-
Posts
405 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by wernst
-
admirable landing skills! any headwind? How fast was the carrier moving forward? How about Dora take off from this carrier?
-
congrats, best landing performance ever seen
-
. . . yes, it's all about practice. But where and how has YoYo demonstrated a 400 m landing roll? It's not that I'm dubious about this landing performance, but I want to know the limits of a perfect Dora landing. My best try was 480 m landing roll . . . without any headwind vector! Remember: At the time when the Dora was built most of the German airfield were grass strips with an average lenght of 800 m only.
-
I agree - FULLY!!! Yes, the Dora has a quite challenging FM - quite similar to the true flight characteristic of the real thing. Verified by a real WWII Pilot! Just this challenge makes this sim matchless. What do you want? Easy flying? O.k., Why not switch to GAME mode. It will cure all your issues and complaints about bugs. When I started to fly the Dora I realized, that it is the most defying sim plane I ever have flown. Now, after some weeks of flying, I gain more and more safe control in take-offs and landings, I achieve an increasing number of successes. Learning curve! That's the positive sense of achievement. If DCS planes would be easy to fly I wouldn't fly them. Biologist’s say: Even an octopus can learn. It’s all about learning curve, not bugs. W.E. (real taildragger pilot)
-
In the phase of takeoff run wings may not stall before they have built up enough lift (dynamic pressure). Just to avoid left wing lowering (and stall) because of torque effect the pilot should give some right aileron in advance. It compensates for the torque in advance and prepares for the moment, when the plane is in transition from roll to lift. At this moment the prop torque has full impact on the roll axis and on the wings from being level. The theories behind forces which have impact on the plane during takeoff are more than complex: Yaw, torque, P-factor (propeller’s angle of attack), gyroscopic precession are the key factors which either boost or agitate against each other at the same time. However, an important question is: How well have these 4 factors been implemented in the flight model (FM) of the Dora? These factors are describing the flight physics of real planes. We may discuss different Dora takeoff methods FROM THEORY but we don’t know which of these factors are relevant for the virtual Dora and which not. The FM of Dora is by far the most intrigue and perfect aviation simulation for any existing PC environment. But it is still a simulation, not reality. Therefore, back to practice: Here is an example of a famous war bird the F4U Corsair, built from early 40th to late 50th This powerful bird had aileron trim. For takeoff the pilot sets rudder 6 deg. right and aileron 6 deg. right wing down. Here is a F4U instruction video, see clip at 6:20 http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/F4U.html Again, it’s all about the learning curve from multiple exercises.
-
Some more remarks about theory and practice of takeoff The theories behind forces which have impact on the plane during takeoff are more than complex: Yaw, torque, P-factor (propeller’s angle of attack), gyroscopic precession are the key factors which either boost or agitate against each other at the same time. An important question is: How well have these 4 factors been implemented in the flight model (FM) of the Dora? These factors are describing the flight physics of real planes. We may discuss different Dora takeoff methods FROM THEORY but we don’t know which of these factors are relevant for the virtual Dora and which not. The FM of Dora is by far the most intrigue and perfect aviation simulation for any existing PC environment. But it is still a simulation, not reality. Therefore, back to practice: Here is an example of a famous war bird the F4U Corsair, built from early 40th to late 50th This powerful bird had aileron trim. For takeoff the pilot sets rudder 6 deg. right and aileron 6 deg. right wing down. Here is a F4U instruction video, see clip at 6:20 http://www.zenoswarbirdvideos.com/F4U.html Whether it complies with theory or not, I’m able to successfully master takeoffs in the Dora as follows: Max power (full throttle to START) straightway from the beginning of the takeoff run hold the stick fully back and keep the plane centered on the runway by "determined" rudder control until 170 km/h are gained At about 170 - 180 km/h don't center the stick to the precise middle position but carefully to a little more middle-right position. With the right wing a little down the Dora stays more safely on the runway as to apply too much right rudder only. Even with crosswinds, regardless from right or left, apply “some” amount of right rudder and right aileron. Don't just throw in any amount of right aileron. Let the airplane tell you what it needs then give that to the airplane. This goes for BOTH, for aileron and rudder correction. The airplane will tell you what it wants. Fly this way and you'll do just fine. Again, it’s all about the learning curve from multiple exercises . . . . this rule applies for real or sim planes equally.
