Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Wings Ripping Off Much Easier?


  • Please log in to reply
264 replies to this topic

#41 boingk

boingk
  • Posts: 8

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:33

Well said Pimpin. I've only just downloaded the game and am checking out the forums as I wait for updates to download.

I own and fly an aeroplane in real life, nothing special in the big scheme of things but an aeroplane all the same - a Gardan GY-201 'Minicab' if you want to google it. Its a dope and fabric aircraft with a 65hp engine up front swinging a 72"x42" propellor along at 2200rpm - very basic.

If an aeroplane is designed for 6g ultimate limit, this is the strength of the airframe, usually dictated by the strength of the wing spar (or spars). If you start poking holes in the spars you will dramatically weaken them for any further loading, and once damaged they need to be replaced. Essentially you write the aircraft off if you damage the spar.

I would not be surprised people are ripping wings off after getting them shot. You baby a plane after any unusual flight conditions - this includes hard landings, midairs (even with bids) and… surprise… firearm damage. If I had a plane full of holes I'd be heading home double quick if I could, with no crazy maneuvers along the way - certainly that would be the case with my Minicab. Hell, I've grounded it for inspection after getting inconsistent mag drops.

Remember, I haven't played the game yet… but those are my two cents worth on the 'issue'.

Cheers - boingk
  • 0

#42 SYN_DerHesse70

SYN_DerHesse70
  • Posts: 173

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:36

I observed the same in the last time.

Some days ago i played on syndicate and tried different planes. I got broken wings in a hard turn with the S.E.5a, the Pup and the Nieuport N17.C1 without any hits of a enemy aircraft.

Never had so much broken wings with these aircrafts.
  • 0

#43 Nrohtnalu

Nrohtnalu
  • Posts: 267

Posted 14 January 2013 - 09:50

Looosing a wing when doing high G manouvewrs at high speed or pulling out of a dive is nothing unexspected. It would be strange if you were not be able to fly the wings of in that fragiles aircraft. Keept in mind. the priciple of powered flight was just invented for 12 years in that time, every airplane back then was basically a prototype and the books tell us that a lot of planes lost it's wings on airstunt manouvers.

It would be a bit strange if we could pull out of a 270km/h dive at 5g in a Se5a (you get black out in game too) without any effects to the fragile wings.
  • 0

#44 Caledonian

Caledonian
  • Posts: 214

Posted 14 January 2013 - 10:40

I've noticed it doesn't seem to affect all aircraft equally. All of the Albs seem to part company with their wings far more quickly under fire, but the Halberstadt seems as robust as ever. I've pulled the wings off Sopwiths + SE5as in hard turns several times since the patch, something I've scarcely seen since I got the hang of the sim. I also see a lot more "delayed" wing nerfings - you get a few rounds in, and your opponent breaks up 15 or 20 seconds later when pulling a turn.

This is happening only since 1.029 - I certainly didn't see any change prior to that. Changes to rate of fire + dispersion were last June I think, and have nothing to do with this current issue at all - the rate of fire in some aircraft actually reduced with the changes to synchronisation I believe, although others increased.
  • 0

#45 Mogster

Mogster
  • Posts: 3919

Posted 14 January 2013 - 11:57

I think there's different issues being discussed here as if they are the same.

Some reports talk about fold ups after damage some just mention the wings coming off. If you're pulling the wings of the SE5a without prior damage then you really are pulling up too hard out of a dive and ignoring the airframe stress queues.

I wonder how many people reporting issues have been away from the sim for some time. Whenever I'm not able to fly ROF much for a few weeks things seem different when I try to get back into it. I seem to lose my "current" status after only a few weeks. I even crashed the SE5a on takeoff, my favourite plane, after installing the last patch. Because of work commitments I hadn't been gaming for maybe 2 months, things came back to me quite quickly but initially there was a steep learning curve again. That curve must be even worse if you're a previous online flyer who jumped on there again.
  • 0

#46 P/O_Plum

P/O_Plum
  • Posts: 54

Posted 14 January 2013 - 14:08

My own experience with wing failures is somewhat confusing (to me, at least) because I have been transitioning from attacking balloons and two-seaters, to fighting against scouts. I have seen a lot of failures since 1.029 came out (mostly on my main a/c, the S.E.5a). The most recent incident was on the "fly now" mission. I had been shooting down balloons, and had experienced a couple of hits. Flying over to the city to engage the scouts, I did a quick visual check of my wings, which seemed OK. I was merging with an Albatros, and he got a quick burst in. I went into a moderate port turn, and the wings came off.

