Kwiatek

The same problem. I found that start launcher from BIN folder open the game. autoupdate.cfg autoupdate_log.txt

eeeee tales, warbirds don't want to spin at all :)

In DCS you could do many crazy stall manouvers close to ground and not afraid that your plane will spin. IRL such manouvers would end in spin and crash. And game over :) Read again manual for IRL P-51 (section about power on spins) or even DCS K-4 manual. Power on snap rolls or spins are generally prohibited and at low alt are expecially dangerous casue it surly lead to spin ( or flat spin) which was not so fast to recover. ( In P-51 manual is that if you dont choop throttle in power on spin there is hardly to recover) Power off stall and spin of course are different case - it was easy and more quickly to recover. From my personal experience e.x with ZLin 526 after one or two full spin i need at least 1/2 spin before plane will recover, after 3 full spins i need at least one full spin before plane stop rotation. Aerobatic planes got bigger control area ( rudder also). Warbirds are much more heavy ( more interia) and not such big controls area.

Resuming these topic i got for you fine sentence from one cleaver man : "Never fall in love with your (mathematical) model. The real system is always right. Simulation is always wrong. The only question is by how much " If mathematical code for any sim would be a perfect copy real world any devs would be take the advice of real life pilots :)

I think many pilots don't even try spin or acceleated stall/spins in their life casue they dont fly into extremum or fly a planes which was forbiden for these. During WW 2 pilots need to fly to the extremum. So for those who never tried spins and minimalize some things i again recomended these video :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaL1NcJs1jw Expecially part at 11:00 min Remember fly smart and don't became a statistic :)

Becasue i think Yo-Yo got different attitude then some others devs and im belive he want make these sim realistic as posible :) I got high respect for Yo-Yo for his knowledge and effort even here when he answer our qestions and explain some things. So thats why i got trust in him :)

109 pilot in prewar test against Heninkel made a few spins into one side and other side and recover :)

These is for idle power stall condition. We mostly speak here about accelerated stall and spins in some extreme condtions. Not lazy turns and straight stalls. K-4 is also much more wingloading plane with high power engine. But surly 109 should have more forgiving stall charactersic from all these fighters. Still it doesn't mean that it should be total spin proof )

I found funny video with C-172 get into spin with wrong pilot control reaction :P Remember that even Cessna could kill you if you made mistake at low alt ;)

I trust that Yo-Yo will take little more care here :)

I think you still dont get a problem here :). Simple test - hard turn in D-9, full stick back and keep it ( you could call it ignorance or carelessness :P ) . It show directly problem with some lack spin interia in DCS. Try the same with K-4. In such condtions plane expecially such as warbird or areobatic one will spin. In DCS these planes just make some quarter of half flick then suddenly stop or recovery byself. IRL pilot need to do recovery by proper control technic. I think you show some ingorance here ragarding spin possiblity in warbirds like some pilots in these video :P I joke of course :) I got also some carelsessnes in my RL flying when i made some spins in my ZLin526 at quite low alt want to drop alt after aerobatic zone before landing. My ZLin make some more spin turns then i supposed before i managed to recover :)

Just watch the video Crumpp it nice shows a problem with power on spins and acclerated stall which warbids ( and any normal plane) could have :)

I thinks these video could show some things :) : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uaL1NcJs1jw Expecially 10:30

It is exacly my point. Warbirds are not Cessna, not such stable. But even common Cessna could suprise pilot with unintentional spin ( like i wrote earlier about one accident in my country - both crew was died after Cessna make full spin at low alt during climbing turn).

I found some videos showing planes spin interia during uncoordinated stall happend:

I understand that it could something like just stall in turn when wing drop after. But still i think that when pilot don't easy on stick in these manouver plane will get into spin rotation. It shound't be stopped byself like it is now in D-9. I read in " Fw 190 Aces of Eastern Front " that pilot used similar manouver to shake opponent from their tail. But it was just spin during the turn where pilot just pull stick full back ( didnt mention any rudder input) and plane get into spin. But there was need some alt to recover from these so it was not used at low alts. Pilots said that manouver shoudn't be done below 1000 m. Some power off straght flight stall of FW 190 A - 6:40 It looks rather violent even with some flaps and power off. I think power on stall in clean cofiguration was even more violent. BTW i known one pilot in my country who bought old fashion ZLin 526AFS and was killed at low alt when he was turn at one direction and banked to opposite turn ended into spin. He didn't have chance to recover and crash.

