Ghilliedraptor Posted October 10, 2015 Share Posted October 10, 2015 I'm watching the Revisiting Dora 9. Part 1. of the interview with Erich Brunotte and at 17.34 he mentions that he rarely used the breaks and while he said that I was reminded of DCS take-off guide ( ) where it is advised to use brakes to steer the dora. Is it possible to steer the dora using only rudder inputs? If not, why is there a discrepancy between what was mentioned in the interview and the DCS dora implementation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sokol1_br Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 DCS World 1.50 Beta. T-Rudder & A2Button brakes (not in axis). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kripzoo Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 Of course you use brakes during taxiing. But when taking off, you lock the tailwheel and use rudder to keep it straight :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anatoli-Kagari9 Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 I'm watching the Revisiting Dora 9. Part 1. of the interview with Erich Brunotte and at 17.34 he mentions that he rarely used the breaks and while he said that I was reminded of DCS take-off guide ( ) where it is advised to use brakes to steer the dora. Is it possible to steer the dora using only rudder inputs? If not, why is there a discrepancy between what was mentioned in the interview and the DCS dora implementation? At low ( taxi ) speeds and power settings, the propwash you get is not sufficient to properly "steer" the Dora using just the rudder. Small power bursts can help, but since we miss, in any pc sim, the proper feedback we get irL, it's tricky to do that, so, toe brakes are the best option, and pulling the stick back when you want to fly straight and lock the tailwheel. But during takeoff, and as you set full takeoff power, soon the propwash will give the necessary flow over you tail surfaces to allow for proper directional control, and that's what Eric mentions - the aircraft does not need during takeoff run a continuous application of right rudder ( a lot of it ), like for instance the 109 requires. Flight Simulation is the Virtual Materialization of a Dream... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghilliedraptor Posted October 11, 2015 Author Share Posted October 11, 2015 Thanks for the clarification guys, I guess I'm too used to the P-51, which I managed to taxi and take-off without using the toe-brakes at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sokol1_br Posted October 11, 2015 Share Posted October 11, 2015 I dont have P-51, but TF51-D have a "magical" rudder, steer the plane on taxi even a slow velocity. Use brakes in this case more hinder than help. :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghilliedraptor Posted October 11, 2015 Author Share Posted October 11, 2015 I dont have P-51, but TF51-D have a "magical" rudder, steer the plane on taxi even a slow velocity. Use brakes in this case more hinder than help. :) That's very disappointing if true. Are there any other inconsistencies with the TF51's flight model? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AussieFX Posted October 12, 2015 Share Posted October 12, 2015 (edited) There are no inconsistencies at all. P-51 and TF-51 have a semi steerable (limited in range) tail wheel where the 109 and 190 have a free castoring tailwheel that can be locked into the straight position for takeoff/landing. Differential braking is required for tight turns as it is also for the Mustang due to it's limited control range. The Mustang is the same as the 190 in that the wheel will lock with the stick pulled back, the 109 has a lever to lock/unlock on the left side panel. There is no real discrepancy with Erich Brunotte either, he isn't talking about doing 90° turns on paved taxiways. You should not be using brakes for takeoff/landing corrections, the rudder will work with any meaningful speed or thrust setting. Only use them for taxiing. Edited October 12, 2015 by AussieFX Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghilliedraptor Posted October 12, 2015 Author Share Posted October 12, 2015 There are no inconsistencies at all. P-51 and TF-51 have a semi steerable (limited in range) tail wheel where the 109 and 190 have a free castoring tailwheel that can be locked into the straight position for takeoff/landing. Differential braking is required for tight turns as it is also for the Mustang due to it's limited control range. The Mustang is the same as the 190 in that the wheel will lock with the stick pulled back, the 109 has a lever to lock/unlock on the left side panel. There is no real discrepancy with Erich Brunotte either, he isn't talking about doing 90° turns on paved taxiways. You should not be using brakes for takeoff/landing corrections, the rudder will work with any meaningful speed or thrust setting. Only use them for taxiing. That's good to know, thanks for sharing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AussieFX Posted October 15, 2015 Share Posted October 15, 2015 It's pretty simple, harder to explain. Taxi around in the planes and play around, you'll soon see how it works. Take-offs and landings are always problematic, even after having all the WW2 birds for 12 months I still have my fair share of wing scrapes with the occasional roll over thrown in. :thumbup: Getting the brakes to work in a linear fashion with my pedals (Logitech G940) is proving to be the biggest hassle. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts