reported movement in the grass

[Robo76]

I suppose the inability to land on grass or get stuck in grass while taxiing is a bug. These aircraft (like the Su-25) were designed to operate from grass airfields.

[gulredrel]

That's not specific to L-39, it's a general DCS issue, where everything else than concrete or asphalt is like muddy glue. Don't know if this will change or not.

Grass airfields on WWII maps should work. I have no idea how the terrain characteristics are modeled.

[Johnny Dioxin]

People have been complaining about it for many years, I doubt anything will change. I thought it had been fixed a while back, but seems not.

[Robo76]

I don't have WWII, so I don't know how it's adapted there, but if it goes there, why shouldn't it go throughout DCS. Maybe it would be possible to modify an area using zones on the map and limit the speed and landing gear endurance on those zones so that DCS would treat it as a "grass runway", which would prevent F-15s, F-16s, F-18s, Su-27s, etc. from taking off over other grass areas on the airfield (which is happening), but allow machines that were suited for it to taxi and take off from the grass runway. If the point of DCS is faithful simulation, the ability to take off on grass is also a strategic feature of the aircraft that becomes very apparent in MP missions where the "red" machines are not just reliant on the airfield. Military eastern doctrine counted on their airfields being destroyed. Western military doctrine dealt with this largely by way of STOVL aircraft.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

[Munin]

I've been operating out of the grassfields in Normandy since they were added. Works with Viggen too (not IRL).

 

[Robo76]

[hsth]

We've been asking for this since the LockOn introduction. Unfortunitly, ED has been developing the takeoff/landing capabalities based on western planes like the A-10.

[Robo76]

So after the latest updates, the F-16 with its weak landing gear handles taxiing and takeoff on grass with no problems. The DCS F-16 is transforming into an arcade aircraft.

 

Edited June 21, 2024 by Robo76

[Robo76]

.... but it's supposed to be exactly the other way around (L-39 to take off on grass, F-16 to damage landing gear on grass)

Edited June 21, 2024 by Robo76

[Flappie]

Can you be more specific, please?

[Robo76]

It's clear from the videos. The F-16 is supposed to break the landing gear when taking off on grass (as it used to be). The L-39 is supposed to drive on grass and take off without any problems without destroying its undercarriage, and this is still not the case.

[Robo76]

recordings

L-39 ZA take-off grass.trk F-16 take-off grass.trk

[Robo76]

The example of the F-16 taking off from the grass proves that the problem is not in the terrain map but in the setup of the module's landing gear operation and durability. If one wanted to fix it according to real machines, it can be done. If it remains in DCS in this state, it looks like an effort to purposely degrade or improve the performance of some aircraft-modules. If an F-16 takes off from a runway-less field base in multiplayer combat, lands there, refuels, rearms, and shoots you down after takeoff, you wonder if you're still playing DCS or if you're already playing War of Warplanes.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator

Edited June 21, 2024 by Robo76

[Flappie]

I've just reported the issue for the F-16.

The F/A-18C is also affected but it's been reported already.

[mikko.1842]

15 hours ago, Flappie said:

I've just reported the issue for the F-16.

The F/A-18C is also affected but it's been reported already.

All good, but did you report the issue for the L-39 ? Just saying, this is an L-39's bug thread...

[Flappie]

On 12/1/2023 at 10:03 AM, gulredrel said:

That's not specific to L-39, it's a general DCS issue, where everything else than concrete or asphalt is like muddy glue. Don't know if this will change or not.

Moreover, Aero shows no data for grass takeoff/landing for L-39C and L-39ZA (scroll down). They have tested the L-39C as seen in the videos above, but it does not seem to me like it's usual for a L-39C or ZA to take off from and land on grass. Less common that it is for the Su-25, which cannot take off from grass in DCS either.

Also, there are far more important things to fix in the L-39.

[Aviator78]

8 hours ago, Flappie said:

Also, there are far more important things to fix in the L-39.

I agree. But! I know for certain the L-29 was used from gras runways by the Soviet AF, and seeing that Aero tested the L-39 in that regard, it is plausible that the L-39 was intended to be used from gras runways as well. I also know that East German AF MiGs sometimes operated from gras runways in exercises, and we know that the MIG-29 has FOD doors for its engines to enable operations from less-than-paved runways, so it must have been a doctrinal thing in the Warsaw Pact to make its aircraft being able to operate from gras strips, therefore it is something that could be considered by ED - probably as well for the Su-25.

But yes, there are more pressing issues with the L-39 than that, and we can call ourselves lucky if ED ever adressed those other issues.

Edited June 28, 2024 by Aviator78

[Robo76]

In normal peacetime operations, these aircraft also take off on concrete airfields to minimize wear and tear. But in combat deployment, they can operate on grass airfields.Landing and taking off on the grass was not just a test to see if the landing gear would hold up. It was a direct design requirement that these aircraft be able to take off and land on highways and grass airfields in combat conditions. The Warsaw Pact reckoned that within the first few hours most of their airfields would be destroyed by nuclear weapons, just as NATO airfields would be destroyed with some Harriers and Swedish planes left in underground hangars. NATO's analysts calculated that they would be left with about 5% of the aircraft in Europe after a nuclear first strike, since 98% of Europe's combat aircraft were concentrated at just 69 airfields (there were thousands during WWII). There was no low-cost way to prevent that, so they made the 5% into 89% and pretended it wasn't a problem and continued to produce mostly planes that needed quality runways.

 

Note: I don't see the details of the program. But something tells me that it would only be enough to modify the chassis resistance parameters, which affect whether the chassis gets "stuck" in the grass or not. Maybe just ask the F-16 module authors how complex their "fix" was that suddenly its landing gear has no problem with any terrain.

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator

Edited June 28, 2024 by Robo76

[BIGNEWY]

Folks I have removed some off topic, the issue is reported to the team you will need to be patient now for the team to take a look. 

thank you