Mosquito landing gear strut incorrect operation..

[NineLine]

Well, no one is in trouble, well one person but they chose the red pill. I am mildly interested in the fact that this might be affected by the terrain, and why we might see it more on one map than another. I am looking into this for sure. So keep sharing and keep engaging, don't be worried unless you start calling people names or anything like that you will be fine

[Slippa]

Ah, ok then 

cheers bignose . 

[NineLine]

6 minutes ago, Slippa said:

Ah, ok then 

cheers bignose . 

Ouch... right in the feelings

Hey, can everyone do me a favor that is having issues? Can you all do some comparison landings on the Caucasus, The Channel, Normandy or any other extra map you have? It can be Caucasus vs any other map. I just want to see if you guys also see a difference. I had noticed it myself and just thought I sucked

Make sure all things are equal, load and weather, etc.

[Slippa]

Just logged in as I thought the same thing. I have every map bar Afghan and will check it out, save tracks etc.

Problem I have is I’m having a bit of a Loach-affair with Tobi & Eightballs’ creation. Time in the Mossie vs lashing myself about dropping all kinds of coloured smoke. I’m plastered in face-paint unsure if I’m Martin Sheen, Marlon Brando or Dennis Hopper. I know, I know, it’s Hopper .

I’ve already tested and tested on the Channel from different airfields, same loads. A lot more on N2 and not a lot on the others but I will .

But… coloured smokes man! Imagine the Mossie with something crazy like target indicators and flares? 

Edited May 10 by Slippa
Typo

[4eyes]

50 minutes ago, Slippa said:

I’m already on the naughty step so I’m trying to be patient and tread lightly with this.

The idea came from a good place and all too obviously must’ve made good sense on paper somewhere. We’re all after improvements and have to accept to a degree that things will change a bit along the way. At least now there’s some acknowledgment that enough of us really aren’t happy with what’s been done. Hopefully, we’re past the brick wall ‘there’s nothing wrong with it, read my data’ stuff and we can get it back on track, pardon the pun.

i’d have been happier if we’d have been warned or as 4eyes says have had the option to stay with what we had. At least until someone had tried and tested the experiments properly. Hopefully, we’ll get something sensible back that we can be happy with. Not everybody’s gonna love it all but no matter what data goes into the tinkering, it’s got to be practical. Like I said, at least now it’s being looked at.

Or… Give us our old Mossie back, pre-super-suspension and start work on another marque from the dream-team for future release (and sales)?

Plenty of ideas and time to get it lovely .

Lots of work.

 

Yes, Please. Give me the Mosquito back I purchased.  Then take all the time you want to tweak it.  Such a simple solution. 

[Terry Dactil]

Had an interesting talk with ChatGPT about the Mosquito landing gear.

Here is the interesting bit ...

  

So you are saying that the rubber blocks resist expansion more than compression?

Yes, that's correct. In the context of the Mosquito aircraft's landing gear system, the rubber blocks are designed to resist expansion (or rebound) more than compression.

Here's why:

1. Material Properties: The rubber blocks used in the landing gear system are engineered with specific material properties that make them more resistant to deformation during rebound compared to compression. This involves selecting rubber compounds with suitable elasticity, resilience, and internal friction characteristics.

2. Design Considerations: The design of the landing gear system takes into account the need for controlled damping during both compression and rebound phases of the landing process. By engineering the rubber blocks to provide greater resistance to expansion, the system effectively dampens the rebound motion, preventing excessive bouncing or oscillations of the aircraft upon landing.

3. Shock Absorption: During compression upon landing, the rubber blocks deform to absorb the initial shock and dissipate kinetic energy. However, during the rebound phase as the aircraft weight is lifted off the landing gear, the rubber blocks resist expansion, thereby damping the upward motion of the landing gear and ensuring a smooth transition to the fully extended position.

4. Optimization: The damping characteristics of the rubber blocks are optimized through careful selection of materials, dimensions, and configuration to achieve the desired level of damping performance while maintaining the structural integrity and longevity of the landing gear system.

Overall, the design of the rubber blocks in the Mosquito's landing gear system prioritizes greater resistance to expansion during rebound to effectively dampen the motion and provide a stable landing experience.

 

Item 3. Surely the landing gear does not rebound to the fully extended position, as it is now supporting the weight of the aircraft.

