Jump to content

Center of Gravity


Europa

Recommended Posts

I do not see why trying to explain to you why you're seeing bugs in DCS, would be biased.

We're just trying to open your eyes to something else, just your observation.

But if you say you can play " perfectly ", so do not say anything.

When it comes to "flying", you have to leave the ground first.


Edited by cromhunt
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tailheavy ? you haven't flown a critical tail heavy plane yet I guess.

 

That is a totally different beast, you won't even touch the stick and goes UP :)

 

...and tailheavy airplanes undercut in a dive, that's how you check if your plane is too tailheavy for everyday flight, make a steep dive 45-60° and see how it recovers....

 

basics !

Gigabyte Aorus X570S Master - Ryzen 5900X - Gskill 64GB 3200/CL14@3600/CL14 - Asus 1080ti EK-waterblock - 4x Samsung 980Pro 1TB - 1x Samsung 870 Evo 1TB - 1x SanDisc 120GB SSD - Heatkiller IV - MoRa3-360LT@9x120mm Noctua F12 - Corsair AXi-1200 - TiR5-Pro - Warthog Hotas - Saitek Combat Pedals - Asus PG278Q 27" QHD Gsync 144Hz - Corsair K70 RGB Pro - Win11 Pro/Linux - Phanteks Evolv-X 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You are writing nonsense things just to oppose me and I dont see the reason of your obsessions.

 

These things should be open to discussion but you are more like fanatics.

 

This is not about my flight skills or customer satisfaction.

 

These are my observations.

I find the center of gravity might be a little bit aft and slats effectiveness is a bit harsh and I also question if it should stall like this.

 

First you refer me to the zero trim hands off post of Yo-Yo which the question is not about the hands off trim. Do you really think that everything is so perfect not to be questioned?

 

If someone has the correct answer please enlighten me. I will surely accept the answer if there is a quantitive answer. Otherwise please show some respect and be quite.


Edited by Europa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Europa, first off, why are you expecting perfection from this, or any sim?

 

It's not magic. simulation (game) engines have gone far from the early 2000 era, and nowdays you get closer than ever before. But no simulation engine is that perfect, that you could just give real life values to it and expect it to

magically produce real like behaviour in all situations.

 

Coding that stuff is complex as hell and when you have finally achieved something that resembles the real thing, say 97% of situations you can congratulate yourself as a coder or developer in that case.

 

You say that you just wanted to bring up this finding of yours to open discussion about it. Lets think about it a little.

 

So you did bring it up. what do you expect to happen next?

 

When a user (you in this case, if we would assume you are right) finds stuff that falls in to that 3% category that they didn't get right, what do you expect to happen really?

 

That all ongoing work must be stopped to put all effort to correct that minor thing? or that the devs will immediately come forward to say that they are sorry that they got that 3% wrong?

or even just an acknowledgement from the devs, " thanks for your report, we look into this"? if they said something like that, then everyone would be asking freaquently, "when is this going to get looked at"?

they made that mistake few times in the past. not gonna happen anymore. sorry.

 

If it was to just bring it up for discussion, what you expect that discussion to lead up to? that every one here agree and start chanting "we want it fixed! we want it fixed!"

 

Did you allways get everything you wanted as a child? if not, why would you expect to have it here, now?


Edited by voodooman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys are biased.

 

LOL! #irony

 

You don't even question the possibility of a problem. You belive the DCS model is the real thing and can't be questioned. You are obbsessed with the idea that everything is perfect....

 

No, some of us are open minded regards a potential problem. I don't know enough hardcore detail regards 109 to say whether this is correct behaviour or not.

 

However:

 

Yo-Yo has supplied the documentation he has worked with, highlighted some of it's limitations and made credible substitutions of data from the previous 109 variant where absolutely necessary.

 

Seems an entirely reasonable design philosophy from where I sit.

 

To top it all, all this results in a flight model that comes close to replicating characteristics described by people who have actually flown 109K variants.

 

Now *maybe* rel4y is on to something, *maybe* some geometry of the horizontal tail and elevator gearing changed into the K version and helped relieve some of the tail heavy characteristics.

 

That's entirely plausible.

 

However, without a specific data set to work to, you are making things up.

 

The philosphy debate then is: do we use a data set that is *possibly* obsolete but likely closely related. Or we create an imaginary data set to meet a highly subjective unquantifiable set of values, niether of which we can prove?

