Air brakes: are they supposed to be "On/OFF" only?

[Dexter092]

Greetings everyone, :)

i'm glad the developers fixed the keys for "airbrakes On" and "OFF", but as the title says, are they supposed to be completely raised or closed? :joystick:

 

Are they planned to be tweaked to have "mid positions" still? If so, are they going to work as the A-10C (The more you keep pressed the open switch, the more they open, and viceversa) or like the F-15C (press once to start opening, press again to stay still, and viceversa)?

 

I tried to land few times and, as i'm used to the warthog, i try to use air brakes. :music_whistling: But with full closed i get too low AoA, with with full opened i get too much (TWW goes below the nose and i can't see anything ^^;). Soooo... yeah, i probably need more practice, but having "custom" air brakes positioning may help. :music_whistling:

 

Thank you for your hard work so far! :thumbup:

[PiedDroit]

They are full open or closed.

 

For landing you should not need them. You can still land with them opened but of course you need to adjust your throttle accordingly, the Mirage can fly fast even with the airbrake extended, so having too much AoA is probably because you're shy on the throttle.

When your FPM starts to drift down just increase throttle, keep an eye on it, the delta wing makes things happens much quicker, keep a hand on the throttle ;)

 

Also, if you get too small AoA (without airbrakes) maybe it's because you are coming in too fast, in that case extend the airbrakes until you get almost good AoA then retract them.

 

Happy landing :thumbup:

Edited January 27, 2016 by PiedDroit

[Nealius]

I save airbrakes for after touchdown. I have noticed that the AoA changes in response to throttle adjustments are very slow.

[Sarge55]

I use air brakes to initially slow to approach speed then close them. As soon as I'm down I open them again.

 

Like Dexter on other aircraft I have them partially open on approach, keeps the engine power up a bit in case I miss the approach. If I have to go around then I just close them and accelerate which is easier as I have some power in hand.

[NeilWillis]

I save airbrakes for after touchdown. I have noticed that the AoA changes in response to throttle adjustments are very slow.

 

There is no direct correlation between throttle and AoA. The relationship is airspeed - AoA. So for the throttle to be effective, the energy change needs to be effective. Allow the energy to bleed off too much, and opening the throttle will not add airspeed quickly. Also, remember that in low energy regimes, the throttle only changes sink rate, and to speed up, you need to push the nose down. Unloading the wings, and reducing induced drag will increase airspeed, and as a result, lower your AoA. Thrust will just add more energy, increasing lift, but not reducing incipient drag.

 

Managing energy in landing is the critical thing - hence the approach HUD mode, which provides a graphical aid to keeping things in the frame. Once energy gets outside the envelope, then corrective action may not help in the way you expect.

 

The key is to manage airspeed, AoA and throttle carefully.

[Nealius]

This is where I'm noticing a big difference between the M2000 and a comparable platform that I'm used to (F-16). In the F-16 sim any minor adjustment in power shows an almost immediate effect both in sink rate and AoA (evidenced by FPM dropping in the AoA bracket). Even in the DCS A-10C I notice immediate FPM changes when I make a change in power. In comparison I've found the M2000 to be sluggish in that regard. Any change in power results in a delayed and slow movement of the FPM.

[NeilWillis]

Are you talking about an F-16 in this sim or a different one?

 

Either way, there is no direct comparison. Here, it is a 3rd party mod, and probably uses a simple flight model. If it is in another well known sim, then comparison is going to open a whole can of worms. We could debate forever about which is right and which is wrong if you are referring to the other sim, but that will soon drift into territory is both unfair, and not permitted under the rules here.

 

All I can say is, keep an open mind, and persevere. You may just need to adjust to the different feel.

[Fab]

Correct way to manage speed and hight under landing, regardless what sim you use is...

Throttel adjust hight, nose attitude adjustes speed. So in the real life, so in sims...

Stopping a plane flying, is by far the most crittical time in the air. There is a reason why, all pilots when possible, make a long approce flight, to set things up right. thight turns in to landing, complitate the aquasion a lot.

[Nealius]

Maybe it's just the dynamics of the delta wing fooling with me. When I fly the Su-25 or A-10 I can clearly see how power affects sink rate, but in the M2000 I don't see it as much.

 

Other than that, the whole "power controls sink rate attitude controls speed" has always confused me because it isn't absolute, yet is always taught as an absolute. A change in power will cause a change in both sink rate and speed. Same for a change in attitude. If you push the nose down yeah you will go faster, but you will also smack into the ground.

[Flamin_Squirrel]

Other than that, the whole "power controls sink rate attitude controls speed" has always confused me because it isn't absolute, yet is always taught as an absolute. A change in power will cause a change in both sink rate and speed. Same for a change in attitude. If you push the nose down yeah you will go faster, but you will also smack into the ground.

 

Couldn't agree more; it's a foolish statement and an oversimplification.

