Damage modelling Vs Weapons strength

[Winder]

I'm not sure the poll, as you've put it, applies particularly well to the issue I originally raised. On "Strongest" I've not been able to make a plane come apart. They go down easier, for sure, but personally that wasn't what I was after in particular (though I do feel they go down more realistically in regard to ease on "Strong").

The poll should ask "Do you want to see planes come apart?" No point asking that one, because I suspect the answer would be 100% "yes".

Planes do come apart - read some of the posts - I have seen them too.

Its now down to - not enough? or enough? Hence my Poll - remember you are one voice and you are now trying to 'shout above the odds' of the vote?

Do you understand that if we make them come apart more visibly that they are then destroyed and hence easier to down etc?
Having them come apart more often is directly related to DM and bullet strength...

Or do you want wings coming off as a visible placebo effect and they keep flying?
Siggi this is not an easy road I told you that but I am prepared to listen to the %'s

WM

[Winder]

Please take the time to vote here chaps as we are looking at whatever adjustments need to be made to DM in next few days...for 1.3


Cheers

WM

[Gousgounis]

I still remember as a 10 year old kid, in RB3D, me chasing an Alb CIII (I remember the light blue textures ). I recall watching him dive and dive...and then suddenly his upper wings got ripped off, detached from the body and he spinned to the ground. I still remember the "SNAP" sound from the game when his wings came off (which was te same sound when you crashed. It sounded like you broke a piece of wood by folding it). I can honestly say that this is the only thing I miss from RB3D. In OFF, I have never seen wings fold in enemy AI. But I would like to add that I voted "Normal". The gun damage and spread are perfect. I just believe that the planes must be just a liiiiiiiiiittle more fragile. Just a little though. Yesterday I got 5 shots on the right wing tip in my Se5 (Just 5!). The rolling ability was vastly reduced. It was so notable that even the mission replay mentioned it. This was just perfect. I assume that the DM modelled a cable being snapped off by just one bullet. This is totally possible (quite unlucky for me though :faint and I like it. But I have yet never seen wings coming off or even a mid-air engine explosion! Maybe it is just my bad luck... . I dont want the planes to come apart easier. But maybe a "Hollywood" effect or two would be nice.

[Siggi]

Planes do come apart - read some of the posts - I have seen them too.

Its now down to - not enough? or enough? Hence my Poll - remember you are one voice and you are now trying to 'shout above the odds' of the vote?

Do you understand that if we make them come apart more visibly that they are then destroyed and hence easier to down etc?
Having them come apart more often is directly related to DM and bullet strength...

Or do you want wings coming off as a visible placebo effect and they keep flying?
Siggi this is not an easy road I told you that but I am prepared to listen to the %'s

WM

I'm not trying to shout above any odds. You started this poll in reference to planes coming apart, on the basis that more bullet damage should achieve more plane break-ups (hence you advising me to increase bullet-damage to "Strongest" if I wanted to see planes come apart).

My point is that after testing in over ten QCs with Strongest bullets AND tightest grouping, and in the last test targeting one wing, one section of that wing, on a non-maneouvering 2-seater, I failed to get a single wing to detatch from any plane.

Hence why I think the bullet-strength (and thus how easily a plane goes down) is not relevant, or at least appears to be not relevant, to the question at hand.

Or, to put it another way, in my experience from testing, all the increase in bullet-strength did was make the targets go down a lot quicker. It did not affect the manner in which they went down. They fell down nearly the same as always, on fire or out of control...but still in one piece.

Dare I mention the possibility that maybe you're not playing the sim as much as we are, and are assuming something you put in place is working, when in fact it isn't? Because I'm finding it hard to reconcile what I'm seeing while playing with what you say I should be seeing (wings falling off from anything other than a plane totally exploding).

If you're saying that planes can come apart ONLY if they're made to die more easily, then your poll stands. But if planes can be made to come apart as the result of a TRIGGER, derived from the CURRENT ease/difficulty of making them die, then in THAT case your poll is redundant.

Hope that made sense.

[Cameljockey]

I'm trying to test, but the last two flights ended when my pilot was killed from getting creamed by a Tripe. And I don't mean shot down! Krumpets need to learn how to fly.

CJ

[Siggi]

I'm trying to test, but the last two flights ended when my pilot was killed from getting creamed by a Tripe. And I don't mean shot down! Krumpets need to learn how to fly.