 

You know, I'm 100% sure that if the relevant data for the K-4 was found in the next 5 mins and given to Yo-Yo he'd get to work incorporating. In the interim, as an engineer and admirer of the scientific method I find Yo-Yos design philosophy faultless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! #irony

 

 

 

No, some of us are open minded regards a potential problem. I don't know enough hardcore detail regards 109 to say whether this is correct behaviour or not.

 

However:

 

Yo-Yo has supplied the documentation he has worked with, highlighted some of it's limitations and made credible substitutions of data from the previous 109 variant where absolutely necessary.

 

Seems an entirely reasonable design philosophy from where I sit.

 

To top it all, all this results in a flight model that comes close to replicating characteristics described by people who have actually flown 109K variants.

 

Now *maybe* rel4y is on to something, *maybe* some geometry of the horizontal tail and elevator gearing changed into the K version and helped relieve some of the tail heavy characteristics.

 

That's entirely plausible.

 

However, without a specific data set to work to, you are making things up.

 

The philosphy debate then is: do we use a data set that is *possibly* obsolete but likely closely related. Or we create an imaginary data set to meet a highly subjective unquantifiable set of values, niether of which we can prove?

 

You know, I'm 100% sure that if the relevant data for the K-4 was found in the next 5 mins and given to Yo-Yo he'd get to work incorporating. In the interim, as an engineer and admirer of the scientific method I find Yo-Yos design philosophy faultless.

I agree with DD_Fenrir here above.

 

Yo-Yo has shown a very fine scientific approach to the FM, and has been willing to show his calculations and assumptions based on real time period documents.

 

I'm sorry, but to me this is just a revival of the very old debate "the DCS 109 doesn't feel like I have been accustomed to in other simulators, so it must be wrong!".

 

But to me, like others have also mentioned in the thread, the DCS 109 lives up to the accounts one sees on 109 behaviour.

In fact I feel I have been educated much more on the 109's quirks and treats in DCS than in other simulators.

 

Overall I feel I have been educated better in general WW II aircraft behaviour, propeller torque, tail wheel quirks etc., by all the DCS warbirds than most places elsewhere.

I feel that I now understand better the challenges that the pilots of the day had to fight with.

 

So for me, I have this recommendation:

Instead of feeling that "this aircraft is wrong!", try to open up, give the module a chance, and see if you can learn it's secrets, and learn to handle it as it is.

Enjoy that it has "personality".

 

I guarantee that this will give much more satisfaction that to try to change the given and well documented flight modelling based on "feelings". ;)

 

Have a good flight out there.

System specs:

 

Gigabyte Aorus Master, i7 9700K@std, GTX 1080TI OC, 32 GB 3000 MHz RAM, NVMe M.2 SSD, Oculus Quest VR (2x1600x1440)

Warthog HOTAS w/150mm extension, Slaw pedals, Gametrix Jetseat, TrackIR for monitor use

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This complaint: text aplenty, evidence none. As usually.

 

 

What is the point of you tease me again while I am trying to be silent and accept this mindset.

You are just boasting as if you knew something or you have the evidence but you are keeping secret.

Do not troll unless you have proper information to share. I can gladly accept and change my mind.


Edited by Europa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Europa,

 

perform a few tests.

 

While we can't set the pilot weight, we can set the fuel weight, and also in the mission editor, empty the rear tank, where methanol or fuel can be filled.

 

Do a few flights with:

 

.) Full fuel + MW50

.) 50 % fuel + MW50

.) Full fuel without MW 50

.) 50% fuel without MW50

 

Then repeat for no ammunition vs full ammunition, but without bomb.

 

Finally repeat for bomb, with and without full ammunition.

 

Can you notice the trim changes ?

 

How does it feel to you when you set no ammunition, no bomb, no MW50 and just 50% fuel ?


Edited by jcomm

Flight Simulation is the Virtual Materialization of a Dream...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do not troll unless you have proper information to share.

 

Not my problem. You presented the claim so the burden of proof is on you, not me.

 

EDIT: Me teasing you again? Hardly, since the above comment was my first in this thread :D

The DCS Mi-8MTV2. The best aviational BBW experience you could ever dream of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Europa,

 

perform a few tests.

 

While we can't set the pilot weight, we can se the fuel weight, and also in the mission editor, empty the rear tank, where methanol or fuel can be stored.

 

Do a few flights with:

 

.) Full fuel + MW50

.) 50 % fuel + MW50

.) Full fuel without MW 50

.) 50% fuel without MW50

 

Then repeat for no ammunition vs full ammunition, but without bomb.

