth edge?

There is only one scene that I can see that has a smooth edge... please give me images of the other scenarios please

And that one scene as the images I and Skoshi have posted should tell you that the assembly process would lead to a break that does not do much damage.

The hurri has a much stronger inner wing due to the landing gear connecting there, the outer wing is bolted on afterwards if sufficient force hits the wing around this point clearly there is going to be a failure (Im no stress engineer and don't know enough about the hurri to determine what would break first) the bolts do seem like a weak point...

What would you expect to see?

[Jumo211]

Smooth wing edge or not argument , this video always brings chill down my spine when
watching , can't imagine to be up in the air when hit by this thing , ripping ,
shredding aluminium effect is devastating
Poor Spitfire

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZoLLDi-M3fk