G-LOC maybe G-LOK

[Moesly_Armlis]

Grsvity induced Loss of Conciousness

- is a term generally used in aerospace physiology to describe a loss of consciousness occurring from excessive and sustained g-forces draining blood away from the brain causing cerebral hypoxia.

The new advanced settings has G limits for the parts and kerbals.

I had set the slider to the extreme and had some lessons in how to control acceleration.

Also learned that when a kerbal losses conscious the effects linger for a while.

Recover a vessel with an unconscious kerbal in it and you can load them back in the seat B.A Baracus style.

 

Also pilots have greater resistance to G-LOC and recover from unconsciousness quicker.

Drouge chutes are much more important if you want the kerbal to remain conscious.

Contracts for High G adventures are much easier to complete.

Also learned that Dr. Wilbur R. Franks contributed by researching the problem and creating a solution.  In my opinion he is very kerbal because he tested the suits on himself.

Wilbur Rounding Franks, medical researcher, inventor of the "G suit" (b at Weston, Ont 4 Mar 1901; d at Toronto 4 Jan 1986). After graduating in medicine at the University of Toronto, Franks trained in cancer research under F.W. BANTING and took charge of wartime RCAF medical research after Banting's death. He invented the pressure suit, which allows pilots to carry out high-speed manoeuvres without losing consciousness, used by Allied fighter pilots from 1942 onwards. Astronauts' pressure suits today are mere refinements of Franks's design. For this project, he built in wartime the first Canadian human centrifuge. Franks's wartime laboratory became the RCAF Institute of Aviation Medicine, which became the Defence and Civil Institute of Environment Medicine, Toronto, and is now Defence Research and Development Canada.

http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/wilbur-franks/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilbur_R._Franks

 

Any one else using this new feature?

What impacts has this had on your program and vessel design?

 

Edited November 2, 2016 by MoeslyArmlis
Wilburt R Franks

[wibou7]

I don't quite understand why this is not ON by default. I activated the feature (at 1.00 ratio) and so far it had zero impact.

I only got close ONCE of getting a kerbal to fall unconscious. And that was after a very botched reentry that went spinning.

On nominal operation it changes nothing, it is far too forgiving. I'm thinking about using 0.5 multiplier instead but I'm worried the only impact might be during interplanetary landing that are already quit challenging (Eve??)

[Long Finger]

I switched it on at the default, but like wibou7 haven't really noticed any difference. The stock aerodynamics are pretty dreadful so pulling G isn't as easy as it should be, and G from parachutes isn't really a consideration since Kerbals don't need to be conscious at that time. They will recover in plenty of time for the landing.

[katateochi]

42 minutes ago, wibou7 said:

On nominal operation it changes nothing, it is far too forgiving

For standard parachute re-entries I agree it's not much of a thing.  But in a streamline SSTO (or other glide to landing craft) you can be quite close to knocking the pilot out if you need to put some turns in to bleed off speed before landing.

[Moesly_Armlis]

3 hours ago, wibou7 said:

I don't quite understand why this is not ON by default. I activated the feature (at 1.00 ratio) and so far it had zero impact.

I only got close ONCE of getting a kerbal to fall unconscious. And that was after a very botched reentry that went spinning.

On nominal operation it changes nothing, it is far too forgiving. I'm thinking about using 0.5 multiplier instead but I'm worried the only impact might be during interplanetary landing that are already quit challenging (Eve??)

Hard career settings should enable this feature.

 
Setting the slider to the extreme resulted in kerbals losing consciousness three times per flight.   Once ascending, then during re-entry and finally on chute deployment.

I think setting the slider to the easier setting could make for an interesting challenge; G-LOK Knocked Unconscious Purposefully.  I will have to try this and see what it takes.

edit:

High velocity maneuvers does knock them out though even at the most tolerant setting.

The standard centrifuge does not affect kerbals. 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 3, 2016 by MoeslyArmlis

[Streetwind]

It would make sense to assume that the Kerbals wear G-suits as described in the OP, which is why they're so hard to knock out on standard settings...

However, I agree that from a gameplay standpoint it makes little sense to develop, implement and default-enable a setting that pretty much doesn't have any effect whatsoever on gameplay. I pulled mine down to 80%, and it's still not a problem most of the time.

[Sagacity]

Wow! Thank you. This should be on by default. Didn't even know it was there! Using it now...

[LordKael]

Build vessels with 100m/s acceleration, and you'll knock your Kerbals out every time. Translates to 10g's of acceleration in space, more if you're in atmo with that sort of acceleration. 

[wibou7]

5 minutes ago, LordKael said:

Build vessels with 100m/s acceleration, and you'll knock your Kerbals out every time. Translates to 10g's of acceleration in space, more if you're in atmo with that sort of acceleration. 

<picky> I guess you meant 100m/s^2 ? </picky>

 

[I_Killed_Jeb]

My high peformance aircraft regularly pull >15gs in a steep accelerated turn, so I think that's the consideration here. How many astronauts pass out in spaceflight from g's? It's more of an issue for aircraft pilots

[Moesly_Armlis]

14 hours ago, Sagacity said:

Wow! Thank you. This should be on by default. Didn't even know it was there! Using it now...

The G-meter on the right side of the NAV ball has been there for so long. 

Now kerbals and parts have an option for G effects and it is not on any default settings.

I wonder if there is something in the code that is experimental. 

Does anybody know who implemented this feature?

Will this feature be further developed?

These questions need some answers.

 

Edited November 3, 2016 by MoeslyArmlis