Pilot fatigue under G's - Page 4 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-11-2019, 08:06 PM   #31
norbot
Member
 
norbot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Germany
Posts: 677
Default

I see it like Pate. DCS is a simulator. So important functions - and this includes the fatigue of the pilot under high G's - should be simulated. Of course, every person tolerates G-loads in different ways. ED could just take an average experience as a reference. To refuse such functions in principle, because DCS pilots only sit in front of a monitor and not in a real plane, I think is exaggerated. Then we can play arcade games right away, because sitting in front of the monitor anyway has nothing to do with real flight. I just wonder why the military are using simulators, too.
__________________
A-10C, AV-8B, F/A-18C, F-5E, Yak-52, NTTR, Persian Gulf, FW 190D-9, Spitfire LF Mk. IX, Normandy + WWII Assets Pack
norbot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 12:00 PM   #32
Xilon_x
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Italy
Posts: 754
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by norbot View Post
I see it like Pate. DCS is a simulator. So important functions - and this includes the fatigue of the pilot under high G's - should be simulated. Of course, every person tolerates G-loads in different ways. ED could just take an average experience as a reference. To refuse such functions in principle, because DCS pilots only sit in front of a monitor and not in a real plane, I think is exaggerated. Then we can play arcade games right away, because sitting in front of the monitor anyway has nothing to do with real flight. I just wonder why the military are using simulators, too.


making a military plane fly is very expensive.
fuel costs
maintenance costs
armament costs
various costs and unnecessary expenses in a period without war.
this is why military pilots not only have training hours in real flight but also training hours in simulated flight. Usually the simulated flight has advantages more than the real one, and in the military the simulators are faithful to reality and they can reproduce war scenarios that are unlikely in reality.
Xilon_x is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 01:15 PM   #33
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 30,156
Default

The g-tolerance simulation in DCS is below fighter pilot capability.
There's no need for fatigue - you can't even hold 9G long enough as real fighter pilots in-game (in DCS you're limited between 5-10 sec, depending on warm-up) ... that you can run around at 4-8g cycles and hold 7g very long may or may not be a thing, but let's be very clear:

Real fighter pilots have said that the g-tolerance in-game is BELOW capability.

ED based g-tolerance on aero-medical studies and a g-tolerance STOHL curve like the one attached.

I await the 'paradoxical people's' own science regarding g-tolerance and fatigue. Present actual number, studies and graphs - otherwise I would expect ED to ignore your wishlist item just as they ignore evidence-free, 'feelings-based' judgments of aircraft performance ... which is exactly as it should be for a SIMULATOR.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	g-stohl.jpg
Views:	17
Size:	5.4 KB
ID:	217090  
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Last edited by GGTharos; 09-12-2019 at 01:19 PM.
GGTharos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 01:48 PM   #34
Pâte
Member
 
Pâte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGTharos View Post
The g-tolerance simulation in DCS is below fighter pilot capability.
There's no need for fatigue - you can't even hold 9G long enough as real fighter pilots in-game (in DCS you're limited between 5-10 sec, depending on warm-up) ... that you can run around at 4-8g cycles and hold 7g very long may or may not be a thing, but let's be very clear:

Real fighter pilots have said that the g-tolerance in-game is BELOW capability.

ED based g-tolerance on aero-medical studies and a g-tolerance STOHL curve like the one attached.

I await the 'paradoxical people's' own science regarding g-tolerance and fatigue. Present actual number, studies and graphs - otherwise I would expect ED to ignore your wishlist item just as they ignore evidence-free, 'feelings-based' judgments of aircraft performance ... which is exactly as it should be for a SIMULATOR.
Thanks a lot for your message very interesting !

It would be hard to gather datas in a pure science if i may say. I hope the not to be named sim will release a part of their studies on the subject. What is possible to do at the moment would be to gather videos of pilots sharing their experiences of flying and G's. There is few i'm already thinking of, i will do it that assap. They explain very well the impact of the fatigue on their G tolerance. And the consequences on dogfight.

If you cross those feedback with a forever 7 to 8G holding in DCS, something seems very very wrong. Add the 9G tolerance too being off, then we can maybe say that it's probably the entire G simulation in DCS being wrong ?

It would then deserve even more to be corrected !


PS : i had a look on some STOHL, did i understood them wrong or they say that symptoms should already appear at 5G
__________________
.
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/20/5/1526668517-vra2013-davided.jpg
.
Pâte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 03:01 PM   #35
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 30,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pâte View Post
It would be hard to gather datas in a pure science if i may say.
No it isn't, I found it in like 10 minutes of googling + reading the science

Quote:
I hope the not to be named sim will release a part of their studies on the subject.
The 'other sim' studies are 100% irrelevant to DCS. You don't use another simulator as the basis for anything in yours, or at least, it shouldn't.

