109 Damage bug??

so this 109 took 2 head on shots to the face from P51 and 2 broadside hits from the top also a bunch of hits to the tail some at point blank it had everything smoking and leaking but continued to fight like there was nothing wrong with it.... here are some screen shoots it took all p51s munition to bring it down kind of unrealistic if u ask me

While everything related DCS and damage model is pretty darn broken, .50cals on P-51 and F-86 are especially so. I don't know whether this 109 was human flown or an AI, in latter case things get even worse as the AI aircraft are all subject to whole another set of rules of physics (or, rather a lack there of).

But even against a human flown aircraft, M3 machine guns in DCS require a pretty concentrated and longish burst on a weak spot to reliably kill anything.

So I think this is a combination of general damage models and M-3 machine guns, rather than 109's damage model specifically.

Well the 109 seems to be the most resilient of all. I saw a109 in MP that took 13 shots from 23mm AAA over a field and flew like nothing happened and then took a few more and started smoking and running and outran my P51D at SL.

So yeah. 190s known IRL for their ruggedness seem to be a lot easier to kill.

Oh wow, than it's clearly both 109 itself and .50 cals in this case :).

I really wish whole damage thing could be overhauled sooner than later.

If that is an AI aircraft you can pretty much forget any comments about the DM. It's pretty well known that all ai aircraft in DCS WWII have some 'interesting' damage models.

The player aircraft are generally much better, although still far from perfect. It is known to ED and a new system is being worked on.

As far as the 109 being the most resilient in DCS, well.... Not really. The damage model has had some interesting progression in the last few months. Any hits near the radiators usually result in overheating and eventually large coolant leaks and engine failure. This happens much more frequently than it used to. Hits in the tail section (anywhere aft of the wings) often cause sloppy controls and a reduced turn rate, generally make the ac a pain in the a$$ to fly. (I believe this may be supposed to be for hits on control surfaces, which sometimes aren't shown visually, often it's just random hits in the tail structure and it flies wierd) Good bursts at convergence tend to break a lot of stuff when the Mustang hit's you. It's just that most people don't hit in bursts, but rather on or 2 hits in a snapshot and then again and again. The Spitfire on the other hand has surprisingly effective weapons. While it won't blow up the aircraft like a 30mm might they really tear it to pieces. Pretty easy to knock control surfaces off with those 20mm and the 303 makes wonderful holes in the wings and radiators.

As far as the most resilient aircraft? In my experience it is by far the Mustang. There is no way that aircraft can survive 3,4 or even 5 30mm rounds plus a couple hundred 13mm. Now 5 30mm is the extreme case but only about 1 in 50 goes down from a single 30mm hit. That and all these things seem to have no effect on how the aircraft handles. I've flown it myself with coconut sized holes in the wings and it turns as if nothing had happened (once again also possibly a mismatch between the visual 'damage model' and the actual damage on the aircraft, either way I've shot them enough that there should be plenty of holes to cause some problems). I've also flown it with the governor blown at 4600 rpm for more than 10 minutes (only once may have been a bug).

On the topic of Machineguns in the .50 cal range (ie the .50s and the 13mm) I've noticed they seem to behave very differently depending on impact angle. At high angles in crossing shots or head ons I've found it much easier to take aircraft apart in one burst (in both the Mustang and the 109 against ai and players), whereas I have flown around at a near 6 position and pumped MG rounds into aircraft without end just to see some smoke and not much else. Maybe this will have more effect with the more detailed damage model but who knows. Certainly seems suspect atm.

On a final note I am pretty sure that a couple of people are going to disagree with me here. Please keep in mind that all of this is based off of my experiences flying all of the aircraft in DCS WWII on both sides and is therefore subjective and not a scientific test. Let's try not to get this one locked please.

Well the 109 seems to be the most resilient of all. I saw a109 in MP that took 13 shots from 23mm AAA over a field and flew like nothing happened and then took a few more and started smoking and running and outran my P51D at SL.

 

So yeah. 190s known IRL for their ruggedness seem to be a lot easier to kill.

Synchronization in this case is also pretty awful, have plenty of situation where I saw People getting hit by Flak and they don't recognize any impact or visual DMG even in the Team Speak.

Also 109 is currently the most fragile Plane of all old 3 War birds, have plenty of Situation where my Rudder is flown away after few impacts with unrecoverable Flat Spin, coolant damaged fuel leaks any possible control surface falling apart don't say this any unrealistic but, Meanwhile P-51 all sorts of black and white Smoke sprayed around and doesn't seem very impressed by 30 MM hits.

Yesterday fly some sorties In P-51 getting one Pilot kill, second 109 lose his Wing and some Dora action 2 times killed with Engine and Pilot kill.