 

You're absolutely correct, and I appreciate the clarification. I misspoke there. Let me correct that.

During the rebound phase after landing, the landing gear does not fully extend to its initial position. Instead, it partially extends as the aircraft's weight is transferred off the wheels and the landing gear strut decompresses. The damping action provided by the rubber blocks slows down this extension, preventing rapid bouncing or oscillations of the aircraft.

So, to amend point 3:

3. Shock Absorption: During compression upon landing, the rubber blocks deform to absorb the initial shock and dissipate kinetic energy. However, during the rebound phase, as the aircraft's weight is partially lifted off the landing gear, the rubber blocks resist expansion, thereby damping the upward motion of the landing gear and controlling the extension to maintain stability.

 

 

( It is a bit of a worry when you find yourself saying/typing please and thank-you to an AI program on your computer ) 

 

 

Edited May 10 by Terry Dactil
typos

[Holbeach]

On 5/9/2024 at 7:15 PM, NineLine said:

There are some changes coming, but I believe Yo-Yo is trying to describe that the changes won't do everything that is expected here. 

This is what I expect to see and Yo-Yo has already said that this is what will happen.

The static position of the strut will look like this. The strut lowered to the position as shown.

An FM to go with it.

If this doesn't happen, then were wasting our time here and this thing will go on for ever.

A lot of people have said they won't fly this excellent model any more, which is a shame, because the bad experience is caused by this update.

 

 

 

..

[Magic Zach]

Holbeach is showing that the static compression distance of the MLG strut is not matching that of real life examples, which I think is a bottom-line example that shows something within DCS's Mosquito struts is incorrect.  We can assume that since DCS represents aircraft in new or near-new condition, that our strut should react more stiffly than some of these real world examples and perhaps not compress as much, but I do doubt it would be so significant as to dramatically change the landing characteristics of the aircraft as we are witnessing.
As far as this effecting bounce characteristics...
A handful of other factors aside, one thing that would influence the tendency to bounce is how stiff the struts would or wouldn't be.  The rate of change in vertical velocity changes the amount of force pushing back up on the airframe from the ground, and creating a torque around the aircraft's CoG.  Having struts that are extremely rigid like these new ones in DCS does have an effect on the bounce characteristics, not just how low the aircraft squats while parked.
I think it's fair to say that something, is wrong with how the Mosquito's struts compress in DCS at the moment.  Specifically just how much "pressure" (for lack of a better word, I know the struts use rubber not air/fluid, but you get the idea) is within the struts, which does appear to be too high.  Lower the "pressure" and it should simultaneously solve the issue with the aircraft squatting too high while parked, and it's tendency to be too springy during by-the-book landing configurations.

[Slaobladder]

On 5/11/2024 at 7:55 AM, Holbeach said:

This is what I expect to see and Yo-Yo has already said that this is what will happen.

The static position of the strut will look like this. The strut lowered to the position as shown.

An FM to go with it.

If this doesn't happen, then were wasting our time here and this thing will go on for ever.

A lot of people have said they won't fly this excellent model any more, which is a shame, because the bad experience is caused by this update.

 

 

 

..

Agreed

[4eyes]

6 hours ago, Slaobladder said:

Agreed

Look at the numbers of active Mosquito fliers on the multiplayer servers for the past 3-4 months.  Players have abandoned their Mossies in droves.  How about a refund?  

[Skewgear]

I organised a 6-ship raid the other night. Said to the squadron, "how about we take up a flight of Mossies tonight and smash something?" They said yes, so we did.

For all that we really want to see the gear bugs fixed, I don't think people are abandoning Mosquitoes just yet.

[4eyes]

6 hours ago, Skewgear said:

I organised a 6-ship raid the other night. Said to the squadron, "how about we take up a flight of Mossies tonight and smash something?" They said yes, so we did.

For all that we really want to see the gear bugs fixed, I don't think people are abandoning Mosquitoes just yet.

Check the Channel and Normandy servers about every 3-4 hours. Then count how many Mossie fliers there are.  I have been doing this for the last 60 days.  The numbers are way down.

[Skewgear]

I run one of them. Numbers are not down. In fact we're adding more Mossie slots because at peak times demand outstrips supply.