Quote:
What is possible to do at the moment would be to gather videos of pilots sharing their experiences of flying and G's. There is few i'm already thinking of, i will do it that assap. They explain very well the impact of the fatigue on their G tolerance. And the consequences on dogfight.
Useless. I hate to be harsh, but this is exactly as useless as trying to simulate an aircraft based on 'pilots sharing their experiences'. Also, the serious effects on physiology caused by this has to do with very rapid onset over-g (positive and negative) and a bunch of it is not possible to simulate. I suppose you could severely penalize g-tolerance, but I think there's just no point for this in the simulator when it is impossible for you to physically perceive that what you're doing is wrong - ie. the warning signs will ALWAYS be lacking.
The nature of these events is also very transient, and IMHO if they're severe enough the DCS pilot will either g-loc or the airframe should take punishment or both.

Quote:
If you cross those feedback with a forever 7 to 8G holding in DCS, something seems very very wrong. Add the 9G tolerance too being off, then we can maybe say that it's probably the entire G simulation in DCS being wrong ?

It would then deserve even more to be corrected !
The G simulation in DCS is actually fine, save for some relatively minor (IMHO) details. The fatigue curves for high G-tolerance/SACM go so far that you'll usually run out of fuel before this becomes a serious factor - this is just my preliminary interpretation and could change.

Quote:
PS : i had a look on some STOHL, did i understood them wrong or they say that symptoms should already appear at 5G
This is for people in 'resting tolerance' ie. no helpful factor from training, g-warm up, AGSM or aids like g-suit. Ie, you and me just sitting in our chairs.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 04:08 PM   #36
Pâte
Member
 
Pâte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GGTharos View Post
No it isn't, I found it in like 10 minutes of googling + reading the science
If yu refer to document like those, it's matter of personnal opinion but those are just experimentations that give more or less the same infos that those pilots give. But you're right we should incorpore them they're solid ref.

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/752...57fa4e7872.pdf

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/845...d0ce277f0c.pdf

https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a204689.pdf

https://books.google.fr/books?id=Blb...atigue&f=false

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/adb...088c1a1dbb.pdf




Quote:
Originally Posted by GGTharos View Post
The 'other sim' studies are 100% irrelevant to DCS. You don't use another simulator as the basis for anything in yours, or at least, it shouldn't.
In what aspect are their studies irrevelant ? We are speaking about research on human G's tolerence. They study the same subject, very probably with the same documents, will extract the same conclusions. It doesnt means copy their studies, it means worth giving a look at them. Sorry but it doesn't make sense at all.



Quote:
Originally Posted by GGTharos View Post
Useless. I hate to be harsh, but this is exactly as useless as trying to simulate an aircraft based on 'pilots sharing their experiences'. Also, the serious effects on physiology caused by this has to do with very rapid onset over-g (positive and negative) and a bunch of it is not possible to simulate. I suppose you could severely penalize g-tolerance, but I think there's just no point for this in the simulator when it is impossible for you to physically perceive that what you're doing is wrong - ie. the warning signs will ALWAYS be lacking.
The nature of these events is also very transient, and IMHO if they're severe enough the DCS pilot will either g-loc or the airframe should take punishment or both.
I never said go on look this video and from this, simulate an entire human body resistence. I say if pilots say A, and DCS is doing F, it's enough to assume that there is a mistake somewhere in the DCS simulation model. I agree finding solid research would be necessary to then simulate it properly. But as a starting point we are initially speaking about : hey there is something wrong at the moment seems, would you consider having a look on it ?



Quote:
Originally Posted by GGTharos View Post
The G simulation in DCS is actually fine, save for some relatively minor (IMHO) details. The fatigue curves for high G-tolerance/SACM go so far that you'll usually run out of fuel before this becomes a serious factor - this is just my preliminary interpretation and could change.
I hate to be harsh, but so 10min of research on internet were enough so you can assume, no in DCS it's fine as it is ? Which means you now know better than most of the pilots who spoke about this aspect. And by the way it took me 5min to find this line in one of the docs :
" at 6G only one subject reached the arbitrary limit of 2min, one subject stopped because of severe discomfort and the other six subjects experienced blackout. "
But you are right, in DCS doing 7G during 20min without blackout is actually FINE.



Guys if i don't know if you are scared by more realism on DCS, or if the fact that we are the chair force for you means that DCS shouldn't keep improving aspect to make it more realist (which does't make sense), but then you'll just have to disable the option. You're welcome. With your logic DCS would still at the level of Flaming Cliffs today.
__________________
.
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/20/5/1526668517-vra2013-davided.jpg
.

