birdstrike

according to Volker Bau, THE BOSS, when its about current 109 pilots, 1/3rd of rudder input is needed until the tail raises, and almost full to full rudder input during the rise of the tailwheel . once it settles on the main gear, different rudder inputs are necessary to balance the bird until it lifts. what we have now is not even close to this.

before this change, the groundphysics on concrete runways, or the "dirt runways" in normandy where very plausible, and tbh, not hard at all to master with a little practice...the only situation where i would agree that it was a little too easy to scratch a wing on the ground was when trying to attempt a field landing in the grass somewhere outside of the airfields without locking the tailwheel...as even in these grass fields it was very easy to land with the tailwheel locked. the change in physics that happened now, is extreme, and tbh i think your argument about "realistic landings" is not really valid, as pilots do make mistakes and there is bad piloting and human error which is THE KILLER number one in aviation...and also this should be simulated in a flight simulator that strives to be as close to real life as possible and not only perfect landings... people do kick the wrong rudder also in real life, ballony, flare too early or not at all, touch down in a slipped attitude and so on...there was a reason why so many 109pilots died on takeoff and landings...MAD is correct when he says that its harder to take off or land a cessna in real life now than the 109 in dcs... the videos shown here, where on purpose bad piloting is used to show the lack of friction, are perfectly fine to show that there is a problem in dcs now imo. yes, we are lacking the feeling of acceleration on our pcs, but we went from one extreme(which wasnt extreme at all actually) to the other, and this, doesnt make it more realsitc at all...sorry. just make a "realistic" landing in the 109 now, try to stay straight, and hit the brakes..you will notice that u begin to drift sideways parrallel to the runway to either side without any crosswind conditions...even at very slow speeds. this is just plain wrong. but u dont even have to attempt a landing to see that there is something very scetchy now. just taxi and make some turns on the ground at normal taxi speeds. it slides so easy on the ground, that its just really obvious that something is not right. nobody is insulting ED...its just my honest opinion, that the current behaviour is not credible/believable anymore. thats not an insult at all.

[NO BUG]??? who tested this new ground behaviour? who gave permission that this is a true to life behaviour? isnt DCS supposed to be a simulation as close as possible to the real deal? before dcs was shining compared to all other sims in this regard...and now puts itself on the last place in terms of believable behaviour... we can land the thing now with a full sideslip without getting into trouble... seriously no bug? i cant believe that the devs gave permission to this ground behaviour...dcs just lost lots of appeal for me with that decision, but worse also lots of its credibilty.

thx very much again! this doesnt sound too complicated at all...will order the BU0836A board then, as i only need it for the axis. once i have it, i hope i can ask u some more few questions so that i dont end up soldering the wrong wires together or something similar :) so far your input was very much appreciated! thx.

hey sydost! first of all thx! well about the jitter...i have 3 sidewinders at home, and every single one of them has this jitter...its not when the stick is in dead center, as then the in-built deadzone prevents the jitters. its only when i pull the stick outside of center and try to keep it in position...then in dcs i can see the virtual stick moving/jitter slightly up and down. when i dont watch that virtual stick in dcs i dont notice it. so the movements when looking outside the cockpit are still smooth and no jitter is detectable. but again, i have this on all of my 3 sidewinders, and all my friends have this behaviour too. neither the thrustmaster warthog nor my MFG pedals have this, so i dont assume its the pc causing it but the stick. its not much though. i am convinced that u are right in that its probably the pots that cause it... i can live with it, but i could imagine that with the higher resolution of the bodnar board these jitters become less severe. as theoretically now when it jumps from one to the next step/position, it wouldnt be 1/1000 of the whole range but only 1/4000... the missing deadzone is something i am really looking forward to...so this alone will be worth the effort. ok...soldering...i will have to re-learn it i think, as last time i soldered something was like 15years ago in school. and even back then i sucked in it :) but im sure i can get it done without too much trouble. ok...so u mentioned u used 2 different boards? i could go with either of them? and yes, having ffb working while actually using another "stick" for the axis is only working in dcs...but with that mod, i could still fly every other sim with just mapping the original sidewinder axis...so nothing is lost with this mod afaik.

