Blackout Incorrectly Modelled?

Yesterday I was reading a book by Brian Kingcome where he describes using blackouts to push the limit of his aircraft and avoid the guy getting on his tail, he states that he could still keep control of the aircraft... why is it modelled like you have passed out and yet still hear the engine sounds in DCS?

By the sounds of it you should be able to retain control of the aircraft?

Is it that there is a kind of sweet spot before losing control and blacking out completely?

Here is the piece from his book if anyone is interested...

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cLvFDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT97&lpg=PT97&dq=brian+kingcome+a+willingness+to+die+blackout&source=bl&ots=8H_uCpKrcd&sig=JBGxZuKTUsQ7jmDi15tKM7i3RnE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjt2IP7oJPSAhWGLMAKHVpPCKQQ6AEIKjAD#v=onepage&q=blacking%20out&f=false

I fly the 109. And you can't black out .Plus you don't even need to aim because you can shoot everybody down with fireballs from your eyes .

I'm not posting a smily because this is actually true.

:shocking:

I fly the 109. And you can't black out .Plus you don't even need to aim because you can shoot everybody down with fireballs from your eyes .

I'm not posting a smily because this is actually true.

I KNEW IT!

But they might as well have with that 30mm cannon, it is a beast!

I fly the 109. And you can't black out .Plus you don't even need to aim because you can shoot everybody down with fireballs from your eyes .

I'm not posting a smily because this is actually true.

Totally true. 109 OP confirmed :megalol:

Yes blackout needs some work. Often incredibly sudden at times when it shouldn't be and sometimes it just jumps into a blackout without the stick even being moved.

It does, but it's still at least a more complicated model than some other simulators. The modeling of the cardiovascular reflex seems overdone. It would be nice to see more color loss modeled, and A-LOC as mentioned by OP. Unfortunately, it's hard to model what g-induced light-loss looks like.

Here is the piece from his book if anyone is interested...

 

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=cLvFDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT97&lpg=PT97&dq=brian+kingcome+a+willingness+to+die+blackout&source=bl&ots=8H_uCpKrcd&sig=JBGxZuKTUsQ7jmDi15tKM7i3RnE&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjt2IP7oJPSAhWGLMAKHVpPCKQQ6AEIKjAD#v=onepage&q=blacking%20out&f=false

Reading the rest of the page puts it in better context.

Blackout Incorrectly Modelled?

I think a complete passing out is plausible :

Ps: he takes a lot of g but he also wear g-pants

I agree that it is a bit sudden in DCS. In real life it goes kinda grey and tunnelly first before going dark and you do still have control for the first bit of completely black. Now I have to confess I never went further than the initial full loss of vision the majority of times immediately reduced back stick pressure when things went grey it was training after all. Now the other aspect is you cant actually feel the g in DCS so that makes the quick onset of G loc even harder to mitigate. I wish the model went grey a little slower and that you still had control at the initial black maybe 3 seconds to recover and after that g-loc.

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

the problem i could see, is that we are flying a simulation where we just cannot feel the g's. in real life you definitely feel 4g, and definitely even feel 2g. you have feedback of what you are doing to your body.

and yes, as Yo-Yo said, blackouts can surprise and can be really sudden...the problem is, we cannot feel it at all. so maybe, some kind of compromise is needed, or that these sudden "attacks" dont happen just as quickly as they do now, but maybe slightly slower.

its a problem of simulating the real thing, while the most important thing, the feedback is missing for us and always will...

Well, if you want to simulate a trained aviator, you want to simulate someone who knows how to handle G with maximum onset rate. The centrifuge(s) in the States simulate 6g per second, which is what Einherjer's video shows. With a G suit and training, onset of that rate for relatively short periods of air combat training is routine.

DCS should model:

- An average resting G tolerance of about 4-4.5 g.

- A g-suit that gives 1-1.5 g tolerance.

- AGSM technique that provides about 3-4 g of tolerance. Make allowances for fatigue over time.

- The effect of the cardiovascular reflex (give it about half a g, with a 2+ g penalty for push-pull effect.)

An onset rate of 6 g/sec should be no problem in this model, as a pilot properly trained starts his strain instinctively. If I were ED, I'd relax the current model, add color loss/stars in place of the basic black tunnel, model fatigue, and model the push-pull effect.

