Wheel brakes don't perform as expected - Not realistic

If I am using the wheel brakes, they don't show a realistic effect.

They don't decelerate as I would expect. No matter which plane I am using (e.g. F-18, A-10 ....). No matter if I am using key "w" or the brakes of my pedals.

I am usually using nearly the whole runway for stopping my plane.... Sometimes the runway is not long enough..... :pilotfly:

By sliding the plane with the rudder pedals, I am getting a higher deceleration...... :cry:

How is that possible? Usually I would expect a deceleration between 0,5 and 1 g by using the wheel brakes. Therefore, for landing with 200 km/h, I would expect less then 300 meters for stopping that damned thing.

There is nearly no brake effect visible for me.

But If I am using the emergency brake of the A-10, it brakes as expected.

You'll need to be more specific.

Describe the aircraft, it's weight, your configuration/speed, etc. and compare the landing distance in game, to what you'd expect from the RL performance charts

If possible include a track.

With flaps and speed brakes deployed a typical A-10A ground roll should be about 1,500 ft (500 m) but it'll depend on weight, etc.

The DCS A-10C should be similar.

I've never had issue with the A-10C but with respect to other modules, where I have had problems (MiG-21/M-2000C), I always found I was over weight compared to RL and that, combined with the required faster landing speeds, was the source of longer landing rolls/runway overshoots.

YMMV.

It's worth noting that braking too soon can end up making the brakes less effective over the landing run if they overheat before you are travelling slow enough for them to work correctly.

A clean F-18 should be easily able to land on a 7500ft runway in DCS with Full Flaps, air brakes, Aerodynamic braking (Stick back) and braking only once speed reduces to <100 Knots.

I just tried it (I have no experience landing the F-18), and used up about 3500 ft of runway - stopping just past the half way mark on Kobuleti.

I think the standard landing is for something like 5000ft+ in dry conditions 3500lbs weight at sea level. The manual is somewhat lacking in info on such things.

There is nearly no brake effect visible for me.

I don't see what's the problem, brakes work fine. They make the planes decelerate reasonably well but you can't expect a 10 ton aircraft to slow down like a Ferrari either.

I was able to fix that problem by changing the checkbox "Slider" in the "Axis Tune" dialogue.

Sounds like overweight and too fast, then. In RL something like a Flanker takes only enough fuel for it's mission lands with only a few thousand pounds of fuel left. Every aircraft has a rated 'bring home'.

The Caucasus airfields are much shorter than typical, as Russian aircraft routinely use brake chutes. Overweight aircraft will ALWAYS have trouble getting airborne or back down. Since the American stuff doesn't typically have chutes, it is more imperative you come in light and slow and do everything properly. And as others observed, you should be able to stop WITHOUT braking most the time.

The problem still exists (after so much time / many releases):

All flyable planes are not breaking as expected. They seem to be too weak.

In the DCS World settings I have set my Thrustmaster TPR to Slider and Invers. And there it shows me that they are working from the minimum value to the maximum value.

But in the game I am breaking, breaking, breaking and I need most of the runway. This is definitely not right.

If I am also using the key "w" the brake force seems to be doubled but even not realistic (= too soft).

GKOver, almost a year ago you were told by Ramsay to provide more info, track, video or anything more at all. We cannot guess what you did and devs cannot help or fix with "seem to be too weak" or "definitely not right".

There's definitely a problem with the brakes since e.g. on the F/A-18 and the F-16 is that there's no difference in stopping distance with antiskid on and off, which doesn't make sense.

Furthermore stopping performance is (at least) on both aircraft considerable longer than the flight manual values.

But since ED has tagged these reported bugs as 'correct as is' I've given up on providing additional info.

I don't know about what issues might exist in terms of antiskid or no antiskid, etc but I find GKOver's postulation interesting. If I'm interprerting this correctly:

...Usually I would expect a deceleration between 0,5 and 1 g by using the wheel brakes. Therefore, for landing with 200 km/h, I would expect less then 300 meters for stopping that damned thing...

...then the expectation is to bring a 14 ton (13,000kg) aircraft traveling at 200 km/hr to a full stop within 300 m. That would be in less than 6 seconds (1 G) or a bit over 11 seconds (0.5 G). Maybe that's correct but that seems like that would require a really heavy-duty braking system.

By way of comparison, the stopping distance for an automobile (2 tons?) traveling 200 km/hr is 235 meters.