-
Yes, stick full(!) back immediately after 3-point landing, that’s it. Surprisingly I found that applying both wheel brakes fully right after touch down causes no head stand. (as it would be the case with the P-51D) Applying both brakes evenly - not any rudder control - keeps the Dora straight on the runway, minor corrections with each single brake may be made in roll out later. Here my practice (watch from 2:10) “…strangely difficult to apply both brakes exactly evenly”. With my Saitek Pro Flight Combat Rudder I don’t have that issue. But, why not using key “W” (both wheel brakes) on your keyboard?
-
best take-off practice? I'm applying rudder AND (!) aileron control theory: At high power and low airspeed (as in take-off runs) the prop wash effect causing the plane to yaw to the left (prop rotating clockwise). The pilot compensates this force through (right) rudder control. Fine, that’s what we are all doing, more or less, initially. But there is another physical force in take-off runs. The effect of propeller torque has an influence on the roll axis. This force isn't countered by moving the rudder but by lowering the appropriate wing via aileron control. For planes with props which rotating clockwise the pilot has to apply some right aileron (right wing a little down) in order to counter the aircraft's left roll tendency. practice: At about 170 - 180 km/h I do not center the stick (carefully) to the precise middle position but a little to the middle-right position. With the right wing a little down the Dora stays more safely on the runway as to apply too much right rudder only. Even with crosswinds, regardless from right or left, I apply a well dosed amount of right rudder and right aileron. The learning curve from multiple exercises will give you a feeling for the optimum amount of combined right rudder and right aileron control. BTW: I apply max power (full throttle to START) straightway from the beginning of the takeoff run (not any “2500 rpm” or “gradually increase” technique) happy take off - safe landing
-
Yes, Godpeed, right rudder AND right aileron, that’s what I practice as well successfully, in sim and in reality. theory: At high power and low airspeed (as take-off run) the prop wash effect causing the plane to yaw to the left. The pilot compensates this force through right rudder control. O.k. that’s what we are all doing, more or less. But there is another effect in take-off runs. The effect of propeller torque is an influence about the roll axis. It’s not countered by moving the rudder but by lowering the appropriate wing via aileron control. For planes with props which rotating clockwise the pilot has to apply some right aileron (right wing a little down) in order to counter the aircraft roll left tendency. practice: At about 170 - 180 km/h I don’t center the stick to the precise middle position but a little to the middle-right. With the right wing a little down the Dora stays better on the runway than applying too much right rudder only. Even with crosswinds, regardless from right or left, I apply a well dosed amount of right rudder and right aileron. The learning curve from multiple exercises will give you a feeling for the optimum amount of combined right rudder and right aileron.
-
Assuming that you have aligned your approach and landing touch down excactly to the runway heading and you have performed a perfect three-point landing - then - above 100 km/h: apply BOTH wheel brakes equally, fully - forget any rudder control - below 100 km/h: use single wheelbrakes carefully to steer and keep the Dora on the runway That's all.
-
yes, but make sure to apply BOTH wheel brakes after touch down equally. If landing roll speed has decreased try to stay on the runway by tapping on the appropiate single brake.