Last edited by Pâte; 09-13-2019 at 10:09 AM.
Pâte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 04:27 PM   #37
MegOhm_SD
Senior Member
 
MegOhm_SD's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: NC-USA
Posts: 1,348
Default

Well hell...this would not be complete and would be totally Unsat without simulating pilot facial expressions as well...
__________________

Thing is....Zuckerberg is definitely an Alien... Some Kind of Grey Hybrid

Cooler Master HAF XB EVO Test Bench, ASUS P8Z77-V, i7-3770K @ 4.6GHz, Noctua AC, 32GB Corsair Vengeance Pro, EVGA 1080TI 11GB, 2 Samsung 840 Pro 540GB SSDs Raid 0, 1TB HDD, EVGA SuperNOVA 1300W PS, G930 Wireless SS Headset, TrackIR5/Wireless Proclip, TM Warthog, Saitek Pro Combat Pedals, 65" Samsung 4k 8 Series, Oculus S, Win 10
MegOhm_SD is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 04:33 PM   #38
Pâte
Member
 
Pâte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 102
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MegOhm_SD View Post
Well hell...this would not be complete and would be totally Unsat without simulating pilot facial expressions as well...
This idea is GOLD !

Show that facial expression in the mirror of the cockpit
__________________
.
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/20/5/1526668517-vra2013-davided.jpg
.
Pâte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 04:56 PM   #39
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 30,156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pâte View Post
If yu refer to document like those, it's matter of personnal opinion but those are just experimentations that give more or less the same infos that those pilots give. But you're right we should incorpore them they're solid ref.
Yep. Everything else is 'feelings'.


Quote:
In what aspect are their studies irrevelant ? We are speaking about research on human G's tolerence. They study the same subject, very probably with the same documents, will extract the same conclusions. It doesnt means copy their studies, it means worth giving a look at them. Sorry but it doesn't make sense at all.
I disagree, it's a bunch of people implementing their interpretation of the data in their game. To be clear, ED will do this independently if they do it at all - thus, the 'other sim' is irrelevant.

Quote:
I agree finding solid research would be necessary to then simulate it properly. But as a starting point we are initially speaking about : hey there is something wrong at the moment seems, would you consider having a look on it ?
Ok, here's the answer then,m IMHO: there's nothing wrong - conclusions are that fighter pilots can consistently maintain 7g performance. Current research is into raising this above 9g.

Quote:
I hate to be harsh, but so 10min of research on internet were enough so you can assume, no in DCS it's fine as it is ?
Actually, yes? I mean the answers were there

Quote:
Which means you now know better than most of the pilots who spoke about this aspect.
I thought we were past the pilots already. The research is what matters. Let me put it another way. These pilots RELY on this research for their very lives.

Quote:
" at 6G only one subject reached the arbitrary limit of 2min, one subject stopped because of severe discomfort and the other six subjects experienced blackout. "
But you are right, in DCS doing 7G during 10min without blackout is actually FINE.
Yes, I am right. Thanks for picking out a quote without any context whatsoever - here's a clue:

At rest, a person can tolerate 3g for a long time, and 4g begins to strain - some people are already unconscious.
A trained and conditioned pilot will usually be able to do a bit better at rest. A pilot who's straining adds another 2g on top of this, +1g for the suit, +whatever pressure breathing gives you, and another + for overall tolerance if you do a warm-up.
Aerobic exercise increases the overall endurance, while weight lifting gives the necessary strength (this what we mean by 'conditioned')

If you believe I'm wrong, I suggest you find specific data. And to be clear, it's not even me that you have to convince, but ED - and they'll look at it in more detail than I do.

Quote:
Guys if i don't know if you are scared by more realism on DCS, or if the fact that we are the chair force for you means that DCS shouldn't keep improving aspect to make it more realist (which does't make sense), but then you'll just have to disable the option. You're welcome. With your logic DCS would still at the level of Flaming Cliffs today.
The only 'chair force here' is you, with respect to the research. You don't know what realism is in this case, and you've proven it by hanging yourself on a single context-free quote.

Centrifuge testing and training for fighter pilots indicates quite a bit more tolerance than you want to believe.

It's more like you're sitting here bothered by your virtual pilot not becoming even more of a limp noodle than he/she is.

Just what do you think you're going to achieve in terms of a dogfight? You want a g-tolerance management mini-game on top of what's there already?
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda

Last edited by GGTharos; 09-12-2019 at 04:59 PM.
GGTharos is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 05:26 PM   #40
Xilon_x
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Italy
Posts: 754
Default

tolerance data to g are useful to create the parameters of the untrained but ready to fly standard pilot.

IN DCS I want the standard parameters to be entered ......
-1 caridaci beats line and rhythm increase according to G.
-2 second line must be an energy line of STAMINA that when the pilot finishes does more work and has more difficulty supporting the G.
-3 line physical strength oxygen serves to regulate the anti-g suit oxygen and pressure.
Effects on the monitor red vision and black vision depending on the G + or G-.
DCS options with stress
DCS without stress.
more realistic combat with the risk of losing consciousness in high G.

Request 3 mini grafic line of survaival
+ and visual effect.

Last edited by Xilon_x; 09-12-2019 at 05:34 PM.
Xilon_x is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 03:14 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.