CJ

For testing put your QC pilot on invincible. Your plane still takes damage but at least you won't have to keep making a new pilot if/when he dies.

[Winder]

Guys I have put this up as an honestly as I can - many devs will not post Polls like this for very good reasons... so Siggi try not to get personal - there is no winning this nor is it a contest.

Craft do break up - aim for the wing roots...if they are not doing this in your build then hey I dunno maybe something is broken but whatever the outcome if you want to see them fall apart more often in sim then there is only one way to do it - with DM mods and hence the poll.

I see posts in this thread and evidence in vids and on my rig that prove craft break up so look at your side first?
We are as always constantly evaluating our efforts.

Or contact us in support if you think the sim is broken.
I have nothing further to add or say other than I will look back regularly to see how the votes go.

HTH

WM

[Gousgounis]

Craft do break up - aim for the wing roots...if they are not doing this in your build then hey I dunno maybe something is broken but whatever the outcome if you want to see them fall apart more often in sim then there is only one way to do it - with DM mods and hence the poll.

I see posts in this thread and evidence in vids and on my rig that prove craft break up so look at your side first?
Wea are as always constantly evaluating our efforts.

Or contact us in support if you think the sim is broken.
I have nothing further to add or say other than I will look back regularly to see how the votes go.

HTH

WM

Ok then! Ill aim for the wing bases more often. I will try to clip the wings of an Alb in QC right away

[Siggi]

Guys I have put this up as an honestly as I can - many devs will not post Polls like this for very good reasons... so Siggi try not to get personal - there is no winning this nor is it a contest.

Craft do break up - aim for the wing roots...if they are not doing this in your build then hey I dunno maybe something is broken but whatever the outcome if you want to see them fall apart more often in sim then there is only one way to do it - with DM mods and hence the poll.

I see posts in this thread and evidence in vids and on my rig that prove craft break up so look at your side first?
We are as always constantly evaluating our efforts.

Or contact us in support if you think the sim is broken.
I have nothing further to add or say other than I will look back regularly to see how the votes go.

HTH

WM

Hey Winder, don't you go getting cranky on me. I've not said a single thing that could be even remotely considered as "personal". Ok?

For the record, my install is running superbly. I had it go tits-up only once, after pausing, bringing up the map and then trying to zoom it. Repeatedly and in different combinations. And even then the game still ran, just the manager crashed.

I'll start my own poll, that should clarify things.

[Smokey]

I voted Normal. From most of my reading these planes were fairly hard to
bring down as most bullets just passed through the fabric covering. Strong
seems too easy to me.

[Bullethead]

Yes its true that the CFS3 DM does not allow for penetration - but I reinvented the way the DM boxes are placed such that you can hit boxes pertaining to items likely to be hit by 'penetration' from that angle of attack and thus from behind you can hit a large number of items ditto side and front based on the craft construction and layout of vitals.

I appreciate the hard work. I tried my hand at this for a couple of RB2/3D planes back in the day and found it extremely frustrating, on top of being tedious. I can't imagine doing it for all these planes <S>.

What I found most frustrating was that in RB2/3D, the bullets were stopped by the pixels of the model itself, whether there was a hit box there or not. The only hit boxes that bullets ever reached were those exposed beyond the model's surface. I trust CFS3 isn't the same way.

But this is all getting off the topic of bullet strength. I just mentioned the penetration thing because it's natural for folks to think their bullets aren't strong enough when it's really a case of the bullet not getting there at all.

Anyway, I like the "normal" setting. I killed Bruno Loerzer last night with only a total of 9 hits on his black-and-white Albatros, all at "normal" setting. One of them must have struck bone because he never pulled out of his diving turn....

[Winder]

Hey Winder, don't you go getting cranky on me. I've not said a single thing that could be even remotely considered as "personal". Ok?

For the record, my install is running superbly. I had it go tits-up only once, after pausing, bringing up the map and then trying to zoom it. Repeatedly and in different combinations. And even then the game still ran, just the manager crashed.

I'll start my own poll, that should clarify things.

Cranky?
And not Personal?

Lol - did you not say that I 'may not have tested this enough'??
That's pretty personal?
We have a whole team testing this not just me...

Here is a shot of a Be2c that I have shot the wing out of.