i wonder, does anybody still see the ACG WW2 server? for me its gone since a few months and im not sure whether its really offline, or if its dcs that doesnt show me the server..

confirm the behaviour. no doubt there is something wrong now

:thumbup:

ah ok nice so its possible. so is it a noticeable difference in terms of precision? for example on all my 3msffb sticks i have slight jitters on both axis. would be nice if i could reduce or even eliminate them with this mod... is it much effort to connect the pots to the board? which board exactly would i need and which tools are necessary for the work...

hey sokol...i was expecting that u would be one of the first to post in this thread... i have to say ur answer really surprises me...u really lose the ffb effects of the stick with a different board? i mean thinking about it it makes sense, but there are quite a few people who did such a mod with the sidewinder, so im confused as to why they did when it means to lose the ffb...are u 100% positive that there is no way to get rid of the deadzone and get more resoultion with such a board(doesnt have to be a bodnar board) and still keep the ffb effects? cheers

nope i dont...i disabled that bs on the first day the aircraft was released and never touched it again...but i also checked yesterday if it re-activated by itself due to the latest patches...but these arcade options are still all disabled. so thats not the problem

ok..dont know if its only affecting the 109, but something as been changed in regards of ground physics...i first noticed it when i landed somewhere in the weeds without tail-wheel lock...it seemed all of a sudden super easy, whereas before it was really challenging...imo slightly too much. but now when i then landed on the runways, it became apparent that its messed up pretty bad now. in fact its really obvious already when taxi at slow speeds... nobody else noticed this yet, or does nobody care anymore? :lol: im really surprised nobody brought this up yet. i can slam the thing down on the ground in a complete grabbed/slipped atittude without being punished whatsoever. not even a slight wing-drop not to mention tilting of the plane. the plane could now compete in a drift race, lol. i assume they messed up either the side friction of the wheels, or they changed the friction of the ground itself. imo, the state it is in now, has little to do with simulation. anyway...i would have a request DEAR DEVS or MODS who could pass this to the DEVS...before u just revert it to the previous state with an upcoming patch, please have a closer look again at the groundphysics OUTSIDE of runways with UNLOCKED tailwheel...i see these broken physics now as a chance to actually not only get it back to the old state, but to improve them.

some time ago, i began to mod my trusty msffb2 stick. i extended it slightly and exchanged the grip with the one of a ch fighterstick. as i kept the board of the fighterstick, the stick is now recognized by windows and all sims as two sticks...the axis are recognized as a msffb2 stick, and the buttons on the grip are shown as a regular fighterstick.(i did it this way to keep the possibilty of using the ch control manager software) im really happy with the result...nevertheless...time passes by, and i begin to want more... i have read some "rumors" that with using a leo bodnar board instead of the default electronics the msffb2 ships with, you can not only get rid of the in-built deadzone, but also get a greater resolution out of the axis, resulting in higher precision.... QUESTION: is that true? now if the above is true, im willing to invest in such a project...the problem is, im lacking in the necessary knowledge yet...i hope some of you guys who are not lacking in this regard, could enlighten me, on what exactly is needed and on how to put the parts together...usefull links would also be very welcome. (if memory serves me right, somewhere existed a thread/article, about i think a russian guy who did exactly this, combined a bodnar board with the msffb2 stick, and documented it in detail...i just cannot find it anymore) every help would be appreciated.

i can only speak for myself, but AI fighters ruin the fun for me and they are not helping performance either. besides imo for a true airquake Server, airspawns are better fitting, and ultimately is the only reliable way to Really Stop vulching...if that Server would meet these requirements, then i would join it, if it would run in open beta...