-
landing speed of gliders at touch down with full speed brakes applied is less than 60 km/h. Landing roll on grass fields (no headwind) will usually take then less than 50 m. Rudder helps a bit to get clear from the runway, even one does not steer at all nothing serious will happen. W.E. (PPL-A,-C pilot)
-
It’s not a bug - it’s the learning curve wolfstriked said: “It’s not a bug its more that the FM is a bitch to handle.” He is right. Yes, the Dora has a quite challenging FM - quite similar to the true flight characteristic of the real thing. But, what do you want? Easy flying? O.k., switch to GAME. It will cure all your issues you are complaining about here. e.g. rudder off center: With my own 1947 built taildragger I experienced this kind of rudder displacement quite often. The rudder control cables are quite long. They are aging, getting longer, getting flimsy, due to temp and other influences. Unfortunately the elongation appears not always equally on both sides. As result, the rudder behaves not always as being centered and tightly stretched. The ground crew may correct this displacement from case to case by bending the fixed trim tabs on the rudder. But also these trim tab settings may change from flight to flight in an unwanted way. These are true imperfections which you'll face in reality - why do you want the FM being smooth and perfect here? If you feel the Dora needs more right rudder than left (sure it does), just apply more right rudder. After a couple of flights you’ll learn to handle this deviation. It’s like shooting with one specific rifle. After some shots, which missed the center of the round target, you’ll get a feeling for the amount of pointing at off center in order to hit center. It’s a learning curve. When I started to fly the Dora I realized, that it is the most challenging sim plane I ever have flown. Now, after some weeks of flying, I gain more and more safe control in take-offs and landings, I achieve an increasing number of successes. Learning curve! That's fun. Recently I have shown a stable spot landing on the threshold with landing roll below 500 m. Great. I was happy. My second success was a safe power off landing from 4.000 m above field. Even more happy. Would it be possible to get this feeling of success with an autopilot landing? In any combat mission you'll face events which require your specific reaction, immediately. There is no predictable scenario. Take-offs and landings are part of this unpredictable scenario. THAT IS the true fun of the sim! Biologist’s say: Even an octopus can learn. Yes, it’s all about learning curve, not bugs. W.E. (Germany - which explains the clumsy English)
-
To which "document (page 2 item 5)" are you referring to? I'm interested to know more about radiator flaps control. The flaps can be operated manually on the ground, opening and closing, slowly but surely, seen from outside view. But as soon as the Dora is in the air the flaps operate automatically ignoring any manual control. This is seems to be logic for engine temp overheat safety reasons. My question is, what then is the purpose of having manual control at all?
-
Hi Godpeed, I refer to your youtube video “DCS FW190 deadstick.1st landing” If this was your first Dora flight with first landing attempt even after engine died and prop stopped spinning . . . Why then complain about "struggling with landing"? Was it skills or one time luck? A “lively” dead stick landing as shown in your video can’t be luck, it couldn’t have been done better (except a little dancing at the end of landing roll) If you can perform a dead stick landing as such what is difficult about a normal landing with full power control? Meanwhile I was also able to provoke an engine seize with prop spinning stop. It’s not that easy, the Jumo 213-A1 was sturdy built and is not as critical heat sensitive as e.g. the DCS P-51D. It took me more than 20 minutes flight with max. power (throttle to “START”, 3.250 rpm) and MW-50 boost switch “EIN” until Dora's engine died and the prop stopped spinning. I was lucky to perform a dead stick emergency landing without damage from 6.000 ft above the near field.
-
Fw 190 D-9 emergency landing after simulated engine failure Engine failure may occur in or off combat mission. This video demonstrates an emergency landing after simulated engine shut down (throttle: "AUS", fuel selector: "ZU", magnetos: "0") from 4.000 ft above field (KRYMSK) happy flying - safe landing
-
your video is now listed as "private", no access anymore. Any reason? When I've seen the video first I was wondering why the prop wasn't spinning. Even with engine power off the prop will keep spinning in the air, at least slowly. The prop only stops altogether due to a jammed or poorly turning engine. I wonder whether this type of engine failure has been implemented into Dora's system sim.