WM

[Winder]

I appreciate the hard work. I tried my hand at this for a couple of RB2/3D planes back in the day and found it extremely frustrating, on top of being tedious. I can't imagine doing it for all these planes <S>.

What I found most frustrating was that in RB2/3D, the bullets were stopped by the pixels of the model itself, whether there was a hit box there or not. The only hit boxes that bullets ever reached were those exposed beyond the model's surface. I trust CFS3 isn't the same way.

But this is all getting off the topic of bullet strength. I just mentioned the penetration thing because it's natural for folks to think their bullets aren't strong enough when it's really a case of the bullet not getting there at all.

Anyway, I like the "normal" setting. I killed Bruno Loerzer last night with only a total of 9 hits on his black-and-white Albatros, all at "normal" setting. One of them must have struck bone because he never pulled out of his diving turn....

Ouch yes that nasty if the pixels of the skin stop the bullets.

Fortunately that's not the case in OFF and we have quite a sophisticated model - but yes no multi box penetration but as I have pointed out we have worked around that limitation largely in P3.

I think multi damage layers and penetration damage is starting to come into FPS shooters now? - according to my kids.

RoF might have this dunno.

Cheers

WM

[Siggi]

Cranky?
And not Personal?

Lol - did you not say that I 'may not have tested this enough'??
That's pretty personal?
We have a whole team testing this not just me...

Here is a shot of a Be2c that I have shot the wing out of.

WM

It was a serious question, that maybe you haven't played (not "tested") it as much as us lot, due to having to work on it so much. Nothing "personal" about that at all.

And the "cranky" came afterwards, with a winkie too.

Ah yes, the Be2c, the gossamer butterfly of the stable. I think you'll find that wing came off due to the pilot stepping on it a bit roughly when he got in.:caked:

[Winder]

It was a serious question, that maybe you haven't played (not "tested") it as much as us lot, due to having to work on it so much. Nothing "personal" about that at all.

And the "cranky" came afterwards, with a winkie too.

Ah yes, the Be2c, the gossamer butterfly of the stable. I think you'll find that wing came off due to the pilot stepping on it a bit roughly when he got in.:caked:

Well it serves to prove my point that the DM principles works and that's all.
Yes I chose a slow target as its easiest to hit and time is precious.

But really I just dont understand your 180 degree turn on this - you ask about damage scaling in another thread - I respond with a poll - you tell me I am not asking the correct poll - this is about DM?? and now you say all you want is more visible bits falling off?

You have wasted my time. I thought you were being serious lol.

WM

[Bullethead]

I think multi damage layers and penetration damage is starting to come into FPS shooters now? - according to my kids. RoF might have this dunno.

AFAIK, the 1st flightsim to have bullets actually penetrate stuff was the short-lived MMO Warbirds 2, made by other folks after HiTech and Pyro went off to start Aces High. They made this a big selling point, for all the good it did them. I myself develop naval sims and we have shells that can penetrate ships and bounce around inside before exploding, or even go clear through. So it can be done. It's just not common yet.

[Rick Rawlings]

Damn you Brits\Europeans with you early morning parties! Late again as usual!

Siggi: Planes (player, at least) do break up. I have died a few times do to structual damage in a Nieuport. I haven't tried anything stronger than an N11 or N17, but those, at least, will definitely crash due to structual damage from pulling out of a dive, just as you described. Personally, I have never seen an enemy craft come apart, but I don't really aim for anything other than the pilot/engine.

Winder: having said that, with a mid 30% hit percentage, it still seems a bit tough to drop people. I won't get a chance to do the test, but based on what Siggi said, Strong seems a good way to go, maybe with a small random chance to simulate a lucky burst that very rarely drops a plane on one burst. Reading reports form back in the Red Baron days, there was the story of how Voss observed Richtofen do several passes on a two seater without bringing it down and then there is the story where Fonk shot down three planes in ten seconds or so. That would not be possible under the current conditions. While I am no Fonk, I just last evening had an Albatross hanging in mid-air at the top of his climb and was pummeling him with my Lewis gun in the cockpit/engine region. He did not go down, despite the fact that I had hit the same plane several other times. He had still not gone down several minutes later when I was killed by his wingman deciding to try to land on my upper wing. :faint:

