Kwiatek

But i suppose that in Fw 190 after doing flick roll he relased stick (center control) to recover before he made another flick roll in opposite side. But i think if stick was still full back plane should not recover and get from stall/flick roll into spin ( or spiral dive) ? P-51 in DCS is more like to do it (spin or spiral dive) with full stick back then D-9. I think D-9 should behave similar in these situation like P-51? I just think that D-9 should got at least similar behaviour with continuously stick back during stall. Regarding P-51 you right, manual says about it:

Hard to say truly speaking before my real flying i was playing sims a lot :) BTW what you think about lack of spin behaviour with P-51 and expecially with Fw 190 D-9? I expected more spin tendency during stall occurs with full aft stick. In DCS e.x when i pull hard with stick in a turn plane make some half flick roll then out of stall for a while, im keeping stick back all time and plane make another half flick then again out of stall for a while. I expected plane should got into spin when wing drop in stall and with still full stick back. P-51 is more close to get spin in these situation then Fw 190 D-9. Also planes recover very quickly from such stall ( spin in P-51 case).

i think with last today update something change in Su27 behaviour. Now with negative G apply planes dont want to go inverted depart like before. Mostly after pilot recovery from blackout plane stabilise with nose down postion. I think now is much better and easy to recover.

From DCs K-4 manual: Engine Ratings: Operating Condition RPM ATA Max Time WEP (MW-50) 2,800 ± 50 1.75 ± 0.01 10 Take-Off and WEP - - - Combat 2,600 ± 50 1.35 ± 0.01 * 30 Cruise 2,400 ± 65 1.25 ± 0.01 Continuous Economy 2,000 ± 80 1.05 ± 0.01 Continuous *) During climb boost pressure may be regulated during climb by a further 0.03 ATA to between 1.31 and 1.39 ATA. Note: With the MW-50 system installed, normal Take-Off and Emergency Power is no longer attainable. Combat mode should be used instead. Production K-4s were often powered by a Daimler-Benz DB 605DB or DC engine. The DB could use B4 fuel which, with MW 50 Methanol Water injection equipment, generated an emergency power rating of 1,600 PS at 6,000 m (1,160 PS maximum continual at 6,600 m), and take-off power of 1,850 PS at 0 m, with a maximum supercharger boost of 1.8 ATA. The DB could also be run on higher octane C3 fuel, but use of MW 50 was forbidden. The DC, which was reinforced internally, could also run on B4 or C3 fuel and could generate a potential 2,000 PS, but only when using C3 fuel with MW 50 and a boost of 1.98 ATA, otherwise the power rating was similar to that of the DB. The DCS Bf 109 K-4 is modeled with the DB 605 DB engine. Looks that it is B-4 fuel version modeled.

As i understand correctly without MW50 enabled maximum ATA should be 1.4 Ata at 2600 RPMs ( like in earlier version of DB605) and only using MW50 could rise ATA to 1.8 ATA. Without MW50 and B4 fuel it shouldn't be possible to got 1.8 Ata - only 1.4Ata http://kurfurst.org/Engine/DB60x/DB605_datasheets_DB.html Something like these:

Yo-Yo i could take off P-51 or D-9 quite good enough but for me as RL pilot with some experience with taildragger suprisely in DCS there is obviously more problem to take off correctly then landing. And i really like landings in DCS and as for sim they are quite realistic to me. I dont know why take off in DCS give more problem to do it nicely then landings. Also e.x. using take off flaps in P-51 complicate things a lot comparing to taking off without flaps. Thats why i think something is too crazy with take off in DCS to me. Everything is quite ok until you try to rise the tail. You need to be really gently and carefully and mostly you need to do it at certain speed. If you do it little earlier or little to late things will complicated a lot. I'm not complaing casue im not able to take off in DCS, i could. Just my observation about taking off and landings behaviour comparing to RL experience. Other hand e.x in the air i think planes are too forgive in spin behaviour. I think planes like P-51 or Fw 190 should be more prone to spin. In DCS i could stall ( in a turn for example) with full deflection of aft stick and keeping it planes don't spin at all. I expected in such situation planes start to spin in the way wing is droping as i still got full stick deflection. Not happened in DCS thought expecially with FW 190 D-9.