 

A stable approach requires good energy management and you can't state one control affects one aspect and one control affects another when they're all interconnected.

[PiedDroit]

Couldn't agree more; it's a foolish statement and an oversimplification.

 

A stable approach requires good energy management and you can't state one control affects one aspect and one control affects another when they're all interconnected.

 

I think this is taught or repeated "as is" without explanation (or understanding).

I tried to fly using those principles without much success too.

 

Only thing I found that could relate a bit to this proverb is that in approach, adjusting power while keeping the AoA helps to fine fune sink rate.

And using attitude helps finding the good AoA (and therefore, speed), however while doing that you need to keep adjusting throttle to maintain sink rate.

 

Therefore both are interconnected, use throttle while maintaining AoA to correct sink rate, and use attitude to correct AoA while maintaining sink rate. That's how it works for me... (edit) but you could very well read it the other way as both work together anyway.

Edited January 27, 2016 by PiedDroit

[Fab]

Couldn't agree more; it's a foolish statement and an oversimplification.

 

A stable approach requires good energy management and you can't state one control affects one aspect and one control affects another when they're all interconnected.

 

Its by no mean a foolish statement.... There is no one arguueing, that all inputs you make in a plane, will affect more than one aspect. The point is, that when your on your final, where you almost glide, perhaps adds a littel trothel or reduce it, at this point, if you WANT to change altitude you use throttel, if you WANT to change speed you use nose attitude. no matter how odd it feels for you, thats the way to do it. At such low speeds close to the ground, at a point where the plane no longer wants to fly, you dont mess around, with your own predictions. I was tought to land like this IRL, and so are all others..

[NeilWillis]

Whoever talked in absolutes? It is a balance, and all things are related of course. However, unless you understand the principals, then you will get nowhere. In low energy situations, the throttle just doesn't increase speed if there is an excess of incipient drag. Unless the aircraft is set up correctly in the first place, and all aspects of the flight envelope are monitored and managed, don't be surprised if it goes wrong.

 

If you want to perfect your landing techniques, read up on principals of flight, practice, and get a feel for what works and what doesn't. Then practice some more, and read some more.

 

I have one overriding ethos. the more you put in, the more you get out. Don't just expect to get everything right first time.

[Nealius]

I'm not looking for landing tips so I don't understand why we're talking about them in the first place, but the statement that throttle controls sinkrate and attitude controls speed is an absolute as it fails to mention how everything is interconnected in reality. The statement implies that changing attitude alone will change speed and nothing but speed, which is not true as both speed and sinkrate will change without a simultaneous change in power.

 

I feel like there are a lot of oversimplifications and I don't know if that's a byproduct of the disconnect between sims and reality or what. Rudder usage is another one. "Step on the ball" and that's it. But when? Do I add increasing rudder as I bank, or do I bank first, see the ball, then apply appropriate rudder? What about combat maneuvers where I need to snap into 60-90 degrees of bank? No matter how much I read or experiment in the sim nothing seems to work.

Edited January 27, 2016 by Nealius

[PiedDroit]

Even if no one asked for landing tips, this clarification is useful for the initial question :thumbup:

This will help OP understand why his FPM is not doing what he wants whatever the airbrake setting he's using.

[jojo]

I'm not looking for landing tips so I don't understand why we're talking about them in the first place, but the statement that throttle controls sinkrate and attitude controls speed is an absolute as it fails to mention how everything is interconnected in reality. The statement implies that changing attitude alone will change speed and nothing but speed, which is not true as both speed and sinkrate will change without a simultaneous change in power.

 

I feel like there are a lot of oversimplifications and I don't know if that's a byproduct of the disconnect between sims and reality or what. Rudder usage is another one. "Step on the ball" and that's it. But when? Do I add increasing rudder as I bank, or do I bank first, see the ball, then apply appropriate rudder? What about combat maneuvers where I need to snap into 60-90 degrees of bank? No matter how much I read or experiment in the sim nothing seems to work.

 

on Mirage FBW maintain 0 sideslip. Excepted for some specific cases like in flight refueling...so most of the time, rudder is useless !

[Nealius]

The tidbit about rudder was just an example of oversimplification; not related to M2000.

[jojo]

Then go fly few hours in real plane with real sensations...it will help a lot ;)

 

Of course stick control speed & throttle control glide path is simplification.

But these are the main parameters you're adjusting, and as long as these are small corrections this is almost true.

[Nealius]

Unfortunately flying a real plane costs more money than I can afford. I've only managed a few demo lessons.

[Sporg]

Then go fly few hours in real plane with real sensations...it will help a lot ;)

 

Of course stick control speed & throttle control glide path is simplification.

But these are the main parameters you're adjusting, and as long as these are small corrections this is almost true.

 

Actually I was taught this technique from a real-life pilot too:

 

Set your attitude correct (and to the right speed), then generally adjust your glide path by increasing or decreasing throttle.