I totally agree that we are better pilots at this point than the real aces were, but I think the damage should still be upped a tad. If you could solve this and then have the enemy break off the fight a little more easily (they seemed to do this better before 1.2), I would say you had pretty well nailed it. Then just introduce bombers, zeppelins, full kills for all balloons, easy squadron transfers, leave of absence, ace challenges, animated aerodromes that play out in first person... oh, sorry, just dreaming for P5

But always keep formost in your mind that you guys have done a fantastic job with immersion and believability. The other day my flight of N17's were tangling with a flight of 5 Albatrosses. An unfair number (4) decided to take on me, while my two wingmen were off on the side having a party with the other. After a few minutes of getting kicked around I wondered when help would arrive. Then I remembered the "h" key and, almost as if by magic, my wingmen remembered that there was originally 3 in the flight. 30 seconds later the cavalry arrived and evened up the odds. Priceless! So good show and take a much needed break!

RR

[Winder]

AFAIK, the 1st flightsim to have bullets actually penetrate stuff was the short-lived MMO Warbirds 2, made by other folks after HiTech and Pyro went off to start Aces High. They made this a big selling point, for all the good it did them. I myself develop naval sims and we have shells that can penetrate ships and bounce around inside before exploding, or even go clear through. So it can be done. It's just not common yet.

Interesting I was not aware of that sim.

Sure I know it can be done - we discussed modifying OFF for this. Instead I rearranged the DM boxes as a reasonable work around on time spent.


Cheers

WM


PS what sim are you working on?

[Winder]

Damn you Brits\Europeans with you early morning parties! Late again as usual!

Siggi: Planes (player, at least) do break up. I have died a few times do to structual damage in a Nieuport. I haven't tried anything stronger than an N11 or N17, but those, at least, will definitely crash due to structual damage from pulling out of a dive, just as you described. Personally, I have never seen an enemy craft come apart, but I don't really aim for anything other than the pilot/engine.

Winder: having said that, with a mid 30% hit percentage, it still seems a bit tough to drop people. I won't get a chance to do the test, but based on what Siggi said, Strong seems a good way to go, maybe with a small random chance to simulate a lucky burst that very rarely drops a plane on one burst. Reading reports form back in the Red Baron days, there was the story of how Voss observed Richtofen do several passes on a two seater without bringing it down and then there is the story where Fonk shot down three planes in ten seconds or so. That would not be possible under the current conditions. While I am no Fonk, I just last evening had an Albatross hanging in mid-air at the top of his climb and was pummeling him with my Lewis gun in the cockpit/engine region. He did not go down, despite the fact that I had hit the same plane several other times. He had still not gone down several minutes later when I was killed by his wingman deciding to try to land on my upper wing. :faint:

I totally agree that we are better pilots at this point than the real aces were, but I think the damage should still be upped a tad. If you could solve this and then have the enemy break off the fight a little more easily (they seemed to do this better before 1.2), I would say you had pretty well nailed it. Then just introduce bombers, zeppelins, full kills for all balloons, easy squadron transfers, leave of absence, ace challenges, animated aerodromes that play out in first person... oh, sorry, just dreaming for P5

But always keep formost in your mind that you guys have done a fantastic job with immersion and believability. The other day my flight of N17's were tangling with a flight of 5 Albatrosses. An unfair number (4) decided to take on me, while my two wingmen were off on the side having a party with the other. After a few minutes of getting kicked around I wondered when help would arrive. Then I remembered the "h" key and, almost as if by magic, my wingmen remembered that there was originally 3 in the flight. 30 seconds later the cavalry arrived and evened up the odds. Priceless! So good show and take a much needed break!

RR

Thanks Rick have no fear- I am not dropping anyone.
I will factor any DM mods with the Poll results in mind thats why I put these things up its a clearer way than debating for threads on end and getting no where.

I too want N11 wings to shed off etc but to make DM scalable is not an easy quick fix solution - we will see.

I am sure I can come up with something as I have a few ideas but lets let the Poll run some time - so please do the test!

WM

[Siggi]

Well it serves to prove my point that the DM principles works and that's all.
Yes I chose a slow target as its easiest to hit and time is precious.

But really I just dont understand your 180 degree turn on this - you ask about damage scaling in another thread - I respond with a poll - you tell me I am not asking the correct poll - this is about DM?? and now you say all you want is more visible bits falling off?

You have wasted my time. I thought you were being serious lol.

WM

I don't remember mentioning "damage scaling". That appears to be a term you applied in order to interpret what you think I meant.

