Crumpp

That is what I was thinking. Those airplanes photos are not representative of what the human eye sees in the air.

Absolutely! It sets the tactical environment and opens up possibilities that do not exist in the "big fat dot on the horizon and I can see everything world". If spotting is easy then tactical options become artificially limited. Gone is the ability to bounce or disengage unless you can just outrun your opponent. I love the "empty sky syndrome" we have in DCS right now. Several times I have found myself in big furballs one second shooting a Bf-109K off a team mates tail. Then after evading a Dora on my six, completely alone in a big empty sky. Tail radar is a great thing, btw!! Climb back up and reengage... I don't think some of these people are playing online that much. I always find targets. I just read the objectives and follow them. There is almost always a target at the objective area....you just have to scan accordingly!!

That is what it should be to model the most common variant! Good find.

I agree. That is a technical issue computer guys are going to have work out. Those with huge monitors have an unrealistic advantage over those with smaller resolution. Not agreeing with you does not make me a <insert some insulting label> does it? I don't know the others experience in spotting traffic. I only know my experience. I also know that other sims in the past did not require the same scanning technique used in flight to spot traffic. That is just a fact. The big fat dots on the horizon were picked out due to color contrast and not motion.

You can boom and zoom in DCS. http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2313136&postcount=32 The spotting is fine and realistic using a 1920x1080 resolution.

Why do you see definition 1 and 2 as mutually exclusive? They are not and both represent the pilot holding the controls fixed to make the airplane do what he wants.... The only difference is the flight profile he might be expected to fly. That is why you get additional training as a test pilot.

Not even close. Try like a few hundred yards....

Does not effect my opinion or experience at all. As it was pointed out to me, on a computer your hardware makes all the difference in the world. My experience is based on my experience flying almost everyday and having to spot other aircraft in flight. In the real world you have to use a proper scan technique and your eye picks up the movement before the detail. That is well reflected in the game and the same scanning I use at work serves me well in DCS. The huge dots on the horizon found in other games I have tried like IL2 are not realistic and do give the same feel of picking up movement before detail.

Exactly. You can see that in the illustration of what goes on during a force reversal.

Rolling is a an energy neutral behavior. Your velocity will not change because of a coordinated roll. At some point....that some point is when maximum roll velocity is attained, then the aircraft will move to maintain that trimmed speed as sideforce from adverse yaw slows the airspeed causing the aircraft to lose altitude to maintain trim speed but the point is not to keep a constant altitude. That has nothing to do with the roll being coordinated up to the point of maximum roll rate and is a function of adverse yaw effects. If you are doing an aerobatic slow roll or rolling below maximum velocity, you are correct. We are not doing aerobatics, our pilot is doing test flying. No. Think of what happens in a force reversal. In a force reversal, the stick free neutral point moves ahead of the CG while the stick free neutral point remains behind the CG in a conventional tractor design. The pilot feels the force change as reversal of the control forces. He thinks "dammit" I had to pull back and now I am having to push forward to maintain the same turn!! The airplane still flies where he wants with the stability of stick fixed neutral point location. What happens to the stability if he lets go?? It becomes unstable because he is now allowing the controls to float.

Oops, I forgot to add the USN Test Pilot manual chapter 1 with the confidence scale. There never was any misunderstanding of the information or process. Only in the communication of it. For the pilot, stick fixed means hands on the controls...stick free hands off. :thumbup: Depends on what you are measuring. If you are measuring maximum rolling velocity, there is no reason to move it as the roll will remain coordinated until maximum rolling velocity is reached. The NACA testing keeps the rudder fixed in the initial coordinated roll entry that is required for basic roll velocity measurement to determine adverse yaw. Any yaw that develops after the coordinated entry and after maximum roll velocity is attained is a function of the adverse yaw of the aileron design. What will happen if the rudder is not coordinated is the roll rate will slow down because of the sideforce component developing from the adverse yaw. The difference in that rate will give the sideforce component. If the pilot corrected that yaw, roll rate would stay the same. Correcting that would defeat the purpose of measuring adverse yaw. c1[1].pdf

You can see from the trim curves, your foot does not need much if at all depending on the aircraft. If you don't move the elevator that is.... In the air, you do coordinated banks or rolls NOT by looking at the inclinometer (ball and fluid filled tube). You do it visually and by feel by noting the position of the nose on the horizon and adding the amount of rudder required to keep the nose at that point as aileron is applied. You keep the nose rotating straight around the longitudinal axis. http://www.langleyflyingschool.com/Images/Flight%20Training%20Manual/Aircraft%20Axis.jpg

We are and that is what I said that in the beginning.

