Yo-Yo

Новая ДМ. Система повреждений.

But you should not.

One of the reports about longitudinal stability and controllability contains time history of flaps deploying. 12 s at 140-130 mph. But no-load movement can be faster. As well as retracting. Will see.

There was a trick that makes things easier - to use manual prop for take off.

Will be added for all radial engines, so - in the same time as P-47 gets it.

Just to add to all written above: all planes becomes less dampened at high speed. Planes with unswept wing suffer from decreased maximal lift due to high Mach at the same dynamic pressure, so less g at the same IAS.

Waste gate automatics maintains not MP but the pressure at turbo nozzles (backpressure), so it is an absolute pressure aneroid (vacuum). If you mean Merlin supercharger, yes, it's vacuum aneroid switch with hysteresis. No ram.

Пруф?

Yes, I understand. I think, after we are get closer to release state, something will be written about the turbocharger that was a new interesting challenge for us.

No, it's very lucky combination of aerodynamic moments. Inherent.

What aspects do you want to see in this review?

P-47 is one of the easiest plane to land. But landing a taildragger you need to get it in three-point attitude with the wheels in 20-40 cm over the surface. After that the plane will seat itself, and all you need to do is to keep it straight using rudder and then - differential braking. If the plane touches the ground not in three-point attitude and with vertical speed it will bounce because of increased AoA. But if the bouncing is not violent, i.e. speed is not high it is not very harmful.

L-39 does not require rudder in RL. Roll... never saw it, try to check the input device, coincide axes from different device, etc. Or, check AoA during this rolls - probably the plane stalls.

https://www.facebook.com/frbiross/videos/611436662804445/

56"/2700 P-47 at sea level shows almost the same boom-zoom swing as 3000/+18 Mk IX, so at high altitude P-47 can be superior.

It is modelled. It seems to me, that debugging thing was not removed before EA. :)

А откуда эта таблица?

There is a difference in trimming between FF and non-FF. Adding curvature to non-FF does nothing bad because trim just adds a bias to the value from the joystick. For FF-device nothing is added, but the actual force neutral point is shifted.

I think, it is because they are different planes with different balance, so - with different required stick deflection. The curvatures in pitch for FF is the worse case in attempts to approach to the full-size stick. Try to use Y-saturation it solves the problem. Or use not deep curvature.

Is it the first or the second round of the IAS gauge? And I would be very greatful if you write numbers directly under the screenshots.

I tried saturation Y 50% and (unexpectably :) ) it works the same way. To be serious - linear curves with no offset expected to work. I use MSFF2.

There is no use to tweak this Spitfire distinctive feature. The normal trim you can see as you start the plane in the air. One tick nose up indicated, stick centered, elevator LE up a bit. Trim the plane in normal way for take off, flight , landing , etc, only for zero hinge force or any force you prefer. And, for sure, no curves fo FF device for pitch. If you find this control too sensitive, just add a linear ~ 50% saturation.

Так а что гадать-то? Серии выше -16 имели только А-13/С-23, винт видно что 836-2С2-18 по форме лопастей. 56 сделали пока, потому что для 64 не все еще готово. Это не просто наддув поднять, там еще есть ряд вещей, которые надо доделать.

насколько давно?

The main problem of reversed missiles is their stability at the initial part of the way. This is the same problem as to fire them from "Cobra" maneuver. As the missile can not accelerate instantly, some time after launching it will fly reversed as it has plane's velocity. Due to its directional stability it will tend to rotate along the plane. This angle can break the head lock on target.