Props don't counter rotate?

[freemind_fly]

13 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

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.

 

 

And that’s what plane(s)? And you can categorically exclude that it has different ground handling characteristics like say a P-51?

Edited September 3, 2021 by freemind_fly

[Hammer1-1]

7 minutes ago, freemind_fly said:

And that’s what planes? And you can categorically exclude that it has different ground handling characteristics like say a P-51?

 

If I had to take a guess, probably the Apache (or what looks like a Beech Apache) in his sig.

[=475FG= Dawger]

5 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

If I had to take a guess, probably the Apache (or what looks like a Beech Apache) in his sig.

That’s a Beech 18. That particular 18 was operated by NASA  long ago. 
 

I have flown a wide variety of tail draggers. The smallest was this crazy little airplane

 

 

The largest was this one, unfortunately recently lost.

 

( As I think about it, all three of the aircraft pictured have been wrecked at least once)

 

 

Enough to be confident in my opinion of where they are likely to be similar and where they are likely to be different.

 

I always regret getting involved in these discussions. No matter what evidence or opinion based on experience, there will be someone who will be heavily invested in believing what they are flying in DCS is perfect. (Sometimes its the opposite, believing something to be wrong that is actually correct but not as often). 
 

A friend of a friend is currently flying the P-51. We joked about calling him for a public opinion a few days back. It is a joke because if he posted a public opinion, someone would counter with “ its not a war time P-51 so you can’t be sure it is exactly the same”.

 

So I will endeavor to keep my opinions to myself.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 3, 2021 by =475FG= Dawger

[Mogster]

It seems there’s some strangeness in the low speed rolling resistance of the aircraft. You watch real world videos and it’s easy to start moving, in DCS it’s as if the brakes are on, then all of a sudden they’re released and you’re moving. It’s as if the tyres are stuck in treacle. I assume this is also affects the low speed turning.

 

However this isn’t unique to DCS or even flight sims though. Low speed handing in driving/racing sims is equally weird. I don’t know why it’s hard to model low speed movement, but it’s clearly difficult. It’s also a nice to have rather than essential feature, I’d rather have better airborne handling that better ground handling.

[=475FG= Dawger]

54 minutes ago, Mogster said:

It seems there’s some strangeness in the low speed rolling resistance of the aircraft. You watch real world videos and it’s easy to start moving, in DCS it’s as if the brakes are on, then all of a sudden they’re released and you’re moving. It’s as if the tyres are stuck in treacle. I assume this is also affects the low speed turning.

 

However this isn’t unique to DCS or even flight sims though. Low speed handing in driving/racing sims is equally weird. I don’t know why it’s hard to model low speed movement, but it’s clearly difficult. It’s also a nice to have rather than essential feature, I’d rather have better airborne handling that better ground handling.

I encountered similar ground handling weirdness in commercial, full motion simulators approved by FAA/JAA authorities as Level D. It seems to be a tough one to get right.

[grafspee]

P-47 manual, it must mean something.

It not about size or weight, it is more about relative size of rudder to prop and it's placment.

There is something wrong with P-51. If you apply power to 1000rpm plane starts moving forward but wheels are locked, they slide on the ground.

Edited September 3, 2021 by grafspee

[grafspee]

3 hours ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

 

A friend of a friend is currently flying the P-51. We joked about calling him for a public opinion a few days back. It is a joke because if he posted a public opinion, someone would counter with “ its not a war time P-51 so you can’t be sure it is exactly the same”.

 

Hee ? Actual this would nail this issue definitely, but you refuse to do it

You show B-17 or Apache as prime example but refusing to give us 1:1 comparison, war time or modern version does not matter, no engine or prop or fuselage changes.

Edited September 3, 2021 by grafspee

[grafspee]

3 hours ago, Mogster said:

I’d rather have better airborne handling that better ground handling.

I think in case of faulty slip stream modeling which lead to weird ground handling it also would lead to airborne miss handling as well.

[Hammer1-1]

Not exactly, everything is in ground effect on the deck and that makes it a whole other animal.

[grafspee]

2 hours ago, Hammer1-1 said:

Not exactly, everything is in ground effect on the deck and that makes it a whole other animal.

Maybe, i tested P-47 if i can steer it with rudder alone, i can't not even slightest reaction to rudder position, if i touch left or right brake P-47 spins around like crazy

[Mogster]

21 minutes ago, grafspee said:

Maybe, i tested P-47 if i can steer it with rudder alone, i can't not even slightest reaction to rudder position, if i touch left or right brake P-47 spins around like crazy

That seems to match the “feral” description from the Richard Grace article I quoted earlier.

[Hammer1-1]

If you really want to try and see if there IS any type of force being applied to the tail from the prop, stand on the brakes and goose the engine up to (in the P-51) 40 MAP. Not sure what it is for the P-47, but its enough to lift the tail off the deck if you pull back on the stick. You "should" be able to balance it on both tires, but be careful of prop strikes. Move your controls around and see if the elevators pick up the nose and the rudder swivels the nose around ever so slightly as it should provide enough torque to pull fwd one side and push back the other side. You HAVE to be very delicate with this or get used to hotstarting and testing all the time.  Will admit its difficult at best, but you can do it.

Edited September 3, 2021 by Hammer1-1

[grafspee]

3 minutes ago, Hammer1-1 said:

If you really want to try and see if there IS any type of force being applied to the tail from the prop, stand on the brakes and goose the engine up to (in the P-51) 40 MAP. Not sure what it is for the P-47, but its enough to lift the tail off the deck if you pull back on the stick. You "should" be able to balance it on both tires, but be careful of prop strikes. Move your controls around and see if the elevators pick up the nose and the rudder swivels the nose around ever so slightly as it should provide enough torque to pull fwd one side and push back the other side. You HAVE to be very delicate with this or get used to hotstarting and testing all the time.  Will admit its difficult at best, but you can do it.

 

True, i did test like that with brakes applied, problem is that at 40MAP P-47 or P-51 you are more in take off phase then taxi if you release brakes plane accelerate pretty fast no matter rudder position. While taxing i would expect very slight power spikes in order to steer plane, some how i can't imagine P-51 or P-47 pilot ramping up engine to 40MAP in order to steer plane while taxing. 

[Hammer1-1]

I didnt mean for you to steer at that engine RPM, its to test to see how much flight control you have in tail authority on the ground not moving. Should be more than enough to tell you whether or not you HAVE control with the prop wash.  Really you shouldnt be able to move the aircraft at idle, but even the Rolls Royce Merlin has to be chained down on a test stand at idle.  It WILL move. But maybe perhaps that static friction isnt modeled properly in DCS either, this little test should determine that.

[grafspee]

On 9/3/2021 at 10:27 PM, Hammer1-1 said:

I didnt mean for you to steer at that engine RPM, its to test to see how much flight control you have in tail authority on the ground not moving. Should be more than enough to tell you whether or not you HAVE control with the prop wash.  Really you shouldnt be able to move the aircraft at idle, but even the Rolls Royce Merlin has to be chained down on a test stand at idle.  It WILL move. But maybe perhaps that static friction isnt modeled properly in DCS either, this little test should determine that.

After seeing countless recordings i can say that initial friction is off in DCS as well free castering tail wheel does not behave like real one, i often find my self in position that i need to use a lot of power to release/free my self of weird tail wheel position.

I will say that in case of P-47 it was improved a lot.

You maybe right that slipstream is modeled properly, but ground handling messing this up.

Check this out, looks weird.

 

Edited September 5, 2021 by grafspee