Swagger897

Mmm i find that a bit hard to believe? There are plenty examples of torque creating devices for spacecraft to adjust their positions for flight outside of earth’s atmosphere.

Exactly this

Okay so in attempt of trying to understand your POV, what is causing the “pivot points”, where is each point located at, and are you referring to either the longitudinal axis or lateral axis of the aircraft? Also for these pivot points, how does their center(s) relate to that of the airframe, and what are their affects on it under normal operation (takeoff, cruise).

It is basic physics, two vectors added together create a resultant sum greater than the natural aerodynamic forces imposed on the airframe. In a non counter rotating multi engine aircraft, two engines assumed to be operating under similar conditions both create a torque action opposite of the path of blade rotation. These two torques are added together. This is the simplest form of explanation. For counter rotating multi engine aircraft, the two torque vectors DO cancel each other out, providing a more stable airframe. The descending blades are then also on opposite sides of the engine centerline, and airframe centerline, thus also decreasing p-factor to a minimal or near zero effect. All of the examples posted in this thread demonstrate that, as well as Mr. Week's referenced video from the first page.

The website I linked already has this shown in its images. Just goes to show the lack of maturity to take any criticism when proven wrong multiple times.

You've completely missed the topic at hand though and it shows you've done no research or have enough knowledge on the topic itself. Until you correct yourself you've already dismissed any further debate of the matter with your opening reply to OP: Torque does not cancel out with non counter rotating twins, as originally stated it only remains just as difficult to control, or if not worse, than a standard single. THE reason for counter rotating twins was to cancel out this torque effect. I'd highly recommend reading this article to have a better understanding and to stop spreading further mis-information, as well as outright denying factual evidence and experience by those who thoroughly understand the topic: https://www.pilotscafe.com/engine-inoperative-principles-in-a-twin-airplane/ Particularly the point of the ascending and descending blade theory which produces more thrust.

Torque does not cancel out in non-counter rotating multi engine aircraft, it only remains the same or becomes amplified based upon engine power or airframe design. There’s a reason why multi engine trainer aircraft use counter-rotating designs and that’s to allow students an easier time to grasp the fundamentals of multi engine flight. It’s sole purpose (counter rotation) is to reduce the gyroscopic effect. Such aircraft like Piper Seminole, Aztec, and others follow this design. In the case of the Mosquito, and any other non counter rotating multi engine aircraft, if the right engine goes out in flight, one would need to immediately feather prop, left rudder pushed (dead engine, dead leg), and apply appropriate power. Anyone unaware of multi engine flight really needs to take a look at some decent instructional videos to get a decent grasp of things, or else this aircraft will easily bite you and quickly that too. edit: There, already done for you and it’s right at 60s long. The aircraft fractured here is a Beechcraft Duchess, Beechcraft’s attempt at a light twin trainer. It features the counter rotating design as well which eliminates the critical engine like mentioned above.

I've read and viewed conflicting reports about flying the P47 and that's the first to say to come in low. Most I've seen have been about starting high and slow when on final and crabbing to have a runway picture. Personally I find it easy to do either standard pattern work or the crab approach and kicking the tail back in line before a 3 point landing. I think however that the struts lack any sort of dampening and the aircraft bottoms out far too easily. I've tested this with a power on and power off approach and both end in the same result where the struts simply just collapse. The only way to grease a 3 point I've found is to continue to fly the aircraft all the way until lift is completely lost at a steady rate.

Since we're on about DC-3's and their exhausts, here's one that we steam cleaned and performed engine run-up's on earlier this year. The stuttering is from performing a mag-check where one of the magnetos were a little wet causing little to no spark. A good set of speakers with good bass is needed:

I'm not concerned about using the radio itself, but being able to add/remove fuel, change liveries, and add smoke pods. There is no work around for that as far as I'm concerned. I should've never purchased this and I'm considering creating a ticket for a refund. Pretty unacceptable.

Reported 6 months ago and a key feature shared by all modules doesn't work here??

Had this same issue the other night after purchase. Loaded a few skins and cockpit textures to change to English, and loaded up the sim to the aerobatic server. Pressing "" doesn't bring the menus up at all so there's no way to access the payload/fuel/skins with ground control.

That's quite interesting. I've never had to give it a shot while starting, usually a slow roll from cutoff to AR will just cause it to light up. I wonder if you do have to add it during start, that if you latch, unlatch, and latch again if it will fix the issue. Similar to how either the oil cooler or intercooler cowls would not be able to move until you moved the switch both ways.

I'm not sure what to say to this really... For my eyesight it is no different than looking outside at a moving car and watching their wheels rotate. The situation when viewed from a moving car looking at another vehicle traveling the same speed is an even better indication, as when the viewed car increases or decreases speed a noticeable effect of the wheel rotation can be viewed. To put another example in place, this time aviation related, the spinner cap of most large high-bypass turbine engines incorporate some sort of swirl mark to signify rotation of the fan. It is obvious to see when the fan is stationary, but also when at idle speeds, accelerating, or decelerating. In the sim, I'm not seeing any effect that is outside of what I have mentioned. There is no flickering of a prop, or rolling shutter effects like you are describing. I'd advise you to actually look up some of these effects and compare them with the sim, as either you are uninformed about how camera sensors capture footage of propellers and rotating objects or you are having your own texture issues within the sim different to that of how it is intended.

Again, this is also untrue to a certain degree. At taxi speeds the air flow over control surfaces is not great enough to affect directional control of the aircraft. I don't recall ever seeing a recip powered aircraft on a soft field able to move around while at prop rpm less than run-up levels without the need of differential braking or nose-wheel steering.