 

For me it has helped.

 

I guess the basic wisdom in this is that it helps you focus on using one control at a time.

As a beginner I had a tendency to use all controls at the same time, with a not very good result. :)

[NeilWillis]

I'm not looking for landing tips so I don't understand why we're talking about them in the first place, but the statement that throttle controls sinkrate and attitude controls speed is an absolute as it fails to mention how everything is interconnected in reality. The statement implies that changing attitude alone will change speed and nothing but speed, which is not true as both speed and sinkrate will change without a simultaneous change in power.

 

I feel like there are a lot of oversimplifications and I don't know if that's a byproduct of the disconnect between sims and reality or what. Rudder usage is another one. "Step on the ball" and that's it. But when? Do I add increasing rudder as I bank, or do I bank first, see the ball, then apply appropriate rudder? What about combat maneuvers where I need to snap into 60-90 degrees of bank? No matter how much I read or experiment in the sim nothing seems to work.

 

No one is offering landing tips. They are simply stating the fact that the throttle won't increase airspeed in that configuration, so we are explaining to you that it doesn't. To ignore that fact is to reject advice that was offered in order to help you.

 

You need to understand ALL the theory to predict what does and is supposed to happen. That's why I said you need to read up on it. There is no simplification, just cause and effect. Moving the stick will change the speed, and moving the throttle will change the sink rate IN THAT PARTICULAR REGIME. It IS simple, because that's what happens. Don't take our word for it though, try it and see.

 

It isn't a debate, it is simply that you are expecting one result, when it just won't do what you think it ought to do.

[Fab]

As long as you fly a plane thats got FBW, you dont applay rudder in an turn (bank) the FBW does it for you, and you just end up with a plane that tryes to counter act the input you make, as it will read you input from rudde, as you want to point your nose a diffrent place, than the bank it self. When i landing configuration, you gain more control over the rudder, because its programed so in the FBW pc. in a non FBW plane you use rudder, aileon and elevator at same time, this i extream diffecault in a sim, because the feed back you get from an IRL plane is missing in sims, where you only got the ball as input.If you fly a smal prop plane like a Cessna, you normal use rudder for turns, and support with aileons...if you like a steeper turn...

But as mentioned above, one realy needs to understand the fysics and aerodynamic laws. Lots of ppl in here talk of AoA and sink rates ect. with out realy knowing what the mean and how they work..... Like airbreaks on planes, where its often sugested that is about drag, but fail to understand its just as much if not more a matter of interrupting the airflow, over lifting planes.

Edited January 27, 2016 by Fab

[NeilWillis]

Air brakes in a lot of aircraft are definitely not spoilers. The M-2000C is a rare exception in DCS World right now in having them mounted over and under the wings, so yes, they may have more aerodynamic impact.

 

You have a very good point regarding the FBW aspect of the M-2000C. If you want to understand co-ordinating turns, try the TF-51D. It is free, and you'll learn an awful lot about basic flight principles. Certainly far more than in the M-2000C, which will mask all kinds of mishandling.

 

The answer regarding the rudder application in turns is not simple either. Initially, you need to watch the ball, and see how much sideslip you get in turns, and then apply enough rudder to compensate. It all takes practice, and can be very different from aircraft to aircraft. There is no straight forward answer to that one.

[Nealius]

It isn't a debate, it is simply that you are expecting one result, when it just won't do what you think it ought to do.

 

The point that I am trying to make is that the wording of that simplistic advice I see thrown around all the time in multiple simming communities causes the reader to expect that one result. Nothing more, nothing less. I don't understand how that's so hard to see....it feels like no one is bothering to read what I'm writing and they are replying to "questions" I never asked.

Edited January 28, 2016 by Nealius

[Nerd1000]

Maybe it's just the dynamics of the delta wing fooling with me. When I fly the Su-25 or A-10 I can clearly see how power affects sink rate, but in the M2000 I don't see it as much.

 

Deltas don't stall like aircraft with straight wings- on a straight wing, exceeding critical AoA tends to result in a rapid decrease in lift and a equally rapid increase in drag. Deltas don't lose lift as quickly, but the drag increases dramatically like on other wings.

 

This means that it is possible to get into what I call 'the hole' where the aircraft is still under control and producing lift but the wing is making vast amounts of drag, so much that you might find yourself needing to use full dry thrust (or maybe even more!) just to maintain your current speed. The only way to escape is to lower the nose and accelerate or use full afterburner to power out of it.

 

You should also keep in mind that there is a delay between increasing throttle and getting extra thrust, as the engine must spool up. Turbine engines tend to have poor throttle response when running at low speed, so if you're throttled back for landing there may be a considerable delay between moving the throttle lever forward and getting the commanded level of thrust.

 

The situation has improved with newer engines. Some older jets had such bad throttle response at low power that pilots used the airbrakes for the entire approach so that the engines could be operated at high RPM.