+1 Definitely

I also noticed that total and sudden black out may occur when I release the stick.. which I found peculiar, at least.

- A g-suit that gives 1-1.5 g tolerance.

Even in German WW2 fighters - which were the original subject of this treatise? I am aware of allied G suits, but I have never seen an axis one, have you?

Bear in mind that the phenomenon was not fully understood, and exercises to counter it not formulated at the time, then G should be treated entirely differently depending on technological progress.

For circa Korean war era pilots, G-suits and counteractive procedures are a bigger more effective factor. Prior to that, then it would be like the sound barrier itself - understood, but not properly overcome.

Also, a centrifuge cannot simulate the sudden onset of G, and G is not a measure of gravity over time, so what exactly does 6G per second actually mean? G is a measure of acceleration, and as such, represents distance per second per second, what exactly is distance per second per second per second?

Some of the videos of people passing out that you see in the back seat, it seems there not either really ready for it or expecting just how harsh it will be and how much work it is to stop yourself not passing out.

This would be a good workout.

M_NvfNA4SWU

Well we do have the heavy breathing as sort of reminder that you are pulling quite a bit of Gs. Obviously this won't help if you jerk back on the stick like some sort of Hulk Hogan, but if you do that you better expect to be put to sleep. :lol:

12g in a centrifuge, it was not on top that the guy blacks out but on the way back down from his 3rd run up to 12.2g

This one shows the difference between straining and not straining to counter act the g force, also you can see the graph of the how the g force is applied to the subject.

So G-3 anti g suits only come about in 1944?

So no pilots had any type of anti g suits back then when fighting the war? This would lower the blackout threshold much I guess.

"If a force form 4 to 6 G is sustained for more than a few seconds, the resulting symptoms range from visual impairment to total blackout."

"The standard G-suit provides passive protection to about 5.5 +Gz."

Acceleration of Blackout in Fighter Pilots

blackout looks like that (been there, done that):

- first the periphreal vision starts to shrink, there are gray/red irregular spots at the edge of the vision (up to 4 G)

- if the +G load contiunes, the gray/red area starts to spread towards centre and vision starts to tunnel. (up to + 6 G)

- you can still controll the plane, one still has the more or less usable spatial awareness, but aiming becomes increasingly difficult

- pulling more G load tunnels the vision quickly (that starts from 6.5 G) and not necessarily black out ensues (in sense of loosing the consciousness).

all of the above limits are of course purely individual, depending on many factors, from physical fitness, health etc....

Even in German WW2 fighters - which were the original subject of this treatise? I am aware of allied G suits, but I have never seen an axis one, have you?

Sorry, no. I went a little off-topic then, naturally began thinking of modern fighters. I think, as you say, technique for AGSM was not so well understood and certainly not so well taught at the time. Somewhat lower numbers would be appropriate.

Also, a centrifuge cannot simulate the sudden onset of G, and G is not a measure of gravity over time, so what exactly does 6G per second actually mean? G is a measure of acceleration, and as such, represents distance per second per second, what exactly is distance per second per second per second?

It does, I've had the pleasure (pain?) of experiencing it. The onset rate of current centrifuges in US inventory is about 6 g per second. So... it takes 1.25 seconds for the centrifuge to reach 7.5 g, or 1.5 seconds to reach 9 g. Pretty fast.

Sorry, no. I went a little off-topic then, naturally began thinking of modern fighters. I think, as you say, technique for AGSM was not so well understood and certainly not so well taught at the time. Somewhat lower numbers would be appropriate.

 

 

 

It does, I've had the pleasure (pain?) of experiencing it. The onset rate of current centrifuges in US inventory is about 6 g per second. So... it takes 1.25 seconds for the centrifuge to reach 7.5 g, or 1.5 seconds to reach 9 g. Pretty fast.

Can you check other ww2 planes?

I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Do you mean give my opinion on what kind of numbers I would suggest for g tolerance in a historical WWII scenario? Same as before, but let's say we reduce the effectiveness of AGSM by 1 or 2 g. I would suggest a pilot be able to pull 5 g for about 10-15 seconds before vision begins to gray and fade around the edges.