How the hell did new pilots not crash when taking off/landing?

[Sarge55]

I'm OK with not having the "seat of the pants" feel since I don't experience the G's in a turn either...

 

Does take some getting use to though.

[SilentGun]

Maybe they took a ride in this first to see how it feels

 

[marcus4hire]

I have wondered the same thing, OP.

 

Overall, I agree with what was written above.

 

First, no matter how accurate the sim is, it doesn't (and can't) have seat-of-the-pants built in. And feel goes a loooong way in aircraft like these. WWII aircraft were very much the last 'fly by feel' aircraft and were the pinnacle of piston engine design. While HUDs, HOTAS, and pilot oriented systems were still a couple of decades (or more) off the jet age ushered in flying as a science and flying as an art started fading out. Not that it is entirely gone, it just became more formal and procedure driven. So, there is a lot of 'feel' involved which we don't have.

 

Second, like others have said as well, tail draggers with rough ground handling and torque monter engines were all pilots of the era knew. Nowadays, when you read a modern perspective of the aircraft pilots all seem to say the same thing, "How on earth did they fly these without dying!?!". Just like we say about the sims. But to the pilots it was 'ho hum'.

 

Third, I think we have to remember how much training pilots had before ever setting foot in the aircraft (and I am talking about Luftwaffe training at its peak, not in the final year/months of the war when new pilots had a mortality rate not unlike that found on these forums). Look at the Mustang. Right now, I have around 30 hours in it per DCS. And I feel like I have it mastered. All the systems blindfolded, all the procedures, all the settings, etc. Pilots would spend DAYS before ever attempting to fly their operational aircraft type. They had schools with tons of instruction and hundreds of hours of flight time before doing it. Sure, from a combat sense they were a rookie but from a pilot sense they were quite experienced.

[fjacobsen]

Also note that many airfields where wide grass strips with alot more room for lateral displacement during the take off roll.

 

And again to re-tell what many others in this thread has pointed out - we miss the physical feedback You would get in the real thing.

 

And most important - as good virtual pilots we beleive we are, only very few of us had ever got a realistic training. Most of us has statered jumping into a high performance prop or jet aircraft, learning by doing VIRTUALLY, but still missing alot of advices, theories of flight and guidance by experienced pilots.

 

I don´t think the DCS ground behaviour is realistic, but to point that out as the main culprit is wrong.

 

 

FinnJ

[Flamin_Squirrel]

And again to re-tell what many others in this thread has pointed out - we miss the physical feedback You would get in the real thing.

 

I don't find that's something that limits the feel of realism too much, at least not for takeoff/landing.

 

I agree with SiThSpAwN: as much as you may think you're concentrating when flying your sim plane, nothing makes you focus quite as much as knowing you could end up upside down on fire if you get it wrong when doing it for real :pilotfly:.

 

I don´t think the DCS ground behaviour is realistic, but to point that out as the main culprit is wrong.

 

It is realistic. It's perfectly possible to lose directional control in a tricycle gear equipped plane, let alone a tail dragger.

Edited April 11, 2015 by Flamin_Squirrel

[fjacobsen]

It is realistic. It's perfectly possible to lose directional control in a tricycle gear equipped plane, let alone a tail dragger.

 

I fully agree with You on that statement, but still under certain circumstances, aircraft acts like they skate on ice.

 

FinnJ

[msalama]

aircraft acts like they skate on ice

I haven't touched the German AC yet - well apart from a couple of botched takeoffs here and there maybe - but I've flown the Mustang a lot over the years. And the only time I remember having seen anything approaching "skating", is when I'd made a grave mistake and the bird then wanted to groundloop on me. Regardless, I've also found she's pretty easy to get under control even then (provided that you don't let the situation deteriorate too far of course), so I'm not sure where this skating thingy comes into play really :)

 

But mismanage a high-powered prop AC, and all kinds of bad things will fry your butt for brekkies pretty soonish. But isn't that just you, the pilot, screwing up?

[Flamin_Squirrel]

...but still under certain circumstances, aircraft acts like they skate on ice.

 

What leads you to believe that's unrealistic?

[fjacobsen]

What leads you to believe that's unrealistic?

 

Because I never have seen any real aircraft react the way I have seen aircraft skidding more or less sideways in DCS.

 

It´s not a common problem, but it does happen sometimes.

An aircraft skidding that way at 100 km/h would rather roll over.

 

Again - it doesn´t happen very often to me, and generally physics in DCS feels very believable to me, but the trees don´t grow into the sky in DCS either.

 

FinnJ

[Scooternutz]

Likewise I've heard real helicopter pilots claim that flying real helicopters is easier than flying realistic helicopter sims.

 

True. Flying a real 60 Bravo was much easier than the Ka-50 at first.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Because I never have seen any real aircraft react the way I have seen aircraft skidding more or less sideways in DCS.

Why not? Indeed I've seen while flying with my instructor at my side :lol: just to show me how far you can go with controls. Of course a tricycle gear is very forgiving, he also wanted to show me that. But if you don't manage a tail dragger you skid all the time indeed. That's what you have to learn about TDs, it's a matter of CG and you can "feel" it quite well here IMHO.

 

S!

