Fox One

https://youtu.be/fDjElbv3TNM?t=36 The video has poor resolution, but is interesting to me because shortly after the beginning of the takeoff run the pilot pulls the stick fully aft. 7.5 sec after the beginning of the takeoff run the nose wheel lifts; 3 sec later the aircraft lifts off. In the real flight manual the takeoff speed with full AB is given as 230-250 Km/h. An elementary calculation shows that in the video at nose wheel liftoff the speed is easily north of 150 Km/h, and that’s a very conservative estimation. An element clearly visible – during rotation the stick is quickly brought to a position close to neutral (stabilator close to neutral) then just 1.5 sec after nose wheel liftoff the “second stick pull” is clearly observed – meaning the speed has exceeded 200 Km/h, the axial air intakes have opened producing a nose-down pitch moment so a stick pull is necessary to maintain pitch angle. This strongly suggest a nose wheel liftoff speed in the 170-180 Km/h range. The fact that is a two seater doesn’t matter. The two seater has an empty weigth 85 Kg less than a 9-12 single seater, that’s completely negligible. In track “takeoff MiG-29-2” I try to recreate the takeoff from the video. The nose wheel lifts at a comical speed: 80Km/h. Then despite the small speed the aircraft has so much ”desire” to rotate that, to avoid scraping the nozzles on the runway I have to actually push the stick to not allow the pitch rate to increase too much. I even reach a FULL PUSH and I still overshoot slightly my target pitch angle of 10deg. From the beginning of the takeoff run until the nose wheel lifts there’s just 4 seconds … So here is the most direct comparison: at 123 Km/h I am almost at the end of rotation with stick FULLY PUSHED, while the real aircraft with full aft stick only lifts off nose wheel at more than 150 Km/h, and during rotation there is definitely no stick push observed … If you believe that in simulator that’s just a very specific weirdness that only manifests if the stick is pulled fully aft at takeoff, then you’re wrong. In track “takeoff MiG-29-1” at the beginning of the takeoff run I pull the stick just about 1/3 of its total travel. The nose wheel lifts at about 120 Km/h, still much slower than the speed at which the nose wheel lifts off in the real aircraft with stick fully aft! In conclusion, in simulator it is possible to lift the nose wheel at completely unrealistic speeds. takeoff MiG-29-2.trk takeoff MiG-29-1.trk

As is known, at the AOA where the leading edge flaps are lowered, the differential stabilator is switched off. Above 18 deg AOA the aileron deflection angle starts to decrease and at max AOA it is only +/-5 deg. So at max AOA the only control surfaces generating roll is +/-5 deg ailerons. The result – at high AOA you move the stick laterally and nothing happens. Of course, the real aircraft has aileron-rudder interconnect. See attached pages from flight manual. How could an aircraft of this kind NOT have aileron-rudder interconnect? Even the MiG-23 has an implementation of lateral stick-to-rudder interconnect. The ARM-150 actuator in the rudder channel has an authority of +/-8 deg. I’m curious what the developers think this +/-8 deg is “reserved” for. At any stick input, no matter the AOA, the automatics in the rudder channel do nothing to help you. The rudders don’t deflect at all; they just sit there dead. The only way you can “convince” the automatics in the rudder channel to show you they’re not dead is to press a rudder pedal fully, then release it. The quite substantial yaw rate generated the rudders will try to counter by an anemic 1 deg or so deflection.

In simulator leading edge and trailing edge flaps lower simultaneously. In video, leading edge flaps lower in about 1sec, trailing edge flaps in about 2.5sec https://youtu.be/6uy0BdmL-Eo?t=99

In the image is a scan from real FKP-EU gun camera film. This in the only search mode where the line at the right edge of display area also appears on HUD. This is from 9-12A aircraft. https://www.flickr.com/photos/187848316@N03/54804728234/in/album-72177720329192972

In the image is a scan from real FKP-EU gun camera film. As can be seen, when the range scale changes from 25 Km to 10 Km, the Rmax1 mark doesn’t just disappear. It remains at the top of the range scale. This is from 9-12A aircraft. https://www.flickr.com/photos/187848316@N03/54804727989/in/album-72177720329192972

In the attached track, with the aircraft trimmed for horizontal flight at 300kts I perform two fast rolls (@0m53s). The high lift devices were selected off, so that the configuration of the aircraft would remain constant during rolls (anyway with high lift devices set to auto the results are nearly identical ). To avoid inadvertently applying a small pitch input during rolls, for this test the pitch was disconnected from the stick. Pitch before rolls was controlled with trim. The initial AOA before the rolls was 4.3 deg. During the first roll, the AOA at first decreased slightly then increased to 11.6 deg at the end of the first roll. During the second roll the AOA continued to increase to 14.2 deg (after about 45 deg roll) then decreased to a minimum of 5.6 deg, then started to increase again with 14.5 deg at the end of the second roll, generating 3.3G . My question to developers: isn’t the increase in AOA during rolls of up to 14 deg too much? 2 fast rolls.trk