GIVEN the current level of bullet damage, under "Normal" in the workshop, and "Normal" grouping, I would expect to see wings come off etc to the same general degree as engine fires starting.

I wasn't expressing an opinion that planes should die more easily, just asking for the way they die to show a more realistic variety.

You have tied the two issues together, I saw them as entirely seperate.

Eg, aircraft die just fine, but the WAY they die leaves a bit to be desired.

So, I put 100 rounds into that plane, the pilot dies, plane goes down in a long glide and crashes miles away. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, it gets away. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, engine sets alight, long glide, crashes. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, pilot dies, planes cavorts into the ground out of control. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, engine sets alight, plane cavorts into the ground out of control. Fine.

Put 100 rounds into another plane, plane spins, hits ground. Fine.

Pilot injured, crashes, force-lands, fine.

But so far not a single plane losing a wing. Or wings. Or tail. Odd. Not fine. You say it happens, so do others, of course I believe it. But clearly not enough.

A player is also unable to damage his own plane, even with the best possible attempt to do it deliberately. You say it used to be possible in P1, but you got rid of it because people complained?! Did you not think to tell them to go **** themselves and play Crimson bloody Skies? Because I would have! "Here you go chaps, lots of paddle-bashing Rambo arcade fliers out there, here's a bit on nth-degree reality for a change!"

Yep, I'd buy that for £53. Oh, I did! Er...but you nerfed it for the ones who complained it was TOO realistic? Argh...another group of devs fell for it! The console-whoring paddle-bashers got their poison in yet again! "Mwaa...it's too real! Give us another arcade rendition, the twenty we already got ain't enough! Feed US!!! More!"

My belief is absolutely BEGGARED that you actually had wing-shedding Nupes and Dr1s in P1 and took them out because people complained! Put 'em back in and I'll give you another £53!

Ahem.

Fact of the matter is the sim's so good in many other regards that it can survive that kind of mangling. But I was just tootling along on the assumption that stuff was already in and fully functioning. Didn't occur to me to think otherwise. Yes, you might imagine my shock when I took the Camel for a terminal dive a couple of hours ago and found otherwise. And there I've been, defending the sim to the hilt when people on other forums were taking the piss.

Anyway, I worked myself up into a bit of a rant there, as I am wont to do.

Please chaps, make it the best it can be...as a full real item, not as a game balanced interpretation. So long as you provide optional scalability NOBODY is a loser, but so long as you put the full-real out of reach of even optional choice...where does that leave it?

[Winder]

Here is your post http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...d.php?t=12179:

************************************************** *****

I've been thinking about how I've yet to see a plane I'm attacking break up in mid-air. Then hearing about it is actually possible in the game, just very unlikely/rare. Then hearing about Fortiesboy's mods which make it more likely.

So I'm assuming if it's made more likely for the AI it'll be more likely to happen to the player. And maybe that's why the planes have been made out of concrete, as it were?

But...IF the AI's maximun range to open fire is made more realistic, and IF one then gets an AI on one's tail and takes a good burst...shouldn't one expect to die right there and then?

And in that case, if one gets a good close-range burst into an AI, shouldn't one expect to see it fold up more often than not?

Are we trading realism for personal survivability?

"Ok, I have to stick to this AI like glue, because they need at least half a mag usually before they properly go down and I can make a clean claim. Which means I may have to tolerate his wingie on my tail, giving me a good pasting too...but that's ok, my plane is just as tough as the AI's..."

Trade that for...

"Get on his tail, go for one good close burst, then get the hell out of dodge before I take one good close burst that'll fold me up like a piece of paper..."

I don't want the planes to be unrealistically frail, but neither do I want them to be unrealistically robust (as appears to be the case currently). I just want them to be as realistic as possible, and for that to cut both ways.

And for it to be (another) workshop option, so players can choose to have it as they like it.

Plane Strength:
Weak.
Normal (realistic).
Strong (as current).

What does everyone else think? Planes too strong currently? Or just right?

************************************************** ****

Hence this Poll - one can test lower DM factorss by simply increasing weapons effectiveness in workshops... as explained above...

And yes please give us another 50 quid and we will offer the 'sortareal' (tm) DM packs for download!

