When it comes to "crash effects" or damage modelling, some people immediately refer to volontary crashes, against buildings or ground or I don't know.

Of course I can understand that this kind of effect is not  really needed in the sim.

BUT, as already mentionned by several other members on this topic, a crash is not just an exploding aircraft, a crash may also be a crash landing because of gear failure (or broken gears), a crash may also be a damaged wing due to air collision (remember those hornets ? One landed withtout the noze, the other one landed with half left wing only). Not to mention emergency landings out of airfields, water landings, and all the other emergency situations that are part of the real life pilot. Finally, one should mention the famous "aircraft damage from stress".... we have the stress, but no damage so far in the FS series. Too bad.

To make a comparison, we can use X-Plane, but I don't know it at all, so I will let those who use it speak about it. I can refer to the IL2 / Pacific Fighters series (again  ). When you fly the Me262 (I already mentionned this example on another topic I think), you really have to be carefull with your engines, because they are very fragile. The same with the airframe, you must really pay attention to your speed and what kind of manoeuver you try to do, or your aircraft will be damaged. And there won't be just a stupid "aircraft damage from stress" message, but instead you will breal a part of your aircraft, wing or aileron or tail or I don't know...

I don't remember how many times I had to make an emergency landing because I lost my elevators, using only the power of the motor to raise or lower the noze of the aircraft. Just like those great cargo pilots in Irak that were shot by a missile, lost completely their controls, but managed to land using only the motors !

I wish FS could offer such experiences, and not with the actual "you-know-it-will-happen" failure system of FS...

Only some of the payware aircraft actually offer some damage stuff, and still it's quite limited (engines or electrical or hydrolic, that's all).

We should stop refering to that stuff as "crash effects". We should name it "Realistic Damage" instead, this would make it an obvious part of the global realism of a sim.

Bindoe,

Ah.... at least they have finally visually modeled an engine fire now.  Do you know what parameters will trigger it....or is it the absurd "click the little box and the fire will start in X seconds" format still??  

And how does the engine fire affect the aircraft's systems?  I HOPE it DOES.  I am assuming that the thrust of the engine degrades somewhat realistically at the minimum.  But doe, for example, the fire eventually "kill" stuff like maybe a hydraulic pump or generator?  And if there is a fire..... do the fire handles now DO something?

I've got the fire alarm and suppression panel sitting on the overhead of my simpit that is just waiting to actually interface to something  .

best,

......................john

everyone knows it to do with terrorism, but they should create different failures, like aileron failures and stuff.
and you have a gear failure, when you land, there should be sparks and fires not that stupid crashed sign!
www.flybernhard.de/777ckpt.jpg

IMO it's quite important to have those crash fx due to realism...it's not THAT necessary to see blood, bolts and guts flying....but a belly landing with broken or "arched" props would be very nice, damage made for a no-nose wheel should be great. As far as I'm concerned, crash fx can be very good! 

cya!

Quote:


I could not agree more!
Even  the "Flight Unlimited" series had the damage modeling years ago and FS still does not have this?

I'm not surprised as an ACES member stated on this fourm the they are more interested in marketing then being realistic!

The slogan should be changed to  "Only as real as we have to make it to make millions of $ !"  

I fear that some day we will have pilots dressed in clown suites if marketing determines that is what the "public " wants! 

Quote:

lol.
I love doing that!

Quote:


Hahahahaha! Burnout is not realistic.

Yeah, but a game where you crash aircraft on purpose is politically incorrect. Imagine how much controversy there would be if they released "Burnout - Airliner Edition".

Also, Boeing wouldn't like people turning their 747 into a fireball.

Quote:



Its not Microsoft killing simulation? Microsoft simulation of 400 people hitting ground at 500mph getting turned to mince meat? Because that's what happened in real life  

I'll have you know, I know people who died in plane crashes, and I don't want the game turning into a bloody killing simulator.