[fjacobsen]

Why not? Indeed I've seen while flying with my instructor at my side :lol: just to show me how far you can go with controls. Of course a tricycle gear is very forgiving, he also wanted to show me that. But if you don't manage a tail dragger you skid all the time indeed. That's what you have to learn about TDs, it's a matter of CG and you can "feel" it quite well here IMHO.

 

S!

 

It is not me having problems take off and landing taildraggers in DCS. I´m doing just fine.

 

I also have no issue with realism regarding to the tailwheel skidding around.

 

But when the aircraft skids sideways on all 3 wheels at high speed without rolling over, then either there must be ice on the runway, or something is not accurate.

I do not complain, but it´s still not 100% realistic, which I also have no problems with, since most other parts of DCS physics are superior to most other flightsims I know.

 

I was simply responding to some posts about how hard or easy it is to take off and land tailwheel aircraft compared to reality and where I find that ground behavior doesn´t feel that accurate.

 

FinnJ

Edited April 13, 2015 by fjacobsen

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Because I never have seen any real aircraft react the way I have seen aircraft skidding more or less sideways in DCS.

 

Of course you haven't because trained pilots avoid getting into that situation.

 

But when the aircraft skids sideways on all 3 wheels at high speed without rolling over, then either there must be ice on the runway, or something is not accurate.

I do not complain, but it´s still not 100% realistic, which I also have no problems with, since most other parts of DCS physics are superior to most other flightsims I know.

 

At high speed the wings are still producing some lift. Lift means less weight on wheels, less traction and more sliding. DCS is realistic in this respect IMO, and I doubt any other RW pilots will disagree with me.

[DieHard]

I would think the sense of self preservation is important to flight/landing/take-off... I guess to simulate this have a buddy/wife stand by ready to punch you in the nether regions if you do something that gets you killed in the sim :)

 

I was in my late age 20's when I started working in tool and die work. I worked with a 1930's era French trained tool maker, he then in his age 60's. The way machinist's were trained in France, then, during their apprenticeship was every time he screwed up, he got whapped on the knuckles with a ruler by his instructor. By the end of his first week, his knuckles were so sore and swollen, he figured he better quickly wise up or try another trade!

 

An earlier post stated the military's way of 24/7 training being very effective. I agree. My Navy training after basic, in my specialty was 10 weeks of very intense training. If elementary and high school were done similarly, we would be in college by age 14. Instead in the USA, schooling is just a glorified baby sitting experience.

Edited April 13, 2015 by DieHard

[[DBS]TH0R]

Of course you haven't because trained pilots avoid getting into that situation.

 

This might put things into perspective:

 

Brakes released, we began to accelerate, and I kept my feet dancing to arrest directional transgressions. As airflow increased across the rudder, I advanced the throttle to 3,000 rpm and 40 inches. (The geared propeller turns at only 1,437 rpm.) I held the stick fully aft to keep the tailwheel on the ground and assist with tracking. I had been taught that the best way to maintain directional control is to increase power in steps as control effectiveness increases.

 

At 50 knots I slowly but forcefully pushed the stick forward. The end of the runway came into view, and I increased power to 55 inches (120 gallons per hour of fuel flow). I began to appreciate why the British (for whom the P-51 was developed) called this airplane a Mustang, a wild stallion of the American prairie. The unbridled acceleration, energy, and noise level are startling and impressive.

 

Although 61 inches of manifold pressure are available for takeoff, I was not ready for the combination of twisting and turning forces that accompany 1,490 horsepower slinging that huge propeller. (Torque alone is impressive and causes the left tire to wear much faster than the right.) A takeoff using maximum power could wait until I had more experience.

 

Fw 190D has a more powerful engine.

[DieHard]

It is not me having problems take off and landing taildraggers in DCS. I´m doing just fine.

 

I also have no issue with realism regarding to the tailwheel skidding around.

 

But when the aircraft skids sideways on all 3 wheels at high speed without rolling over, then either there must be ice on the runway, or something is not accurate.

I do not complain, but it´s still not 100% realistic, which I also have no problems with, since most other parts of DCS physics are superior to most other flightsims I know.

 

I was simply responding to some posts about how hard or easy it is to take off and land tailwheel aircraft compared to reality and where I find that ground behavior doesn´t feel that accurate.

 

FinnJ

 

I think sim realism is relative.

 

The best P-51 sim add-on is supposed to be in FSX, evaluated by a real P-51 pilot according to a retired US Navy instructor that taught at Pensacola that now sim flies the VRS SuperBug.

 

I thought the toy P-51D at Aces High was pretty good until I learned the P-51D sim here at DCS. I am not a real life pilot and have no real P-51D experience to compare it. I do not much like FSX, so I don't have their P-51 to personally evaluate.

 

A sim aircraft to me, is, everything works! Nobody does that, that EVERYTHING thing, except the Falcon 4 and that is hearsay, and a space shuttle sim done years ago.

 

The realism in the sim aircraft community, not necessarily DCS, is relative.

 

DCS has got me spoiled---I love it!

Edited April 13, 2015 by DieHard

[Ala13_ManOWar]

But when the aircraft skids sideways on all 3 wheels at high speed without rolling over, then either there must be ice on the runway, or something is not accurate.

Yeah mate, I just try to figure out what you mean about the "ice", I'm not sure I've seen that in DCS, may be I didn't pay attention to it.

 

S!