WM

[Rick Rawlings]

A player is also unable to damage his own plane, even with the best possible attempt to do it deliberately. You say it used to be possible in P1, but you got rid of it because people complained?! Did you not think to tell them to go **** themselves and play Crimson bloody Skies? Because I would have! "Here you go chaps, lots of paddle-bashing Rambo arcade fliers out there, here's a bit on nth-degree reality for a change!"

This part at least is not true. Nieuports, at least, will crash due to airframe damage during high-g maneuvers, whether hit by enemy fire prior or not. The flight ends almost immediately, so I have not been able to determine visually what this looks like from the outside, i.e. whether the wings are missing or not...

[Siggi]

Here is your post http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforum...d.php?t=12179:

************************************************** *****

I've been thinking about how I've yet to see a plane I'm attacking break up in mid-air. Then hearing about it is actually possible in the game, just very unlikely/rare. Then hearing about Fortiesboy's mods which make it more likely.

So I'm assuming if it's made more likely for the AI it'll be more likely to happen to the player. And maybe that's why the planes have been made out of concrete, as it were?

But...IF the AI's maximun range to open fire is made more realistic, and IF one then gets an AI on one's tail and takes a good burst...shouldn't one expect to die right there and then?

And in that case, if one gets a good close-range burst into an AI, shouldn't one expect to see it fold up more often than not?

Are we trading realism for personal survivability?

"Ok, I have to stick to this AI like glue, because they need at least half a mag usually before they properly go down and I can make a clean claim. Which means I may have to tolerate his wingie on my tail, giving me a good pasting too...but that's ok, my plane is just as tough as the AI's..."

Trade that for...

"Get on his tail, go for one good close burst, then get the hell out of dodge before I take one good close burst that'll fold me up like a piece of paper..."

I don't want the planes to be unrealistically frail, but neither do I want them to be unrealistically robust (as appears to be the case currently). I just want them to be as realistic as possible, and for that to cut both ways.

And for it to be (another) workshop option, so players can choose to have it as they like it.

Plane Strength:
Weak.
Normal (realistic).
Strong (as current).

What does everyone else think? Planes too strong currently? Or just right?

************************************************** ****

Hence this Poll - one can test lower DM factorss by simply increasing weapons effectiveness in workshops... as explained above...

And yes please give us another 50 quid and we will offer the 'sortareal' (tm) DM packs for download!

WM

Hmm...you're right, I don't know how I lost track of that train of thought. Got mixed up in all the digressing I suppose. I seem to have gone from wanting the planes to break up AND die more easily to accepting some sort of compromise where they die the same as they do now BUT with more variety in the manner. Looks like I proposed that compromise to myself in some kind of self-inflicted mind-****.

My apologies.

But hey, you're right, the sales-spiel DID say "historically accurate" as opposed to "hyper realistic", and I bought the game on that basis (as did everyone else). So...full-real FM/DM pack for £xx amount of "The Queen's Stoiling" (Mike Strutter)? Yeah, could it possibly be worth your while financially...

Hey...:gossip:...you know what the RoF guys are going to be saying...:gossip:...doncha? Hmm...?

[Siggi]

This part at least is not true. Nieuports, at least, will crash due to airframe damage during high-g maneuvers, whether hit by enemy fire prior or not. The flight ends almost immediately, so I have not been able to determine visually what this looks like from the outside, i.e. whether the wings are missing or not...

I dived one vertical from 10,000ft, full throttle. The stick/FFB seemed to 'give' under full-forward pressure (needed, to keep the nose down), then there wasn't much with which to pull it out of the dive. I cleared the ground by about 50ft. There wasn't even any shake going on, much less creaking, grey-out or structural failure. I then engaged in combat with the six DIIs and did the lot of them. And it has a snazzy little mirror!

I can do a video if anyone likes. Maybe my install IS porked.

[Rick Rawlings]

I dived one vertical from 10,000ft, full throttle. The stick/FFB seemed to 'give' under full-forward pressure (needed, to keep the nose down), then there wasn't much with which to pull it out of the dive. I cleared the ground by about 50ft. There wasn't even any shake going on, much less creaking, grey-out or structural failure. I then engaged in combat with the six DIIs and did the lot of them. And it has a snazzy little mirror!

I can do a video if anyone likes. Maybe my install IS porked.

I dunno, I've been surprised by it before, particularly in a sharp turn near the ground, it killed me! As for shooting down the Albatrosses, did you switch your gun strength back, I run out of ammo by the fourth plane!

RR