Flight model stability

[crazyave]

My buddy and I really struggle to get this plane flying decently and consequently do not enjoy flying it, we have definite purchase regret but really want to like it.  Unlike any other DCS modules it's the first time we've had to use curves on the controls up to 50+ just to stay somewhat in control.  Particularly the yaw and pitch axis.  I know how to fly coordinated with the rudder, but it seems no matter how hard I try I still end up flying with a wagging tail and the airplane flying 30deg to the direction of travel.  It's impossible to use the guns or rockets to hit anything consistently due to it's sensitivity and instability.  My brain tells me aircraft physics seem to not really be at play in its handling.  Is there some setting I'm missing or way of practicing that's different than any other module which will help?

[DD_Fenrir]

What stick hardware you using crazyave?

 

[Dragon1-1]

Do you have the Spitfire, by any chance? Controls on British aircraft are incredibly sensitive, which was noted historically as a great quality, but with all but the most precise joysticks (like the Winwing Orion), the throw is too short and they wobble all over the place, especially if you don't have a stick extension. For rudder, my CH pedals do work, but if you use a twist stick, you're in for a rough ride.

[Bozon]

@crazyave, the mosquito requires a very significant Y saturation in the stick calibration - most of the full linear stick travel is useless and beyond the effective travel of the elevators. I too strongly dislike how DCS model the stick moments (geared towards people with stick extension length similar to the real stick), but it is what it is.

So put a lot of saturation and reduce the curvature to a minimum.

The other thing that makes pitch control difficult is that the flight model fails to deliver a feeling for the angle of attack or how deep into the stall you are. We need more sound cues and/or gradual vibrations to get some feeling.

As for the yaw axis, the mosquito has a lot of adverse yaw. This is typical to planes with wingspans as long or longer than their fuselage. On top of that there are secondary effects from the props (gyro and p-factor). In the mosquito you must coordinate the rudder with every deflection of the ailerons - this is important for creating a smooth roll without flinging the nose around, and significantly increases the roll rate vs an uncoordinated roll. I know this is not easy - I fly sailplanes and there the effect is extreme, so it takes time to develop the instinct for this.

It helps a lot if you unload the plane during fast rolls and load it again after the roll. For coordinating the turn it helps to look forwards along the plane axis while rolling. The latter is not alway possible during combat and the former requires to develop a slightly different flying style than the single engine fighters.

[crazyave]

I've had a RealSimulator FSSB for several years and Logitech/Saitek pro pedals.

I also use a warthog and cougar setup at times.  I'm comfortable with the pressure stick in warbirds, this is the only one I have troubles with.

The spit is definitely the next toughest handling warbird for me.

Awesome input Bozon, thanks!  I will definitely try those settings, I've never used saturation vs curve.  I never thought about the wingspan vs fuse ratio, that makes a lot of sense, I thought maybe they just put on a small tail to keep the rear weight down or something. 

 

I wonder if the yaw in the mozzie is very realistic.  Listening to actual pilot interviews for the plane no one mentioned that handling characteristic vs other things that are much less subtle in the DCS version.  That much slip seems like a recipe for a hell of a snap spin, which interestingly rarely happens when I'm flying it.

Edited February 27, 2023 by crazyave

[DD_Fenrir]

30 minutes ago, crazyave said:

I wonder if the yaw in the mozzie is very realistic.  Listening to actual pilot interviews for the plane no one mentioned that handling characteristic vs other things that are much less subtle in the DCS version.  That much slip seems like a recipe for a hell of a snap spin, which interestingly rarely happens when I'm flying it.

 

Not having flown a real one I cannot authoratively corroborate; however more often than not the overriding concern is speed when designers are allowing for the size of control surface area in WW2 combat aircraft; larger vertical tail surfaces causes more drag, so the designers calculate the minimum vertical tail surface area to keep the aircraft just positively stable directionally. Else you are slowing the aircraft down.

The Mossie is not unstable directionally; the wobble (actually called a phugoid and a realistic behaviour in any axis with low positive stability) dampens out after a time which indicates positive directional stabilty, just not a lot. However the designers may have chosen that as the compromise for the Mosquito to have the straight and level performance it exhibits.

If you practise coordinating the rudder and aileron inputs in the right way then the slip and skid issues whilst rolling and turning are much mitigated and the aircraft naturally starts to feel more stable but it is tricky to time the rudder inputs correctly and make the correct amplitude (size of pedal dispalcement) to get it spot on.

 

Edited February 27, 2023 by DD_Fenrir

[Morat]

Get a long throw stick, like the Authentikit Spitfire stick. It works great for the Mossie (and they'll have an actual Mossie stick eventually). I too have the Warthog but I don't use it for Warbirds as it doesn't have an extension.

Edited March 1, 2023 by Morat

[Ala13_ManOWar]

No matter you hadn't "trouble" before, to be honest a force sensing joystick isn't the best suited hardware for any Warbird in DCS. I've almost always (years ago, well before mossie, there were changes on how warbirds in DCS behave controls wise) used curves and if something I have made my long stick (Warthog) even longer, but still you need curves most of the time, and it really makes sense bearing in mind usual British setups. Using that you're really good to go in any warbird, but I'm not really sure a force sensing joystick gives you any of that required sensitivity in deep control movements. Using a long stick any warbird is a pleasure to fly, that I can tell you unambiguously, and Mosquito is the same despite de two engines setting which is tricky by nature, and I believe very well depicted in DCS unlike… well, unlike anything else because Mosquito is a first time ever and for the moment a unique masterpiece in simulation software development for home use.

If I understood you right, you say you have also available other hardware (like warthog). Please, try those, and if you're able (you can buy it already done, but it's really simple and cheap to do it by yourself) try a long stick setting (20cm is fine, I'm using 25 right now and it's even better but you need a stiffer spring). With a long stick it's really pleasant to fly this or any other warbird without encountering those problems you mention, maybe others, but not those problems with oversensitiveness and uncontrollability you find.

[peachmonkey]

some possibly relevant tidbit of information if you're thinking about getting the FFB for DCS:

- do not put any curves on the FFB axis.

Any curve moves the FFB center forward (larger the curve, larger the shift), and it no longer matches the control stick center.

[DD_Fenrir]

10 hours ago, peachmonkey said:

some possibly relevant tidbit of information if you're thinking about getting the FFB for DCS:

- do not put any curves on the FFB axis.

Any curve moves the FFB center forward (larger the curve, larger the shift), and it no longer matches the control stick center.

Wholeheartedly disagree.

As an Microsoft Sidewinder FFB2 user, trying to fly the Mossie with no curves is unpleasant to say the least; all of the OPs original issues will be exacerbated.

It is true that a conventional curve setting (15-25 range) can cause a mismatch between virtual stick force/trim and stick position that causes a nasty automatic tucking sensation as airspeed increases.

However, the trick is to use a custom input in the curve setting to get a balance between controllability and moving the tucking phenomenom to further up the speed range:

Go to your pitch curve input cell for your FFB stick, highlight it and select Axis Tune.

In the pop up window, find the user curve box and tick it.

You can then adjust the numbers manually. 
Use the following values:

0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 56, 100

I find these the best compromise between controllability and moving the airspeed range at which the mismatch between the virtual stick force and the physical stick position becomes untenable. It will also still allow you to access the full range of the elevator on the ground or at very slow speeds.

What seems to be the case is that the shallower that initial gradient the lower airspeed the trim tuck manifests. At these values it does not occur until we’ll above 300mph indicated, so be wary of it during shallow dive bomb or rocket attack profiles from several thousand feet, but it shouldn’t manifest during cruise or level bombing attacks.

[peachmonkey]

6 hours ago, DD_Fenrir said:

Wholeheartedly disagree.

As an Microsoft Sidewinder FFB2 user, trying to fly the Mossie with no curves is unpleasant to say the least; all of the OPs original issues will be exacerbated.

It is true that a conventional curve setting (15-25 range) can cause a mismatch between virtual stick force/trim and stick position that causes a nasty automatic tucking sensation as airspeed increases.

However, the trick is to use a custom input in the curve setting to get a balance between controllability and moving the tucking phenomenom to further up the speed range:

Go to your pitch curve input cell for your FFB stick, highlight it and select Axis Tune.

In the pop up window, find the user curve box and tick it.

You can then adjust the numbers manually. 
Use the following values:

0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35, 56, 100

I find these the best compromise between controllability and moving the airspeed range at which the mismatch between the virtual stick force and the physical stick position becomes untenable. It will also still allow you to access the full range of the elevator on the ground or at very slow speeds.

What seems to be the case is that the shallower that initial gradient the lower airspeed the trim tuck manifests. At these values it does not occur until we’ll above 300mph indicated, so be wary of it during shallow dive bomb or rocket attack profiles from several thousand feet, but it shouldn’t manifest during cruise or level bombing attacks.

you disagree then tell me I need to set up a custom profile to sort of fix it.  that aren't documented anywhere, nor tested on anything other than your FFB2

your settings/values don't work on my Rhino, it still tucks like crazy, it's a total mess.

Curves on FFB axis are borked. End of story.

[DD_Fenrir]

43 minutes ago, peachmonkey said:

you disagree...

Because you made a blanket generalisation that doesn't apply to all FFB users.

I kind of have a right to do that in a public forum; you expressed your opinion - guess what! - I am allowed to express a counter opinion. Don't get pissy with me when your (very apparent) frustration needs to be directed at ED.

 

43 minutes ago, peachmonkey said:

then tell me I need to set up a custom profile to sort of fix it. 

No, I suggested a custom input curve that provides a compromise between getting a measure of controllability and delaying the tuck phenomenon to airspeed regions where it will still occur but, as you will not be in that region so often, presents less of an issue.

I nowhere stated it was a cure and I certainly don't think that the force/trim model in DCS is helpful for FFB owners - I even started a thread here in an attempt to open dialogue with ED to get it changed but thus far no dice.

 

52 minutes ago, peachmonkey said:

that aren't documented anywhere, nor tested on anything other than your FFB2

No, they aren't because I took some time to investigate the issue and try and present to the community an interim band-aid to make the Mossie a little less intractable whilst trying to keep the tuck effect as far out of the general flying regime as possible.

I tried to give advice to make the Mossie more accessible and enjoyable to a portion of the community that are adversely affected by the force/trim-FFB issue.

So sorry my altruism isn't as wide ranging or officially ratified as you deem acceptable.

 

56 minutes ago, peachmonkey said:

your settings/values don't work on my Rhino, it still tucks like crazy, it's a total mess.

 

I never claimed they should do.

Given the wide range of physical controllers and their differing stick lengths, throws and displacements (that all effect this issue to varying degrees), there is no one size fits all solution or even mitigation. That's why I prefaced my description with the stick I run.

The concept IS however a starting point. YMMV. I would have thought that was a given.

 

Your posting history shows a great deal of this kind of irascible, prickly response to anyone who dares to disagree with you. It's a shame as it precludes constructive discourse.

I for example, ordinarily would have asked what the Rhino was like as I have had an eye on getting one; if your tone was more agreeable I'd have even looked at suggestions as to how to improve the curve suggestion for your stick in an effort  to nail down some settings that provide a better experience, not just for you but for the wider Rhino using community.

However, right now, I think you can go swivel.

 

 

 

 

[peachmonkey]

51 minutes ago, DD_Fenrir said:

Because you made a blanket generalisation that doesn't apply to all FFB users.

I kind of have a right to do that in a public forum; you expressed your opinion - guess what! - I am allowed to express a counter opinion. Don't get pissy with me when your (very apparent) frustration needs to be directed at ED.

 

No, I suggested a custom input curve that provides a compromise between getting a measure of controllability and delaying the tuck phenomenon to airspeed regions where it will still occur but, as you will not be in that region so often, presents less of an issue.

I nowhere stated it was a cure and I certainly don't think that the force/trim model in DCS is helpful for FFB owners - I even started a thread here in an attempt to open dialogue with ED to get it changed but thus far no dice.

 

No, they aren't because I took some time to investigate the issue and try and present to the community an interim band-aid to make the Mossie a little less intractable whilst trying to keep the tuck effect as far out of the general flying regime as possible.

I tried to give advice to make the Mossie more accessible and enjoyable to a portion of the community that are adversely affected by the force/trim-FFB issue.

So sorry my altruism isn't as wide ranging or officially ratified as you deem acceptable.

 

 

I never claimed they should do.

Given the wide range of physical controllers and their differing stick lengths, throws and displacements (that all effect this issue to varying degrees), there is no one size fits all solution or even mitigation. That's why I prefaced my description with the stick I run.

The concept IS however a starting point. YMMV. I would have thought that was a given.

 

Your posting history shows a great deal of this kind of irascible, prickly response to anyone who dares to disagree with you. It's a shame as it precludes constructive discourse.

I for example, ordinarily would have asked what the Rhino was like as I have had an eye on getting one; if your tone was more agreeable I'd have even looked at suggestions as to how to improve the curve suggestion for your stick in an effort  to nail down some settings that provide a better experience, not just for you but for the wider Rhino using community.

However, right now, I think you can go swivel.

 

 

 

 

 

you can justify your nonsense as much as you'd like. For Rhino users FFB axis curves attribute to broken behavior in ALL modules.

 

[DD_Fenrir]

22 minutes ago, peachmonkey said:

 

you can justify your nonsense as much as you'd like. For Rhino users FFB axis curves attribute to broken behavior in ALL modules.

 

Ah, you’re one of the nuance = nonsense brigade; well then I’ll save my advice for those with the capacity to differentiate.

Have fun being angry at everything that doesn’t fit a neat little binary category set!

[peachmonkey]

14 minutes ago, DD_Fenrir said:

Ah, you’re one of the nuance = nonsense brigade; well then I’ll save my advice for those with the capacity to differentiate.

Have fun being angry at everything that doesn’t fit a neat little binary category set!

what are you rambling about? I'm not angry, I'm just pointing out the issues with FFB and you're getting all jumpy because you disagree.

You can try a simple test with your MS device with P47:

- enable FFB

- on pitch axis add a curve of 40

- go for a flight and see if you can trim it out for a horizontal flight without touching the FFB stick

On my Rihno the trim is max tail heavy and the AC is pitching down, all because the FFB center is now moved way too forward. The max curve on P47 pitch axis I can do is ~20, at which point it's still at max tail heavy however it can maintain a horizontal flight more or less.

[Ala13_ManOWar]

1 hour ago, peachmonkey said:

You can try a simple test with your MS device with P47

And you can try reading, OP said FSSB, a force sensing device, not FFB. You were the first and only one talking about FFB here mate… just saying

 

P.S. Either didn't know Saitek Rhino was an FFB device, weird how an FFB profile doesn't work there, right?

[MAXsenna]

And you can try reading, OP said FSSB, a force sensing device, not FFB. You were the first and only one talking about FFB here mate… just saying
 
P.S. Either didn't know Saitek Rhino was an FFB device, weird how an FFB profile doesn't work there, right?

Not Saitek, a homemade one, (like the Slaws), by a guy fram Latvia(?). It looks really good. He just happened to chose an identical name for it.
I agree though, using curves on my MS FFB2 messes up things. Will eventually try to mod it with an extension, but I feel it won't really help with the Mossie as I have a 40cm extension for my Warthog. It's better but I really have to use small inputs.

Cheers!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk