Props don't counter rotate?

[Hammer1-1]

Not very effectively...you CAN, but just easier to swing the tail around using the P effect. Only time Ive ever really thought to use the brakes would be taxiing in an S pattern so I can see whats in front of me.

8 minutes ago, iFoxRomeo said:

Can you taxy and turn without ever touching the brake lever?

 

Fox

Oh hell no. I pretty much ride the brakes. Obviously thats bad, but brakes are a wearable surface and can be fixed...and whos going to have hot brakes at the end of a taxi that will just fail due to excessive heat? Unless you're taxiing at 100 kts the whole time.............I just contradicted myself didnt I. No, I use the P effect to swing the tail around,  I dont keep the engine at idle power to turn I goose the throttle...but I dont use the brakes to turn; I use the brakes to induce the turn.

Edited August 28, 2021 by Hammer1-1

[=475FG= Dawger]

1 hour ago, iFoxRomeo said:

But the reason to add power could also be that he doesn't want to come to a stop because he knows that he'll use the brake for the turn while taxiing on grass.

 

If you fly a (coordinated)turn you also anticipate the additional power necessary to stay at your altitude and speed while performing the turn, right? And just before leveling off you reduce the power, to prevent acceleration. 

 

He also kept some power while taxiing at some positions. It is hard to tell the reasons for a resulting action without knowing the intention and actions of the pilot and other factors like friction changes of the underground. 

 

There could also be a slight slope that would cause the P-51 to come to a stop while taxiing so slowly and turn without additional thrust. Just not visible enough on a GoPro fisheye. 

 

I could make a video with opposite ruder use while using the brake to turn and not showing my toebrakes. Without knowing my intentions and actions one could come to the conclusion that right rudder input causes a left turn.

This would work with a P-51 of Bf109, etc. but never with a Spitfire. There you have to use the rudder for differential braking. If the rudder was the main means for turning, then you should turn sufficiently without the brake(as you should use it only when necessary), and stop the turn, but we can can hear the constant use of the brake and its "pffff" in the previous video. 

You can't turn a Spitfire without using the pedals, because the rudder and wheelbrakes are mechanically connected to the pedals, so it is hard to tell from a video what is the primary reason(rudder or brake) of the force that causes the aircraft to turn.

 

So to come to the conclusion(of Kermit's video) that he added power to turn with the rudder is not necessarily the correct conclusion. It is a possibilty, but with enough uncertainties to not use it as a proof of your claim("he added power for the rudder to turn").

 

 

This way you automatically apply differential braking unless you completely release the brake lever.

Can you taxy and turn without ever touching the brake lever?

 

Fox

Grafspee contends that you cannot move the tail of any WWII fighter without using brakes.
 

This is false. 
 

Of course, the videos do not provide conclusive evidence either way. 
 

However, my interpretation of what is going on in the videos is based upon my real world experience. 

 

 

[Bozon]

2 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

Not very effectively...you CAN, but just easier to swing the tail around using the P effect. Only time Ive ever really thought to use the brakes would be taxiing in an S pattern so I can see whats in front of me.

Oh hell no. I pretty much ride the brakes. Obviously thats bad, but brakes are a wearable surface and can be fixed...and whos going to have hot brakes at the end of a taxi that will just fail due to excessive heat? Unless you're taxiing at 100 kts the whole time.............I just contradicted myself didnt I. No, I use the P effect to swing the tail around,  I dont keep the engine at idle power to turn I goose the throttle...but I dont use the brakes to turn; I use the brakes to induce the turn.

 

If by P effect you mean what I think you mean (induced yaw by the “down” moving half of the prop disc producing more pull than the “up” going half) then you are wrong. This has near zero effect when the speed is as slow as taxi speed. 

[grafspee]

1 hour ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Grafspee contends that you cannot move the tail of any WWII fighter without using brakes.
 

This is false. 
 

 

I haven't said anything like that.

I said that sharp turns require brake use.

And i said that you cant drive it like car using only rudder.

I even tried it in DCS and i could taxi spitfire using only rudder, i found out that sweet spot for turn is rpm around 900-1000 anything higher makes spitfire accelerate too much.

In case of Bf-109 which we all know that rudder efficiency is poor that kind of taxing is very problematic so assist with brakes is very much needed.

My view on this topic it that, while taxing pilot should use available rudder authority if not enough brakes.

This way brakes ware will be reduced to minimal.

Despite the fact that some ppl think that all tail draggers act exactly the same, i think it will depend on the plane one will react to rudder inputs other not so much.

Edited August 28, 2021 by grafspee

[=475FG= Dawger]

On 8/27/2021 at 1:54 AM, grafspee said:

 

Second thing in those planes you can't turn plane with rudder only, 

 

I think you did say it. 

Edited August 28, 2021 by =475FG= Dawger

[grafspee]

8 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

I think you did say it. 

 

And you siad that you cant do it in DCS  But truth is that you can.

 I only said that like that because you said that with small power spike you can turn plane and you can't do that in DCS

so i assumed that you wanted to do like 180 degree instant turn by using only rudder.

Edited August 28, 2021 by grafspee

[Hammer1-1]

1 hour ago, Bozon said:

If by P effect you mean what I think you mean (induced yaw by the “down” moving half of the prop disc producing more pull than the “up” going half) then you are wrong. This has near zero effect when the speed is as slow as taxi speed. 

No, by P effect I mean the flow of air from the prop striking the rudder. To do that, you need to increase RPM to get enough force to move the tailplane. IIRC If you imagine the flow of air from the prop it looks like a helix; it basically barrel rolls across the airframe and winds up striking the top of the vert stab. Im probably wrong in calling it P effect most likely...

Edited August 28, 2021 by Hammer1-1

[grafspee]

3 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

No, by P effect I mean the flow of air from the prop striking the rudder. To do that, you need to increase RPM to get enough force to move the tailplane. IIRC If you imagine the flow of air from the prop it looks like a helix; it basically barrel rolls across the airframe and winds up striking the top of the vert stab. Im probably wrong in calling it P effect most likely...

 

It is called spiral slipstream, P-factor is associated with asymmetric thrust.

[Hammer1-1]

2 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

Grafspee contends that you cannot move the tail of any WWII fighter without using brakes.
 

This is false. 
 

Of course, the videos do not provide conclusive evidence either way. 
 

However, my interpretation of what is going on in the videos is based upon my real world experience. 

 

 

Of course you can move the tail without the use of the brakes...but you have to be damned good at it. The brakes just makes it easier to control for those of us who dont know how to anticipate whats going to happen if you do it wrong.

1 minute ago, grafspee said:

It is called spiral slipstream, P-factor is associated with asymmetric thrust.

Ok, well thats basically it in a nutshell. Theres enough force to act on that rudder to throw it around with or without brakes..and its also the reason why single engine props fly kinda cockeyed and you need to trim the nose left to right.

[grafspee]

 

[=475FG= Dawger]

2 hours ago, grafspee said:

And you siad that you cant do it in DCS  But truth is that you can.

 I only said that like that because you said that with small power spike you can turn plane and you can't do that in DCS

so i assumed that you wanted to do like 180 degree instant turn by using only rudder.

 

This is what I actually said

 

Quote

Airflow over the tail due to propwash is something very poorly modeled in DCS. In a real airplane you can blip the throttle to get some airflow to swing the tail during taxi. You cant do that in DCS. Also, early in the takeoff run, there is no airflow modeled, making the aircraft behave strangely. 

 

And I stand by that statement.

 

Airflow over the tail due to propeller slipstream is poorly modeled, making for strange ground handling characteristics and the necessity to use brakes in situations where you should not have to use brakes.

 

The conventional gear modules in DCS don't really behave like real conventional gear aircraft on the ground.

 

These errors/lack of modeling also explain the milquetoast torque modeling. Without tail slipstream, properly modeled torque would be a difficult proposition.

[grafspee]

I tested P-47 as well, looks like P-47 react to rudder input very poor. I found training video for P-47, they don't bother using rudder at all while taxing :P.

Like i said different plane different behavior.

 

 

Edited August 29, 2021 by grafspee

[Nealius]

Isn't airflow over the tail correctly modeled in the Spit? Taxiing with rudder only is quite easy if you get the timing right. I only need the differential brakes when making sharp turns. Rudder is also quite effective on the initial takeoff run. Same experience as shown in Graf's video.

[grafspee]

Another thing why in modern taildragger steerable tail wheel with 30 Degree L/R deflection is mounted ?

[Bremspropeller]

4 hours ago, grafspee said:

I found training video for P-47, they don't bother using rudder at all while taxing :P.

Like i said different plane different behavior.

 

Neither do I in game, when I have locked the tailwheel.

[=475FG= Dawger]

4 hours ago, grafspee said:

I tested P-47 as well, looks like P-47 react to rudder input very poor. I found training video for P-47, they don't bother using rudder at all while taxing :P.

Like i said different plane different behavior.

 

 

 

What makes you think he isn't using rudder during taxi?

[grafspee]

1 hour ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

What makes you think he isn't using rudder during taxi?

When he is turning, rudder stays in one place  same when he moves out of pitstop no rudder movement i can see. 

Edited August 29, 2021 by grafspee

[=475FG= Dawger]

27 minutes ago, grafspee said:

When he s turning rudder stays in one place  same when he moves out of pitstop no rudder movement i can see. 

When taxying, the rudder movement to start and stop the turn is very momentary. It has been described as “dancing” on the pedals and that is pretty accurate.
 

During the S turn, you can see the minor rudder deflections required, emphasizing how easy it is to move the tail with idle airflow. 

 

The entire challenge of flying a conventional gear aircraft is the fact that it does not go straight without serious effort. They are very easy to turn and quite often difficult to stop from turning. 

