I cant fly a loop or Cuban 8

[hector_evc]

SiThSpAwN, what's your joystick?, I think that makes a difference.

 

(sorry by my bad english)

 

Regards,

Héctor

[NineLine]

I am using the x55.

[hector_evc]

haha.....that's the difference. I have x52.....

 

guys....you needs a very good joystick and unfortunately costly

 

Regards,

Héctor

[NineLine]

haha.....that's the difference. I have x52.....

 

guys....you needs a very good joystick and unfortunately costly

 

Regards,

Héctor

 

Not sure I totally agree with that, I dont think the x52 is that bad of a stick, and I am pretty sure I could do a cuban 8 with my old ThrustMaster Hotas X. The better the controller the better the experience... for sure.

[hector_evc]

SiThSpAwN....no....no..my x52 is excellent, it works good. I did not say well, I would say from x52 up, at least. I also have a Thrustmaster T Flight Stick (buy it last week, and I'm very sorry about it) and works differently (poor), even with curve settings.

 

Regards,

Héctor

[Sporg]

The excessively nervous behavior of the ingame 109 near stall, which is not realistic, is what makes this maneuver hard for newcomers, esp. if they haven't set up some good curves.

-

The problem with the 109 atm is the wing rocking and rapid stall near CLmax, and that needs fixing. Hope it happens soon so that it will feel as forgiving & agile as the real aircraft does in this regime, i.e. during slow to medium speed heavy maneuvering.

 

I'm a little bit, should we say, miffed by these statements.

(Hope it's the right expression. :) )

 

Do you have any experience flying the real aircraft?

Or do you have access to pilots flying this aircraft?

 

If not, what do you base your statements on?

 

I'm sorry to jump at this, but after the very long and tedious discussions in this forum, I have developed a sort of hypersensitivity to claims about what is the "realistic" behaviour of the aircraft in this simulator. :)

 

Truth is that unless we have tried the real thing ourselves, it is difficult to have any idea how the aircraft behaves, other than relatively vague ideas conceived by reading snippets from pilot's descriptions.

Snippets that does normally not cover all regimes of the flight.

And snippets that are based on that particular pilot's experience at the time.

 

For instance, we could experience a pilot describing an aircraft as simple and easy to fly.

But how do we know what lies behind those words?

Maybe it is relative to other aircraft, that we would feel are completely crazy in their behaviour nowadays?

And maybe it is relative to having "grown up" with taildraggers of the period, so that the general muscle memory of flying such an aircraft lies deep within the pilot already?

 

In order to get more detailed descriptions, we would have to make very detailed enquiries about very detailed points.

And probably several times.

 

On top of that there is the issue of us sitting at each our own PC, with different set-ups, speed, smoothness, controllers and what not:

 

You mention that you do always use curves, if you are "not satisfied" with the aircraft controls.

 

Well, I do not, and SiThSpAwN does not either?

And we probably have different controllers, just between the three of us?

You use curves, SiThSpAwN and I do not, I use an extension.

The real aircraft had a longer stick, and direct sensory feedback from the controls?

 

So how are we to determine, how close each of us are to the feel of the real aircraft, when sitting at home?

 

What I am trying to say is, it is okay to have opinions about the aircraft behaviour.

It is just, it is very difficult to say whether it is realistic enough, unless we have tried controlling the real thing, or at least have detailed feedback from pilots that did.

 

And for me, all we can really do, is to trust that ED and Yo-Yo have tried to provide as realistic flight as possible, developed from reports and in dialogue with pilots that has flown, or is flying the real thing.

And of course accept also, that they have had to make some assumptions etc., as well as compromises from having to operate within the restrictions of this being only a simulator.

 

And with that premise in place, what is mostly left for me as a "desktop pilot" is to try to improve, so that I can recreate the flying I see described.

 

That is also the reason I try to not criticise too much.

I don't really know where I should start, and I don't really have any merits other than hearsay and test in the simulator to contribute with.

The rest is really just guesswork from my side. More or less educated, but guesswork nevertheless. :)

 

And, to take it further, maybe this is really the difference of the two "camps" in here, and the culprit of so much discussion:

One camp who wants to try to change the simulator behaviour to what they conceive is right.

And another that tries to just trust a bit in what ED and Yo-Yo has come up with.

 

For me that's the dream of how we could discuss in here:

Start from the latter of these points, and realize that we really don't know.

And from that starting point give our feedback and ideas as to how the simulator could maybe be improved. :)

 

PS: Sorry for wall of text. ;)

[NineLine]

SiThSpAwN....no....no..my x52 is excellent, it works good. I did not say well, I would say from x52 up, at least. I also have a Thrustmaster T Flight Stick (buy it last week, and I'm very sorry about it) and works differently (poor), even with curve settings.

 

Regards,

Héctor

 

Copy, misunderstood you.

[Sporg]

SiThSpAwN, what's your joystick?, I think that makes a difference.

 

I am using the x55.

 

haha.....that's the difference. I have x52.....

 

..

 

Héctor and SiThSpAwN, that's exactly part of what I mean by my post above. :)

 

Here I'm using Warthog with extension, and Saitek pedals.

[NineLine]

I still say that the stick is only part of it, practice is a larger part, I know my experiences from when I first tried the 109 in testing to what we have today are huge, and mostly its about knowing how to handle the aircraft, and practicing to not take it beyond what it can do. The attempts I made at the Cuban 8 I saw where I pushed too hard, or entered in with not quite enough speed and it will make you pay, its a high performance machine, you have to respect it, some people forget that with simulators because ultimately there is no dire consequences to not giving it the respect it deserves

Edited October 20, 2015 by NineLine

[Sporg]

I still say that the stick is only part of it, practice is a larger part, I know my experiences from when I first tried the 109 in testing to what we have today are huge, and mostly its about knowing how to handle the aircraft, and practicing to not take it beyond what it can do. The attempts I made at the Cuban 8 I saw where I pushed too hard, or entered in with not quite enough speed and it will make you pay, its a high performance machine, you have to respect it, some people forget that with simulators because ultimately there is no dire consequences to not giving it the respect it deserves

 

I agree to this too.

 

That's why I also stated, that what there is for me to do, is to try to get better (at handling the aircraft).

 

Maybe I should have made this clearer. :)

[NineLine]

I agree to this too.

 

That's why I also stated, that what there is for me to do, is to try to get better (at handling the aircraft).

 

Maybe I should have made this clearer. :)

 

 

No no, nothing against what you said, more so just agreeing with what has been said.

[Sporg]

No no, nothing against what you said, more so just agreeing with what has been said.

 

Thanks. :)

[Hummingbird]

I'm a little bit, should we say, miffed by these statements.

(Hope it's the right expression. :) )

 

Do you have any experience flying the real aircraft?

Or do you have access to pilots flying this aircraft?

 

If not, what do you base your statements on?

 

I'm sorry to jump at this, but after the very long and tedious discussions in this forum, I have developed a sort of hypersensitivity to claims about what is the "realistic" behaviour of the aircraft in this simulator. :)

 

Truth is that unless we have tried the real thing ourselves, it is difficult to have any idea how the aircraft behaves, other than relatively vague ideas conceived by reading snippets from pilot's descriptions.

Snippets that does normally not cover all regimes of the flight.

And snippets that are based on that particular pilot's experience at the time.

 

For instance, we could experience a pilot describing an aircraft as simple and easy to fly.

But how do we know what lies behind those words?

Maybe it is relative to other aircraft, that we would feel are completely crazy in their behaviour nowadays?

And maybe it is relative to having "grown up" with taildraggers of the period, so that the general muscle memory of flying such an aircraft lies deep within the pilot already?

 

In order to get more detailed descriptions, we would have to make very detailed enquiries about very detailed points.

And probably several times.

 

On top of that there is the issue of us sitting at each our own PC, with different set-ups, speed, smoothness, controllers and what not:

 

You mention that you do always use curves, if you are "not satisfied" with the aircraft controls.

 

Well, I do not, and SiThSpAwN does not either?