What may help to solve this is a scientific approach. Executing similar maneuvers in damaged and undamaged condition (possibly with video documentation of the trials) to establish a baseline of how many failures we're talking about. Then, armed with information the devs can address the problem.

Ron
  • 0

#47 PatAWilson

PatAWilson
  • Posts: 3381

Posted 14 January 2013 - 14:58

I find that the SE5a has always shed its wing very easily. Not sure why, but this has always seemed to be the case.

My own preference would be to see very few kills for structural failure. It happened, but it was not the norm. Wing hits would mostly just punch holes in fabric. Even if a spar or two was hit it would generally not cause the aircraft to fold up. Dead pilot or dead engine (meat or metal) was the usual way of bringing a plane down.

Not sure why a full fuel tank would lessen the odds of fire. Explosion maybe, but certainly not fire. A punctured tank full of fuel would be pouring highly flammable fuel allover the place - not a good thing.
  • 0

#48 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 14 January 2013 - 15:35

Mogster makes a good point. I wonder how many complaining about fragile wings are just getting back to their routine after holidays? 1-2 weeks away from virtual flying always causes me to make silly mistakes that I wouldn't make during my normal routine.
  • 0

#49 Pirato

Pirato
  • Posts: 1595
  • LocationUnder a Bridge

Posted 14 January 2013 - 15:50

I fly on regular basis,there may be a day or two when I don't now and then. At first I thought it was just me pulling too hard for whatever reason,it wasn't that much of a problem before the Update…even with the new dispersion and rate of fire,which i really like btw. But even if I'm very careful I will lose my Wings almost for nothing on the Albatros D.III lately. I know the Alb D.III will lose its ailerons now and then in a hard turn,or even the Wings. But it did never happen when beeing careful and going by the sounds (if there are any :lol: ).

I'm not entirely new to the Albatros D.III,I fly it frequently for a few month. As for the other planes,I noticed the wings come off easier then they used to aswell…atleast the ones I have tried since the Update.

One observation I did just yesterday online: I was on the tail of a Fokker D7f with my N17 and got just the chance for a short burst out of my single Gun. Well,I hit its left wing and he dove away from me engaging someone else a bit lower. As he turned onto the other planes tail the D7f's left wing just folded upwards and got off. From what I could see,he wasn't pulling extremly hard,it was more of a wide curve he was flying but that was enough stress on the wing already.
Sure,I have no idea what damage he already got but I was very close and couldn't see any damage on the wing.
  • 0

Dann gibt's Heulen und Zähne klammern, für das ganze Lumpenpack.
Dann ist Schluss mit "Tischlein deck' dich", da gibt's "Knüppel aus dem Sack"!


#50 Der.Mo

Der.Mo
  • Posts: 1011

Posted 14 January 2013 - 15:53

Especially the Sopwith Triplane´s wings i find way too fragile.
One short burst and it´s wings form a "V" and down she goes..not good
  • 0

#51 Bullets

Bullets
  • Posts: 780

Posted 14 January 2013 - 15:58

I have not found this the case at all, It makes sense if a plane which has just had say 5/10 rounds blast through its wings hitting the wooden frames for its G tolerance to be lower, pilots though in the mist of combat don't notice and enter a hard and fast turn ultimately ripping their wings off.. then complain their wings fell off… People are just pulling their stick to hard and expecting more from a plane that is essentially a flying shed with lawn mower engine :lol: :mrgreen:
  • 0