Main difficult with taking off with these planes is time and way of tail wheel rise. You need to be really gently with these and make it in right speed. Most depend of these. Also using take off flaps expecially in P-51 casue strange effects with these planes - never see such IRL where usually flaps help you to take off. With P-51 in DCS it is opposite. Tuco is right these is only PC similation and never be close to RL. So we need to accept some anomalies in game.

For me Su27 also feels strange. She is doing little cobra also with negative angle of attack - when you push stick forward. Plane is making negative G cobra then go on its back and get inverted depart. Tried the same with F-15 but it stall in classical way or automatic stabilisation don;t allow such things. Su27 behave strange in such sitution like automatic stabilisation dont work correctly.

I also feel that take offs with P-51 or D-9 in DCS are too twichy comparing to real life. I got more problems with nice take offs then with landings. Of course IRL it should be opposite. From my experience with taildraggers landings are much more difficult then take offs and taking offs are fairly easy done.

Thx for manual. Really nice ED work on manual. Brilant.

Could someone upload DCS K-4 manual?

I just compared it to RL 109 G-4 landing when in similar position and speed slats were open in it. But looking at DCS videos with K-4 take off and landing i think it looks very good like real 109 :) Ohh maby not in second take off in Eight Ball video - i dont think that in real 109 he could recover from such situation :P

Well second take off looks strange. I think 109 should stall like the hell after aribone with such wing drop and you should make big boom on the ground like it was with first take off. Also looking at DavidRed landing i saw that during approach before touch down at speed below 200 kph and nose up position slats were still closed - i think they should be full open. ( in 109 slats open about 200 kph with increasing angle of attack)

Well i tried similar things with F-15 but it behave like other clasical planes and can't get such inverted depart like with Su27.

Well truly speaking in P-51 you should have hardly chance to win 1 vs 1 dogfight against K-4

Can someone explain me why in DCS Su27 after pass negative AoA got steady inverted depart? As i know most planes can't keep such position in inverted or normal flight. Plane if stall and dont have slip input drop its nose byself. It could be in normal or inverted fly. After all planes would drop its nose - thats how planes are constructed. Or if it would be slip input plane eventually would got spin (normal or inverted). But from some unkown for me reason Su27 in DCS when got inverted depart it could stay it until crash? No inverted spin just depart like a stone. Why plane can't drop its nose byself in such configuration? It looks really strange to me.

