Vatikus Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 ... I cannot get full deflection past 160km/h. I understand that the forces build up, but 160 is a bit pessimistic. Saying 160km/h to be high speed is .. :music_whistling: On Spit, I can yank full deflection w/o any speed limit. 1
Art-J Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 On Spit, I can yank full deflection w/o any speed limit. That's because it hasn't been implemented yet and is confirmed to be on the "do to" list. Not a fair comparison then :). i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.
Vatikus Posted October 28, 2017 Author Posted October 28, 2017 Ok, but not being able to deflect full rudder above take off rotation speed is odd. yes?
Art-J Posted October 28, 2017 Posted October 28, 2017 Yes, I guess it is. But honestly, I've never noticed it - why and when would you need full deflection after liftoff anyway? i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.
WildBillKelsoe Posted October 29, 2017 Posted October 29, 2017 are you trying aerobatics? AWAITING ED NEW DAMAGE MODEL IMPLEMENTATION FOR WW2 BIRDS Fat T is above, thin T is below. Long T is faster, Short T is slower. Open triangle is AWACS, closed triangle is your own sensors. Double dash is friendly, Single dash is enemy. Circle is friendly. Strobe is jammer. Strobe to dash is under 35 km. HDD is 7 times range key. Radar to 160 km, IRST to 10 km. Stay low, but never slow.
Vatikus Posted October 29, 2017 Author Posted October 29, 2017 Yes, I guess it is. But honestly, I've never noticed it - why and when would you need full deflection after liftoff anyway? What kind of bizzare question :) ... A: to have a realistic simulation of the plane and to be able to perform maneuvers using yaw component which are currently impossible to do since rudder is ineffective.
=37.Sqn= Mjugen Posted October 31, 2017 Posted October 31, 2017 Yes, I guess it is. But honestly, I've never noticed it - why and when would you need full deflection after liftoff anyway? What a bizarre question indeed.
Anatoli-Kagari9 Posted October 31, 2017 Posted October 31, 2017 (edited) +1 Furthermore is wasn't uncommon to apply a lot of rudder in dogfighting with the enemy on your tail to make aiming more difficult by masking the actual flight path. As aileron and elevator (should) become noticable heavy only at very high speed I doubt that it should be different concerning rudder. The Flight Replicas Bf109K for FSX simulates all this very realistic. Indeed, I had that one, and really liked it. Even ground handling in that add-on is probably the best I found regarding models of the Bf 109 in various sims... But that's not really a surprise - Bernt Stolle is a REFERENCE in fdms for FSX... The only aspect that was a bit different from how I see it implemented in other sims is the auto prop pitch controller ... ( don't recall the correct German designation ... one of those typical longish German words... ) Edited October 31, 2017 by jcomm Flight Simulation is the Virtual Materialization of a Dream...
Burning Bridges Posted October 31, 2017 Posted October 31, 2017 was it "Luftschraubenblattanstellwinkel" ? :megalol:
Anatoli-Kagari9 Posted October 31, 2017 Posted October 31, 2017 Found it! "Kommandogerät" Flight Simulation is the Virtual Materialization of a Dream...
Art-J Posted October 31, 2017 Posted October 31, 2017 What kind of bizzare question :) ... A: to have a realistic simulation of the plane and to be able to perform maneuvers using yaw component which are currently impossible to do since rudder is ineffective. It's a "bizarre" question from me, because of bizarre in my opinion issue noted by you. IF it is a noticeable issue at all, that was my point. There's literally no situation either during takeoff or landing when one would need full deflection above 160 km/h, unless someone experiments with extreme crosswind landings in non-realistic conditions. We don't even need 100% to initiate a spin or do a sideslip approach, or perform a hammerhead. I've been flying 109 since February '15, not all that much, but still, I learned about beginning of force cut-off at 160 only now as you started the thread. It's just not something noticeable, especially when we're still above ~75% of deflection range at 220-230 and start loosing rudder big time (60% of deflection) only above 300. Just out of curiosity, I checked the other warbirds which have rudder forces implemented and for Mustang the limitation gradient at low speeds is pretty much the same as in 109, while for 190 it's about 10 km/h higher on average. I guess we can expect similar values in Spit when it gets its rudder forces modelled as well. Now, I don't know how accurately or not the "legs strength" of out virtual pilot in DCS is simulated, maybe the minimum treshold of 160 is a bit too low indeed, but 109 is just not much different in that aspect than other DCS warbirds and they're all still fully controllable in typical flight and aerobatics situations. i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.