And we probably have different controllers, just between the three of us?

You use curves, SiThSpAwN and I do not, I use an extension.

The real aircraft had a longer stick, and direct sensory feedback from the controls?

 

So how are we to determine, how close each of us are to the feel of the real aircraft, when sitting at home?

 

What I am trying to say is, it is okay to have opinions about the aircraft behaviour.

It is just, it is very difficult to say whether it is realistic enough, unless we have tried controlling the real thing, or at least have detailed feedback from pilots that did.

 

And for me, all we can really do, is to trust that ED and Yo-Yo have tried to provide as realistic flight as possible, developed from reports and in dialogue with pilots that has flown, or is flying the real thing.

And of course accept also, that they have had to make some assumptions etc., as well as compromises from having to operate within the restrictions of this being only a simulator.

 

And with that premise in place, what is mostly left for me as a "desktop pilot" is to try to improve, so that I can recreate the flying I see described.

 

That is also the reason I try to not criticise too much.

I don't really know where I should start, and I don't really have any merits other than hearsay and test in the simulator to contribute with.

The rest is really just guesswork from my side. More or less educated, but guesswork nevertheless. :)

 

And, to take it further, maybe this is really the difference of the two "camps" in here, and the culprit of so much discussion:

One camp who wants to try to change the simulator behaviour to what they conceive is right.

And another that tries to just trust a bit in what ED and Yo-Yo has come up with.

 

For me that's the dream of how we could discuss in here:

Start from the latter of these points, and realize that we really don't know.

And from that starting point give our feedback and ideas as to how the simulator could maybe be improved. :)

 

PS: Sorry for wall of text. ;)

 

Sporg I am not basing my comments on snippets, if I were I wouldn't make such blunt statements. No I'm rather basing it on repeated (i.e. they all say the same thing) and detailed descriptions of said aircrafts' behavior in said aspects of flight.

 

Skip Holm, Mark Hanna & Dave Southwood all say the same thing, and they are backed up by veteran testimony. I would love to hear what Klaus Plaza has to say, hence I tried to contact him during the Roskilde Airshow August this year, unfortunately he was not available for a chat when I was there, thus I had to make due chatting with one of Red 7's mechanics.

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

Honestly, after the latest patch, I can't really complaint about anything particular in the Bf109 K4.

 

The stick and rudder force simulation are a great addition and they provided a lot more of realism to the maneuvers I am able to fly.

 

The blackout due to Gs is also very plausible, I believe.

 

Of course I have never flown such an aircraft or had the chance to talk to anyone who did...

[jester_]

I think the bottom line is this:

 

If you are going to perform an aerial maneuver in the BF-109 and think you're going fast enough to complete it, you aren't.

[Sporg]

Sporg I am not basing my comments on snippets, if I were I wouldn't make such blunt statements. No I'm rather basing it on repeated (i.e. they all say the same thing) and detailed descriptions of said aircrafts' behavior in said aspects of flight.

 

Skip Holm, Mark Hanna & Dave Southwood all say the same thing, and they are backed up by veteran testimony. I would love to hear what Klaus Plaza has to say, hence I tried to contact him during the Roskilde Airshow August this year, unfortunately he was not available for a chat when I was there, thus I had to make due chatting with one of Red 7's mechanics.

Hummingbird, a little teasing question:

Is it only if you talk to Klaus Plaza that it counts? :)

 

As far as I understand, Yo-Yo has had, and have, recurrent conversations with both Erich Brunotte and Klaus Plaza.

Does that not count? :)

 

Apart from that:

Are you sure that you are flying the aircraft like they would?

Could your perception come from pushing the aircraft too hard?

 

Could it be, for instance, that physical constraints in the real aircraft (big forces required to push the stick, buffeting before stalls) keep the real life pilots from pushing the aircraft as hard as we do?

 

In my opinion it could be difficult to know.

And I think also that this is why SithSpawn and ED require hard evidence as opposed to anecdotal "evidence" which is hard to quantify.

 

But of course it could be nice with a comment from ED/Yo-Yo if they have been around this issue, and what they think of it.

