Over-g the TGP

[Skyracer]

In the dos gringos song "I'm pilot" the lyrics goes like this:

Quote

And I'll over-g the targeting pod
With a smile on my face

Why is not possible in the game?

Edited January 12, 2021 by Skyracer

[fudabidu]

Work - In - Progress ?

[Deano87]

It’s also not currently possible to “Over-G” anything else on the jet (or the F-18 for that matter) I’m hoping G limits for all stores (including T-pod) to come in the future.

Edited January 12, 2021 by Deano87

[=Panther=]

What exactly is the goal with an over-g of any suspension gear? I am curious what the simmers would want to see in an over-g scenario.

[KalAbaddon]

 

3 hours ago, =Panther= said:

What exactly is the goal with an over-g of any suspension gear? I am curious what the simmers would want to see in an over-g scenario.

 

have things break realistically. Like if you are doing a mixed mission and need to do a2a first and over g the bomb racks they may not release right or something to that effect come the actual mission.  That said the f-16 is really tolerant to over g iirc.  iirc there where a lot of over g inspections but rarely was something broken.

[G.J.S]

4 minutes ago, KalAbaddon said:

 

 

have things break realistically. Like if you are doing a mixed mission and need to do a2a first and over g the bomb racks they may not release right or something to that effect come the actual mission.  That said the f-16 is really tolerant to over g iirc.  iirc there where a lot of over g inspections but rarely was something broken.

If you wish to be realistic, you would never indulge in A2A with ground stores still onboard. You would have a dedicated escort who would fend off airborne attackers whilst those who have a ground target to deal with deviate, and hopefully reform with the escort at a rally point further along. A2G takes priority, if you can’t outrun and evade, you dump ground weapons and face the aggressor in A2A fit only. You would never engage whilst weighed down with stores, why fight at a disadvantage?

If you have no dedicated escort, then if you are in a flight of three or more, you nominate one or two to dump stores and turn on the attacker, and they become the escort. If you are a two or less, then depending on the target, you better run and evade, or both dump and fight.

Main point, if on a dual mission (A2G/A2A) then the ground portion of the mission takes precedence, but if you can’t run, dump the ground ordinance and then fight without hindering yourself with unnecessary weight.

[falcon_120]

1 hour ago, garyscott said:

If you wish to be realistic, you would never indulge in A2A with ground stores still onboard. You would have a dedicated escort who would fend off airborne attackers whilst those who have a ground target to deal with deviate, and hopefully reform with the escort at a rally point further along. A2G takes priority, if you can’t outrun and evade, you dump ground weapons and face the aggressor in A2A fit only. You would never engage whilst weighed down with stores, why fight at a disadvantage?

If you have no dedicated escort, then if you are in a flight of three or more, you nominate one or two to dump stores and turn on the attacker, and they become the escort. If you are a two or less, then depending on the target, you better run and evade, or both dump and fight.

Main point, if on a dual mission (A2G/A2A) then the ground portion of the mission takes precedence, but if you can’t run, dump the ground ordinance and then fight without hindering yourself with unnecessary weight.

 

Well yeah, I see your point, but in any case it would be nice to have some kind of not excesively complex over-g simulation, for example a jammed bomb rack, or a bomb directly falling off the wing if you made a sustained 9g missile evasion (if that is even possible, dont want to invent something is not real). Jammed rack would be easy to implement I guess.

[G.J.S]

2 hours ago, falcon_120 said:

 

Well yeah, I see your point, but in any case it would be nice to have some kind of not excesively complex over-g simulation, for example a jammed bomb rack, or a bomb directly falling off the wing if you made a sustained 9g missile evasion (if that is even possible, dont want to invent something is not real). Jammed rack would be easy to implement I guess.

Right, I see where you are going. If you have your F-16 on a dual mission, then you wouldnt even be contemplating a 9G reef around whilst still carrying a warload of ground fun. If you get bounced on ingress, then if you know you can’t outrun, you would dump your ordinance (drop your knickers/panties!) then turn and fight on more equal terms.

As for suspension issues, again, no pilot would pull that hard with any ordinance aboard - losing a bomb or two would be the least of your worries. It could be a career killer. I’ve personally no experience of a bomb rack failure, in my time flying I have admittedly heard of a bomb rack failure, but have heard of a hung weapon due to pins not being pulled at last chance on one side. Jamming a rack, like you intimate, should be a relatively easy thing to implement (I guess), it could be added to the list in mission editor that deals with failures maybe? Weaponry fails would be a good one to add.

[Deano87]

11 hours ago, =Panther= said:

What exactly is the goal with an over-g of any suspension gear? I am curious what the simmers would want to see in an over-g scenario.

