Pilot fatigue under G's - Page 5 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-12-2019, 05:45 PM   #41
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 30,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Xilon_x View Post
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.
What for?

Quote:
-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.
There's already a g-warm up mechanic, adds tolerance to the STOHL curve, as do other devices in-game, like g-suits etc.

Quote:
-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-.
Already there, modeled by following the STOHL curve.

Quote:
more realistic combat with the risk of losing consciousness in high G.
Already there.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 10:04 PM   #42
Pâte
Member
 
Pâte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 102
Default

Will we really play this game like that forever.

Man don't tell me 'picking out a quote without any context whatsoever ' to do the exact same thing right after ...

But fine if you want more infos here it is :

-----------------------------

The Duration of Tolerance to Positive Acceleration
CAPTAIN HUGH MILLER, USAF (MC),
FIRST LIEUTENANT MITCHELL B. RILEY, USAF,
CAPTAIN STUART BONDURANT, USAF (MC) and EDWIN P. HIATT, M.D.

Test done within a group of eight young adult males varying widely in positive g tolerance chosen from the trained volunteer centrifuge panel. Are those people pilots or in formation or just people trained to G i don't know tbh.

During the test done with G suit here are the best results :
- 3G : 1h arbitrary stop without any problem except one subject who blackout
- 4G : 20min arbitrary stop without problem
- 5G : 6 subjects up to the arbitrary stop at 4min, 2 subjects blackout
- 6G : 2 subject up to 2min arbitrary stop, 6 blackout

If we add the + 2G for experienced in straining and eventual +1G for people having better tolerence it still fairly low.

-----------------------------

A Conceptual Model for Predicting Pilot Group G Tolerance for Tactical Fighter Aircraf

Another report from the Aerospace Medical Association who made studies after the F16 to see how G's tolerance can be increased. Their idea was the F16 seat is around 30°, what if we recline a seat to 65° reducing the height of the column from 334 to 220mm (which isn't the case in any plane in DCS)

Only with this 65° seat it appeared that (only) the strongest pilots could resist 10.8min at 7G (in DCS at the moment we can keep between 7 to 8G for more than 10min, and we have at best around 30° seats)

They saw that in ACM simulation that 65° would not increase the performance but improve the resistance through time to the G's. They estimated that you can add 2G's without problem compare to the 30°. Except the problem of the head/eye angle.

-----------------------------


Its also interesting to look at NASA point of view on G's for the safety of their crew

On the NASA-STD-3001 VOL 2 we can see that their limit before considering during the launch, that their crew capacities may be affected, is between few secondes to max 5min at 7G


----------------------------


So, infos seems to confirm what those pilots said, which make sense because being pilots they know what they talk about. DCS is indeed simulating warm up, but doesn't seems to simulate fatigue, or simulate it wrong. Time is affecting the G tolerence but at the moment it seems that in DCS G tolerance increase but never decrease. So back to the original post, it would make sense to add that g tolerance degradation through time & G's in DCS.
__________________
.
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/20/5/1526668517-vra2013-davided.jpg
.

Last edited by Pâte; 09-12-2019 at 10:51 PM.
Pâte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 10:49 PM   #43
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 30,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pâte View Post
Will we really play this game like that forever.
We can. I'll post the PDF I was reading some time later.


Quote:
Test done within a group of eight young adult males varying widely in positive g tolerance chosen from the trained volunteer centrifuge panel. Are those people pilots or in formation or just people trained to G i don't know tbh.
Given the names of the researches and the rest of the text, those are likely pilots. But, the test appears to be a resting g test. That means you're in the centrifuge but you do nothing to resist the g.

Quote:
During the test done with G suit here are the best results :
- 3G : 1h arbitrary stop without any problem except one subject who blackout
- 4G : 20min arbitrary stop without problem
- 5G : 6 subjects up to the arbitrary stop at 4min, 2 subjects blackout
- 6G : 2 subject up to 2min arbitrary stop, 6 blackout

If we add the + 2G for experienced in straining and eventual +1G for people having better tolerence it still fairly low.
+2 for strain +1 for g-suit, +0.something for g-warm-up, and you're immediately at the 'DCS level' ... so you're theoretically at the '4g level' for your standard DCS pilot.

I'm skipping the reclining seat because it's not that important in this case:

Quote:
Only with this 65° seat it appeared that (only) the strongest pilots could resist 10.8min at 7G (in DCS at the moment we can keep between 7 to 8G for more than 10min, and we have at best around 30° seats)
This is continuous 7g, which we do NOT do in DCS anyway, nor is it done in real combat. In real combat you do SACM.

Quote:
So, infos seems to confirm what those pilots said, which make sense because being pilots they know what they talk about. DCS is indeed simulating warm up, but doesn't seems to simulate fatigue, or simulate it wrong. Time is affecting the G tolerence but at the moment it seems that in DCS G tolerance increase but never decrease. So back to the original post, it would make sense to add that g tolerance degradation through time & G's in DCS.
Again, pilot opinions are largely irrelevant in simulation. IMHO Fatigue isn't going to give you much, you're going to run yourself out of fuel before fatigue becomes a problem. You'd have to run on unlimited fuel for it to be a factor, in which case ... you're not simulating realism anyway.

If you're looking to simulate fatigue overall, then why not consider the time-in-flight as well? From the moment you spawn in the cockpit until you go to spectators, your pilot accumulates fatigue. Or perhaps you want to keep it server-based and a pilot is fatigued on a given server for a number of hours?

Yep, it's pretty much the same as you're suggesting, because this fatigue will not affect a dogfight - if the fatigue was aggressive, it would affect both pilots so you change nothing. If the fatigue isn't aggressive, you gain nothing.
If your opponent performs SACM (g-on-g-off), he won't be fatigued.
If someone has to take on one dogfight after another, they're still fuel-limited.

So once more, I'm not sure what result you're looking for other than changing the g-tolerance mini-game. I don't consider that to be more realistic.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 11:03 PM   #44
M1Combat
Member
 
M1Combat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Prescott AZ, US
Posts: 712
Default

"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."

I'm pretty sure the study notes is what was being referred to... Not the implementation of them. So... No reason to start from ground zero if someone else has done well reasoned scientific study and/or aggregated the research.

Relative implementation is a different subject entirely.
__________________
Win-10 x64

Nvidia RTX2080 (HTC Vive)
MSI Z77 MPower
Core i5-3570K
24GB G-Skill Trident-X

Saitek X-65F and Fanatec Club-Sport Pedals
(UCR - mapping throttle and clutch pedals together to form a rudder Axis)
M1Combat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-12-2019, 11:24 PM   #45
GGTharos
Veteran
 
GGTharos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 30,153
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by M1Combat View Post
No reason to start from ground zero if someone else has done well reasoned scientific study and/or aggregated the research.

Yes, ED will do their own research. They won't rely on anyone else's notes.
__________________

Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump
I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
GGTharos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2019, 07:54 AM   #46
Pâte
Member
 
Pâte's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 102
Default

Damn man how many back and forth did it required. So we are on the same page now right ? DCS isn't simulating G tolerance decrease ?



Just if we add +2G to the value of the test. Possibly done without any AGSM indeed they never speak about any, we still not at DCS level man :
4G = 4 min with 2 subjects blackout --> that would give 7G = 4 min with 2 subjects blackout.
6G = 2min with 6 black out --> that would give 8G = 2min with 6 blackout

Cross this with the 10.8min 7G only with 65° seat, in DCS we should not last as long under those G's.

Indeed and combat nor flight you will never be at 7G for 10 min non stop, as i said it's to show that DCS doesn't simulate fatigue. I'll read better the ASCM part but the way i understood in the end it's the same, but pulling releasing, pulling releasing you still hurt your organisme and reduce your tolerance. At a point you still have to stop because g tolerance reduced too much.

And you're right ! Fligth time should affect it too exactly. And it should be part of a new human body simulation.

Then if now we are on the same page, in DCS it's wrong atm, why should be implemented ? It's not a mini game, it's a part of the simulation.
- For many reason, it will be a game changer if after 1h of flight already done if you had to enter for any reason into some ACM it will be more difficult.
- In a dogfight of pilots of the same level in the end it's the one that preserved the most his pilot that could take the advantage.
- It would force you to consider the fuel ressources of the plane but also energy ressources of the pilot
- It would avoid, take off fight land quick refuel, take off fight land quick, refuel, take off fight ...
- Etc etc ...

But better, why shouldn't it be implemented ? It's a simulator, a point is wrong, why shouldn't it be corrected. Would be like saying getting out of a stall is a minigame itself why implementing stall aircraft behavior. Spending minutes managing your GPS guided bombs on the DDI's. Spending minutes orbiting exploring the SA ... everything itself is a minigame. Because we are on DCS.
__________________
.
https://image.noelshack.com/fichiers/2018/20/5/1526668517-vra2013-davided.jpg
.

Last edited by Pâte; 09-13-2019 at 08:25 AM.
Pâte is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-13-2019, 10:26 AM   #47
Xilon_x
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Italy
Posts: 753
Default







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 09:55 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.