Controlling Aircraft in Flight

[C3PO]

Hi,

 

I’m finding it really hard to control the aircraft in flight - particularly when loaded with bombs. Tiny inputs seem to deliver exaggerated results in a way I don’t see in the Hornet. Using trim doesn’t help a great deal - it feels it needs constant inputs for free flight. Any advice gratefully received.

[Wisky]

unlike the hornet this doesnt have a computer thats flying it for you. if you pull on the stick its up to you to decide where to stop or break your wings trying. 

 

you will want a curvature of ~23 to have better control at high speeds, depending on the stick you use

[C3PO]

Todaoy took delivery of the THM HOTAS Warthog - completely different feel and much more stable. No more random twitches in the middle. 

[cw4ogden]

On 1/23/2021 at 6:10 AM, C3PO said:

 

I’m finding it really hard to control the aircraft in flight - particularly when loaded with bombs. Tiny inputs seem to deliver exaggerated results in a way I don’t see in the Hornet. Using trim doesn’t help a great deal - it feels it needs constant inputs for free flight. Any advice gratefully received.

AFC on versus off are two different flying styles for me.  I use AFC nearly all the time, except when doing excessive maneuvering.  The trim button works like a trimmer when the AFC is off, but with it on, it is more a direction button.  You can hold down the left trim for example and roll into a left bank, the roll movement stops when the button stops, same for pitch.  

 

Dropping bombs I used to always chase the roll attitude but if the AFC is engaged, it will level itself given a few seconds.  

 

For me once I stopped fighting the AFC, and embraced flying via trim button, the harrier feels like a modern jet.  You can do stick movements as well I believe, if you don't like trim button flying but at some point stick deflection seems to turn AFC off.  Sometimes it takes several attempts for me to get the AFC to reengage after a big maneuver, but it beats trying to hand trim this beast, which as you point out is even more difficult with asymmetric loading.

[Fri13]

IMHO the Harrier inputs are fairly itchy, it is very difficult to get it trimmed or even hold on level flight for longer periods, why the AFC is there to make possible fly long periods for straight and perform the normal flight procedures.

In the cockpit videos you can see pilot flying aircraft with the trim, but as well using stick. There is still something that makes it question that the Harrier reactions to input is too sensitive.

[Zilch]

On 2/1/2021 at 2:33 AM, Fri13 said:

IMHO the Harrier inputs are fairly itchy, it is very difficult to get it trimmed or even hold on level flight for longer periods, why the AFC is there to make possible fly long periods for straight and perform the normal flight procedures.

In the cockpit videos you can see pilot flying aircraft with the trim, but as well using stick. There is still something that makes it question that the Harrier reactions to input is too sensitive.

 

Keep in mind, too, that by the time a USMC Harrier pilot gets to the Harrier, they've got more flight hours than many professionals. Fleet pilots do this as a full time job, with hundreds and thousands of hours in fight and training, and the training never stops. 

 

For (most of) us, it's a hobby and we get hours in the dozens, if we're lucky.

 

Also, they can feel their jet. Any upset or change in attitude can be felt by the seat of the pants, spine, and so on. All we have are visual cues, so we glue our eyes to the cockpit a lot more. 

 

It's something my CFI pointed out. Students with lots of simulator experience tend to glue eyes to guages more and he had to break that habit for us. 

 

What you're seeing may not be an issue with sensitivity at all. Cool thing about DCS, too, is you can adjust your axis curves to suit. 

 

Another thing you'll notice is that unless you build a sim pit, your stick's pivot point is far shorter than theirs, since the real jet's stick pivots from the floor and ours tend to pivot right below our wrist. It may also make it feel like smaller stick deflections do more than what you see in the videos and thus, harder to make those minute adjustments that are so critical in landing, aiming, and AR. Again, mess with the axis curves (or build a sim pit) until it works. 

[Dragon1-1]

You don't need a sim pit, it is possible to build a rig with just a chair, the stick and the throttle. I built one for rotorcraft, and it's indeed a world of difference, with powerful springs and a long-handled stick, you can make really precise, small movements. Really goes a long way towards a good helo experience.

 

All this doesn't change the fact the Harrier just isn't that easy to fly. It was known as "Ensign killer" in the UK for a reason. USMC picked Harrier drivers from experienced helo pilots at one point. Short of building a full-on motion platform (which I might try to do someday, for my rotorcraft rig), you're not gonna get the physical cues, which will always make things harder in a hover.

Edited February 5, 2021 by Dragon1-1

[Fri13]

3 hours ago, Zilch said:

 

Keep in mind, too, that by the time a USMC Harrier pilot gets to the Harrier, they've got more flight hours than many professionals. Fleet pilots do this as a full time job, with hundreds and thousands of hours in fight and training, and the training never stops. 

 

For (most of) us, it's a hobby and we get hours in the dozens, if we're lucky.

 

Also, they can feel their jet. Any upset or change in attitude can be felt by the seat of the pants, spine, and so on. All we have are visual cues, so we glue our eyes to the cockpit a lot more. 

 

It's something my CFI pointed out. Students with lots of simulator experience tend to glue eyes to guages more and he had to break that habit for us. 

 

You are suppose to share your time with instruments, outside and your lead. When instruments becomes your HUD, you can spend more time looking outside than inside. But each time your eyes look close and then back to infinity you have challenges to see well outside.
 

Considering just the instruments alone, one needs to perform the proper glancing technique between main instruments and outside. And then when flying as wingman keep an eye to lead. There is little time to look around as time is valuable.

 

That is why I love VR as I can fly head down and still maintain flight through turns or level flight as I can see the aircraft attitude in corner of eye. When I did fly with display, it was far more about instruments and directly looking outside. In VR it is about seeing and feeling those visual indicators of attitude when looking outside.

 

Couple weeks ago I stretched my neck muscle, that made impossible to turn head to the right or up. And part of the muscle exercise I used VR flying to return slowly back to normal head movements using natural means to look around. And it was terrible experience to try fly with such condition. Requiring to first just make turns to the left and not able to look upward to look at the target etc. Going just for the instruments and HUD was annoying as it is like flying in a bag.

 

3 hours ago, Zilch said:

What you're seeing may not be an issue with sensitivity at all. Cool thing about DCS, too, is you can adjust your axis curves to suit. 

 

Another thing you'll notice is that unless you build a sim pit, your stick's pivot point is far shorter than theirs, since the real jet's stick pivots from the floor and ours tend to pivot right below our wrist. It may also make it feel like smaller stick deflections do more than what you see in the videos and thus, harder to make those minute adjustments that are so critical in landing, aiming, and AR. Again, mess with the axis curves (or build a sim pit) until it works. 

 

I have 30 cm extension, that doesn't include the grip height from the extension. It is about 35-40 cm from the gimbal axis, that in VR measurement is already longer than what Harrier does have as from gimbal position that is under the floor already, the joystick is little taller than the cockpit stick is.

 

What I am talking about is the sensitivity that is exactly about DCS requiring to use curves and other artificial changes that shouldn't be required when you have almost matching control factors.

 

The trim function is one of those, too sensitive or to say, reacts too effectively. But that is a reason to just use FCS to fly in level as trimming doesn't seem to work at steady speed, altitude and attitude.

[Fri13]

2 hours ago, Dragon1-1 said:

.All this doesn't change the fact the Harrier just isn't that easy to fly. It was known as "Ensign killer" in the UK for a reason. USMC picked Harrier drivers from experienced helo pilots at one point. Short of building a full-on motion platform (which I might try to do someday, for my rotorcraft rig), you're not gonna get the physical cues, which will always make things harder in a hover.

 

I find Harrier easy to fly, hover and do all those. That is because helicopter flying is so strongly in the muscle memory.

 

But the problem is not really the handling but the sensitivity. How you can not trim it to level flight as it always goes past the wanted attitude. Roll to right and give minimum trim to left and it starts slowly rolling to left. Just tap to right and back to rolling to right. Pitching up, and similar thing. Constantly chasing the trimmer.

 

Why doing the P-51 trick by adjusting trimmer sensitivity much lower in lua file makes it possible to trim easily to level flight as quickest possible trim input doesn't make huge difference.

 

 

With that you can get it to be less sensitive to trim input so that you don't need to be oscillating because you can't input proper trim. Then that gets it to be in landings more controllable where you can be constantly giving trim to fly through.

 

Such change should allow get trimmer text less so you can trim for speed and only now and then correct it as fuel is consumed or wind direction changes etc.