I have performed again the test described in the post above using the latest version of the sim, track attached. I don’t think I see an improvement. In the video, when the roll ends the ball on the artificial horizon was displaced about one diameter. From the moment when the roll ends it takes the ball only half a second to be centered again. In simulator, when roll ends the ball goes FULL left, then FULL right, then center. From the moment the roll ends it takes the ball 3 seconds until is centered again!!! The nose still yaws at huge angles until the yawing motion stops. The sim and the video still are night and day. I am sure the real aircraft doesn’t yaw so badly after a roll in identical conditions, even with the rudder damper switch off. Such an aircraft would not have been accepted for operational service, even half a century ago. This is the only aircraft in DCS that during a roll the longitudinal axis of the aircraft rotates on a large cone, it looks shocking even in cockpit view. This is the only aircraft in DCS that, after a fast roll can’t be stopped precisely where you want, the controllability is way too imprecise. This is the only aircraft in DCS that, after a roll it takes 3 seconds for the resulting chaos to fully die down. Awesome “handling qualities” for an aircraft with a pretty sophisticated flight control system This simulation has been in EA for over a year now. It should be by now in a pretty well polished state. It is not. IMO this FM is still not ready for EA. It is still in a way too rudimentary state. Personally I regret very much buying this module. In my mind I have very greatly overestimated the developer’s competence. I was naive. test1.trk

The upper end of the AOA bracket corresponds to 10 deg AOA instead of 11, track attached. 16-1.trk

@ SOLIDKREATE IndiaFoxtEcho made a poll about aircraft they would like to make for DCS https://forum.dcs.world/topic/308903-what-is-the-aircraft-you-would-like-to-fly-on-dcs-world/ Currently the F-105 is leading...

Here is a knife edge flight without altitude loss: As can be clearly seen from the video, to maintain horizontal flight in knife edge at this alt/speed the pilot must create a beta angle of approximately 10 deg. I have tried in simulator the maneuver in similar alt/speed conditions. Pressing the rudder pedal fully, the beta angle that can be generated in no more than about 5 deg. The lift produced is insufficient and altitude is quickly lost.

On EZ 42 gunsight range scale (screenshot attached) there is a range marking at 600, then another range mark, then... 100. Am I correct to assume the range mark between 600 and 100 corresponds to 350m ? On a serious note, instead of 100 actually there should be 400, as this picture clearly shows https://airandspace.si.edu/collection-media/NASM-A19601563000cp01 Then of course range marks for 300, 200, 100 Currently there is no way to know the inputted range in the 600 - 100m interval that is the most important. Also on the picture of the real gunsight, there are markings for 1000, 800 and 600m with lines between them at half distance, so between 1000 and 600m there are 5 markings. In DCS there are only 4...

In the video already posted in this thread @14m18s the pilot performs an Immelmann followed by a roll and a half during descent I have tried to recreate this using the latest version, track attached. What actually interests me here is the roll. In the video pilot initiates roll at about 130kts, notice how the ball on artificial horizon moves just a little to the right. In my track the ball moves a little left, then hard right, then a little left, then hard right where it remains. I will now compare the last 360 deg of roll, the established roll. The aircraft speed in my track at the beginning and at the end of this roll corresponds pretty well with the video. Roll duration too. Notice in the video how during the roll a point on the ground right in front of the aircraft – the intersection of taxiway to the runway – rotates in a quite small circle. This shows that during the roll the aircraft has a low beta angle, it is almost “pointed”. Now look at my track, watch the aircraft in external view from behind. The aircraft’s longitudinal axis rotates on a cone with a quite substantial tip angle. This happens because during the roll the aircraft has a large beta angle, probably in excess of 10 deg. Because of this, between the start of this established roll and the end of it the aircraft changes its heading with an astonishing 18 deg angle. If the aircraft had a modern HUD, during the roll the velocity vector would leave the HUD sideways. In the video, when the roll ends the nose remains where it was. There is an almost imperceptible yaw oscillation of one or two deg. In my track, because during the roll the flight control system deflects the rudder a lot trying to fight yaw rate/ adverse yaw, when the roll ends the nose goes left 37 deg, then right 11 deg, then left again 6 deg. All the people in this thread already noticed long ago what I described here. Is the developer's official position that actually everything is fine? test2.trk

Comparing the nearly perfect profile picture of the B model posted above by MetalRhino with DCS model, IMO the accuracy of the front cockpit canopy and the transparent part between cockpits leaves something to be desired. Also the angle of windshield arch appears slightly off.

Please see the attached screenshot - between cockpit accelerometer and info bar there is a difference of about 1G.

@ Scandfox Here is a video of an F-16C landing and aerobraking down to about 75kts I would be surprised if the real Mirage 2000 can't hold the nose up even to a lower speed...