5 hours ago, Nealius said:

Isn't airflow over the tail correctly modeled in the Spit? Taxiing with rudder only is quite easy if you get the timing right. I only need the differential brakes when making sharp turns. Rudder is also quite effective on the initial takeoff run. Same experience as shown in Graf's video.

The Spitfire feels the most like the real thing with a serious drop off in the others. 

[grafspee]

7 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

When taxying, the rudder movement to start and stop the turn is very momentary. It has been described as “dancing” on the pedals and that is pretty accurate.
 

During the S turn, you can see the minor rudder deflections required, emphasizing how easy it is to move the tail with idle airflow. 

 

In this training manual they say to use brakes for this lol  are you so blind ? comon.

Next, full right rudder when start moving by your theory plane should turn sharp to the right but plane roll to the left. Some time later right turn in to the runway clear visible right tow brake used.

 

 

[=475FG= Dawger]

1 hour ago, grafspee said:

In this training manual they say to use brakes for this lol  are you so blind ? comon.

Next, full right rudder when start moving by your theory plane should turn sharp to the right but plane roll to the left. Some time later right turn in to the runway clear visible right tow brake used.

 

 

I am not arguing that you never use brakes to assist in turning in a tail dragger.

 

You most certainly do, quite a bit.

 

However, you have stated that you CANNOT move the tail without use of brakes, which is false.

 

And then you stated that you never said that.

 

Now seem to be arguing that brakes are absolutely required to turn and that the procedure for taxying a P-47 is to use brakes ONLY.

 

I know you desperately want to believe that DCS WWII aircraft are perfectly modeled in this regard.

 

All I can suggest is that you find someone willing to give you an hour or so of tail dragger taxying instruction in a real airplane.

 

In any case, I am going to exit this conversation as you are only interested in seeing what you want to see and there is nothing I can type that is going to change your opinion on this matter.

 

Cheers!

[grafspee]

3 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

I am not arguing that you never use brakes to assist in turning in a tail dragger.

 

You most certainly do, quite a bit.

 

However, you have stated that you CANNOT move the tail without use of brakes, which is false.

 

And then you stated that you never said that.

 

Now seem to be arguing that brakes are absolutely required to turn and that the procedure for taxying a P-47 is to use brakes ONLY.

 

I know you desperately want to believe that DCS WWII aircraft are perfectly modeled in this regard.

 

All I can suggest is that you find someone willing to give you an hour or so of tail dragger taxying instruction in a real airplane.

 

In any case, I am going to exit this conversation as you are only interested in seeing what you want to see and there is nothing I can type that is going to change your opinion on this matter.

 

Cheers!

This is exactly my whole point, you are assuming that every plane behave exact the same im saying that it depends one plane can other cant simply as that.

Since we are in Mosquito section then yes you can't turn with rudder alone.

And i believe you that in civilian taildraggers you can do that, this does not mean that P-47 or Bf-109 can.

And in this last video with P-47 he applied right rudder and plane rolled to the left how to explain that if you are saying that P-47 should swing to right in that situation?

From P-47 manual

I can say same thing about you, just you see everything like you want to see, ignores any thing which are opposite with your view.

Edited August 29, 2021 by grafspee

[freemind_fly]

On 8/29/2021 at 3:04 PM, =475FG= Dawger said:

The Spitfire feels the most like the real thing with a serious drop off in the others. 

 

That's quite a bold statement. We can agree that different airplanes generate a different amount of slipstream at low RPMs and that the tailwheel is connected differently to the rudder at different planes.

 

Unless you have some deeper insights into warbirds I would not state that the Spitfire feels "like the real thing". If you mean the Piper Cub with that, it might be true.

[=475FG= Dawger]

16 minutes ago, freemind_fly said:

 

That's quite a bold statement. We can agree that different airplanes generate a different amount of slipstream at low RPMs and that the tailwheel is connected differently to the rudder at different planes.

 

Unless you have some deeper insights into warbirds I would not state that the Spitfire feels "like the real thing". If you mean the Piper Cub with that, it might be true.

You assume, incorrectly, that my experience in tail draggers is in lightweight models. The vast majority of my 5000+ hours flying conventional gear aircraft is in aircraft larger than the Spitfire.

 

Edited September 2, 2021 by =475FG= Dawger

[Mogster]

There’s an article online where Richard Grace writes about his experiences display flying the P47. He says you want to taxi with the tail wheel locked as much as possible and describes the ground handling with it unlocked as “feral” lol.

[Bozon]

8 hours ago, Mogster said:

There’s an article online where Richard Grace writes about his experiences display flying the P47. He says you want to taxi with the tail wheel locked as much as possible and describes the ground handling with it unlocked as “feral” lol.

I taxi the 47 with tail locked most of the time. I unlock it only for tight circles. In DCS of course.

Edited September 3, 2021 by Bozon