Anatoli-Kagari9

Maybe, share the enjoyment of a beauty aircraft module to fly around in the DCS sceneries ?

Maybe in the future they'll add a way to adjust the trim tabs in the settings, like we have for the Bf 109, but otoh, this is a realistic feature - the real aircraft reacts the same way, unless the pilot counters the tendency of the rudder to deflect, but he'sw bnot supposed to do so because these settings are calculated for cruise, and to avoid the need for rudder input under such circumstances. It's a realistic feature, not a bug :-)

Looking fwd to read from the pilots of the real thing how this latest beta has progressed towards a more fine tuned FDM ?

My guess is that the ground adjustable trim tab for the rudder has been added, and it starts moving your rudder as dynamic pressure increases, hence not being noticeable while on ground, taxiing or any under circumstances where propwash or airflow aren't suficient to make the tiem become alive...

Maybe they adapted something in the terrain files themselves ? Anyway, operating from softfields should be easier - these aircraft were made to operate from grass, soil, .... not really paved runways ...

I really don't like this way of working through the patches, without a single word about some items. It's been like this since always, and it's really not good :-/ Maybe just a lack of coordination between the teams responsible for the web updates and internal development ( ? )

PM sent :-) Sometime ago, one of the changes I did was increasing the tailwheel axial drag coeficient. Don't know but the 109 k-4 always felt a bit "loose" on ground - add a bit of power and it it accelerates wildly, on paved or non-paved surfaces... Of course if the sideways friction has been tuned down as much as you point out, something must feel weird now :-/

Definitely it's the sideways friction coefs that have been tuned down, either for specific aircraft of for the surface types themselves ( ? ) I still find that although with it's limitations, X-Plane is probably the simulator that presently does the best job at simulatiog softfield conditions vs paved runways. Operating the 109 F4, G2, G6 and G10 and P51d models I have for it is really a charm, compared to the combat sims, the same applying to tail surface authority at taxi speeds and power settings, and during takeoff - the end result is probably the most realistic I can find among the sims I( 've ) use ( d ).... The sideways friction coefs should probably get increased a bit, together with the longitudinal. I always found the ww2 birds too lose when taxiing, accelerating too fast at any TOW...

I think your observations stem mostly from the fact that probably most of you never really handled a real aircraft on takeoff / landing... I surely never handled a taildragger IRL, but as a glider pilot, having flown many types of gliders, I assure you that landing and taking off under x-wnd in some gliders can be really tricky, and, no sim I have ever used can even by far represent the feel of it, and ask for the same inputs used IRL, because, among other factors that start with modelling the transition between flight and ground physics, to the absence of feedback ( the so called seat of pants ) totally distort the experience we get in a desktop flightsim. And guys, having "long" sticks can help, looks to me as a sometimes subjective claim! I've used a quite fancy cockpit setup and while I did notice a difference from my cheap T16000 + Saitek RCS I can no where say it is much closer to RL... So, a developer IMO should cut / relax on those effects that are really not going to cause to the virtual pilot the necessary physical / sensorial feedback allowing to properly cope with it. The key to success is finding the best compromise between filtering the unnecessary, that would make it too and irrealistically difficult, or make it feel arcadish... I honestly feel that the latest updates have brought DCS to an excellent level of "possible" realism. Certainly far from arcadish, probably possible to fine tune a bit more, but pretty much satisfactory.

Just another thread on this subject, from PPrune: https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/10337-artificial-horizon-russian-style.html

I must have been smoking some stuff, because last night I tried hard to "feel" those "relaxed" ground physics you're all talking about and the 109, as well as the Spitfire ( the only two I tested ) are just about as difficult as I can remember from previous versions ? I surely can takeoff describing an "arc" if I do not use rudder at all, provided I'm on "open field" and no obstacles. But on open fields at least in the Caucasus map, the soil easily causes bumps, and the wing tips that I was used to... Landing without dancing on the rudder in the Spitfire, or in the 109 if I forget to lock the tailwheel is certainly still a no go. And, please look at the way the 109 performs it's first landing on this video: or here: If anything has changed, it surely changed for the better IMO. I can reproduce such landings in DCS easily, and not necessarily crash, wing tip or ground loop... So, what the heck are ya talking about guys ? P.S.: My experiments were run with the MW tank emptied, and fuel set to 65% in the 109, and 65 % fuel in the Spitfire too. On both aircraft no amno loaded.

Oh, @DefaultFace - I didn't try that :-) I usually just try what I would do IRL ... But if it works that way, something must have been relaxed indeed...

I actually find it more realistic now. Even with the reported skidding. The soft fields in the Caucasus map aren't teh best example. Non-paved rws in Normandy do a much better job IMO. The K-4, D-9, P51 and Spitfire are certainly still "tricky" to operate if the correct handling is not used.

I'm always learning, or remembering stuff it's been a long time since I last reviewd… Thx for the various contributions, that schema posted by bbrz, and Frederf's post.

Oh, it only happens to one of the skins ? I'll try with a few then... but since apparently there is no difference in performance, maybe I should rather wait for latter updates...

Exactly bbrz! Well, I'm on hold for patches... :-)

Also, there's a graphical glitch, at least with my GPU ( GTX 960 ) when the 3-blade version is chosen. Strange graphic artifacts in the "propeller disk"...

I have to reafirm that I do find what it's being called "new ground physics" much better than what we had before. The main features are there, namely the inneficiency ofthe rudder until the aircraft gains speed, thus implying the use of rudder and differential braking if teh tailwheel is unlocked, and I still have to work with the toe brakes if I land without the tailwheel locked. For me it's Perfect!

Well, for me it's a lot better than before, and I wouldn't touch it.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3592994&postcount=154

Presently I guess we all have to use none, because: 1) the Yak hasn't got cockpit trimmable aileron or rudder and... 2) the ground adjustable ( fixed ) trim tabs can't be adjusted in the Special Settings menu, like for the 109... It's been mentioned that it will be added in future updates.

Just that, and directed to AcroGimp who flies the real stuff :-) Do you find the effect plausibly modelled ?

It's good to have all this feedback from the RW hands/feet-on experience. It's also good to know from Yo-Yo we're actually using a EA version which is not the one which was supposed to be made available, and, sorry for putting it this way, but indeed in almost all of the modules I bought ( ww2, f-86, uh-1h and now this great Yak-52 ) this has been a constant. Most of the time Yo-Yo describes features that are supposed to be working on the released version but didn't sync on time, and I believe it means there being a bit of a discoordination between developers ( at least in the flight dynamics and systems areas ) and code revision control ? Then again, most of the time after noticing it, we can see a few DCS updates being released but nothing changing, or then something changing in another feature, either broking it, or fixing it, but there being usually very few information about what actually changed - a decent change log. This is an area where ED could certainly improve, IMH.

Ah! Ok, that proves the problem's on me - I have to search better along the list of assignable functions. Thx! :thumbup:

I couldn't find how to bind keys to open / close the radiator inlet shutter ? Any hint welcomed ;-)