Anatoli-Kagari9

Thx for sharing|

Having prop RPM full fwd, and taking the throttle about 2 inch from idle will also help with rudder effectiveness.

I found the best way to reproduce the brake is to assign it to my TS16000 button 1 ( trigger ), and then use the rudder to steer. On landing, I try to land 3-point, and then, ASAP: 1) keep the stick pulled back; 2) retract the flaps 3) keep some power while applying brake and steering to stay on centreline This works ok most of the time.

Yep! That's the one Sporg! Thx for the prompt correction and meant link. I just updated my post ;-)

https://www.warhistoryonline.com/guest-bloggers/newly-restored-messerschmitt-bf109g-flies-test-pilot-shares-experience.html/2

Yes, found that too, and also killing the magnetos didn't help to bring it down.... a BUG ! My experience with DCS ww2 add-ons: wait at least 6 months for some convergence / stability... Then start thinking about using it to the best of their capabilities.

If there is a crosswind component the best option will usually be to bring the aircraft down to 10 - 20 feet in a crab, and then use rudder to align the nose of the aircraft with the imaginary runway axis ( left or right rudder depending on the crosswind component being from starboard or port side ), and opposite ( into the wind or upwind ) to keep the wing on that side a little lower than the downwind wing, or simply the wings level if the wind is not too strong ( bellow 3 m/s ). If you come to land with some good power then other effects - prop effects - will contribute to yaw your aircraft nose to the left, an effect which is enlarged by the effects of the deployed flaps. You'll have to align the nose with the rw axis using a bit of right rudder to counter it, unless there is already a crosswind component from starboard compensating the prop effects... The idea is to touchdown with the wings level and the aircraft longitudinal axis aligned with the runways centreline as much as possible, or with the upwind slightly down if there's a stronger crosswind.

Ok guys, I'm just giving you some advance until I get into it... Get ready ! Poor souls... You won't even be able to ear me approaching from your 6.... ;-)

I am using a TS16000 and the TQ of an old broken X52 Pro system, and also a Saitek Combat RCS. I have programmed the trigger / gun key of the TS16000 for the brake function, and it works just great, although it would be nice to have some way of tuning it's rate of actuation on the brake system. The Spitfire is a charming module!

At least in the non-ffb version, which I use because I do not have a ffb joystick, the control stiffening is modelled for roll, although not that well ( I guess ) for yaw. Rudder is still pretty much active at top speeds, which causes instability in yaw when trying to aim at the faster Bf109 / Fw190 ahead of you... This was the case with the initial release of the Bf109, and probably all other modules, while they go through an update process until declared "Final".

Get it! You wont regret ! At the promotional price I wouldn't even think twice :-) It's an early release, still a long way to go before the final release - usually not less than 6 months - but it's already a very good module, in many ways, and the one I try to pick every time I start DCS World, unless I'm at a MP server and there are just too many already taken by other players. My next choice is always the p51d, followed by the 109. The 190, being probably one of the most perfect modules doesn't really feel that much useful for short times at a MP server. Maybe wait for the Normandy missions and use it as it was supposed to be used, at higher altitudes for escort or bomber interception ( ? ) The Spitfire is really a must, and the overall physics modelling will make you sweat while you'll trying to learn how to operate this beauty. Charly Owl's Guides will help a LOT!

And moist too - to sum-up: Pressure Altitude... But one thing that DCS World's weather model models, and we do not have in the Civil Sims is the effect of cold air on geopotential height. I do not guess to what level they model it ( probably a fixed table or formula for just a generic variation ? ). You can check it easily by creating a mission with the exact same QNH, but fly it between a cold Winter day and a warm Summer one... If there are mountains around you'll easily notice the difference, otherwise you can compare the altimeter readings with the F2 displayed alt...

You're a masochist Yo-Yo :-) But indeed I also prefer it that way, at least as an additional form of thrill - and having to use differential braking...

Excellent notes rel4y !

SO, to sum up - you've always been right in your comments regarding the pitch trim! I don't believe it is any different in the K-4.... Thx for sharing

What is the altitude of the aerodrome you're operating from ? What is the temperature and QNH for the mission ? It can be due to density altitude, or a bug too...

Probably due to the pitching down moment created by the gear, and the fact that neutral pitch trim is usually the one set for takeoff, while inflight, at higher AoAs, or during approach in landing configuration, plenty of "tail-heavy" trim is required instead.

I no longer have Nevada, and I don't know where you were operating the Sptifire from at that Map, but altitude / temperature / moist ( although I don't think this last is taken into account in DCS ... ) basically DENSITY ALTITUDE can play quite a role on aircraft performance. If you were taking off from high airfields it doesn't surprise me that you can really notice the difference...

Will we have such an option in the future for this, for runup ? I had that in the good-old A2A Sptifire Accusim model. Would like to see it ported into DCS World - it's a nice touch of detail, and can actually be useful for engine runup without risking a prop strike.

:thumbup:

I read that the Spitfire was heavy on both the ailerons and rudder, with a very light elevator, as speed built up. In the present module, while I do feel the ailerons getting heavier the rudder is still very effective, sometimes making it a bit difficult to stay on target if you use it to coordinate... Shouldn't a bit more stiffer feel be the case ?

Yep Zulfi, if I pool at high G, the wings will certainly break apart and the aircraft will become uncontrollable. What I meant in the OP is that it remained "too stable" when losing only one of the wings to the root, but I believe there are probably two reasons: .) Due to being an early release, there is not yet a perfect sync between the graphics and the damage and flight dynamics modules of the aircraft; .) The circumstances under which it occurred were all low G situations. We can arrange for an online flight at one of the servers, with you on your Fw190 following me in a tight turn, and shooting from a close position at the root of my port or starboard wing, trying to make it detach...

In the Settings menus there is an entry you can tick to enable FFB. I don't recall the exact section right now, but will check it at home and post here. I actually noticed it after I re-installed DCS and bought the Gazelle module, which was acting really weird, even more than the Spitfire. The trimmers were reversed, and I posted at their support forum, where someone suggested the culprit might be the FFB enabled when not using a FFB stick. Apart from it, the Spitfire, like any other DCS module, usually requires training - it took me a while to tame down the takeoff and landing issues with my over controlling actions...

Interesting and thx for sharing that info Yo-Yo. I don't believe the weirdiness with the ripped surfaces has anything to do with the flight dynamics of the Spitfire, which are probably, for an early access module and after my experience with the other ww2 modules, probably the best ever released in such an early phase. There are details that I have pointed out in other threads, like the way sideslip affects dynamic and static ports and impacts on ASI, the ground handling, the overall feel of the aircraft when flying that are 2nd to none. Instead I think it's a graphical / damage model problem, and indeed when we do not see some surfaces there visually, this is actually not fully in sync with the lattice seen by the core FDM ( ? )

I don't have even Nvidia Shadowplay enabled because my system is rather old... OTOH, recording a flight in DCS is still bugged, so, it's not going to be a video by me, but I can confirm having had my wing ripped to the root... Yet, I was at low G, probably very near 1G, so no great forces were being applied, and this could account for not spinning around the moment the wing got ripped off... Regarding the tail thing, that's a different story, because with a tail ripped off I would expect at least a deep nose down pitching .... certainly not a shallow / flat spin, and all with the engine still working....