well, i wouldnt want to be at the location where you are while playing dcs because there are pretty much no alternatives for you in ww2 , but, a player with a 400+ ping, absolutely destroys the experience for the others. its not only your plane thats warping through the air horribly, but others as well, as soon as somone with such a ping joins a server....there is a good reason why many of the really popular servers in dcs have a ping limit set. thats the ugly truth and a known fact for dcs for many years now... and tbh, such warping that everybody can experience, is of course not entirely the server owners fault...its bad netcode. thats what we have. but i personally think, that people with a 400+ ping should be excluded from such a server for 1 certain reason....this 1 individual will destroy the experience for everybody who is joining this server....which in consequence means, that much potential is lost in terms of new guys joining and staying/ coming back....they experience the horrible warping, which is pretty much unique in dcs, and go back to the other ww2 sim.....

fixed? big improvements??? besides a little brighter colour, those grassfields still look like the A2 autobahn. there is no transition from grass to runway textures whatsoever, besides you see the cutting edges from the taxiways towards the runways or other taxiways very clearly..furthermore you see the overlaying texture of paving stones....so no, its not fixed at all imo.

well, im running open beta version, and i only see 1 ww2 server which is burning skies...from time to time there is the other american server, which would actually be really neat to fly on, but unfortunately it has AI fighters in there...which in my opinion is the main reason why its usually empty. then, there is/was acg server...dont know if its online in stable version or completely disappeared altogether...but again, it had AI b17 in the mission, which were horrible for performance, but worse, were spawning and despawning right in front of your face...which is a complete immersion killer,....well at least for me... to my knowledge, there is not a single permanent ww2 server, with: -no AI -airspawns close to each other which would resemble a so called airquake server, where its all about dogfighting and gaining skills... where it doesnt matter much if you are killed, because respawning brings you back right into action without time consuming start up procedures, without flying for 15minutes only to see contacts right above their airbases, which again results in vulching, and as a consequence, disconnecting clients, and ultimately an empty server....

imo, yes we need it....even one with airspawns and a close by dogfight area...quick action for people who dont want to waste their time searching the needle in the haystack. i would love it, especially right now where there is pretty much only 1 server available, with too big distance between the airfields for the numbers we have online.

i didnt claim you were saying this. thats my personal impression. unfortunately, there are a few bugfixes needed for some years now... frankly even though they might not have the highest priority, the timespan where ED thinks its ok to carry over these bugs to the next version is astonishing. btw, i cant remember anymore, because its been quite a while,...but were the additional guns a promised feature?

no love for the 109...no bugfixes and no other improvements...

make sure to check the "exclusive" checkbox right of the field where you select your profile....this should do the trick.

what happens if i stay in online mode and just dont start my pc for more than 3days? will i run into trouble?

well...something is dodgy here with your game....watching the controls indicator, you seem to be able to give full elevator deflection at speeds way higher than normally possible...if for example i pull my joystick completely back at speeds anything higher than ~250kph, the controls indicator will show a limited deflection of the virtual stick because of the stickforces....so there must be something wrong with your game i assume. EDIT: thinking about it....are you maybe flying in "game mode"? i have never tried it so i dont know how this affects the physics, but i could imagine that maybe things like stickforces are not modeled in game mode as well as blackout effects, which you also seem to be lacking...just a thought.

1)rudder forces and effects of the 109. are you really of the opinion that the 109 pilots in dcs should be restricted in rudder deflection already during the takeoff run? the way it is now in dcs, full deflection is only possible at really really slow speeds, and already during the later parts of the take off run, the pilot will not be able to give full rudder deflection due to the forces. the same is true for the stick forces acting upon our 109 pilot. at speeds way below 300kph IAS he will not be able to pull the stick completely back... and what makes me personally really sceptical that the stickforces are implemented correctly, is the fact, that once you lose 1 elevator, you all of a sudden can turn much tighter at higher speeds, which for me at least doesnt make any sense. whats your opinion about the matter? 2)ground physics outside of airfields and runways. please try some take offs and landings with unlocked tailwheel in the 109 somwhere in the grass fields on either of the maps in dcs, away from airfields and runways. i would be interested whether you think this is implemented correctly...

thats exactly what the program is doing....it makes dcs or any game think you are using a trackir like camera. and it is working in dcs. actually really simple.it took me maybe five minutes to figure out how to set it up for dcs.