Structural damage/hard landings

Granted, EA, but it seems like both the Hornet and Viper invincible when it comes to poor airmanship. Currently you can pancake the Viper in a stall starting at 200’ above the runway with no recourse. Not even a blown tire. I imagine the Hornet may be a bit forgiving, but when doing these drastic tests, it seems like the simulation of damage is far from over. Has anyone else had different result?

Am I crazy/don’t know what I’m talking about or is this something in the works?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Havent testet it lately but i remember blowne tires at least in the F-16.

Cant remember what exactly caused this anymore.

Maybe thats changed in the meantime but since you can have blowne tires in every Plane i tried so far i think it will be added or fixed if it currently doesnt work.

Over speeding the tires on the runway will make them blow.

The Hornet in DCS is indeed incredbile forgiving when it comes to hard landings, but with the Viper I always have to be careful not to blow my tires on takeoff with a heavy loadout.

Structural damage/hard landings

I see. So damage is implemented for tire separation, but not for anything else.

Yet?

I’m surprised the Hornet is so deep in development that these items are yet to be implemented. (Shrug)

Funny how the recent roadmap doesn’t even mention this for the Hornet.

DCS: F/A-18C Hornet Features Roadmap 2020

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink/topic?share_fid=74365&share_tid=276224&url=https%3A%2F%2Fforums%2Eeagle%2Eru%2Fshowthread%2Ephp%3Ft%3D276224&share_type=t&link_source=app

Just wondering if developers are even going to simulate damage from abuse? Like I said before, I know the Hornet can take the additional abuse, but it sure isn’t invincible IRL.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

The Hornet has a far more rugged gear, given that it is designed to land on carriers. And a carrier landing isn't so much a landing, more like an "arrival".

I have bent and damaged the gear, and had popped tires plenty of times in the Hog, which itself is a more stout aircraft than the Viper. Admittingly, most of the gear and tire damage on the Hog was my own doing from being a bit ham fisted on landings, more so than combat damage, especially early on when learning the Hog.

Now that this topic was brought up, I never realized that I've hardly ever damaged the gear on my Viper, if at all.

I have hit the deck hard a few times in the F-16, and the biggest issue for me is how easy it is to veer and tip. I did hear a thunk one day, and with no caution lights I decided to continue the flight. As soon as I pulled a turn, something broke off. On landing, same issue. Keeping it on the runway is a white knuckle experience. I haven't learned to flare my landings yet. That's next on the list.

I heard BB say blowout one day when I hit hard and veered off the runway. It didn't end well.

I have hit the deck hard a few times in the F-16, and the biggest issue for me is how easy it is to veer and tip. I did hear a thunk one day, and with no caution lights I decided to continue the flight. As soon as I pulled a turn, something broke off. On landing, same issue. Keeping it on the runway is a white knuckle experience. I haven't learned to flare my landings yet. That's next on the list.

The Viper is very easy to tip, but that stems from it’s design. The L/G has a very narrow wheelbase, and the C/G is above the wheels. Turning to fast and/or too sharp will put it on it’s side. If you have a 90° turn, it’s good practice to slow to 10-15 kts before turning. That’s good practice in most aircraft as it helps in not excessively side loading the gear.

For flaring, if your on speed and AoA, watch your radar altimeter, at 50’ AGL throttle down and gently pull up. Bring the boresight cross a few degrees above the horizon line and the mains will touch down first. Rudder to maintain directional control and use elevator to maintain the boresight cross 10°-12° for aerodynamic braking until speed bleeds down and you can’t keep the nose up anymore. Be careful not to bring the nose up too high or you’ll scrape the engine nozzle on the ground. Engage NWS below 50 kts. The thing that clicked for me was at the flare to pay attenttion to the boresight cross and not the velocity vector.

 

For flaring, if your on speed and AoA, watch your radar altimeter, at 50’ AGL throttle down and gently pull up. Bring the boresight cross a few degrees above the horizon line and the mains will touch down first. Rudder to maintain directional control and use elevator to maintain the boresight cross 10°-12° for aerodynamic braking until speed bleeds down and you can’t keep the nose up anymore. Be careful not to bring the nose up too high or you’ll scrape the engine nozzle on the ground. Engage NWS below 50 kts. The thing that clicked for me was at the flare to pay attenttion to the boresight cross and not the velocity vector.

This is the point of my post, the procedure you just described is correct in it’s entirety. However, my point was what if a player didn’t follow what you just described. It seems you can land the Viper like the Hornet without penalty, which to me is not realistic. I even did a more drastic measure of beginning flare 200, 400 feet above the runway.

The Hornet @ 200’, without surprise rolled away without a scrape. Viper, the same not even a blown tire for both.

@400’ Hornet had severe damage to tail from me trying to limit as much forward velocity as possible. Viper exploded on impact.

This does raise some question as to how accurate is the damage model for the Viper going to be? Is it going to be a copy/paste of Hornet or will it be realistic and be accurate to its own limitations?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I heard BB say blowout one day when I hit hard and veered off the runway. It didn't end well.

In the Viper?

This is the point of my post, the procedure you just described is correct in it’s entirety. However, my point was what if a player didn’t follow what you just described. It seems you can land the Viper like the Hornet without penalty, which to me is not realistic. I even did a more drastic measure of beginning flare 200, 400 feet above the runway.

 

The Hornet @ 200’, without surprise rolled away without a scrape. Viper, the same not even a blown tire for both.

 

@400’ Hornet had severe damage to tail from me trying to limit as much forward velocity as possible. Viper exploded on impact.

 

This does raise some question as to how accurate is the damage model for the Viper going to be? Is it going to be a copy/paste of Hornet or will it be realistic and be accurate to its own limitations?

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Oh, I agree with you. It took me a while to get the timing and technique correct for the flare. I've planted the Viper hard quite a bit before I got the hang of it. Have done the same with the Hog after I got it a few years ago. I've collapsed the gear on the Hog (nose gear once, and either main several times), and have bent it as well to the point that it wouldn't retract. Not to mention quite a few blown tires.

Other than a tire, I have yet to damage the gear on the Viper on landing. And the Viper's gear is likely not as sturdy as the Hog, and definitely nowhere near what the Hornet has.

Someone taught me once to keep a little forward pressure on the stick to keep the nose down to help steering. Seems to help.