Echo38 Posted November 1, 2017 Posted November 1, 2017 (edited) If it is wrong, it should be corrected, whether or not it is noticeable by the average pilot. How noticeable an error is should not be a factor in considering whether or not to fix it. However, is there actual evidence that the behavior is incorrect? From this thread alone, I'm not seeing it. 160 KPH does seem rather low to me, but there may be factors that you & I are overlooking. Edited November 1, 2017 by Echo38
Whisper Posted November 2, 2017 Posted November 2, 2017 And there has been no measurement of how much is missing from "full deflection" at low speeds Whisper of old OFP & C6 forums, now Kalbuth. Specs : i7 6700K / MSI 1070 / 32G RAM / SSD / Rift S / Virpil MongooseT50 / Virpil T50 CM2 Throttle / MFG Crosswind. All but Viggen, Yak52 & F16
amazingme Posted November 3, 2017 Posted November 3, 2017 Actually, Jump to min 6:37. Specs: Asus Z97 PRO Gamer, i7 4790K@4.6GHz, 4x8GB Kingston @2400MHz 11-13-14-32, Titan X, Creative X-Fi, 128+2x250GB SSDs, VPC T50 Throttle + G940, MFG Crosswinds, TrackIR 5 w/ pro clip, JetSeat, Win10 Pro 64-bit, Oculus Rift, 27"@1920x1080 Settings:2.1.x - Textures:High Terrain:High Civ.Traffic:Off Water:High VisRan:Low Heatblur:High Shadows:High Res:1920x1080 RoC:1024 MSAA:4x AF:16x HDR:OFF DefS: ON GCI: ON DoF:Off Lens: OFF C/G:390m Trees:1500m R:max Gamma: 1.5
Echo38 Posted November 4, 2017 Posted November 4, 2017 Was that the one that EagDyn specifically fixed after the interview, because of his input? Somewhere, they mentioned that they fixed a problem that he talked about. Don't remember where or which. It does look to me as though something's wrong, if the the sim pilot is unable to obtain full rudder deflection at greater than 160 KPH.
Art-J Posted November 4, 2017 Posted November 4, 2017 (edited) In the end, we can "feel" anything we want, but if we can't provide developers info on the rudder force gradient for the aforementioned planes, or other planes with similar empennage geometry, the thread will go nowhere. Not that Yo-Yo got the rudder forces out of the hat anyway. He must've based them on something for his flight models, but I don't remember them being mentioned anywhere on the forum (I think I recall him posting the virtual pilot "strength" limits for the stick in one of 109 or Spit threads, but I don't think similar info was posted for the rudder). Edited November 4, 2017 by Art-J i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.
BitMaster Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 was it "Luftschraubenblattanstellwinkel" ? :megalol: propblade-pitch :) Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Sapphire Nitro+ 7800XT - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus XG27ACG QHD 180Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X
BitMaster Posted November 5, 2017 Posted November 5, 2017 Is the prop's airstream at full throttle not just as intense as any airstream that could possibly ever flow across the rudder in level flight, driven by that prop ? I can hardly imagine that Messerschmitt or Daimler Benz were able to cheat physics and develop a prop with an efficiency >1. In other words, with a prop test run, airplane tied down, you should see up to which throttle setting you can apply full deflection of the tail stabilizers. Does this approach make sense ? Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Sapphire Nitro+ 7800XT - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus XG27ACG QHD 180Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X
Burning Bridges Posted November 8, 2017 Posted November 8, 2017 Luftschraubenblattanstellwinkeleinstellgerät No other language is as exact as German with what a word can mean :) That's also the reason no one likes Germans, they make it impossible to be of two different opinions
Buzzles Posted November 8, 2017 Posted November 8, 2017 Any link for this word? I'd really like to know where this 'gerät' is being used. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Ger%C3%A4t It's device. Fancy trying Star Citizen? Click here!
Buzzles Posted November 10, 2017 Posted November 10, 2017 I know that, thanx. The question was where the Luftschraubenblattanstellwinkeleinstellgerät comes from, or if it has been invented just to create a long German word. Ah, I see what you mean now, I misread your other post. Fancy trying Star Citizen? Click here!
Burning Bridges Posted November 10, 2017 Posted November 10, 2017 Any link for this word? I'd really like to know where this 'gerät' is being used. Not that I know, I was just trying to demonstrate how a word is properly formed. It must say exactly what it is supposed to mean.
Bex Posted March 4, 2018 Posted March 4, 2018 (edited) Don´t forget the hyphen. We are crazy with word creations but not complete maniac.:D:hehe::prop: For the correct orthography you can refer at the "duden". https://www.duden.de/sprachwissen/rechtschreibregeln/bindestrich You have to separate long words with one or more "Bindestrich/e" (hyphen). Or you get huge words like Luftschraubenblattanstellwinkeleinstellgerät =>(better)Luftschraubenblatt-Anstellwinkel-Einstellgerät. To read more about Luftschrauben-Anlagen, try this scan of a german manual from april 1943. It´s complete in german.:smilewink: Have a look to page 20 picture 10 (Anbau von Nabe und Regler) or page 23 picture 11 (Bedienanlage). There you can find a regulator (Regler). Zweiflüglige Argus Verstell-Luftschrauben-Anlage mit hydraulischer Regelung. Ausgabe April 1943 http://www.germanluftwaffe.com/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/m/Motoren/Argus/Verstell%20Luftschrauben%20Anlage%20Argus/Verstell%20Luftschrauben%20Anlage%20Argus.pdf This website is a wonderful source of scanned manuals or original german cockpit instruments. German ww2 aircraft ammunitions and weapons. Also allied scanned documents, P51 Pilot Manual or BIF Bombardier Information File (251Pages) ect. Very cool. I had a lot of fun with this website because i like and trust the original manuals.:thumbup: Edited March 4, 2018 by Ovis
Burning Bridges Posted March 4, 2018 Posted March 4, 2018 Ok that was new to me. But you are absolutely right it gets down right ugly otherwise. There are many things other languages do better but when it comes to technics imo German is the king of nouns. The advantage is that there can be no ambiguity about what the word means. The disadvantage is that human semantics often turns out so complex that you need 4, 6 or even 8 single words. But that's no longer the fault of the German language imo.
Recommended Posts