Jump to content

bbrz

Members
  • Posts

    2508
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by bbrz

  1. +1 The F-5 used to be my favorite module and the lack of updates (don't forget the tumbling artificial horizon) isn't exactly promising. Same goes for the rather basic Yak-52 module.
  2. +1 I'm really surprised that although this is a comparatively simple module, that there are zero updates. We still have to deal with e.g. the super high drag flaps and the wrong prop/MP relationship :(
  3. There must be something seriously wrong with your install since drag with the extended flaps is way too high presently. Even with full throttle you can just barely accelerate to the go speed in level flight, let alone climb and perform the go around as described in the various manuals.
  4. R U sure that you know what you are talking about? http://www.migflug.com/jetflights/the-incredible-pugachevs-cobra-maneuvre.html
  5. This doesn't match mvsgas' observation at all and he's using the same build….weird.
  6. And? Speedbrakes are only effective at high speed. You are comparing apples and oranges since ailerons only need to create a roll moment. Btw, a few inches of aileron deflection don't cause a noticeable amount of drag. Not even full deflection causes a strong increase in drag.
  7. Not sure if it's not the other way round, because the Airbus does compensate for configuration changes and additionally you don't have trim when doing thrust/speed changes, but AFAIR on the 777 you have to trim when speed increases/decreases. The point I'm trying to make is that FBW doesn't change the way you fly a medium/heavy jet. If you are trimming or autotrim etc. does the work, it doesn't make much difference. In fact I found the A320 more difficult to fly on e.g. the ILS than the 767 because you don't feel any speed and/or vertical speed changes since the attitude is basically remaining constant. Don't agree on the last point. Especially on the ILS where usually only small thrust changes are required the pitching moment is usually negligible.
  8. I strongly believe think that the 'method I' and 'method II' description is an outdated, misleading and incomplete explanation, as you basically confirmed in your last sentence. A FBW airliner doesn't 'compensate' for anything regarding normal flying and there shouldn't be any difference concerning pitch/power handling if you follow e.g. a 3deg GS in a tiny ERJ170 or an A380.
  9. I don't understand the first sentence and what FBW has to do with it. You e.g. fly an A340 and a 747 the same way. And what 'basic rule' are you talking about?
  10. That's incorrect. I've flown a certain 19seat turboprop which has to accelerate in ground effect in the engine failure case.
  11. Depends on the pilot, I and many other pilots simply don't like it. I much preferred e.g. the straight 767 way since I (usually) know what I'm doing and I don't like a computer which continuously alters the behavior of the aircraft! Feels as artificial and lifeless like the rest of the FBW system.
  12. That's not cheating. If you have to make really gross corrections you have to make pitch corrections as well.
  13. Why should this be dangerous? E.g. on the 747, 767, A300, A310 this is simply a mechanical connection which always turns the nosewheel by a fixed amount when using the pedals. On the A320 it's a typical 'new' Airbus feature and it feels rather strange IRL. On the A340 it feels even worse because it is acting different during landing than during takeoff! Takeoff > no NWS above 150kts and full deflection up to 100kts but during landing you don't get any NWS above 100kts.
  14. I did have to use a dead zone of 7 with my old T16000M and thought it was ok. Now I'm using 1 on my new T16000M and the difference in handling and precision is like night and day.
  15. Where have you got this wrong info from? Even the performance data section in the NATOPS manual mentions the increased landing distance when performing a flare.
  16. On jets and turboprops there's usually no VNE and there's no reason why an aircraft should suffer from structural damage just by exceeding VNE/VMO. VMO in the F/A-18 depends on altitude and varies between 720 and 780kcas. MMO is 2.0.
  17. Furthermore stick length and deflection angle is usually way less on a joystick so using curves can be a necessary comprise. Once you are using a 35 curve and maybe a large dead zone as well, it might be time to think about a new joystick. After many years I've exchanged my still rather precise (so I thought) T16000M with a new one and the difference is surprisingly high. Furthermore many aircraft are using a kind of 'progressive steering'. E.g. they switch off the outboard ailerons and/or restrict rudder travel above certain speeds etc.
  18. Which commercial aircraft ? I'm not aware of e.g. any Boeing or Airbus which have this feature. Usually steering angle is around 6deg (low gain) with the pedals and 60deg (high gain) with the steering tiller. I don't have any problems with the NWS in the DCS Hornet nor IRL with other aircraft. edit: just checked the NATOPS manual and in the F/A-18 low gain is 16° and high gain is 75°. There's apparently no automatic switch over.
  19. I'm not aware that the question is about how much of the FM needs to be changed. I would certainly don't call a bug 'very specific' if it's about basic aerodynamics, especially if it causes the F/A-18 to crash. The flare is also affected by this bug.
  20. I don't know why people are always asking for a video or a trk. Why don't you simply try it? Btw, it's a well known and confirmed bug: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=213372&highlight=sucked
  21. That's absolute nonsense. You are apparently simply unable to fly at e.g. 500kts and below 30ft.
  22. Oh, it's new to me that the real F/A-18 gets sucked down / pitches down at a very low altitude.
  23. Looks very nice at a first glance but I definitely don't agree with the way the guide says you have to fly the final approach: Control your airspeed with aircraft pitch, not with the throttle. This is a small GA like trainer and you can use any 'method' you like, although I'm one of the pilots who are saying that you always have to use both, throttle and stick for corrections. One real Yak 52 manual describes how to correct a too low position on the glideslope: Increase power and pull back on the stick to decrease the glide angle. And another real Yak 52 manual says concerning speed control on final: regulate the speed using throttle.
×
×
  • Create New...