10 hours ago, GlideBy said:

I hope that MSFS has decent crash and collision detection.  It is not very realistic to see a plane bounce off a building as if nothing happened.  I want a hard landing to actually damage the plane, if it would in real life.  Not to mention pulling up too hard on some planes should rip a wing off.

I hope a future feature discovery video covers this.

https://gifs.com/gif/plane-crash-fsx-4QwJm0

Out of all of the feature enhancements you could possibly want from a sim (and there are many), THIS is what you've come up with?  The worst of humanity has left its mark on the world by crashing aircraft into buildings.  This is the feature you want embellished in graphic detail.

 

Edited January 22, 20206 yr by ErichB

Absolutely no to crash damage in its fullest extent. This will be exploited by the xbox crowd or even other pc users, by crashing into everyone and everything for their fun of it ruining everyone elses realism immersion.

However, I think a damage model should be a part of a simulation to some extent.  Landing overweight or very hard landing, blow tires, collapse the gear. Bird strikes, causing an engine fire and damage should be a prompt return to the airport.  These are aviation scenarios that do happen and are trained for in  level Ds.

No, I don't want to sit around crashing planes into buildings all day.  But I do want hard landings to be modeled correctly.  I want clipped trees to act correctly.  And I want planes to act like they should in high G situations, including losing a wing if they should.  I want a realistic simulator.

10 hours ago, GlideBy said:

I hope that MSFS has decent crash and collision detection.  It is not very realistic to see a plane bounce off a building as if nothing happened.  I want a hard landing to actually damage the plane, if it would in real life.  Not to mention pulling up too hard on some planes should rip a wing off.

I hope a future feature discovery video covers this.

https://gifs.com/gif/plane-crash-fsx-4QwJm0

If this is a meant as a joke, it isn't really funny. We had to see real life footage of an airliner tragically going down recently and this is just vulgar.

If this is meant seriously, MSFS certainly is not the right software for you.

 

Can you imagine the genre of videos that this would spawn on Youtube.  

Gear collapses I get as that does happen quite often is not a deliberate action.

10 minutes ago, GlideBy said:

And I want planes to act like they should in high G situations, including losing a wing if they should.  I want a realistic simulator.

How many cases do you know or have read about aircraft actually loosing a wing due to over-g?

During over-g and hard landings structural damage can occur, but this is most of the time invisible. That's why a hard landing inspection can take from a few minutes up to a many hours.

 

 

To those worried about Youtube crash videos, here is FSX with realistic crashes - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blww97GYQ1g  This is all they need, just structural failures, not explosions.  And if that is too much for you, then ask for the option to turn it off.

And as for wings coming off, it happens.

Here is a F-15 landing without a wing.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M359poNjvVA

Here a C-130 loses it wings.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A4QZAxrb28

And here is an airshow - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxXnQ4Pd8P4

Gear can jam and then not work on the next flight, etc.  I just don't want to land and think the flight was OK but in reality it wouldn't have been.

And based on their statement, the damage model is a top question.

 

11 minutes ago, GlideBy said:

And as for wings coming off, it happens.

Of course it can happen, again how often does this occur?  The F-15 case was the result of a mid-air collision and in case of the C-130 it was a fatique issue on a 45 year old airframe. The Partenavia Victor crash is the only crash due to over-g.

Edited January 22, 20206 yr by FDEdev

To be honest i don't feel the need for it. We are not training to fly, this is not our profession and this is but a game, regardless of what people who made different professional choises in their lives want to believe in.

An extensive damage model makes sense in a combat simulator where damage is part of the routine (especially in the great wars) but not so much for civilian aviation purposes.

Glad to see a quasi-consensus on the obnoxiousness of any "realism" in building or ground and aircraft collisions. 

But that calls for a parallel question : the crash detection. Not with buildings or the ground mind you, but with equipment (including taxiway light system, signs, vehicles) or other aircraft on the ground during taxiing and with the trees (wheels) when landing into one of these dirt strips hemmed in trees in the bush that I affectionate. That would include also hard landing.

FSX and P3D offer an option to activate such a detection. Some very well respected developers have derided it, calling it unrealistic. This is not my opinion. It forces you to be careful on ground when handling your way to/from the parking spot and, when landing, to think twice about your arriving slope. 

I put aside the crazy AI behaviour bumping into each other. Talking about ownships here.

Edited January 22, 20206 yr by domkle

3 minutes ago, Pastaiolo said:

We are not training to fly, this is not our profession...

Even if you are training and it is your profession, once you loose a wing the flight is over. No need to simulate anything after loosing a wing.

2 minutes ago, FDEdev said:

Even if you are training and it is your profession, once you loose a wing the flight is over. No need to simulate anything after loosing a wing.

a damage model doesn't necessary mean losing a wing, so i am not taking just that as an example 🙂 But agreed on the fact i do use my civilian sims to fly, not to see if i can still fly a damaged aircraft.

23 minutes ago, domkle said:

FSX and P3D offer an option to activate such a detection. Some very well respected developers have derided it, calling it unrealistic. This is not my opinion. It forces you to be careful on ground when handling your way to/from the parking spot and, when landing, to think twice about your arriving slope. 

Exactly this. I agree. Not sure why people here are acting so shocked and disturbed by the question. Weird.

Whether we should have visual damage or not is less important to me, but crash detection (damage modeling) should be part of the sim. I would prefer the flight not to be over when I make a hard landing, but maybe some indication as to what happened would be nice.

Edited January 22, 20206 yr by dikkeduif

11 minutes ago, dikkeduif said:

Exactly this. I agree. Not sure why people here are acting so shocked and disturbed by the question. Weird.

 

We are not shocked by the idea of a crash detection but by the call for 'realism' in building and ground collisions, knowing that it will generate an onslaught of disgusting videos on YouTube. Not so good for our hobby ! 

 

I agree that discussing the crash detection on and close to the ground and the question of a visual representation of (minor) damage is reasonable.

But that is not what the OP was about. He was talking about crashing into buildings, ripping off wings and he showed a video of an airliner diving into the ground in flames.