Kwiatek

I dont think that it should be too much difference between Buchon and 109 flight characteristic. Both had similar take off weight( Buchon between 3200-3300 kg), Buchon could have more engine power without WEP, rest of fusalege and wings was the same ? If so Buchon could be more difficult to handle cause opposite direction of prop rotating when asymetric tail was unchanged ( was prepared for DB60X ) BTW i wonder if not all prop planes in DCS dont have problem with stiffened controls at higher speeds?

For some reason trim dont work with some FF stick and FF effect on. I got Saitek Evo Force and trim dont work with FF enabled in game options. :(

Try the same with human opponent :harhar:

So the question is what is more strong P-factor pitch up moment or gryscopic pitch down moment :P

P-51 got also lower G tolerance in rolling manouvers.

If i remember my flights it could be that when i drop landing flaps the same time i push stick forward to keep speed and landing glide angle ( eventually trim nose down). I remember that at least in 2 planes when i trim for heavy nose to get correct ladning speed and angle with full flaps down ( one taildragger upperwing, one tricycle lowwing). In aerobatic Zlin 526 F (taildragger, low wing) i dont change trim at all, in final at landing with full flaps as i remember i move little stick forward to got correct flight patch and speed. But the same time i dont remember " balloning " effect casue some times before flaps drop there is need to pitch up a plane to drop more speed ( VFe). It would be need to test a few planes in level flight to check these things correctly not in landing glide. BTW Yo-Yo did you compare take off with G-4 Red 7 and K-4 in DCS? I mean stick postion during take off phases? I dont have yet K-4 but looking at videos there is stron pitch up tendency immidietly with tailwheel rise and plane imidietly got aribone. Comparing to G-4 pilot after rise the tail (stron push stick) he relase the stick then move it little back to lift the whole plane. I think take off power in both planes is quite similar - G-4 probably got little more power but it is much lower weight then K-4 so it could be even that it have better power to wieght ratio at take off ( without K-4 using Mw50).

Such behaviour ( flaps down pitch up) is noticable in most sims. In CLOD TF managed to made pitch down movement with flaps down but it cost some elevator effectivness at slow speeds. Maby these is generally a problem in sims to make correct behaviour in these area.

Hmm gyroscopic precision should rather casue nose down moment with apply right rudder ( prop is clockwise in 109).

I read about take off and with flaps 20 deg and trim +1 after rise the tail there was need stick back to lift the whole plane. In landigs section there is no info about trim. I think i got some book where Mark Hanna describe trim with landing on 109. Dunno how it is with DCS K-4 casue i dont have it yet.

First some radial engine - maby Fw 190 or P-47 Second - dunno Third - 109?

Loking at DCS K-4 take off it's clearly got strong pitch up tendency during lift a plane which need s push stick reaction. I dunno about it casue at video with real 109 G-4 Red 7 i see that pilot use strong push stick forward to rise the heavy tail then he move stick back to lift the plane.

IRL in side slip speed indicator dont work correctly. There is side airflow at the pitot. 109 got quite powerfull rudder so i suppose it could make quite good flat turn with rudder. Dont see nothing to much unusal in these video

What i see on these video there is no need to stick forward during lift the plane rather pilot make stick little back to lift the plane. Strong stick forward is need only to rise the tail during take off run then pilot relase the stick to lift the plane. Also what is strange to me that K-4 lift very fast after rise the tailwheel which is not to seen in video above casue plane need some more take off run with rised tailwheel. In DCS K-4 lift near immidietly after rise tailwheel.

We dont know what exacly type of 109 enounter Bud Anderson in his P-51. It could be absolete 109 G-6 regarding that Bud was flying P-51 B version not D. P-51 with -3 version of Packard Merlin ( high alt version) was much better at high alt then standart G-6 for example

IRL 109 was very tail heavy on the ground. Even for proper taxi and ground turns there was need to unload tail by push stick forward, give some power and use brake. Without unload tailwheel by pushing stick forward there was not possible to make correct turn on the ground. So tail shouldn't be so easly to lift.

I hope so casue im little dissapointment with Fw 190 D-9 spinproof in DCS. I will buy it but not yet now :)

I dont have K-4 yet but my friend said that these things is not possible to stall at all in hard turns. Yea i know that K-4 got slats which prevent a stall quite degree but still shouldn't be a stall proof. Also K-4 got quite high wingloading ( around 210 kg/m2) comparing to earlier version of 109. I suspect that like Fw 190 D-9 also K-4 could be to easy to handling regarding stall characteristic in DCS? Just some thoughs.

Saitek Evo Froce

I tried your settings but it dont work for me :( I tried trim force 30% or even 0 %, got unchecked swap axis but still trim dont work in Su27. Only with FF off trim work ok.

I find Mark Hanna report about 109 ( Buchon) flying : " Pitch tends to be heavy above 400km/h, but it is still easy to manage up to 500km/h, and the aircraft is perfectly happy carrying out low-level looping manoeuvres from 550km/h and below. Above 550km/h, one peculiarity is a slight nose-down trim change as you accelerate. This means that when you run in for an airshow above 500km/h, the airplane has a slight tucking sensation-a sort of desire to get down to ground level. This is easily held on the stick, or it can be trimmed out, but it is slightly surprising initially. When you maneuver above 500km/h, two hands are required for a more aggressive performance. Either that or get on the trimmer to help. Despite this heavying up, it is still quite easy to get 5G at these speeds. The rudder is effective and of medium feel up to 500km/h. It becomes heavier above this speed, but regardless, the lack of rudder trim is not a problem for the type of operations we carry out with this airplane. Initial acceleration is rapid up to about 560km/h-particularly with nose down. After that, the 109 starts to become a little reluctant, and you have to be fairly determined to get over 600 km/h." http://www.eaf51.org/newweb/Documenti/Storia/Flying_%20109_ENG.pdf

Why not? I got 8 G in aerobatic Fox glider for very short time without blackout and without any special training for these. Remember that WW2 pilots were trained also for aerobatic so they were familiar with G forces also. Actually my G meter in my aerobatic plane usually stand at + 6, -2.5 G.

Very short 8-9 G could possible to stand without blackout for a pilot. More harder to stand for a pilot is prolonged lower G then quick higher G. Example pilot could blackout at prolonged 6-7 G but could stand short 8-9 G without blackout. Aerobatic pilots ( Red Bull Air Race) could stand for very short time even above 10 G without blackouts. http://videosift.com/video/Extreme-flying-Red-Bull-Air-Race-pilot-pulls-11-2G

Good pilot have no problem to sustain 5G. Higher G like 6-7 are no problems also for short time. Tested byself :) Suprisly D-9 in DCS could stand 7 G without any blackout symptoms which i think is little too high.

How exacly you did it? Casue i tried different things with FF ON and trim dont work anyway. Only disable FF casue trim to work :(

Turn off force fedback in game options. Unfortunaley from unknown reason trim in jet planes ( Su27 or F-15) dont work if force fedback is on.