"""There is also plenty of People there unable to get solid burst out of the

P-51 spray down the Sky not even WW1 Biplane is falling apart after 3 Hits in the left and right Wing and referring to the bad DMG Model."""

So I don't know why we have every second Day new Thread about 50 cal, not perfect but far from not able to kill some one, should be more every second day a thread about lack of punch of 30 mm Cannons rounds, but we live with it and looking forward what the future brings.

ok so if you look at the pictures there is a huge part of the aft fuselage missing in fact the only thing that seems to hold it together is the radio antenna :)..... eventually the tail did come apart but like i said it took all 51s ammo.... I mean look at it there is no way that thing should be in any kind of flying shape with that many holes in the wings and engine.... just syaing i hope WW2 stuff gets a face lift when Normandy comes out

ok so if you look at the pictures there is a huge part of the aft fuselage missing in fact the only thing that seems to hold it together is the radio antenna ..... eventually the tail did come apart but like i said it took all 51s ammo.... I mean look at it there is no way that thing should be in any kind of flying shape with that many holes in the wings and engine.... just syaing i hope WW2 stuff gets a face lift when Normandy comes out

the same is true for all planes...seeing threads complaining about the 109damage model only is kind of biased...

i.e. you can shoot of whole tail sections of P-51s and Spitfires and they just magically re-appear as if they were lizards.

the damage model for all aircraft needs a serious improvement, but they told us repeatedly that they are working on it(like in today's update)

BUT as a pilot flying all prop planes in dcs, i am convinced, that some people only knowing the one side, will want the good old times back, once that is out, and here is why:

while the overall damage model is "not up to date" for all aircraft, it became slightly but noticeable more sofisticated with each module in chronological order...

-P51

-190

-109

-Spitfire

it hardly matters in P51 if you have huge holes in wings or if you miss control surfaces, there are no fuel-leaks, oil leaks whatever...you have to kill the engine of it, or shoot off complete wings or break the fuselage apart...and sometimes i watch them even dogfighting with a missing wing making fancy evasive manouvers..

190 is already slightly better, but honestly, i havent flown it for a long time, so cannot comment in too much detail on it. but i remember that loosing parts of control surfaces, and also bullet holes in wings had an effect on flight behaviour...

now the the 109, beloved by some suspects in this very thread

radiator leaks are modeled and will kill your engine very quickly if you dont react accordingly...you are out of the fight thats for sure.

damaged controls surfaces have huge impact on flight characteristics already, not to mention if you loose them. lost rudder=flat spin=bail out or die.

(compare that to P-51-> lost rudder=keep dogfighting with slight sideslips)

holes in ailerons and elevators have huge impact on roll and turn rate often to an extent that you just can try to run away...

you can have fuel leaks and run out of it really quickly(not possible in the P-51...those self sealing tanks really do magic for football sized holes in your wings )

there are more things like asymmetric radiator failure thats modeled in the 109.

but lets have a look at that topic from another perspective....netcode and synchronisation of events/visual effects...

unfortunately, just like with clouds, all those leak, smoke and bullet hit effects are not synchronised.

Well the 109 seems to be the most resilient of all. I saw a109 in MP that took 13 shots from 23mm AAA over a field and flew like nothing happened and then took a few more and started smoking and running and outran my P51D at SL.

 

So yeah. 190s known IRL for their ruggedness seem to be a lot easier to kill.

lol,...maybe you were sitting on the apron watching and counting exactly 13shots from flak on a 109 :lol:

the thing is, it doesnt matter at all as its currently implemented..

flying the 109 and having extensive experience in the 109 with the flak, i can guarantee you, what you might have seen, didn't happen to the 109 pilot you were admiring. no way. usually the flak hits you once, and you are either a burning wreckage tumbling down towards mother earth, or the governour is gone and you miss control surfaces=you limp home or die...

again...even if you really counted 13visual impacts online...it doesnt mean a thing. what you see isnt necessary the same what the pilot is seeing. and very likely, he didnt receive a single actual hit during the 13 you counted...

thats again true for all aircraft, damage effects and unfortunately even clouds are not synchronisted online.

and one more thing to consider is definitely the netcode...unfortunately, its still far far off from beeing stable....dcs netcode seems to be overwhelmed as soon as there is more going on than a handfull of aircraft dogfighting on an empty place on the map...it might run and not crash, but things get noticeable worse with each more client....

and damage model coupled with AI...well...lets just say, dont take it too serious for now.(but again, true for all prop planes).im sure the devs will improve that with the upcoming new damage model.

as a person flying all prop planes in dcs, im really looking forward to the new damage model, but i am convinced, that while it will be an improvement for all of us, the "P-51 only pilots" will have the least relative improvement competitive wise, because for aformentioned reasons.(least detailed DM)

Haven't seen that particular break before but there are plenty of weird LOD bugs where wing mid sections are missing and then you zoom in and they aren't. Once again AI Damage model is different to the Player one and this is well known. Secondly visual damage model =/= actual damage model in DCS.