-
you have passed your Fw 190 D-9 Rating successfully, ready for combat mission. You're well prepared for an off field landing after engine stop which might be rather likely happen in combat
-
spot landing on runway threshold with landing roll below 500 m Before any 190 D-9 pilot was sent on combat mission he had to show that he is able to takoff and land the Dora safely. At the time the Dora was in operation most of the German airfields were grass strips with an average runway length of 800 m (2600 ft). After some attempts I was able to take off orderly, repeatedly, having no damage. Meanwhile my take off runs do not require more than 500m (1640 ft). Stick back, full (!) power, keep it (rudder) on the runway, at 170 km/h center stick slowly - lift off. But trying to get to ground safely was a major challenge. Initial landing attempts were only successful provided that I used more or less 2.000 m (6.600 ft) of the runway length to full stop. Therefore I was complaining in the forum that it’s impossible to land the Dora on short fields with e.g. 800 m runway length. I was wrong, fully wrong. It IS possible!!! Yo-Yo reported that he was able to land the Dora with less than 800m landing roll. His remark has stimulated my ambition. After many systematic trials with different landing techniques I managed to land and stop the Dora even below 500m away from the start of the runway. And I was able to perform a stable spot landing in 3 point configuration right on the threshold of the KRYMSK runway 22. See the Video here: For reference I have put 3 containers at the right side right of the runway 22. The first container is 500m (1640 ft) away from start of the runway, the second 600m (1970 ft) and the third 700m (2300 ft) As you can see in the video I was flying a flat approach with minimum sink rate during the last 300 m before reaching the threshold. The speed during this approach is shown in the insert. About 500 m before the runway IAS was 250 km/h with power setting of 1800 rpm. While slowly, carefully increasing the angle of attack the plane slows down to about 220 km/h. Be careful! If you pull too much the plane may stall easily. 50 - 100 m before touch down I only control the final sink rate by pulling throttle back gently. After touch down I apply full (!) both wheel brakes. I was wondering that I experienced no headstand. Dora's brake characteristic is much different to the P-51D. The P-51D pilot may only deploy the wheel brakes with extreme care. And I was wrong saying elsewhere that the Fw 190 D-9’s flying properties are not really predictable. The more you’re getting used to the properties of this specific flying model the more confidence you’re building in the Dora, she is a truly predictable plane. To me the Fw 190 D-9 appears even more stable than the flying properties of the P-51D. Happy flying - safe landings W.E., Germany
-
Hi Yo-Yo Just to confirm and close my discussion about the runway length required to land the D-9. After many attempts I was able to perform some full stop landings in the range of 700 to 800 m runway length. You are fully right, it IS possible! Instead of flying with a standard (more steep) angle of attack I tried a more flat approach configuration. I kept the speed during the last 500 m before the threshold up to 250 km/h IAS with a power setting of 1700 -2000 rpm. For the touchdown point I have not the real threshold in view but an imaginary threshold, which is placed about 300 m before the start of the runway. When reaching my imaginary threshold (not the real one) I reduce throttle slowly while holding the plane in smooth flare. When getting tin can height above ground I further reduce throttle slowly until the plane settles down in a 3 point landing configuration. As soon as I feel touchdown I apply brakes . . . but I don’t use the single left and right rudder wheel brakes but the “Wheel brake Both” function (keyboard “W”). I know, it's a cheat function. This cheat function applies brake power to both brakes equally, with maximum effect. It keeps the plane straight on the runway, avoiding any damage, like headstand or mowing the grass. Happy flying - safe landings
-
Congrats, Yo-Yo. I do not have a flight instructor (SEP) licence but I herewith will sign your Fw 190 D-9 rating. You have passed the most difficult task of D-9 flying. This is not irony but true admiration. When reading your thread I begin to understand what my problem could be. You mentioned, that touch down is 400 after the threshold, which is a fair assumption. Consequently, in your case, it leaves 360 m for the landing roll. An old tail dragger wisdom says, that landing is only completed when the plane has stopped fully. It means, after I get the plane down on the runway, I’m half through, it’s part 1. To slow down from 180 km/h to zero is the next landing challenge, it’s part 2. I apply brakes always carefully as I was used to do this with my own (real) taildragger. Once I have seen a tail dragger after landing not only in headstand but in full rollover. That image still effects me deeply. And here we are. Most of the WWII landing fields were grass strips. Grass does not only moderate bumping and jumping, but it has a natural resistance against any turning wheel. Grass is a natural brake assistance which we are missing in DCS world. I probably would pass my Fw 190 D-9 rating if there is any grass strip available in DCS world.
-
yes, that's also for me the only way I can manage to get the plane down safely. Mostly this landing attitude takes up to 2.000 m of the runway length for full stop. Yes, all DCS world "runways are plenty long" - made for heavy metal. Please note, that at the time when the Fw 190 D-9 was going to service most of the German airfields were grass strips with an average runway length of 800 to 1200 m. Only very few fields were later (1942 -) extended with concrete runways with a length up to 1400 m. I'll get my 190 D-9 rating only when I'm able to land this plane on runways not longer than 1.000 m. W.E. (PPL Pilot from Germany)
-
"780m"!?! well done. If you have headwind it might even be shorter. Great, unbelievable. It's only possible to hit the start of the runway - when you are tin can high 5 - 10m before the runway starts - when have a perfect setting for speed and rate of descent which enable smooth flare and smooth touchdown - when, after touchdown, you apply wheel brakes carefully but efficiently at the same time Trying to hit the start of the runway or the threshold is highly ambitious not to say only possible by fortune. I'd like to see videos here from those lucky pilots.
