It did not.
Here’s a Ki-43-II, caught on an US plane’s gun camera. Note the comment: “It appears the [canopy] was open to clear the view. This is not a particularly unusual behavior.”
I’m talking specifically about props, not jet aircraft. Which nobody arguing for massive UNREALISTIC effects applied to open canopy users has bothered differentiating between.
Without getting into it too much. The easiest way to solve this issue is just make the airflow or wind going by the canopy deafening over 300 knots or so, if the canopy is busted. So all a player would hear if they broke the canopy or if the canopy opened is “WHOOOOOOOSHHHHHH!”
Boom solved.
The Ki 43 could reach speeds of up to 540km/h. At this speed, the aerodynamic noise caused by the airflow could reach up to 110dB, plus the engine at maximum power could produce a noise of 130dB. That’s a total of 240dB, which is twice the human pain threshold. And the noise-canceling devices, such as headphones, reduce the surrounding noise by about 30dB. So in that situation, he must have felt the noise at around 130dB. So it felt like he had a jackhammer to his head.
That is kind it, this is about mig23 s with oped cockpts and toptier. That is the reason for this topic. WWI and WWII I give you that some slow aircrafts had opend cockpits when thy could. But this is not about this. The isue is opend cockpit at toptier and all the jet fighters.
Decibels (the math) – Understanding Sound.
Combining sources
When you have multiple sources of sound in a room, the intensities add together. For example, if there are two loud vacuum cleaners in a room, and each produces a sound intensity of 100μW/m2, the total sound intensity in the room is twice that amount, or 200μW/m2.
However, when sources combine, the sound levels do not add together. Two 80 dB vacuums create a sound level of just 83 dB! Going from one vacuum to two does double the sound intensity, but doubling the intensity only increases the sound level by 3 dB. (Remember the rules of thumb!) If you look at a decibel chart for common sounds (like the one in the last section), you realize that two 80 dB vacuums could not possibly create a sound level of 160 dB- the combined sound would have an SIL greater than a jet at takeoff (130 dB)!
noise scale related to plane
source
unclassified a10a prototype eveluation report
according to this canopy open/close time is wrong ingame btw
I personally think that whole discussion about decibels and wind is quite off the mark.
Fact is that it’s far from standard operating procedure for modern jet aircraft to fly with open canopy, for whatever reason (except tests and axidents), and to be able to open it in flight in WT without any really significant negative effect in my personal opionion means a) that it is an abuseable function and b) should be corrected.
in mig 23ml u cant open canopy in flight or above like 400km/h on ground
it rips off and u can fly
if it dont have negative effect and is possible its not a bug its a feature ;)
agreed, but how and what data for flight performance penalty is needed?
according to tests emergency jettison aand accident articles plane is able to perform emergency landing in such cases
increased noise is unnoticeable and for being real penalty war thunder should mess with system sound lvl and set unmuteable noise like 10 times more than now
also agreed
THE STORY OF THE F-14 PILOT THAT WAS ABLE TO LAND HIS TOMCAT WITHOUT CANOPY AFTER HIS BACKSEATER ERRONEOUSLY BAILED OUT - The Aviation Geek Club and some interesting reading
The He 112, with its open canopy:
…went faster than that in dive speed trials. So no, you aren’t experiencing 240dB at that speed and that’s not how the decibel scale works either.
Yet your “suggestion” for speed-based effects would affect every WW2 plane in the game heavily.
This is true. It should be corrected. I will make the criticism that in-cockpit engine sounds absolutely SUCK, and flying open canopy then is still far superior from a sound design perspective… though fixing that would probably require more effort than gaijin is putting into Simulator modes.
My horse in this race are mostly concerns that while yes, jets might not have a reason to open canopy in flight - props on the other hand do. While lamentably a lot of planes where you SHOULD open your canopy on landing, you can’t (zeros, hellcats), it’s still something I’d hate to lose.
If anything, I’d love if we could have different limits for head position with canopy open and canopy closed. While I don’t have IL-2, when I watch videos of it I often see people make landings by opening the canopy and leaning out from behind the windshield for better visibility (especially if the canopy glass got hit with bullets or covered in oil).
Why dont you use some numbers or prove of what you are saying.
Seems like you just found some oped cockpit plane and you defend it for every cost. Show me some prove of it.
It is a little bit of a diference when you fly something disaiend for flying without canapy at speed max 400km/h in dive, and flying toptier jet above 1 MACH.
You think that one rule applyes to all the planes, like if I say you can fly in the alt of 12km in warthunder, people like you would stand up and yeal that ki-43 cant go that hight. All what you say seems to be based on your thought. And now you just want to ground my suggestions, with out you ever possibly thinking it throu.
Funnily enough, there’s at least 2 109s that can open their canopy in-game: the B and C models. The others are much older and gaijin wasn’t doing these animations then.
The N1K1-J also opens its canopy, while the N1K2-Js can’t. Ki-43-1 vs -2 and -3, same story.
I did use some numbers. You have straight line top speed - varies with specific model, the FIRST prototype reached 466kph in a straight line and obviously more in a dive, later models only got faster. This was all with an open canopy as only the later B-series would change to an enclosed canopy for drag reduction.
By the way the Heinkel 112 isn’t some classified or obscure plane, you can go look it up yourself.
In-game dive limit for He 112 is 680kph, including a little increase as a safety margin. I don’t have any books specifically on this plane, but it’s at least plausible.
It exceeded those 400kph in LEVEL FLIGHT.
Ok then change the following:
To only apply to aircraft that are above the speed of sound and above 8km. After all, if your issue is open canopy supersonic jets, then make it only apply to supersonic jets. And since the 112 clearly made it to 8km with an open canopy, then you can AT LEAST get that high up with one so you shouldn’t “die when above 5km”. That’s ridiculous.
On the contrary, I simply looked for aircraft that used an open canopy and saw what they achieved in real life. I didn’t make up numbers like pilots blacking out at 450kph or straight up dying above 5km.
P.S.: the Ki-43 may not reach 12km, but it’ll happily float up to 10km :)
some articles posted debunked those made up numbers.
there is difference, but suill need numbers, data and sources ;)
With quotes or screenshots of the work cited, please.
hey, i did
Depending on how it is solved I think no physical details are needed. Simply make it impossible to open the canopy in flight where a) this isn’t a viable realistic standard operation (e.g. all but aircraft with sliding canopies), and b) below a certain speed (e.g. 300 km/h) for all.
That would make it impossible for all hinged canopies to intentionally be opened in flight, but still allow the props and some jets with sliding canopies to do so if they are slow enough (like what is commonly known fact for even jets, like Cutlass, for take off and landing to facilitate emergency egress…)…
I know, I’m talking about others. Relying on A.I to read things for you only leads to misinformation and hallucination.
mandatory " F7U Cutlass when???"
Once again, When you fly a plane that has a wind shield made for flying with opend cockpit you can, but when you take F-16? You cant fly F-16 above 300km/h without a cockpit closed. I said how the direct blow effect human and the plane. And you show a picture where are airplanes with opand cockpits. You have to understand the differenc.
It is, but that is speed where plane gets destroyed by the force of the wind. Its not a speed thay would dive in. I will beleve that thay usually flew at 400km/h not more. And diveing. Thay would go intothe dive slowest thay could and thay wound get into that hight speed.
I understand that you think it might effect older planes with opend cockpit but it wount just becouse those planes were build the way, so thay arent effected anyhow by the wind.