Well they did update p51 a bit you get canopy holes and oil all over the windscreen and canopy I have flown all prop planes in dcs.... Mustang just always been and is my favorite :-)..... lets hope most of this gets fixed when the actual ww2 map is ready :-)

the same is true for all planes...seeing threads complaining about the 109damage model only is kind of biased...

i.e. you can shoot of whole tail sections of P-51s and Spitfires and they just magically re-appear as if they were lizards.

 

the damage model for all aircraft needs a serious improvement, but they told us repeatedly that they are working on it(like in today's update)

 

BUT as a pilot flying all prop planes in dcs, i am convinced, that some people only knowing the one side, will want the good old times back, once that is out, and here is why:

 

while the overall damage model is "not up to date" for all aircraft, it became slightly but noticeable more sofisticated with each module in chronological order...

-P51

-190

-109

-Spitfire

 

it hardly matters in P51 if you have huge holes in wings or if you miss control surfaces, there are no fuel-leaks, oil leaks whatever...you have to kill the engine of it, or shoot off complete wings or break the fuselage apart...and sometimes i watch them even dogfighting with a missing wing making fancy evasive manouvers..

 

190 is already slightly better, but honestly, i havent flown it for a long time, so cannot comment in too much detail on it. but i remember that loosing parts of control surfaces, and also bullet holes in wings had an effect on flight behaviour...

 

now the the 109, beloved by some suspects in this very thread

radiator leaks are modeled and will kill your engine very quickly if you dont react accordingly...you are out of the fight thats for sure.

damaged controls surfaces have huge impact on flight characteristics already, not to mention if you loose them. lost rudder=flat spin=bail out or die.

(compare that to P-51-> lost rudder=keep dogfighting with slight sideslips)

 

holes in ailerons and elevators have huge impact on roll and turn rate often to an extent that you just can try to run away...

you can have fuel leaks and run out of it really quickly(not possible in the P-51...those self sealing tanks really do magic for football sized holes in your wings )

 

there are more things like asymmetric radiator failure thats modeled in the 109.

but lets have a look at that topic from another perspective....netcode and synchronisation of events/visual effects...

unfortunately, just like with clouds, all those leak, smoke and bullet hit effects are not synchronised.

 

 

 

lol,...maybe you were sitting on the apron watching and counting exactly 13shots from flak on a 109 :lol:

the thing is, it doesnt matter at all as its currently implemented..

flying the 109 and having extensive experience in the 109 with the flak, i can guarantee you, what you might have seen, didn't happen to the 109 pilot you were admiring. no way. usually the flak hits you once, and you are either a burning wreckage tumbling down towards mother earth, or the governour is gone and you miss control surfaces=you limp home or die...

 

again...even if you really counted 13visual impacts online...it doesnt mean a thing. what you see isnt necessary the same what the pilot is seeing. and very likely, he didnt receive a single actual hit during the 13 you counted...

 

thats again true for all aircraft, damage effects and unfortunately even clouds are not synchronisted online.

 

and one more thing to consider is definitely the netcode...unfortunately, its still far far off from beeing stable....dcs netcode seems to be overwhelmed as soon as there is more going on than a handfull of aircraft dogfighting on an empty place on the map...it might run and not crash, but things get noticeable worse with each more client....

 

and damage model coupled with AI...well...lets just say, dont take it too serious for now.(but again, true for all prop planes).im sure the devs will improve that with the upcoming new damage model.

 

as a person flying all prop planes in dcs, im really looking forward to the new damage model, but i am convinced, that while it will be an improvement for all of us, the "P-51 only pilots" will have the least relative improvement competitive wise, because for aformentioned reasons.(least detailed DM)

I flew at an angle off chasing that 109 and saw it well enough and had a video of it, but not anymore. It wasn't that interesting, I see that regularly, so I didn't think that it would suprise anyone.

But I do have another video. Let me just leave this here, it speaks louder than any of us:

Let me guess, that was an AI right?

that's normal for the AI...

Oh dear Solty you Hilarious to post this, I lost my Wing on your Tail your Mustang is flying unharmed without any scratch away or did you think your one hit Scratch my WING apart? =)

And my 109 is burning out of Wing Fuel Tank, oh no there is no Wing Tank what are Burning there hmm and was still on the Ground Burn and Burn?

After lost the wing after the Slat it was still flyable? Would be rename in immortal P-51!!!

David is right :

Spitfire has the most advanced damage model.I've never seen one leek fluid and not go down eventually.

Tail section damage and radiator damage is implemented for the 109.For the p51 unless you shoot the whole tail off controls still work.But if anyone knows different post a video.

