Damage modelling is anathema! Damaging modelling is the devil, and only evil people ask for it. No serious flyer is interested in damage modeling, and if you are, you are obviously not a true simmer and possibly emotionally and psychologically compromised as well. 
Its EViiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiillll!!!!!!!
THREAD CLOSED!!!!!!!
At least that's pretty much how it goes on other simulation sites. :confused: 
Be interesting to see whut happens here though, since the wings have previously come off of some planes of FS1. That raises the hope that the subject will at least be open to reasonable discussion.....
The multi-body physics in the Aerofly FS 2 is far more complex than in FS 1. The few aircraft from Aerofly FS 1 actually still have wings that can break off as far as I remember. (Extra, Pitts, Swift, ASG29...)
The other aircraft with complex gear setup use a different joint calculation where a lot of uninteresting or undesired degrees of freedom are removed (upper part that retracts the entire gear, middle part that is dampened against the upper part and third part that hinges around the middle part which carries all wheels with it, and that 4 times for the 747 for example, that's 12 bodies for the gear alone).
For example: several parts of the gear can only move up and down significantly, but not left, right or forward and backwards, rotate around x, y or z which would have been the case for all bodies in the Aerofly FS 1 physics model. The Aerofly FS 2 physics engine simplifies the equasions a lot but they need to be calculated differently. If we were to break a connection like this the end points of the now seperated pars suddenly would need to be calculated independently. We would need to dynamically change the type of the connection, which is possible but isn't "nice" in terms of performance or programming.
So because we are aiming to be flight, not a crash simulator we left this open for future updates. Its one of the things on our todo list.
Cheers,
Jan
Hehe Hiflyer,
don't know but my younger daughter ( a psychologist ), told me the other day people who drink espresso without sugar are more prone to have mental problems 
Maybe this damage thing could be given to her to examine more in detail
Not really a big deal for me not having damage modelled at least as in AEFS1, but if possible in the future I would like it too
I would very appreciate a realistic (stress) damage model.
Why? Because I'm a PC hobby pilot with no clue about how to fly a real plane and when I do something very bad/wrong, then I want to know this. So I can do it better next time because I learned something.
Why is this importent? Because when I fly in an air plane and suddenly bouth pilots die of heart attack.
The stewardess asks the passanger:
"Who can fly a 747?!" - "Here, over there, yes jk1895 can! I flyed it on Aerofly FS2! I bring them all down!" :o
Just kidding (the last part)...
A work mate asked me to crash my mobile Aerofly during lunch. "I don't do crashes!".
until the next big update we are left to speculation.
will we stay arcade or are they aiming realism.
without damage modelling simulation is a joke, no question.
without damage modelling simulation is a joke, no question.
I have a question... why?
In the real world, the whole idea is not to crash in your aircraft, or to damage it. If you do damage it (e.g. hit another aircraft while taxiing, land heavily on a strut) then the aircraft is not airworthy and can't be flown. So, why spend time modelling damage for a sim where avoiding any sort of damage is the very purpose of it?? I'd rather the time be spent on correct flight characteristic modelling, and proper instrument and weather simulation.
flaps having been deployed at too high an IAS ( above Vfe ), or gear, or g-stress...
That's it. This is important. As is damaging undercarriage with heavy landings. We don't need accurate damage modelling when you decide to taxi into a hangar or crash into the ground with a finite ending, but damage sustained in flight which could be flyable should be modelled I think.
I'm not thinking this, it needs to be in real life situations: http://www.wearethemighty.com/wp-content/upl…ssing-wing1.jpg
I'm not thinking this, it needs to be in real life situations: http://www.wearethemighty.com/wp-content/upl…ssing-wing1.jpg
But stuff like that makes a lot of fun to practise If you lose part of your wing you can land it most of the times. Both wings off make it much harder though, luckily Aerofly simulates lift from the fuselage... Just that your minimum velocity keeps increasing the more wing you lost
Apollo did pretty well, from Wiki' :cool:
