A crash doesn't mean a crash

You are missing something, or have a cool idea for us ? Tell us here !

Moderator: FSAirlines Staff

Post Reply
CRGaming
Ticket Agent
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2021 6:37 pm

A crash doesn't mean a crash

Post by CRGaming » Thu Oct 27, 2022 4:10 pm

Hi,
I'm wondering how people would think of a crash ending your flight and submitting it similar to pulling the parking brake. It seems silly that we can avoid the big repair fees after a crash or hard landing by just closing the FSA program. I've been told by virtual airline staff to close out the application if its a bad flight and don't log it. (I'd prefer to take my bad landing and just pay for the repair) Especially on short flights, this allows for way worse airmanship because pilots can just cancel the flight. I know not all pilots are experienced, but they can do training flights witch don't affect the VA. In real life a plane crashes and everyone dies. In the sim their should be some simulated consequence, but the consequence is ignored by making the flight never happen. It could be logged and ended as soon as a crash happens. As for hard landings would there be a way to partially submit it so if the users closes the app it fully submits it, but still wait to see if they also crash? Just seems the whole idea of having the financial aspect is ignored by poor pilots. Those pilots would be better off flying a VA platform without financial implications.
-Cody

User avatar
joefremont
FSAirlines Developer
Posts: 3694
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 5:46 am
Location: KSFO

Re: A crash doesn't mean a crash

Post by joefremont » Fri Oct 28, 2022 5:33 pm

Right now the client waits for the pilot to enter a comment before submitting the flight report, which is why closing the client prevents the crash from being recorded. Another thing pilots do is turn of crash detection in the sim, then the sim never raises the crashed flag and the client does not detect it. We could be more strict about it but there is a balance that needs to found. Things happen, sims freeze at the wrong time, network or power goes away, invisible buildings are often found the hard way in the sim, cats walk across the keyboard , etc. There have been a few things I have been considering including
  • Any landing with a vertical speed greater than 2000fpm should be recorded as a crash
  • When a crash is detected immediately submit the report but allow the pilot to submit a comment later.
  • Handle slow speed crashes differently, if landed and speed less than 30 knots record it as some sort of ground handling accident rather than full crash.
Its true in the real world, when aircraft crash everyone dies and the aircraft is gone, but if we did that on FSA the person who is the pilot will probably leave our platform and never come back.
Image
I've sworn an oath of solitude until the pestilence is purged from the lands.

CRGaming
Ticket Agent
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2021 6:37 pm

Re: A crash doesn't mean a crash

Post by CRGaming » Sat Oct 29, 2022 3:52 pm

I like all the ideas you mentioned:
Any landing with a vertical speed greater than 2000fpm should be recorded as a crash

If 1000-2000 is not a crash can it be a more severe/higher penalty over 1000fpm? I mean over 1000fpm would really damage the plane even if everyone walks away (or goes down the slides). Also is there a way to consider it a crash if it lands with more then 5% nose down angle (regardless of fps) I've seen pilots with crash turned off literally fly it into the ground nose down going way to fast.
When a crash is detected immediately submit the report but allow the pilot to submit a comment later.
Good idea. That way they can't get around the crash by closing it out. That's pretty much what my whole suggestion was.
Handle slow speed crashes differently, if landed and speed less than 30 knots record it as some sort of ground handling accident rather than full crash.
Makes sense. Crashing into a building at 30 knots won't do the same damage as slamming it into the ground.

Also would it be possible to add a smaller penalty if the flight is ended before the plane stops (or gets down to 30 knots). I've seen people over shoot the runway and end the flight before crashing into stuff at end of runway.

As for sim issues and cat walking on keyboard, you're normally pretty reasonable about fixing flights with a good description. I would imagine unfortunately making crashes more strict would result in more flight submitted for review. But maybe get some fsa volunteers to comb through them.

User avatar
joefremont
FSAirlines Developer
Posts: 3694
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 5:46 am
Location: KSFO

Re: A crash doesn't mean a crash

Post by joefremont » Tue Nov 01, 2022 6:41 pm

CRGaming wrote:
Sat Oct 29, 2022 3:52 pm
If 1000-2000 is not a crash can it be a more severe/higher penalty over 1000fpm? I mean over 1000fpm would really damage the plane even if everyone walks away (or goes down the slides). Also is there a way to consider it a crash if it lands with more then 5% nose down angle (regardless of fps) I've seen pilots with crash turned off literally fly it into the ground nose down going way to fast.
I have seen a video done for a TV show where there remote controlled a 727 and landed it at 1500fpm in the Mexican desert and the aircraft broke apart and was totaled, anyone who saw the video would classify it as a crash. looked at the reports for the last year, there are 290 reports where the VS was greater than 2000fpm that were not recorded as crashes and not reviewed by an admin, 60 where the VS was greater than 5000 fpm, including one at 38305 fpm (380 knots straight down). Sometimes the code that reads the VS has been inaccurate, especially on x-plane where XPUIPC does not have all the features of FSUIPC so need to give a wide enough margin of error.

Down angle is not something i have though of considering before and may have some possibilities, although I am sure someone will find an example where it regularly lands with high nose down angle.

Do we need something between 'hard landing' and 'crash'? A 'Very hard' landing maybe, not sure about that, what do others think?
Image
I've sworn an oath of solitude until the pestilence is purged from the lands.

CRGaming
Ticket Agent
Posts: 67
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2021 6:37 pm

Re: A crash doesn't mean a crash

Post by CRGaming » Wed Nov 02, 2022 7:35 pm

I like "very hard landing". I was not aware of the software limitations in x plane. There may be a few planes that land nose down but they could be excluded from the rule similar to how concord/an-225/747-8 are excluded from the 150 knot rule on take off.

User avatar
Mesquaki
Ticket Agent
Posts: 25
Joined: Tue Sep 27, 2022 9:49 pm
Location: CYYQ

Re: A crash doesn't mean a crash

Post by Mesquaki » Wed Nov 02, 2022 7:44 pm

"Hard landing", "Very Hard landing", "Crash"... that seems good to us.

CaptainPrecious
Ticket Agent
Posts: 30
Joined: Sun May 26, 2019 9:28 pm

Re: A crash doesn't mean a crash

Post by CaptainPrecious » Wed Feb 01, 2023 7:26 am

You could also have the option of having a crash recorded immediately. If you turn it on one might get an extra bonus, similar to the 1x simrate bonus.

AdySmith
Flight Attendant
Posts: 75
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2017 8:55 am

Re: A crash doesn't mean a crash

Post by AdySmith » Wed Feb 01, 2023 10:49 am

Down angle is not something i have though of considering before and may have some possibilities, although I am sure someone will find an example where it regularly lands with high nose down angle.
Concorde lands with a very high nose UP attitude.

I believe the DC9 sometimes landed nose wheel first, but generically nose wheel first is very dangerous, greater than 5 degrees nose down is seriously amiss.
Image

Post Reply