bbrz

Anticipation and knowing the approximately required RPM and corresponding throttle position is the key. These problems make it obvious why flying becomes unnecessary difficult when you are flying different aircraft at the same time.

If you touch down at idle, with the speed decreasing and no or little attitude change, how can you be airborne again within a split second? ;) Furthermore an important part during the touch and go is to lower the nose to the takeoff attitude or even lower after the mainwheel touchdown.

You can't be too fast. The only things that make you bounce are a too high sinkrate and/or pitch up at touchdown. If you apply forward stick when doing a wheel landing and the sinkrate it very low, you will not bounce, regardless of the speed.

Furthermore you should learn to fly/land the Sukhoi by managing thrust manually. Relying on automation due to the inability to manually control your airplane is a definite no-go IMO.

Here are few different examples, three point and wheel landings. Use whichever technique makes you happy.

If you do a wheel landing, (touching down on the maingear only in a flat attitude) many aircraft tend to skip back into the air, even if the touchdown isn't perfectly smooth. In this case there is actually a secret. At touchdown you have to immediately apply a bit of forward stick to avoid the pitch up and hence bounce. Some aircraft, e.g. the DC-3, usually only perform wheel landings.

During a touch and go you land as usual, don't understand why this should cause a bounce? No secrets.

Why should they? If you apply an pitch up command you definitely don't want it to cease on its own. If it's self-centering it's like an arcade game.

That's not supercruise. Per definition it's a significantly higher Mach number than 1.0, e.g. > M1.4.

That's one of the problems in many forums. One can have detailed knowledge, data etc. but all this will very seldom change the mind from people who have a fixed mindset, like nighthawk2174. This can be frustrating, but don't let this keep you from posting valuable first hand info :)

The stabilator has a fixed up/down limit which can only be utilized with the stick. With the trim you can move the stabilator only within this range. A difference in elevator effectiveness due to trim occurs only with an adjustable stabilizer.

Haven't tested lately, but the main problem is that there's no difference in stopping distance with antiskid on and off, which doesn't make any sense. Like with the F/A-18, antiskid on brakes are approx 30% too weak and I don't understand why ED considers the F/A-18 and F-16 brakes to be ok.

Of course you can flare the F/A-18, you just don't cut the throttle during the flare, that's what I was trying to say.

If you pull the throttles back to idle during the flare (which you shouldn't btw.) the throttles will remain at flight idle after WoW IRL as well. You have to manually pull the throttles further back in this case. No significant difference IMO.

Nope. Still suffers from the suck-down-phenomenon at very low altitude.

Isn't the S-3 carrier based? (buddy refueling not possible with the A-D models)

Because the screenshot says IAS?

Yesterday I bought a Rift S since I have a rather low spec PC for VR and even with the limited FOV and rather fuzzy scenery it's a great experience, even for a RW pilot like me. I can't imagine what an unbelievable experience it must be for people who have never flown a high performance plane IRL. TIR doesn't provide even 10% if the immersion of VR.

I believe that you are having wrong expections about blown tires and collapsing landing gear. That said, if you have only on/off brakes (like I do), slowing down the F-5 without drag chute isn't a nice experience. edit: just tested and (at least) with the latest beta directional control with full braking has become noticeable better! :)

That apparently depends on your expectations about an EA release. I'm enjoying the F-16 a lot :)

Furthermore the thread title violates forum rules 1.14.

Recording the sound at e.g. 3000 rpm on ground wouldn't be very realistic anyway for the required in-flight-sound, since the propeller blade angle will be much lower, which results in noticeable different sound than with the aircraft in flight.

The antidkid system is, like in the F/A-18, still broken. With the antiskid working, the wheels shouldn't intermittently lock up and there should be no rubber marks with 100% braking. The landing roll should be also considerable shorter than with antiskid off, which istn't the case.

Just tested and didn't notice any difference either.

Definitely not seing this problem. Neither in pitch nor in roll. And the roll problem seems to be fixed since the latest patch for most users.