109 surly should be most gentle from all these fighters here casue also it has slats which covers airleons area which allow higher CLmax and higher critical angle of attack. But still when you pass critical angle of attack plane should spin in certain situations as any other plane. About Fw 190 i read that pilots used it prone to spin characteristic in turns to shake opponent from tail. I think it work like just half flick roll in turn which casue opposite turn direction ( something like half flick roll in aerobatic). But still i think that after initiating such manouver ( stick back and kick rudder) pilot need to quick recover (stick forward and probably opposite rudder). It work exacly like half flick roll in any other plane. But as i said it need to be counter to get out of these ( at least stick forward but i think rudder was need too). Flick roll is the same like one full spin. So it work in the same manner. So if you initiate such manouver ( half flick roll) you still need to recovery it very fast to not continue full spin. E.x in DCS D-9 if you make these and even if you still keep stick full back plane stop flick byself which is wrong i think. It should continoue rotation until you prevent by controls ( stick little forward and opposite rudder). I think it should work that way. Often pilots dont exacly remember what they are doing with controls of plane. They do it automatically and when you ask pilot how he did it he could not even remember that he e.x give little stick forward or use some rudder in some manouver. He just feel how the plane is react and make some things automatickly ( dont know if said it clearly )

Nobody says that these planes should spin like the crazy but at certain situations plane should spin ( like i said even spinproof C152 could do it). In DCS some planes ( D-9 or K-4) instead make a spin they mostly do only some "mechanical" quarter of flick roll then suddenly stop even if you got stick full back. So it looks for me that they lack some spin interia. P-51 is the most natural here and in such situation as i describe it spin but D-9 or K-4 dont want to do it.

Im not sure if any FSX or A2A plane could be even comparable regarding flligh physics to DCS or BOS. Avionics and system of planes are at high level but flight model was arcade in FSX engine. Even A2A planes can't change it too much. These is how i remember when i tried some time ago A2A P-51 and some other planes. Power off stall are tested by pilots for normal operations purposes like landing ( slow speed approach), What is more important to fighter expecially WW2 is stall and spin behaviour with power on stall and spin. In combat situation at high angle of attack stall and spin could happend ( or even were do intentionaly). True that most fighters forbiden in manuals to do intentional spins and snap rolls but it only show that such things were dangerous expecially at low level not only for construction of a plane but also casue much harder to recovery. I think what is lack in DCS prop planes is exacly power on spins interia. P-51 is more natural here ( but still quite easly to recovery even with power on spins). D-9 and K-4 is fall behind. Yo-Yo said that there is still beta so i hope we will some improvements here. I hope also he don't forget to check D-9.

Yep but power on stall are much more violent these is different story then power off. The same power on spins are not recomended and are far more dangerous then power off. When you read these P-51 instructions you will see that power on spins are not welcome to recover until your power will be not cut. Instuction says that with power on spin ( from 2 to 5 ) after cut throttle it is need about up to 6 spins turns before recovery and you could lose even 9000 ft.

Yes i know read all manuals :) I should note that DCS P-51 feels much more realistic and natural then Fw 190 D-9 and K-4. I think about spin proof mostly here about D-9 and K-4. I checked it again and P-51 has much better spin interia. Get into spin with stick full back at stall in turns, and flick rolls are possible to do. Of course Fw 190 D-9 and K-4 are way off here. I hope as you said that there were still in beta and it would be adjusted in close future.

I hope so Yo-Yo really hope so casue all prop planes in DCS behave to mechanical and unnatural regarding spins characterstic and mostly are too spin proof. Crump could be right that slipstream is overdone and these block spin interia and spin tendency of these planes. Im mean all prop planes in DCS not only K-4. It looks that jet planes dont have these problems in DCS so maby they behave more natural ( i still wonder about rudder effectviness in F-86 and opposite direction spin charactersic - but it defnitly feel more spin interia then prop planes)

Yes it looks that jet planes behave more natural in DCS air then prop planes even with simpler flight model. Can't agree here. As a real life pilot and if you got some aerobatic experience you should notice that DCS planes behave strange and not natural regarding spin characteristic ( im not talking only about clasical cross controls spin). 109 should be more difficult to spin but not spin proof - slats on ailerons area casue more controlability at high angle of attack and rise critical AoA but still after pass it plane should spin normaly like any other one. BTW even very forgive and stable plane as it is Cessna 152 could suprise pilot with unintentional spin behaviour. Nothing even comparable with WW2 warbirds.

Exacly more heavy planes should got more interia. Try for comparsion F-86 in DCS in hard turns with full stick back and see how planes react. Try the same with all prop planes in DCS. They react very "mechanical" and not natural at all. Only repeatable mechanical quarter of flick roll then suddenly stop. Even worse situation is when you try to make flick roll with prop rotation way.

I think ED team is lack of some experience RL aerobatic pilots who could advice something here expecially in stall/spin characteristic. Truly speaking i think modern pilots can't probably have posibility to check WW2 warbirds in such condtions like spins, flick rolls which surly are prohibited in such planes.