[DBS]TH0R

Skyraider after the incident: Aileron remained attached to the wing. Although probably non functional...

Guilty! :joystick: I don't find it any more difficult than P-51D. Must be your FPS then.

Apparently so. Rudder as in air moving over it isn't effective at 10 km/h, but the plane turns anyway without using the brake lever. For me rudder has effect at very slow speeds. Clearly a valve which applies necessary pressure to have a 'braking' effect facilitates a turn in whatever direction the rudder is applied - at very slow speeds and minimum ~70% power.

Correct. For me, the plane turns with rudder movement only at 60-80% power starting at 10 km/h (measured from the external view). I did not use the brake lever, and I did not see any of the pneumatic pressure gauges move.

Do try it with TF-51D. Without center fuel tank its CoG lies move forward and it doesn't need any forward trim. IIRC P-51D is some 600lb heavier than the TF-51D when both completely empty. With 68% fuel and 100% ammo (usual default loadout) - the difference is close to 1200lb. Here is the A2A vid I was talking about: From A2A, elevator trim required: No fuselage tank: 0° Empty fuelage tank: +2° (For DCS I wouldn't recommend more than 1°) Full fuselage tank: +4° If you want an interesting take off, load it up with fuel and external tanks. :)

That!

Interesting. I started using full flaps since it helped me control the thing and after watching YT videos. Didn't know it was recommended. Another thing, after watching A2A video they recommend 2° nose down trim for an empty center fuel tank. I found that even 1° is enough in DCS when taking off with no flaps. You can keep her on the runway as much as you want if you trim nose down. Haven't tested it with TF-51D. That one should have CoG more forward due to not having the fuel tank behind a pilot and thus no trim is required from my experience / DCS tests.

Nice flying. :thumbup: That is another thing that I started doing when flying in DCS is lowering full flaps every time I land. Yeah, less than full flaps will make it a bit harder. On this note I started looking at YT videos and P-51 landings. Almost all of them feature full flaps, be it a two or three point landing.

Not as it is currently simulated. In training taxi mission I can turn without brakes with or without nose wheel brake with as little as 10 km/h and power between 70-80%. If this is the correct behavior then obviously there is some kind of a pneumatic device that engages only after power is advanced to 70-80% and is linked to the rudder movement (i.e. nose wheel steering).

I too was under impression that at lower speeds you could be only able to steer with brakes. Then I read this: Source: http://www.kamov.net/general-aviation/mig-21-landing-gear/ As it stands now, the plane with nose breaking disabled will turn even with rudder movement only at speeds lower than 5 km/h.

@ OP: Nothing wrong with the struts IMO. I had similar results when first attempting to land in DCS. Couldn't pull a two pointer for the love of it and it bounced all over the place. Then I read how one should land tail draggers. With its CoG being behind the main wheels the plane will want to drop its tail upon landing. What other sims have taught us is to pull back on the stick when landing / flare. This is the opposite of what you should do once you feel the wheels touching the ground. Simply center the stick and all should be fine. Even if you do bounce it shouldn't be hard to recover if you know what to expect. The trick is "knowing" where the ground is. I usually center the stick half a second before anticipating the wheels will touch the ground. After you do it a couple of times you will find that you can really "drop" her on the ground and struts will absorb it. Makes up for landings on the unpaved and short runways. Also worth mentioning is that the TF-51D is easier to land since it doesn't have a center fuel tank resulting in different CoG. At least from my experience (another squad mate shares this view). The only reason I use differential braking in P-51. Steerable tail wheel with its 6° of movement and a touch of brake in the direction where I am turning is almost always enough. Perhaps I am spoiled with my equipment. Those Crosswinds really do enable accurate control.

As a person who doesn't have the time to modify .lua files to get a simple pinky switch on TM Hog to act as toggle on and off for nose wheel brake, I am not happy with this solution. In the latest patch, Fw-190D9 module introduced on and off keys for EZ42 gunsight while maintaining the old one-key bind toggles as well. That works for everyone. Not the case with Mig-21Bis.

Seconded. So many switches that have on and off position require two binds. That is all nice and dandy for someone building a full simpit, but for the majority of us a toggle key that does on and off would do just fine. For the example drag chute and gear cover require two binds while one would me more than enough. Same goes for nose wheel braking, etc...

This video tutorial states around 95 MPH IAS with flaps and gear up for B variant:

Pr-purchased. :thumbup:

Interesting twist. Care to share from whom the input was Pilum? :) Seconded. This thread is a welcome sight in contrast to the majority forum discussions.

Anyone tested their turn rates at 8km in-game? I'm interested in hearing Yo-Yo's comments on your simulated results. Seriously? Have you read the thread title and who the OP is?

So very true. If I could pick just on thing that would be fixed, I'd say fix the horrid spotting of other planes and other objects in this sim. For many things DCS is second to none, but in this area a 10 year old sim blows DCS out of the water in this regard.

What I'd really like to see is skins combined with a mission file. So that once you join the server and start downloading map files the skins are also downloaded. This way one isn't forced to get a proper skin or squadron default for lets say an online historical event etc. Skin downloading during (on) the fly is also eliminated like it was/is in IL21946. In any case, skins need to be looked into. P-51D skins in particular with all those fuselage numbers look off unless someone assigned a custom skin to that slot.

Both tests (Figures) apparently feature propeller removed with no flaps, wind speed 60 MPH. Figure 16 is also accompanied by text below it where comments values from Figure 4: "The maximum lift coefficient of 1.44 for the faired and sealed condition and of 1.40 for the service wing are higher than those obtained for airplanes 5 and 6". Perhaps there are some graph scale errors in the Figure 16 with the X & Y axis. EDIT: Things like these make me wonder if Hummingbird actually studied the document or just searched it for the values he wanted to find...

Very interesting conversation. In comparison, Figure 16 on page 21 is also interesting - showing CLmax of a "low drag wing" from Plane 1 (P-51B by the looks of it). Unless I am mistaken, also with no flap deflection (δf=0°). Is that where the CLmax value of 1.28 comes from?

Awesome. :joystick:

Phenomenal looking skin. :thumbup: