bbrz

The higher the speed, the more effective the speedbrakes (applies to all aircraft). If the boards aren't extended already on final, extend them as soon as you touch down.

I did have this problem as well and I love flying the F-5 in bad weather since it is very immersive and realistic! If there are no procedures, I've designed a let down which works with basically all TACAN equipped aircraft/airfields.

Not only due to GLOC, also due to aerodynamic reasons e.g. consecutive aileron rolls are a no-go on many combat aircraft, e.g. the F-15.

You don't give up, do you.

The main problem with the yaw SAS off is that rudder trim isn't available, which means that during single engine ops and/or asymmetric loads, flying the F-5 is more demanding. The -1 states that The aircraft can be safely flown without augmentation throughout the entire flight envelope.

This has nothing to do with FBW. Even a 767 will show a noticeable amount of adverse yaw when you are applying full aileron at the start of a turn at low speed. Manual rudder input is not required and you don't apply rudder, because the yaw damper turn coordination function will immediately counteract adverse yaw. Furthermore on most aircraft the vertical tail itself will be sufficient for the adverse yaw to be removed after reaching a steady bank angle. That's one of the reason why there's one bolted onto the fuselage. If it wouldn't remove sideslip on its own, e.g. flying in turbulence would be next to impossible. Btw. if aileron application would cause skidding, it would be the opposite of adverse, (too much) proverse yaw.

Definitely not and one of both obviously couldn't be the result of adverse yaw.

The A-10C is doing it too because it does IRL as well: The dual channel SAS provides rate damping in both the pitch and yaw axis as well as automatic turn coordination. If the yaw behavior with yaw SAS on and off is identical, it's because the flight model isn't so sophisticated that it simulates this 'failure' case.

What has a standard GA aircraft in common with an F-5? FYI, that's from a T-38 manual: Aileron deflection produces yaw in the direction of roll (favorable yaw). Rudder is not required to produce coordinated turns. Btw. not even the A-10 requires any manual rudder input to achieve turn coordination.

The problem with your posts is that you don't seem to accept facts you don't like. You are making statements like: It's physically impossible for a banking aircraft to not exhibit adverse yaw. We provide info that this is not always the case and your reaction is that you are suddenly talking about a different aircraft and claim that there's no ARI. Again you are proven wrong. Your reaction? If I turn the SAS off, the A-10 doesn't react the way it should. But that's a different story and not all failure cases are simulated in all DCS aircraft.

Page 55 from the manual you linked: The dual channel SAS provides rate damping in both the pitch and yaw axis as well as automatic turn coordination. (obviously an ARI) This feature is being called ARI in the A-10A -1.

I'm amazed that ED didn't even get flight model right on the basic Yak-52, so SMHs doubts are not unfounded. What's a Cessna 40?

The exact title is T-38A PILOT'S BRIEFING NOTES northrop corporation.

I've bought most of my manuals via different sources on the internet e.g. flight-manuals-online. What 'mechanism'? I have the impression that you are trying to apply C172 aerodynamics to high performance jet aircraft. In case you doubt that this is an actual quote:

If you agree that the T-38 is very similar to the F-5, you are wrong about adverse yaw and what's written in manuals. Quote from the T-38A pilot's briefing notes: TURNS Aileron deflection produces yaw in the direction of roll (favorable yaw). Rudder is not required to produce coordinated turns.

Do you even read your own posts???

Incorrect. Ever heard e.g. about roll spoilers? Differential ailerons are countering exactly this problem.

Not an 'issue' on the F-5 and an F-86 manual states; ....inherent stability of the plane is such that coordinated maneuvers can be made with minimum use of rudder.

Just take a look at the short wingspan, compared to the fuselage length. Not much surface sticking out to the sides to induce adverse yaw. On most jets you generally don't need rudder at a low AoA to keep the turn coordinated.

Erm, the same goes for the 172 and a number of other civil aircraft

Did you notice that there's a Yak-52 in your Combat Simulator? 172 = No 337 = Yes

The -1 also mentions to use wheel brakes and aerobraking to achive the minimum landing roll.

Out of curiosity, how do you 'correctly' stall an aircraft?

Thanx for taking time for the detailed explanation. Makes perfect sense

Without knowing the weight/approach speed, this doesn't mean a lot...