March 31, 201214 yr In my opinion the biggest thing missing from flight is a damage/failure model (for structure and systems) and I can't quite understand the reasoning behind leaving it out. Even if it was like the damage in FSX (just stopping the game) it would of added so much. Is it even going to get put in? What do people want out of a damage model?GIVE ME BIRD CAUSED ENGINE/PROP DAMAGE AND RIPPED OFF FLAPS NOW rant over
March 31, 201214 yr In my opinion the biggest thing missing from flight is a damage/failure model (for structure and systems) and I can't quite understand the reasoning behind leaving it out. Even if it was like the damage in FSX (just stopping the game) it would of added so much. Is it even going to get put in? What do people want out of a damage model?GIVE ME BIRD CAUSED ENGINE/PROP DAMAGE AND RIPPED OFF FLAPS NOW rant overAlthough I saw no damage, I heard the sound of an impact with a tree branch when I was attempting to get an aerocache in a ravine. I survived the impact .. missed the aerocache but got it on the second attempt
March 31, 201214 yr Clearly, if you want damage models, you are totally removing the "E" rating the MS FLIGHT Development Team is aiming for. Alex Leung Aerospace Engineering Undergraduate Glider & Private Pilot via Royal Canadian Air Cadets
March 31, 201214 yr I don't get the "E" rating. And I have actually seen two ratings for Flight, one says "E" the other says "E10". If you have passengers sobbing when a crash is eminent is not much better than the plane breaking apart, in my opinion its worse. Besides its a widely known fact that airplanes can break, ignoring that fact doesn't make a crash any better; a crash is a crash. Todd Fleck
March 31, 201214 yr True, though in Damage Model you see planes breaking up. When you are about the crash, all you hear is screaming, you don't actually see any visuals. Alex Leung Aerospace Engineering Undergraduate Glider & Private Pilot via Royal Canadian Air Cadets
March 31, 201214 yr Damage modeling does not equate to visuals. That is one aspect of an implementation, but I think what most are looking for is the simulation of the many problems that can arise from operating the aircraft beyond its limits.An engine failure from running too lean is am example of damage modeling.
March 31, 201214 yr I can suggest this, but I don't think they will implement. Alex Leung Aerospace Engineering Undergraduate Glider & Private Pilot via Royal Canadian Air Cadets
March 31, 201214 yr I would at least like to see "crashes" induced by overstressing the airframe at high speeds.Of course, that would mean less fun for the Zero and Mustang people, so it's not going to happen.
March 31, 201214 yr I would at least like to see "crashes" induced by overstressing the airframe at high speeds.Of course, that would mean less fun for the Zero and Mustang people, so it's not going to happen.Actually, that would be nice. In FSX, if you overstress or go overspeed, the game just says that I crash. Nothing else. Alex Leung Aerospace Engineering Undergraduate Glider & Private Pilot via Royal Canadian Air Cadets
March 31, 201214 yr In my opinion the biggest thing missing from flight is a damage/failure model (for structure and systems) and I can't quite understand the reasoning behind leaving it out..Damage/failure modelling is way down on the list of things I'd like to see implemented in Flight. Steve Smith i7-2600K - GTX580 - 8GB ram
March 31, 201214 yr I would at least like to see "crashes" induced by overstressing the airframe at high speeds.Of course, that would mean less fun for the Zero and Mustang people, so it's not going to happen.They can go the FSX route and make it optional. Problem solved! :Idea:
April 1, 201214 yr They can go the FSX route and make it optional. Problem solved! :Idea:Good idea and I do think they will do that, just like they did with optional stability increases. Alex Leung Aerospace Engineering Undergraduate Glider & Private Pilot via Royal Canadian Air Cadets
Create an account or sign in to comment