...then the expectation is to bring a 14 ton (13,000kg) aircraft traveling at 200 km/hr to a full stop within 300 m. That would be in less than 6 seconds (1 G) or a bit over 11 seconds (0.5 G). Maybe that's correct but that seems like that would require a really heavy-duty braking system.

With a heavy duty braking system you get e.g. these data for an A319. 40t, VREF 198km/h, landing distance from 50ft = 670m.

Deceleration rate with autobrakes LOW = 0.17G, MED = 0.3G, MAX = 0.6G. The MAX value is just a target value and can't be achieved AFAIR.

I agree the brakes seem weak but maybe that is how fighters are, don't know. Hopefully they code off the performance charts

I don't know about what issues might exist in terms of antiskid or no antiskid, etc but I find GKOver's postulation interesting. If I'm interprerting this correctly:

 

 

 

...then the expectation is to bring a 14 ton (13,000kg) aircraft traveling at 200 km/hr to a full stop within 300 m. That would be in less than 6 seconds (1 G) or a bit over 11 seconds (0.5 G). Maybe that's correct but that seems like that would require a really heavy-duty braking system.

 

By way of comparison, the stopping distance for an automobile (2 tons?) traveling 200 km/hr is 235 meters.

How about thinking once again about your last post?

There are only mistakes in it....

By the way I have tested several sports cars in the past and the distance for braking from 200 km/h has been 123-144 meters....

How about thinking once again about your last post?

There are only mistakes in it....

By the way I have tested several sports cars in the past and the distance for braking from 200 km/h has been 123-144 meters....

Though something like an F16 weights around 8 times a Ferrarir F458.

There's weight to take into account, brakes temperature, runway surface conditions, wind.

I think brakes work just fine especially if you compare the size and weight of any aircraft compared to the size of its wheels and brakes

How about thinking once again about your last post?

There are only mistakes in it....

By the way I have tested several sports cars in the past and the distance for braking from 200 km/h has been 123-144 meters....

A bit of a different mass to tire ratio there, or even body mass to brake mass ratio;)

Using Ironhands example, the plane weighs 7 times more, yet doesn’t have seven times the tires or brake size, wouldn’t you say with your sports car 200kmh break testing experience that would effect a few things?

Seen the wheels on an A-10 or Hornet? You only have two wheels with brakes and not a lot of space for big carbon ceramic ones

If you land light enough on speed at a long enough runway you will be fine, you can even aerobrake if you need. There is a very good reason that is a real often used technique

You could have Ferrari like breaking but you would have such massive tires brakes landing gear it would be a crappy plane.

Navies get around this with arresting cables. Russians get around this with parachutes. Airlines and Viggens get around this with reverse thrust. If you want a sports car experience and stopping distance defines how much you like a module, the Viggen will light any straight road on fire!

As mentioned if you are having trouble stopping at all, upload a track and someone can watch it and provide some pointers

Aircraft I fly most (F-14 and F-15) with right technique and proper weight I rarely touch the brakes on the landing roll if at all - maybe to force and take the earlier exit in the half of the runway lenght.

From what I see in other's videos F-16 is doing fine too.

short runway w/brakes:

long runway w/aerobraking:

GK, where is your track/video?

How about thinking once again about your last post?

There are only mistakes in it....

By the way I have tested several sports cars in the past and the distance for braking from 200 km/h has been 123-144 meters....

Naw. I've put as much thought into this as I plan to. This, I believe, is the formula I used for my numbers (with a reaction time of "0"): Random Science Tools. And, FWIW, I too have stopped a sports car is a surprisingly short distance, though it had oversized brakes and I was downshifting all the way as well. So it was a bit like throwing out the drogue chute.

From my own testing based off the A1-F18AC-NFM-200 manual for a landing at 32klbs, no wind, 15°C, 8.1α, 135kt approach speed, at a 4.0° glide slope, with no flare and full flaps should be in the range of 3000-3720ft for full anti-skid braking. The variation is due to an approximation for additional range for a no flare landing. Unkown if this additional factor adds in a safety margin as well. Current in game stopping distance is ~4000ft

...with no flare and full flaps should be in the range of 3000-3720ft for full anti-skid braking. The variation is due to an approximation for additional range for a no flare landing.

Don't know where you get a variation from during a no flare landing. 3000-3700ft isn't a meaningful value. There's no 'range' in the performance tables.

Does anyone have a real evidence that brakes in DCS are weak?

RL deceleration charts vs DCS measured? Or stopping distances?

Yes of course. Lots of tests with the F-16 and the F/A-18.

It's not exactly difficult to find out during testing that there's a serious brakes performance problem with and without antiskid.