Adding Structural Damage due to use of the cobra button for Realism

Dev Server "Hornet's Sting" General Discussion - Dev Server
1

With the latest dev server update, Gaijin has introduced the Cobra button, which is essentially an AoA limiter override for now. While it’s a cool addition, I think its current implementation isn’t very realistic. In real life, high-AoA maneuvers like the Cobra put extreme stress on an aircraft’s airframe and control surfaces, which is why they aren’t used often outside of demonstrations.

Right now, there’s no real drawback to using the Cobra button in War Thunder—it can be spammed with no consequences. This is where I believe a more realistic structural damage model could improve the feature. Instead of allowing unlimited high-stress maneuvers, there should be a system where excessive use of high-G turns and Cobra button maneuvers slowly degrades the aircraft’s performance. Over time, this could result in:
• Increased structural damage, causing control surfaces to become less responsive.

  • • Reduced maximum speed and maneuverability due to airframe fatigue.*
  • • Potential failure of key components like flaps, elevators, or even wing deformations in extreme cases.*
  • • If the Cobra button is used at excessive speeds, the intense G-forces should cause the wings to rip off instantly. There should be a realistic speed threshold where using the Cobra maneuver is viable, but exceeding it results in catastrophic failure.*

This would introduce a risk-reward element to using the Cobra button, making players think twice before overusing it. It would also better represent why real pilots avoid these maneuvers outside of controlled scenarios.

15 Likes
2

I think they also need to revert overG mechanic - so plane would break instantly

9 Likes
3

I would say that completely breaking the plane due to high g forces is too realistic for warthunder haha, but yeah maybe slightly making the plane’s structural damage a bit yellow resulting in a less responsive plane would make sense.

now regarding the cobra button if its use at high speeds i do agree that the plane should completely be unflyable at least or have its wings ripped off

3 Likes
4

For flankers that “cobra button” is FCS switch off, which must in result make it having negative pitch rate, maybe even enough to black-out and rip wings

1 Like
5

so immidately stalling and becoming a sitting duck isn’t a drawback?

this has already been rules out multiple times with “Over-G Wing rip” that recieved changes within the last year

the cobra button is only engages at lower speeds, it automatically disengages at higher speeds,
on the deck you need to be going around 500mph IAS before it engages, and around 300mph to where AoA is the limiting factor, not the G-Stress - plus that does not override any G limit Tolerances the instructor gives, it purely disengages AoA limitations which is only a limiting factor at low IAS.

the risk reward is already in game, you immediately stall yourself, and the reward is a possible gun or missile shot you would not have gotten anyway

people would not overuse it, in Air RB airspeeds usually stay above the maximum speed for it to engage, and any actual use of it will make you really easy to 3rd party, it will quickly become a gimmick feature outside of 1v1s for the mostpart

16 Likes
6

that depends on the velocity of the jet, at low speeds the wings are capable of somewhat handling the high gforces and strain

7

stalling and becoming a sitting duck is a drawback for sure, however i think that there should be more drawbacks to using the said cobra button. And trust me its will be overused A lot even a disadvantageous position.

and yeah why wont gaijin model the speed limits where the your speed makes it so that the “cobra button” does not affect at certain speeds, the g pedal has it so does the Russians.

either way I believe that your plane shouldn’t behave the way it does in warthunder when you use the cobra button, at least for the su27, not sure about the su30 as it has thrust vectoring. There’s basically no risk to using it other than what you mentioned about being a sitting duck.

2 Likes
8

This is already in the game as wing-ripping.

9

just add 9X lmao

10

wing ripping that barely works most of the time, what im saying is damage to the airframe that slowly increases the more insane high g maneuvers you do, and would in turns make your aircraft less responsive or downright unflyable

1 Like
11

It turns it self off until quite slow anyway, and you need to get even slower for it to have any real affect over turning it off

this has already been ruled out with normal high G rip mechanics, they would not let there be a damage gradient from G loading, just a black/white you pulled too much for too long, bam your wing is gone

1 Like
12

A system like that would effect more than just the jets that can disable AOA limiters. A damage model like you’re suggesting doesn’t really belong in war thunder with how ARB is when high G maneuvers are pretty much required. If you want better simulated aircraft you should check out DCS.

4 Likes
13

Make it light yellow, yeah…

14

ah well too bad on gaijin’s end, so much for their wanna be historically accurateness,

it makes me go retard seeing players casually flipping around and spamming off their thrust vectoring missiles, only to crash back into the ground

15

well im sure some middle ground could be found where its not game breaking and annoying yet simplistic enough

16

that went out the window a long time ago

we could be limited to 9G for 90% of top tier, not our 17G that you can achieve quite easily in the Typhoon

or the effective removal of multipathing for everything top tier, meaning terrain and energy are the only ways to defeat missiles

it has always been a balance between gameplay and realism, this isn’t a Milsim

such as the way we do not have functional FCS and Lead systems for ground-ground vehicles

or air battles being 2v2/4v4 for realistic numbers of aircraft in a single engagement

theoretically a pilot could do this irl, but warthunder players don’t seem to have a surivival instinct, nor would you get a situation to do this irl.
there will be fatigue for this within the first week or so, and you will likely not see it at all often before next patch

17

Theres 0 gameplay in making flips.
Untill youre going to pilotage server

18

there is 0 gameplay in snapping your wings off because you may have missclicked

people will quickly realise it is quite niche, like IRST in air RB

Adding this progressive airframe damage is like adding track throwing to ground, its a poor idea

3 Likes
19

Missclicked and pulled a lot*

20

I’d say being aware of the limits of your aircraft is quite a big part of gameplay.

I’m a prop player, but the stuff I can do in props IF I HAVE AN MAX CREW is very stupid.

I took a P-51 cannon mustang.

I dived down to 700 km/h and like 50 m from the ground, yanked the stick back in FRB controls and started turning a whole 180 degrees.

Maxed crew.

What happened?

Screen went a tiiiiny bit black but retain control the whole time. No G suit on P-51 cannonstangs btw. According to WTRTI, I exceeded 12G in an early model allison mustang without consequences.

Now, I did repeat this with a completely untrained crew and I promptly blacked out (still managed to level out from the kamikaze dive beforehand).

Funny thing about the untrained assymetry: Doing a classic dogfight opener (dive down to gain speed, execute a pitchback/sliceback to merge) will knock you out in a Ki-100 without expert, but you can do it just fine with an expert crew.

It’s ridiculous and it prevents gameplay complexity.
Some WW2 match-ups should also rely on airframe construction.
Why would anyone make dive bombers’ and american fighters’ airframe so heavy and tough compared to the acrobatic turnfighters if not partially to better resist the forces experienced in a dive (why spend so much on focke-wulfs if messerschmidts do the job)?

Zeros, assuming you can get them up to speed, can execute similar G dives as purpose-built dive bombers and sturdier airframes.

Quite notably, high-G turns have been noted to cause misalignment/deformation of the tailplane (horizontal stab + elevators) on a lot of WW2 aircraft.

The only reason you’re “forced” to do extreme-G (excess of 10G) maneuvers in air battles at dogfight brackets is because your opponents can as well. If we had more realistic G force limits for ace/max crews, it’d be far less of an issue even without structural stress.

Having structural stress build up would give additional assymetric complexity and a thing to think about in your dogfights which I’d love even if I’d likely forget and stress out my japanese airframes getting greedy.

1 Like