I posted a video to show tail,controlls damage model comparison between 109 and p51.And also a tackview file with the first fight from the video, the p51 flies and turns without problem after geting hit in the tail by at least 4 30mm shells and my plane on top of that (The tackview file apperently Is too big to atach but if you give me your mail in pm i can send it to you).

XZFgksaB6Gw

Also both 109 and P51 can fly with a third of the wing missing and with that wing on fire like in the video.

The Point is all Planes sufferd from this Damage Model more or less looking strange things, but the Point is no one is running in the P-51/109 forum and start cry thread all the time how uneven ridiculuos unfair the damage Model for the 109 is expect 1 Guy.

This entire thread is moot anyway.

ED are doing a completely new damage system. It's going to be rolled out in the not-too-distant future for all the WWII aircraft.

Lets just wait and see.

Completely new is a bit of an overstatement. And not too distant future is probably also an overstatement as well but I guess that remains to be seen.

Oh dear Solty you Hilarious to post this, I lost my Wing on your Tail your Mustang is flying unharmed without any scratch away or did you think your one hit Scratch my WING apart? =)

And my 109 is burning out of Wing Fuel Tank, oh no there is no Wing Tank what are Burning there hmm and was still on the Ground Burn and Burn?

After lost the wing after the Slat it was still flyable? Would be rename in immortal P-51!!!

You are hilarious because it is clear the damage was due to my fire, not a colison. There was no sound, but I can assure you we have not smashed into each other. You pulled up on the last second, but your wing got riped off and you were still flying faster and climbing faster than me. So how can you explain that?

You are hilarious because it is clear the damage was due to my fire, not a colison. There was no sound, but I can assure you we have not smashed into each other. You pulled up on the last second, but your wing got riped off and you were still flying faster and climbing faster than me. So how can you explain that?

I give up LOL think what are you mean because you are absolute convinced about what are you talking there is no Point to make any discussion with you.

This entire thread is moot anyway.

 

ED are doing a completely new damage system. It's going to be rolled out in the not-too-distant future for all the WWII aircraft.

 

Lets just wait and see.

+1

There is no way those 2 rounds ripped the wing off. Looking at the distance and the angle at which you wwre flying a collision seems much more likely.

There is no way those 2 rounds ripped the wing off. Looking at the distance and the angle at which you wwre flying a collision seems much more likely.

It was not a colision though, my theory is that graphics engine failed to render all hits(it seems only tracers in DCS show hit marks on targets [other bullets seem to produce hit marks on the ground though]) or hits from that close made the HP fall more and by pulling hard G above me, he riped his wing on his own, as there is no other explanation for lack of any impact on my part. No changes in course or vibration or damage on the plane nor sound, because I can assure you the sound was recorded but I have deleted it because of harsh language on the TS.

Anyway, the important part is. That a wingsless 109, burning, was faster than a not even scrached P-51D, both climbing and flying level. This is mindbogling and frankly shows that DM doesn't change anything for the FM, as the airplane should have way less lift and much more drag due to loss of an wing. It might not be just the 109, but the current DM is just bad (I know thats nothing new). And thats why I agree with Buzzles, we have to wait for the new DM to have a proper discussion. Did it improve during that time? Yes it did. Both 109 and Mustang and Dora consistently loose their control surfaces, that is good. But the damage to those surfaces before they drop off doesn't count for any drag or loss in maneuvrability, eg. in my last video, I was damaged badly to my aileron, the thing was nearly non-existant, but felt as a brand new aileron and the airplane rolled like dream.

No, not everything is just related to the 109, but it is the only plane from my playing time that took a AiM120 to the face and kept on flying:smilewink: (from WW2 planes, cause VEAO HAWK seems even more broken. That thing could take two missles and fly :P)

Also, if DM was better, you could realy expect two AP .50cal bullets to damage a spar so that it could break during a high G pull out.

Damaged control surfaces certainly do affect the 109. I already mentioned this. Also I and many others here have seen mustangs do things just as if not more suspect... So what is your point? The 109 is no more broken than the Mustang, arguably less so IMO since damage has at least some effect on the handling characteristics of the aircraft, even if these effects are only partial.

Damaged control surfaces certainly do affect the 109. I already mentioned this. Also I and many others here have seen mustangs do things just as if not more suspect... So what is your point? The 109 is no more broken than the Mustang, arguably less so IMO since damage has at least some effect on the handling characteristics of the aircraft, even if these effects are only partial.

Well, still the airplane with one wing and burning flies faster in a straight line than a prefectly good aircraft. Don't you find that a bit wierd? Do you want to tell me that airplanes would fly better if they didn't have wings?

The M2000C regularly takes two AIM120s and goes supersonic at MSL right afterwards. :P