Strange it should be more forgive and smooth then 190 or P-51 cause slats help a lot here. Mark Hanna report about 109 handling ( also at slow speed with slats open): The roll rate is very good and very positive below about 250 mph. This is particularly true of the Charles Church's Collection clipped wing aircraft. Our round tipped aeroplane is slightly less nice to feel. With the speed further back the roll rate remains good, particularly with a bit of help from the rudder. Above 250 mph however the roll starts to heavy up and up to 300 or so is very similar to a P-51. After that it's all getting pretty solid and you need two hands on the stick for any meaningfull roll rates. Another peculiarity is that when you have been in a hard turn with the slats deployed, and then you roll rapidly one way and stop, there is a strange sensation for a second of so of a kind of dead area over the ailerons - almost as if they are not connected ! Just when you are starting to get worried they work again ! Pitch is also delighful at 250 mph and below. It feels very positve and the amount of effort on the control column needed to produce the relevant nose movement seems exactly right to me. As CL max is reached the leading edge slats deploy - together if the ball is in the middle, slightly asymmetrically if you have any slip on. The aircraft delights in being pulled into hard manuevering turns at these slower speeds. As the slats pop out you feel a slight "notching" on the stick and you can pull more until the whole airframe is buffeting quite hard. A little more and you will drop a wing, but you have to be crass to do it unintentionally. Pitch tends to heavy up above 250 mph but it is still easily manageable up to 300 mph and the aircraft is perfectly happy carrying out low-level looping maneuvers from 300 mph and below. Above 300 mph one peculiarity is a slight nose down trim change as you accelerate. This means that running in for an airshow above 300 mph the aeroplane has a slight tucking in sensation - a sort of desire to get down to ground level ! This is easily held on the stick or can be trimmed out but is slightly surprising initially. Maneuvering above 300, two hands can be required for more aggressive performance. EIther that or get on the trimmer to help you. Despite this heavying up it is still quite easy to get at 5G's at these speeds. The rudder is effective and if medium feel up to 300. 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 the aeroplane. Initial acceleration is rapid, particularly with nose down, up to about 320 mph. After that the '109 starts to become a little reluctant and you have to be fairly determined to get over 350-360 mph. So how does the aeroplane compare with other contemporary fighters ? First, let me say that all my comments are based on operation below 10,000 feet and at power settings not exceeding +12 (54") and 2700 rpm. I like it as an aeroplane, and with familiarity I think it will give most of the allied fighters I have flown a hard time, particularly in a close, hard turning, slow speed dog-fight. It will definitely out-maneuver a P-51 in this type of flight, the roll rate and slow speed characteristics being much better. The Spitfire on the other hand is more of a problem for the '109 and I feel it is a superior close in fighter. Having said that the aircraft are sufficiently closely matched that pilot abilty would probably be the deciding factor. At higher speeds the P-51 is definitely superior, and provided the Mustang kept his energy up and refused to dogfight he would be relatively safe against the '109. Other factors affecting the '109 as a combat plane include the small cramped cockpit. This is quite a tiring working environment, although the view out (in flight) is better than you might expect; the profuseion of canopy struts is not particularly a problem.

Something looks strange to me with these inverted stall depart of Su27. I think if planes is not in inverted spin but just inverted stall depart it should drop nose by itself without doing any reaction from pilot. And from inverted spin it should recover using correct procedure. So i think ivnerted stall depart of Su27 actually in DCS it is probably flight model bug, similar like with sudden negative G push going to inverted with stabilisation ON - i suppose no plane fly like these way.

I use FF stick ( FF is on) . Trim doesn't any effect with stabilization ON. Work only with stabilization OFF.

I use full trim for both side ( pitch up and down) and with stabilisation dont see any changes in pitch. With stabilisation off - using trim up or down is noticable imidietly.

Trim work only with stabilisation off ( S). Other way trim dont work at all and Su27 fly constanly with pitch up tenendcy. I see no changes in pitch using trim with stabilisation ON. So something is wrong with trim. Also planes behave strange way with negative pitch apply like stabilisation dont work in these situtation. Planes go imidietly invert position and depart on its back . For comparion F15 can't do such things just stall when you reach negative critical AOA. So Su27 behave very strange to me

How Su27 shoulda fly : https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=272495789475221

Yea very nice flight model. Hehe You should make video also with negative pitch when plane go imidetly go on its back. F-15 new FM yes i like it it looks realistic to me but Su 27 actually big no no.

For me trimm doesn't effect anything in pitch. Nor secondary trimm way - with button 3. Thats why plane still flying pitching up and need constant forward stick. Planes behave strange with negative pitch - like any plane i have seen. Its turn immidetly on its back then depeart on these position. ( ASC is ON) I dunno but it doesn't look too much realistic to me.

Im new with FC in DCS ( before i tried FC 2.0 and earlier version) but when i tried new F-15 comparing to new Su27 i think F-15 fly much more beliveable to me then Su27. F-15 react as i expect from such plane and i think it have very good flight model. But Su27? Negative pitch in Su27 made crazy things with plane, not possible to do in F-15. F-15 stall with negative pitch but in natural way, Su27 with negaitve pitch just suddelny move to on its back react very strange. Also trimms for me dont do not any notiacble job. The same with alternative timm - with button3 on joy - dont make any change in trimm - i press and hold button move stick then off button - not any noticable change for me ( i got FF stick). I think old Mig29 behave more beliveable to me then new Su27.