#52 Der.Mo

Der.Mo
  • Posts: 1011

Posted 14 January 2013 - 16:01

Actually i was talking about AI Sop.triplanes ;)
  • 0

#53 Pirato

Pirato
  • Posts: 1595
  • LocationUnder a Bridge

Posted 14 January 2013 - 16:05

I basicly agree with you there…if it would only happen when pulling back hard. But it also happens when only moderatly pulling into a turn,and there wheren't such problems before the last Update. I usually was able to fight on even with my Wings holed like Swiss cheese,but not anymore.^^
  • 0

Dann gibt's Heulen und Zähne klammern, für das ganze Lumpenpack.
Dann ist Schluss mit "Tischlein deck' dich", da gibt's "Knüppel aus dem Sack"!


#54 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 14 January 2013 - 16:06

I think you guys should make some films. If something is awry, others will be able to see it.
  • 0

#55 Pirato

Pirato
  • Posts: 1595
  • LocationUnder a Bridge

Posted 14 January 2013 - 16:10

Yeah,propably a good idea. Will do that if I remember to hit the record button.
  • 0

Dann gibt's Heulen und Zähne klammern, für das ganze Lumpenpack.
Dann ist Schluss mit "Tischlein deck' dich", da gibt's "Knüppel aus dem Sack"!


#56 Bullets

Bullets
  • Posts: 780

Posted 14 January 2013 - 16:11

But it also happens when only moderatly pulling into a turn,and there wheren't such problems before the last Update. I usually was able to fight on even with my Wings holed like Swiss cheese,but not anymore.^^

So your complaining about the game being made more realistic? sheesh :mrgreen:
  • 0

#57 Pirato

Pirato
  • Posts: 1595
  • LocationUnder a Bridge

Posted 14 January 2013 - 16:13

I'm not complaining at all. I'm just sharing my observation and it seems I'm not the only one experiencing this.
  • 0

Dann gibt's Heulen und Zähne klammern, für das ganze Lumpenpack.
Dann ist Schluss mit "Tischlein deck' dich", da gibt's "Knüppel aus dem Sack"!


#58 Bullets

Bullets
  • Posts: 780

Posted 14 January 2013 - 16:33

I'm not complaining at all. I'm just sharing my observation and it seems I'm not the only one experiencing this.

I know buddy ^_^ but It sounded like you were peeved that you couldnt turn like a eurofighter anymore :lol: :S!:
  • 0

#59 Waxworks

Waxworks
  • Posts: 630

Posted 14 January 2013 - 17:01

Lionel Rees attacked and drove down a hostile machine with his main spar shot through and rear spar shattered. Richtofen knew that the spar of his DIII had cracked so he had to land, I'm not sure how that would be represented in game? Strut damage is very visible but a cracked spar…?

I wish that damage could be revisited by the team, I don't find the demise of the Bristols in the OP very convincing at all. Great War machines were far more robust than represented in Rise of Flight. Particularly, a spar failure due to battle damage should be a rare event. Spar failures tended to be due to poor design or quality control rather than bullet hits. Rifle calibre machine gun bullets are not good for damaging a spar, they punch through so you'd need more than one hit in a small area.

Also, while there are justifiable complaints about the over performance of many Entente machines, the too-fast-climbing Bristols seem also to be afflicted by a vulnerability for which there is little historical basis? The Fokker Dr1 flies with its wings shot off… Fokkers and Nieuports had the reputation for being fragile aircraft. While the Albatros series was notorious for lower wing fragility, the Dr1 and Nieuport 28 had upper wing issues.

I would like a general increase in damage values. Pilot kills were a far more common cause of destruction than structural failure. The wing tolerances should also be much higher for dives and turns- with the specific exception of machines known to have structural flaws, naturally.
  • 0

#60 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 14 January 2013 - 17:16

The Dr.I's upper-wing issues are modeled in RoF: you can easily lose your top wing when pulling out of a dive too sharply. But the Dr.I certainly did not have weak wings….they're of a cantilever design and the first prototype flew even without the wing struts, which were added only to prevent vibration of the wings and because pilots didn't want to fly without them (probably rightly so).

I think it's very correct that the Dr.I's wings do not fold up like the Sopwith Triplane's when a part of them is lost.
  • 0

#61 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 14 January 2013 - 18:35

So why did pilots die when the upper wing collapsed due to shoddy workmanship?
  • 0

#62 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 14 January 2013 - 18:39

Because they probably didn't collapse as neatly as they do in Rise of Flight, where they can't be damaged past the cabane struts, the ailerons always work as long as they're attached, you don't have realistic forces on your joystick, perhaps other reasons…..the wingstruts probably wouldn't have detached so neatly as well, damaging the lower wings also.

What do you think?

RoF is still a simulation that has its limits. I'm just saying, in the Dr.I the wings don't form a box construction together, they don't need eachother for structural strength.
  • 0

#63 Gadfly21

Gadfly21
  • Posts: 1081

Posted 14 January 2013 - 18:45

The Dr.1 spar is very thick, and made of several toothed components which interlock. It is a very robust wing. Accidents were caused by poor workmanship/poor quality wood.


Anyway, IF the spar is damaged, I see no reason why the wing shouldn't begin to collapse under stress (high speed sharp turns). The only issue is that RoF treats any damage to the wing surface to be a critical structural hit. So, if five stray bullets simply pass through canvass, you will still lose that wing! This is proportionately disadvantageous to aircraft with large wing areas compared to those with small wing areas, even if they have similar spar structure.

This also means attacks from above or in a tight turn fight are going to be way more deadly than attacks from the rear - you will have greater chance of hitting the wing as more area is presented to you, and every hit counts. A short burst is enough to turn your opponent into a fuselage with toothpicks.
  • 0

#64 Pirato

Pirato
  • Posts: 1595
  • LocationUnder a Bridge

Posted 14 January 2013 - 18:57

I'm uploading a short video right now. I have recorded it in a Quickmission with me in an Albatros D.III against another Albatros D.III with Ace AI. Its not the whole Video,it starts right before a short burst hits the AI's Wing.
I landed a short burst to the fuselage pretty early in the original Video but without any effect.
Sorry for bad quality and a shortened Video. It's because I have a bad uploadrate,something like 13 kb/s,thats why I shortened it a bit or the upload would take forever.

I will edit the Video in when the upload is completed.

Ok,here it is…http://youtu.be/t5S2kWO-Ewg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">
  • 0

Dann gibt's Heulen und Zähne klammern, für das ganze Lumpenpack.
Dann ist Schluss mit "Tischlein deck' dich", da gibt's "Knüppel aus dem Sack"!


#65 Waxworks

Waxworks
  • Posts: 630

Posted 14 January 2013 - 19:01

No the DR1 top wing failures were a design issue- the spar was not the problem but aerodynamic factors that caused the top wing surface to detach. Poor workmanship didn't help- but the problem was not solved by better quality.

While Luno is right that hits in the wing area should be differentiated, in the absence of a more detailed hit box it would still be an improvement to simply have the wings be more robust. Even bullet hits would not crack a spar unless they were grouped. Design complications were more of a hazard for spars than damage.

Has anyone tested against O_Taipan's Quick Reference tables to see if the dive and turn speed limits have changed?
  • 0

#66 CAFulcrum

CAFulcrum
  • Posts: 926

Posted 14 January 2013 - 19:19

I wonder if the flak lethality is inflated as well, since the majority of the time I die from flak comes from the wings folding up (from a near miss), rather than outright damage or systems damage.
  • 0

#67 pcpilot

pcpilot
  • Posts: 117

Posted 14 January 2013 - 22:03

No the DR1 top wing failures were a design issue- the spar was not the problem but aerodynamic factors that caused the top wing surface to detach.

Never heard that before, sorry.
The main wing spar was box-like, wood glued together, by an external (non-Fokker) company.
The problem was, when moisture got into the wing and this box-type spar, it couldn't get
out good enough again, and began to weaken the construction, until the spar collapsed.

Fokker had to change the way the upper wing was built, and that took very long, which is
the reason for the long delay, before the Dr.1 came back to the front.

Aerodynamic factors detaching the top wing surface - that was the problem of the Nieuport 28
in dives.
  • 0

#68 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 14 January 2013 - 22:10

I've heard it before: the lift coefficient of the top wing was higher than the lower two.
  • 0

#69 pcpilot

pcpilot
  • Posts: 117

Posted 14 January 2013 - 22:11

Today I tried to start a campaign with the Sopwith Pup. It was ended to fast
and tragic: I had only just begun a mostly horizontal turn fight with an
Albatros D.II - when the wings collapsed in my third turn.

I read that nothing was changed on the wing stabily, and that it was the changed
effect of machine gun fire? Sorry, but nobody had been shooting so far.
Definitely not on me. I'm usually an Albatros man, and so I'm used to careful
turning. But the Sopwith Pup could turn very tight, without structural problems.
If nothing was changed intentionally, then some accident happened and caused this.
  • 0

#70 pcpilot

pcpilot
  • Posts: 117

Posted 14 January 2013 - 22:15

I've heard it before: the lift coefficient of the top wing was higher than the lower two.

Maybe, but that didn't matter. Actually the middle wing was rather useless.
The wings were a bit too close to each other and caused more drag than to
have a positive effect. But the Germans very so impressed by the Sopwith Triplane,
that they wanted their own. The Fokker D.VI was more or less the Dr.1 without
the middle wings, and it was a very good craft (but overrolled by the D.VII).
  • 0

#71 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 14 January 2013 - 22:20

Hi pcpilot, as I understand it it does matter: because the top wing generated more lift it could basically tear itself away from the rest of the plane….which is what happened. Obviously, also due to poor workmanship which allowed it to happen.
  • 0

#72 MPcdn

MPcdn
  • Posts: 421

Posted 14 January 2013 - 22:28

Pirato good video and it shows even with limited damage {almost none} the wings came off. Has anyone seen any info from the Dev saying they are looking into thie wings coming off. I must say between the wings coming off and the sound bug it is getting hard to stay flying. I do love this game but hate the state it is in now. Sorry if tht sounds hard but it is how I feel. I hope 777 can make some changes.
  • 0

#73 Hellshade

Hellshade
  • Posts: 786

Posted 14 January 2013 - 22:40

I think you guys should make some films. If something is awry, others will be able to see it.

That is exactly what I did in the original post. :)

Two quick slashing attacks was enough to make the wings rip entirely off the first two AI planes. They didn't even have to turn. And the third plane I shot down, I attacked it once and then several seconds later the wings just melted away even though it was not pulling a hard turn.

Watch the video at 1:30 to see how the third plane went down. I barely hit it. A moderate turn and his wings melt. I did not hit him hard enough to result in that kind of total structural wing failure. It wasn't like that before the last patch.



I'm not that good of a shot and I didn't hit any of them that hard or that many times. Somehow, there has been a change that has caused the wings to (I'm presuming unintentionally) weaken. That's why people are noticing their wings melting away so often suddenly. It's not that everyone, including the AI, suddenly forgot how to fly. Something changed in the last patch.
  • 0

#74 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 14 January 2013 - 23:35

The F.2b has never had strong wings. Try a scout with tough wings, like the Camel or Dr1, and see what you get.
  • 0

#75 Waxworks

Waxworks
  • Posts: 630

Posted 15 January 2013 - 00:28

This is from the article I linked: "Unlike the D.VIII, the triplane was grounded not because of spar failure, but because of the disintegration of the secondary structure- wing ribs etc- whilst the spars remained intact. The similarity of the failures in the N28 and Dr.I is intriguing because the 2 aircraft are fundamentally different: one a biplane of almost sesquiplane proportions, the other a triplane of equal-chord wings."

But why has the Bristol not got 'strong wings' Gav? Why should the wings of a Camel resist bullets more effectively? Is there evidence that the Bristol suffered wing failures due to combat damage? It can be dived faster than a Camel, no?
  • 0

#76 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 15 January 2013 - 00:36

I have no idea, waxworks. By their appearance, you would think the F.2b had stronger wings than the Camel because the F.2b was double-bay, and more heavily braced.

Attached File  camel.png   66.31KB   109 downloads

Attached File  F2b.png   86.14KB   105 downloads
  • 0

#77 Hellshade

Hellshade
  • Posts: 786

Posted 15 January 2013 - 01:09

The F.2b has never had strong wings. Try a scout with tough wings, like the Camel or Dr1, and see what you get.

As you wish…

I set up 3 Quick Missions with myself against 3 Camels in each mission for a total of 9 Camel opponents.

The first one took awhile to kill, mostly due to my poor marksmanship and flying and I felt it took a reasonable amount of damage before it went down, so that first kill is NOT shown in the video.

Of the next 8 engagements - kill #5 was set on fire and all of the remaining 7 (78% of the total kills) had their wings melt with a relativey short number of rounds hitting them.

8 Camels Kill Clips (3:35) 720HD


The videos show 8 of the 9 kills, each one starting from the first round fired in the engagement or just a few seconds before that. Judge for yourself if you feel the wings should melt away as often as they do. Granted, they sometimes took a little more damage than the two seaters, but often not much. I don't pull the trigger that often and I certainly don't hit with every round I fire. It seems to me the wings of even the strongest scouts (if the Camels are among the best) aren't what the used to be prior to this last patch.

what are your honest impressions?
  • 0

#78 catobird

catobird
  • Posts: 78

Posted 15 January 2013 - 01:39

The F.2b has never had strong wings. Try a scout with tough wings, like the Camel or Dr1, and see what you get.

As you wish…

I set up 3 Quick Missions with myself against 3 Camels in each mission for a total of 9 Camel opponents.

The first one took awhile to kill, mostly due to my poor marksmanship and flying and I felt it took a reasonable amount of damage before it went down, so that first kill is NOT shown in the video.

Of the next 8 engagements - kill #5 was set on fire and all of the remaining 7 (78% of the total kills) had their wings melt with a relativey short number of rounds hitting them.

8 Camels Kill Clips (3:35) 720HD


The videos show 8 of the 9 kills, each one starting from the first round fired in the engagement or just a few seconds before that. Judge for yourself if you feel the wings should melt away as often as they do. Granted, they sometimes took a little more damage than the two seaters, but often not much. I don't pull the trigger that often and I certainly don't hit with every round I fire. It seems to me the wings of even the strongest scouts (if the Camels are among the best) aren't what the used to be prior to this last patch.

what are your honest impressions?


This exactly what I am seeing now. This is not realistic.
  • 0

#79 NattyIced

NattyIced
  • Posts: 175

Posted 15 January 2013 - 01:48

Maybe everyone here has been working out and getting stronger?


Hah! That was funny joke.
  • 0

"Now comes a matter that I want to discuss with you: Our aircraft, quite frankly, are ridiculously inferior to British [aircraft]. The [Sopwith] Triplane and 200hp SPAD, as well as the Sopwith [Camel] single-seater, play with our [Albatros] D.V. In addition to having better-quality aircraft, they have far more [of them]. Our really good fighter pilots are lost in this manner. The D.V is so far surpassed by and so ridiculously inferior to the British single-seaters that one cannot begin to do anything with [the D.V]. But the people at home have brought out no new machines for almost a year, [only] these lousy Albatroses, and have remained stuck with the Albatros D.III [types], in which I fought in the autumn of last year." - Manfred von Richtofen


#80 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15542

Posted 15 January 2013 - 01:53

The F.2b has never had strong wings. Try a scout with tough wings, like the Camel or Dr1, and see what you get.

As you wish…

what are your honest impressions?

Ok, you have me on board. The Camel is normally tougher than that.

I just came from a quick MP session, and my impression is that aircraft are coming apart much easier than normal. For example, I knocked the wings off two HP 400s without much effort. Something is fishy.
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users