 

As much as anyone, I would of course like the module to be as close to the real thing as possible. :)

Edited October 21, 2015 by Sporg

[Nedum]

At the risk of embarrassing myself, here is my Cuban 8... full disclosure... I am not an acrobatic pilot

 

0uyxJwgLo8Y

 

 

Hmm... not bad... but fare away from a good looking Cuban 8!

The extreme rolling and shacking at low speed we've seen in your vid I couldn't see in any RL BF109 vid.

And the extreme loss of speed and the extreme need of time to gain this speed on the other side look for me very strange.

We have a plane trimmed down and "falling" down with an extreme good powered engine but in your vid (looking very similar to mine) you need an extreme long time to pull the next loop, because you can’t pull the loop until you reach again a 50° - 45° dive. You must open your pull very soon after you have passed the return point and your “loop” becomes a flat one.

The problem with the DCS is you can't even fly a round loop with a starting speed of 600 kph. As soon as you pull the stick the plane start to loop and at a point you have no fine control anymore about the speed with how hard you pull the stick. You will lose extreme much energy.

If you try to manage your speed with the throttle, the BF 109 start to roll and you will lose more speed because you must now use the ruder much more and the ruder is now like a brake. If you try to control your speed or how wide the loop should be with the stick, the new feature of “auto pulling” ruins all the fine control a real pilot would have and could use (I wish I could disable this “feature”).

Only 0.5 millimeter of stick way can ruin all your good work.

I don't know why the BF109 must loop by itself and why is there this "auto steering/dampening" or whatever this is called but that thing take away my direct control of the plane.

Why does the plane starts shaking at high speed in flight direction if I pull the stick and the plane loses fast the speed and if I have lost “enough” speed it tries to roll the whole time in such a way that I must use the ruder in a way that the ruder becomes a brake?

Is there really no momentum to push the plane forward and are there no air drag at the wings and no lift force to stabilize the plane? Sometimes it feels as that there are no wings or I am flying in a vacuum with no air drag. Where are all this forces gone?

And for what again are those front flaps good if the plane becomes a bitch a 300 kph, a speed miles away from the stall speed?

As I've said. I only fly RC single motor planes, but the physic is by 100% the same, so why do they are not behave like the DCS BF109?

A Cuban 8 should start with a 45° - 40° dive in a loop. You should roll in this loop. This roll is now your cross point for the next roll after a loop!

You will pull this loop until you are again head over at 45° - 40°, and dive to the height/point you did start the first loop, now roll 180° and start the next loop the same way until you dive again head over at 45° to 40° to the point you did the 180° roll (cross point), here you roll again 180° .. that was it.

The important part is, that the dive should be around 45° - 40° and the dive after the loop again. And that’s the point where the DCS BF109 lacks!

The bird is losing energy like hell but it could be enough to fly the loop to the end, but now the shaking and rolling of the bird starts and at this point the DCS pilot must open the loop too early and the loop will look like a hand written "L" on the side.

That is the problem in this vid and for me too each time I try a Cuban 8.

If I try to fly a good looking Cuban 8 it ends all the time with a rolling and shaking plane and I don't know why I can fly with ease loops with RC planes, even if I fly only with 10% of the power I could use.

You know... if I fly my planes on the back in a loop they are “flying”! In DCS the 109 start to drop out of the sky as soon as she has passed the top point of the loop, because no power anymore.. no force… no flying. Suddenly she behaves like in an air free room.

And you too as I could see in this vid!

There is no good/plausible flight behavior because the plane wants the whole time doing a loop by itself.

And I don't know why!?

Because as soon as I pull the stick even a micrometer this strange stick auto-/self-pull feature comes in?

What does it try to "simulate"?

I don't know what it is, but for me it doesn't feel and look like any near like I can see at RL planes or at my RC planes and that is extreme strange because physic should be physic, shouldn’t it!?

[ZaltysZ]

The problem with the DCS is you can't even fly a round loop with a starting speed of 600 kph.

 

You have to go easier on the stick at the top of the loop. Depending on trim, stick can even be neutral in pitch axis. Otherwise, if you push the plane to max through wide speed range, you will get non round loop as radius decreases with speed.

 

As soon as you pull the stick the plane start to loop and at a point you have no fine control anymore about the speed with how hard you pull the stick. You will lose extreme much energy.

 

It would be easier if you made a video. Otherwise we will be speculating only on most likely reasons of your issues.

 

BF109 is supposed to be heavy on controls. As speed increases, elevator becomes heavier and heavier. I think at speed of 400km/h your virtual pilot can't event pull stick fully. That means, once you pull your stick over the strength limit for given speed, further input in that axis is ignored until you ease on the stick and go below that limit.

 

I think you initially pull too much, go way over that limit, and then don't see immediate difference by going easier on the stick, because your real stick still stays over the limit. Your easing is ignored until you ease enough to go below strength limit. Once your speed bleeds, forces on elevator decrease, and your virtual pilot becomes able to pull more and more closer to your real stick. At certain speed forces becomes light enough for virtual pilot to pull near critical AoA, and if your real stick is still held pulled more than that you will be moment before shaking starts.

 

Basically, you need to understand how control heaviness is modeled and adapt to it (learn not to pull over the strength limit of the pilot by using visual cues and/or IAS reading) or get FFB stick. Comparing to what red square (CTRL+ENTER) shows to your real stick position should be helpful too.

 

And for what again are those front flaps good if the plane becomes a bitch a 300 kph, a speed miles away from the stall speed?

 

Concept of stall speed is more useful for landing. While doing maneuvers think about angle of attack. Wing stalls once you reach critical angle of attack, and you can do that at speeds higher than stall speed. Slats (front flaps) help with high angles of attack. If they were removed, you would be getting problems at lower angles of attack.

[NineLine]

Hmm... not bad... but fare away from a good looking Cuban 8!

 

As I said, I am not an acrobatic pilot, I have great respect for guys that can do that stuff, in real life and in sim. The fact that you cant just jump into a DCS module and be an ace pilot or super duper acrobatic marvel is telling of the quality of the FM, fighter and acrobatic pilots are very skilled people with hours and hours of practice... it would probably be pretty silly to say we could have a couple hours in a simulator and fly as good as they do after hundreds of more hours of experience and practice... would tell me the FM probably isnt that great if that was the case.

 

 

The extreme rolling and shacking at low speed we've seen in your vid I couldn't see in any RL BF109 vid.

 

Show me a comparison vid, the youtube vid vers what you are seeing in sim, you always reference vids you have seen, I wish I could find all these great 109 vids you talk about.

 

 

We have a plane trimmed down and "falling" down with an extreme good powered engine but in your vid (looking very similar to mine) you need an extreme long time to pull the next loop, because you can’t pull the loop until you reach again a 50° - 45° dive. You must open your pull very soon after you have passed the return point and your “loop” becomes a flat one.

 

I am not sure I agree with you, and referencing my vid probably isnt indicative of the planes performance, I was trying to reach the end of the runway before performing my second loop, probably not correct for the Cuban 8, but again, I am not an acrobatic pilot, and was only trying to work with what reference I had.

 

The problem with the DCS is you can't even fly a round loop with a starting speed of 600 kph. As soon as you pull the stick the plane start to loop and at a point you have no fine control anymore about the speed with how hard you pull the stick. You will lose extreme much energy.

 

Again, post a video of this issue because I simply dont see this issue. I was having trouble with loops well under that speend, but at 600 kph, no issue what so every, I figure your loop is either too deep or too shallow... but I am not an expert.

 

blah blah RC stuff blah blah

 

I cant comment on comparisons to RC stuff, but bottom line is time to put up your vid and show us your Cuban 8 attempt. People can better judge if you are seeing an issue or making one with your flying abilities... if you dont put up a vid, no one can help. I can practice my cuban 8 for a while, I can ask someone like Pman for tips, I am sure I could eventually fly a quality cuban 8 without issue with this module.

Edited October 22, 2015 by NineLine