-
How would Fw190 D-9 land on real WWII airfields?! Well, finally I managed to land the D9 safely into Krymsk. Repeatedly. So far so good. But I was always using almost the full length of the runway, which is 8.530 ft or 2.600 meter. At the time when the Fw 190 D-9 was going to service most of the German airfields were grass strips with an average runway length of 800 to 1200 m. Only very few fields were later extended with concrete runways with a length up to 1400 m. I have no idea how I could bring down this special bird safely on such a short runway as this. All the landing techniques proposed here assume an approach speed of 220 km/h (IAS) with flaring smoothly to 170 km/h for touch down. If doing so I’ll easily need to have 1500 m to 2000 m landing distance. And, after touch down, I start praying that I may slow down the beast before reaching the end of the 2,6 km runway avoiding a headstand or run into the grass beside the runway. I should mention that I was owner of an real antique tail dragger, I have logged 600 hours flying time on it. Comparing the flight behavior between the D9 with the P-51D I have to say, that the P-51D flies as easy as a toy. The P-51D has an uncritical flying attitude, everything is well under your control. The D-9 in contrast is fully different, unpredictable flying attitude, needs full attention each second. If the flight model of the FW 190 D-9 reproduces the flight physics of the real plane well, then I ask myself, how smart were the young German pilots. These young boys were being deployed to combat only a few weeks after training in a double seated trainer (190 A-5/U1, A-8/U1, S-5). But the D-9 was a fully different single seated plane with fully new flight characteristics.
-
Would you want/ allow flyable civilian aircraft in DCS
wernst replied to Kroll's topic in DCS Wishlist
CIV aircrafts in DCS? Yes, but special planes with special challenges CIV aircrafts in DCS? This is not a valid question for me. As real PPL pilot I fully enjoy flying DCS planes: A-10C, UH-1H and P-51D. But always unarmed. Never done any combat mission. Flying itself is the fun factor for me in the DCS world. Just enjoying the high fidelity simulation of the aircraft systems and adore the perfect flight model. Each aircraft has its very own flying challenge and provides different immersion feelings. Technique and flight character of each aircraft has been amazingly well engineered for the sim. Flying an ILS approach with the A-10C in a rainy night, land the UH-1H on a flat roof or exercise touch and go with crosswind in the P-51D taildragger keeps my blood pressure always in an unhealthy range. The immersion feeling is as near to reality as it ever can get. No other (noncommercial) flight sim is even close to this experience which DCS planes give. DCS is unique in this sense. On my wish list for CIV planes are not planes like B747 or a C150/172, not at all. If you want to fly a B747 from e.g. KLAX to EDDF take a B747 of FSX, switch the AP to ON and lean back for more than 12 hours. If you arrive in bad weather at EDDF let the AP do the ILS approach. If AUTO BRAKE is on, you may even sleep until the Jumbo stands still. Does this kind of simulation give you any challenge or Immersion feeling? Does this kind of straight level flight need an ATC? Why a worldwide map? Here we are. For some of us combat is the main challenge, flying is the vehicle for it. For others flying is the main challenge. Airplanes are the vehicles for it, regardless whether they are built for MIL or CIV missions. Here is my wish list for new DCS aircrafts. All of them have flight challenges, which are different to the challenges of the existent planes: EXTRA 300 or YAK 50 Pure aerobatic beasts. The challenge here is flying maneuvers involving aircraft attitudes that are not used in normal flight. No bombs, no complex flight system, only a broad set of “extra” piloting skills is required. DC-3 / C47 Taming the biggest taildragger on earth. Control the two P&W 1200 HP radial engines properly. Basic NAV aids only. The challenge starts even before take-off by keeping the DC-3 right on the taxiway. L-39 Albatros Solid built single engine jet, two seated trainer, aerobatic capable (see famous aerobatic team Wjasma Rus), L-39 is considered to be underpowered, which means you have to care keeping the bird flying at low speed. Happy flying - safe landings