Yo-Yo

If it's impossible to climb in P-51 at more than 46/2700, how the tests were conducted for 61/3000? The same for P-47.

If you take a look at the bullet path you can see that from dead astern you shot the bullet strikes skin - 20 mm Al armor - a tank - and only after that with significantly lower speed and increased precession strikes the armor plate. It is known effect of multi-layer screen. If you manage to put the bullet directly to the armor plate and the bullet path continues through the pilot - the result will be different. Just 3 mm of duralumin does a trick And for some bullets it is really a miracle.

Типичный случай, когда отсутствие твердых базовых знаний об окружающем мире у многих замещается поклонением религиозным догмам. И да - если факты противоречат догмам, то ну их, эти факты. Давайте, как на строевых занятиях - по разделениям. ПРИ НАЛИЧИИ ЗАПАСА МОЩНОСТИ в новом установившемся режиме при даче правой или левой педали автоматика точно поддерживает номинальную частоту вращения НЕЗАВИСИМО от того, насколько больше или меньше отнимает от общей мощности рулевой винт. Раз! Вертолет вращается в мире, добавляя или отнимая собственную скорость вращения от постоянной скорости вращения лопастей относительно самого себя. Два! Подъемная сила на лопастях, зависящая от скорости лопастей в мире, увеличивается или уменьшается. Три! Раз-два-три, раз-два-три - и так до полного просветления.

I just want to remind few graphs from the article issued by ED some times ago. etc...

If you take a look at the wing of 109 you can see that the wingtip has no tough spar but a light systems of ribs. HE blast ripped of the skin and probably took the wingtip with it.

0.5 * R = 4 м/с , 30 * R = 240 m/s, т.е. примерно 1.7%. С учетом того, что подъемная сила пропорциональна квадрату скорости, то получается примерно 3.5% добавки. А это на сбалансированном вертолете уже заметно.

Yes.

The oil thermostat adjusted exactly as the manual directed.

Besides, any helicopter is unstable in hover... Some practice is necessary to hover.

The plane did not have the spar broken. If you look frame-by-frame you will see that a big shapeless piece of the skin is out and, probably, the aileron.

The main spar is a powerful load-bearing beam withstanding about 40 tons of load. Vertical walls, especially the central part of them play almost no role, so it is necessary to hit their horisontal walls, and the hits must be quite close to each other. And it must be something like AP projectiles. So, in RL the probability of ripping of the wing at 1-2g (fully destroyed spar stability) is very low. But either in DCS or in RL the spar can be weakened and can be broken at high g-load.

So, temporary removal of the rollers was useful... null

And after all it is just 1 tick... the parallax is still there. But it has sense only if you want to compare to the pilot's notes. The snaking seems very strange to me, because the plane is quite stable. But anyway, you have to apply the rudder not counter the veering angle but mainly against the angular velocity. For example, the plane veers left, you apply right rudder, but you have to reverse the input to left as the nose is straight and the plane has angular velocity to right. If you reverse rudder as the nose is already right - it is the best conditions for PIO.

Rather heavily loaded, I successfully tried even +12 lb takeoffs from 1000 m airstrip, but most of hints work for any any load - the rules are generally the same.

I think, I nailed the problem. The tail comes up a bit early. The real Mosquito was known to have the same feature. The tail does not get enough power to stabilize and control. Try to gradually reduce nose-down trim, the plane requires not more than 1 tick (the right way to set correct value is to avoid parallax reading). Anyway, you can set gear down, flaps down 10 during flight and ttim the plane at 120-140 mph, then use this trim position for TO, wherever you see the pointer.

Ok, but could you explain in details, what part of takeoff goes wrong without the assistance - initial slow run, rising the tail or something else?

It becomes interesting to me.. very differs from my experience, could you remember in details how did you interact with this option, where do you see it really helped, etc.

Assist for fighter planes is very useful AS YOU ARE NOT FIGHTING WITH it. So, I agree (I experienced it several times!) that considering it OFF, although it's actually ON , can be quite confusing... but it is very easy to find out if it is On or OFF: if you freeze the pedals and somebody controls the rudder, it means it is ON. There is another thing many users do not pay attention to: TO assistant is your instant reflexes, and you have not to compensate airplane fast veering - just apply slow and gentle rudder input to correct the main direction. As the one-engine planes have no natural STABILITY at the start of the run and as all taildraggers are unstable, they have a lot of CONTROLLABILITY, as the tail is in the downwash stream. It is like a tightrope walker - he is unstable, but if he has a fan or a long pole - he has a lot of control power to keep balance. So, for example, some planes like Spitfire require relatively fast power-on to gain control. Mosquito, as you can see, is a very different beast. The tail, generally, is out of downwash and the rudder control is close to zero till enough speed is gained. But it means that the plane gains STABILITY as well and no fast rudder work is necessary. So, it is obvious that TO assistant, that is necessary at the start of the run, is absolutely useless in Mosquito because of the lack of control power, and its work just confuses the user. It can not do its work at all - keep the plane path straight counteracting any external or internal destabilizing factors. Moreover, if the user tries to add a bit of brakes to help the assistant, it can aggravate the situation with strong overcorrection due to increased steering power.. So, I am very doubt if this TO for Mosquito would be useful for anybody. Rather it would confuse our users, that's why it was disabled. Auto rudder, though, works in the air as usual. It was my decision, and I explained why it was done.

As you are able to lift the tail having the stick (watch the Red Square) a bit forward to the center, the power of rudder is adequate to steer the plane, and the yaw stability is enough. As the plane is on two wheels the only reason of instability is PIO or overreaction to yaw. ... and with a status bar enabled/

Generally, for three point attitude you have to deal with certain amount of P-factor yawing the plane left, as you rise the tail you will momentarily increase left yawing due to gyroscopic moment, but after the plane is in 2 wheels attitude this P-factor significantly decreases. And that is the sequence you have to anticipate. You can make the things easier if you do not force the tail to rise too early and too fast. And the second hint, probably obvious: rudder input must be proportional rather to yaw velocity than to yaw itself.

So, that's OK. Of course you can not see arrows, as I used them only to show how read the value correctly. Your case is about 0.9, not 1.1.

@Nealius Try this test: take the default ME plane with no bombs and 67% of fuel, set input pitch axis LINEAR, at 200-230 kph (125 - 140 mph) IAS set the trim for REAL 0.5 ticks (thin yellow arrow to the green arrow) while airborne WITH GEAR DOWN and flaps up. Set the joystick neutral. If the plane is slightly out of trim adjust the trim at 200-230 kph. Take a screenshot of the trim scale.

The plane in DCS turned out very similar to the test results and you are not right that tail efficiency in DCS is low - CONTROL efficiency is high even at zero speed, but you have to use this power properly. STABILITY the tail deliveres is low, of course, at low speed. As you can see, there are two special planes in DCS - Spit and 109 that require takeoff power applied rather fast to be more pleasant. And very interesting that the pilots that flew and flies these planes mentioned the same.

0.5-1 tick (REAL TICK with parallax taken in account!) nose-down trim, a bit of right rudder (but it has no big sense because you need to use rudder pedals anyway). Then brakes on and add up +4 lb and be sure that the engines are synchronised if you use separate throttle levers. Release brakes and use rudder pedal to maintain straight path initially using brakes because rudder authority is very low. Then, smoothly add power to +12-15 lb, forward the stick slightly beyound the zero and maintain AoA ~8-9 degrees (note the cockpit frame position). Do not force to climb till you have at least 260-270 kph.

It is full MAIN fuel that I meant.