dcs mustang Rudder effect much too strong

[Anatoli-Kagari9]

For those who do not understand why the rudder is so stiff I can gift a word "anti-booster tab".

 

+1 in favor of this great simulator, and in particular this extraordinary aircraft add-on.

 

I finally was able to look with attention at the rudder trim tab, and the "anti-booster" system is visibly present, and I am sure physically as well :-)

 

When you deflect the rudder, watch the rudder trim tab deflecting the same way, thus helping to increase the effective hinge forces, and thus turning the rudder more stiff for the pilot to operate, and avoiding unwanted inputs.

 

This is what I call DETAIL!!! ACCURACY!!! QUALTY / REALISM !!!!

[SilentEagle]

When reducing maximum pilot input due to hinge forces, do you scale all inputs so 50% input is now 50% of the new maximum pilot deflection or do you just cap the input so any inputs greater than the maximum are ignored at that high speed? I have tried scaling them and it created fairly sluggish controls.

 

Also, isn't knowledge of the internal workings of the control system needed to estimate pilot stick forces, not just control surface size, deflection angle, airspeed, and angle of attack. Is there any standard way of estimating this? Book definitions always assume you know everything about the control system.

Edited July 4, 2013 by SilentEagle

[sobek]

When reducing maximum pilot input due to hinge forces, do you scale all inputs so 50% input is now 50% of the new maximum pilot deflection or do you just cap the input so any inputs greater than the maximum are ignored at that high speed? I have tried scaling them and it created fairly sluggish controls.

 

They are simply hard saturated at the maximum value for exactly this reason to keep the control feel constant.

[Echo38]

They are simply hard saturated at the maximum value for exactly this reason to keep the control feel constant.

 

Well, it may not be 100% realistic, but it can't be nearly as bad as the old IL-2 method. I recall during the old discussions that Maddox modelled the pilot as only being able to exert 50 lb. of force on the stick, which is absurd; a real pilot would be able to let go of the throttle and put his second hand on the stick, if he had to. Besides, 50 lb. pull per arm seems on the low side, especially for a pilot who is not already tired out.

Edited July 5, 2013 by Echo38

[Yo-Yo]

Well, it may not be 100% realistic, but it can't be nearly as bad as the old IL-2 method. I recall during the old discussions that Maddox modelled the pilot as only being able to exert 50 lb. of force on the stick, which is absurd; a real pilot would be able to let go of the throttle and put his second hand on the stick, if he had to. Besides, 50 lb. pull per arm seems on the low side, especially for a pilot who is not already tired out.

 

THis discussion is very old and has no sense. 50 lb was the standard force for the famous 868 test report and it gives an opportunity to compare planes but not pilots. The same is for g-force tolerance.

[Echo38]

elevator force for 1g is relatively low so it was possible to overstress the plane before elevator becomes "frozen".

 

Been puzzling over this for a while, but I can't figure it out; how can you over-stress the ship at 1G, unless you're above VNE?

[Yo-Yo]

Been puzzling over this for a while, but I can't figure it out; how can you over-stress the ship at 1G, unless you're above VNE?

 

It's my mistake: I should have written "stick force PER 1g". It means that if you have speed enough to overstress a plane you can relatively easily do it pulling the stick.