Hmm, stores no longer being usable or in extreme cases like the M2000 already does, just ripping clean off the jet. Realistic? Probably not, but it does add a risk that needs to be mitigated against by changing how you fly. Which would be the ultimate point of it.
 

As far as saying “well a real pilot would never pull 9G with heavily loaded jet” yeah, ya don’t say. Regardless of how career limiting that would be irl, sim pilots DO pull rediculous G with AG configurations. Since the release of the Viper I’ve seen people online pulling 8G-9G repeatedly on recovery from a dumb bombing dive attacks or evading SAMs while fully loaded, heck, iv’e undoubtedly done it myself at some point.

 

A risk of damaging the jet or being unable to use the payload would add another thing the pilot has to be aware of and balance against whatever manoeuvre they want to do. Which imho gets us closer to the reality of real flying rather then just going “yeah 9G baby, woooo!” All the time. Specially in a jet like the F-16 which has no automatic G-limiter unlike the Hornet.

Edited January 13, 2021 by Deano87

[KalAbaddon]

10 hours ago, garyscott said:

Right, I see where you are going. If you have your F-16 on a dual mission, then you wouldnt even be contemplating a 9G reef around whilst still carrying a warload of ground fun. If you get bounced on ingress, then if you know you can’t outrun, you would dump your ordinance (drop your knickers/panties!) then turn and fight on more equal terms.

As for suspension issues, again, no pilot would pull that hard with any ordinance aboard - losing a bomb or two would be the least of your worries. It could be a career killer. I’ve personally no experience of a bomb rack failure, in my time flying I have admittedly heard of a bomb rack failure, but have heard of a hung weapon due to pins not being pulled at last chance on one side. Jamming a rack, like you intimate, should be a relatively easy thing to implement (I guess), it could be added to the list in mission editor that deals with failures maybe? Weaponry fails would be a good one to add.

 

Hung weapon is usually not pin related,  and was actually kind of common all said and done, ( the SUU-20 I am asking to get added to game was notorious for it iirc).  Heard weapons called over radio having to go and check weekly (could be wrong, Was not weapons).  I recall pins left on jets was pretty rare,  I think the most common forgotten pin would of been the gun pin cause we leave it pined inflight unless they are actually gonna do a live ammo training. ( when doing a live fire mission the pin would be inserted normally so the ribbon is showing so you would know to remove it,  When not live ammo, the ribbon was rolled up and weapons had it pinned from inside the out so it would stay on during flight iirc)

 

Your right about the a2a and dropping stores prior to engaging,  I was just saying it as an example of why you would want the realism cause if there is no damaged modeled then people can ignore that aspect and pull 9g all the time( and I did mean as in you get jumped on way to target,  not that they where tasked with a2a first).  I prefer to have as much modeled as we can,  Of course following procedures makes it "pointless" but this is also a game,  Maybe someone is doing a SHTF scenario and you have to hit the target, and have to defend your self unexpectedly inroute.  

My Thought is make it as correct as you can sim wise, and let the mission builder / sim pilot decide how much realism they want in actual procedure following.  

 

Also seen enough over g'd inspections happen that it makes me think it was not that much of a career killer HEHE.

been a while since I was in and my memory is never been great so could be having a serious brain fart about the pins n stuff.  but with so many checks and eyes on the jet from the crewchiefs, expiditers, fireguards, weapons or specs, and finally EOR that it is hard to get a pin missed.

[G.J.S]

If I’m remembering correctly, a single pin was left in the (starboard?) mau-12 ejector, the streamer was pulled and it disconnected from the pin, which remained in place, ac was due to hit Tain with a couple GP bangs.

This was however back in early ‘90’s!

Edited January 13, 2021 by garyscott

[KalAbaddon]

58 minutes ago, garyscott said:

If I’m remembering correctly, a single pin was left in the (starboard?) mau-12 ejector, the streamer was pulled and it disconnected from the pin, which remained in place, ac was due to hit Tain with a couple GP bangs.

This was however back in early ‘90’s!

 

So live fire,  that blows.  The pins have a button that needs to be pressed to remove.  Someone may have been brand new on the team launching the aircraft.  But since it was a hot weapons launch it normally would of been more seasoned guys doing the ground work.  I, unfortunately or fortunately depending on how you look at it, mostly did training launches so BDU-33 is what I meant when saying it would get hung all the time.  again hard to remember but more seems to be coming back,  I want to say one of the weapons guys told me it was if you didn't hold down the release but just pressed it, the bomb would get in a hung state.  I have not heard about to many hung munitions with loaded hot.