In fact, this is the entire reason for confidence levels in test flying. It tells the engineer how well the pilot flew the profile. I have included chapter 1 of the USN Test pilot manual that explains the confidence level scale. Here is a flight test procedure for determining the stick fixed and stick free nuetral points of any airplane. Here is the instrumentation used to measure the data required: Notice at NO POINT does the test require the pilot to "fix" the stick. He flies to the trim point and data is measured for later reduction by the engineers. http://www.iitk.ac.in/aero/fltlab/stability.html The NACA used similar analog instrumentation..old fashion strain gauges and tensiometers. In fact, I used a 1942 tensiometer to check cable tensions on a Piper Cub as part of my A&P practical test years ago. http://aviationmiscmanuals.tpub.com/TM-1-1500-204-23-9/css/TM-1-1500-204-23-9_124.htm

There are not being moved throughout the test. They are held fixed by the pilot. In fact, if I don't have ability to fix the controls in the position I want to make the airplane do what I want....I am not a pilot....I am a passenger. Exactly the way the NACA did it and is in practice today. Force gauges, protractors on the control system, tensiometers on the cables, and standard photographic instruments developed by the NACA. It is exactly what they did. It is standard instruments of the day adopted for their purpose. Gather the data and run it thru the math. Again, that was one of the breakthroughs in Stability and Control engineering that the NACA gets credit for Effte. They did flight measurements or forces, hinge moments with control surface deflection while the aircraft was under the pilot's control. I went to college too for this stuff, too. If you have issues with that fact, PM me and I will put you in touch with the professor and career test pilot that taught the class. Here you can see in the NACA flight testing of the F6F. Rudder fixed, the control surface is deflected by the increase in force and the PILOT compensates. The engineer has all the data he needs, control deflection, force measurement, velocity, etc. to calculate the lateral control characteristics of the design. I have no doubt it was done this way as well. You can examine typical directional trim curves and deduce that this method will work for a majority of flight conditions as the directional trim is typically speed stable for a good portion of the envelope. It does not work for all of them. The result is the same though as the information needed for the calculator is available. Again, that is one of the break through in Stability and Control research that the NACA gets credit for...the ability to measure all the important parameters in flight with the pilot at the controls.

No it is not. That being said, drag estimates for the design are all over the map. Some the B series is ahead and others the D series.

It was pointed out that this very much depends on your hardware. I have a 1920x1080 monitor and the spotting is well...spot on. Aircraft are hard to spot in the air. Very few have the "eagle eyes" required of an ace. Adopt a proper scan technique just like is required in reality and the spotting is not that difficult. That is the key. The spotting ranges in DCS remind me very much of what I see almost everyday spotting traffic alerts from ATC.

Here is another PEC chart for the P-51 dated 15 June 1945:

A turtleneck smooths the airflow reducing separation drag that a bubble canopy almost always has USAstarkey. Why do you think so many unlimited racing P-51's removed the bubble canopy for a turtleneck?

Yep! Rudder "fixed" at the trim point simply means the pilot keeps the roll coordinated with his foot.

That should be "and coordinated rudder". :smilewink:

I agree.

Yes...just YES!! You and Yo-Yo are correct from the point of view of the calculator. I am correct from the point of view of the test pilot. Yo-Yo should have access to trained test pilots at The Fighter Collection to confirm. That was the real breakthrough at the NACA, developing the instrumentation and methods to measure the stick forces, hinge moments, and control deflections in flight needed to advance stability and control engineering as a science.

Fixed means fixed by the pilots foot as he puts in the amount of rudder required to keep it trimmed.

Key phrase..... :thumbup: The aileron is fixed by the stops. The rudder has no stop except where the pilot puts it to maintain coordinated roll. You do not bicycle either. If you have to do that, you have over controlled the entry. Lead the bank with enough rudder to eliminate the nose moments on the longitudinal axis as you apply aileron.