bbrz

Flying AoA or IAS doesn't make any difference during the approach. In most aircraft you fly approaches in good visibility at a much higher speed than necessary. Even in a 747 it's sufficient to reach the correct approach speed at 500ft AGL.

Exactly. Isn't that what you want?

1. 10G in which plane? And please don't say an Extra or a similar toy plane. And what has inverted flying to do with it? 2. Quite a useless number without any weight info. What turn performance do you expect? Vst is almost 140kts at MTOW. At 2.2G the stall speed will be 210kts. That's exactly what I'm seing in the DCS A-10.

Just did a few other tests with a similar config Habu23 posted and a calculated DI between 4-6. At S.L. IAS should be 320 and was 320. At 10000ft it should be 285, DCS A-10 = 285. Initial ROC close to 4000ft/min.

I don't know what a 'Russian' and a 'Western' style landing is in your opinion, but you do flare in the West as well.

R U sure? With the xwnd from the right you have to crab to the right as well.

Great info concerning the handling :) , but 'almost' doesn't equal 'full'. Concerning the ground effect; If there's no AoA change then is must be something else. As mentioned before, the pitch down moment might be the effect of the altered stabilizer downwash. Have to re-test but AFAIR the pitch down occurs way too early/high for this effect to be the reason.

Simulator or video game. Getting the performance and handling correct isn't rocket sience neither in a sim or a video game. That said, even RW multimillion dollar Level D sims are sometimes grossly wrong at the edge of their performance envelope. I haven't read all the complaints about the FM since I own this module only since yesterday. All I can say is that under few the conditions I've tested so far, the A-10 performs according to the -1.

I've only tested the A-10 in clean config so far, but at least in this area she performs according to the manuals (and even better). I don't know what point you are trying to make. Have you tested the DCS A-10 performance yourself? How do you know that the FM is 'improper' and/or which part of the performance envelope?

Especially on the 2nd video it's clearly visible that he applies full aft stick well after touchdown. This can be noticed much better when looking at MiG-29 landings from the outside view.

At least with DI 0 @ 30000lbs the climb, sustained turn, max speed and AoA values are matching the performance section from the -1. The time from brake release to climb speed is even noticable shorter than the -1 numbers.

Where? Looking at the various MiG-29 landing videos I've not seen a single landing where the pilots applies full aft stick during the flare.

That's new to me since e.g. the performance data/manuals for the A-10 are available. Following this logic Ace Combat 7 would be as realistic as DCS. edit: just did a max power run with a DI of 0 at S.L. where the A-10 should accelerate to 345kias, and that's exactly what I'm seeing. Concerning the AoA 'secret'; With the NACA 6716/13 a close to 17° max AoA doesn't seem to be too far off, if at all. Found the 6716 wind tunnel data. Max AoA = 18°. edit 2: Did another test: 30000lbs, DI 0, max sustained G at 270kts should be 3.8G.....again exactly what I'm seing. Presently I'm rather impressed!

If it is true that ED intentionally derated the engines, this would be the most stupid thing I've ever heard/read for a flight simulator. Bought the A-10C yesterday and will do some tests ASAP.

That's new to me. What makes you believe that the real MiG-29 requires full aft stick for the flare?

Interesting observation since this is what I initially thought was going on in the F/A-18 as well (before doing the ground effect tests) https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3945053&postcount=97

Talk about precise weight control. Got rid of the gun ammunition, started the approach with 1000lbs fuel. Suddenly the 7.5°AoA equals 290km/h and touchdown at 230-240km/h is no problem, except for the annoying destabilizing pitch down in ground effect.

Tried the latest beta and can't confirm that the reverse ground effect is gone.

15min...it wasn't unusual to land with 10min fuel remaining (or even worth mentioning to ATC) back in my time.

Departure with 30% fuel in AB. Landing out of a half cuban eight with some unintelligible Russian kilogram aural warnings. Touchdown at 220km/h is possible but only with a tailstrike.... Btw, still noticed the reverse ground effect.

The approach AoA and touchdown are identical to the RW values. So it's either the weight or the FM that's a tiny bit off. Concerning the trim; Is this the latest beta? If so, since the reverse ground effect has reportedly been fixed (haven't tried myself), there should be no more need to re-trim before the flare.

Don't know which manual you are referring to. The RW manual says the nozzles are at 80% at idle and they close to near minimum with advancing throttle position. With the landing gear handle up, the nozzles are near minimum at all times, except at MIL and above. At MIL the nozzle is 5-10% open. In the AB range the nozzles open to compensate for the higher fuel flow.

You are making your flying unnecessary difficult if you are not in trim. The screenshot you posted shows neither the approach, nor the average (7.5°) AoA during the approach ;) It shows the moment as he flattens the approach and starts the speed reduction.

Unfortunately I have to wait until the weekend to try both....

I'd love to, but unfortunately I don't have access to my DCS PC until the weekend :(