 

Finally repeat for bomb, with and without full ammunition.

 

Can you notice the trim changes ?

 

How does it feel to you when you set no ammunition, no bomb, no MW50 and just 50% fuel ?

Exactly. I would add, has anybody noticed how the pitch up moment is worst with radiator flaps fully opened manually? And how it's worst with manual propeller pitch set, say 11:30 or 12:00, and just after take off when revs reaches 2500+ with barely 250Km/H? Then set radiator and prop pitch to auto, cruise to 1.2, 1.3 ATA and all of a sudden she cruises nicely hands off @400-450Km/H and trim +1 while a minute earlier I couldn't hold the nose up @250Km/H and fully forward trim…

 

I think it's because this is not Digital Combat Simulator but Hogwarts Combat Simulator and it's magic… nomelopuedodecreer.gif

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not my problem. You presented the claim so the burden of proof is on you, not me.

 

EDIT: Me teasing you again? Hardly, since the above comment was my first in this thread :D

 

Not my problem. You presented the claim so the burden of proof is on you, not me.

 

EDIT: Me teasing you again? Hardly, since the above comment was my first in this thread :D

 

If that is not your problem than why you bother to troll.

And the "again" is not solely dedicated to you. You felt special huh?

 

 

and most of all read the OP

"Does anyone having the same issue or is this happens particulary to my self?"

 

as you will see and capable of understanding I explained my observations and asked this question. And this is not a claim. I am just asking for information.

 

If you have a proper information then answer properly do not keep it secret for your self.

 

 

@Jcomm, thank you for your answer. I will make my tests. A test I made earlier was, following the manual normal landing prosedures, I trimmed the aircraft -3 as of the check list. But it was painful.


Edited by Europa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Jcomm, thank you for your answer. I will make my tests. A test I made earlier was, following the manual normal landing prosedures, I trimmed the aircraft -3 as of the check list. But it was painful.

 

I feel your pain Europa :-)

 

I tried with the default Quick Mission - Final App. :

 

.) Edited the Mission and set ammunition to 0%, and emptied the MW50, so, rear tank empty...

 

.) Lowered gear and full flaps, and letting trimmed speed get a little bellow 200 km/h the best I could set was around -2.5 without having to push the stick...

 

Well, I'll never know how close it's to the real deal, but ... I would say it's a bit tail heavy :-)


Edited by jcomm

Flight Simulation is the Virtual Materialization of a Dream...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You felt special huh?

 

No, I did not. You, on the other hand, seem to constantly behave like someone just pished on your breakfast.

 

and asked this question. And this is not a claim

 

Right, you're not claiming anything. Apart from claiming, and I quote, "I still claim that it is unbalanced" right on the first page of this thread. So are you or aren't you?

 

But OK, I'll stop now and get my coat. However, I'd still like to suggest that you read carefully what Fenrir, Sporg and Voodooman wrote above and maybe even learn something. Toodles for now.

The DCS Mi-8MTV2. The best aviational BBW experience you could ever dream of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

Oh, NO!!! Groundhog Day...

 

 

Ніщо так сильно не ранить мозок, як уламки скла від розбитих рожевих окулярів

There is nothing so hurtful for the brain as splinters of broken rose-coloured spectacles.

Ничто так сильно не ранит мозг, как осколки стекла от разбитых розовых очков (С) Me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I don't say that it is not possible. I just wanted you to see I can handle things with Bf109. Some people might think I am complaining because I can't fly it regarding to some posts.


Edited by Europa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not directly related about the subject but maybe you judge that I dont know anything how to fly or maybe it is just the Bf109.
Mate, really… :lol: After your previous posts I was about to think, "well, he seems more calmed, may be we can talk…", then you come over again with your "no claim" and the "it flies with half a wing" and I'm sorry, there's nothing to talk with you. Nice of you thinking we all are trolls (professional ones definitely) and we don't try to debate anything. Still your manners weren't the best to start with and as explained before, we have seen sooooooo many people behaving exactly the same as you right now that I'm sorry, but I won't try any more. Search for yourself, read for yourself, and maybe, just maybe, you learn something for yourself before coming here to "claim" anything.

 

 

Nice to meet you, bye :bye_2: .

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mate, really… :lol: After your previous posts I was about to think, "well, he seems more calmed, may be we can talk…", then you come over again with your "no claim" and the "it flies with half a wing" and I'm sorry, there's nothing to talk with you. Nice of you thinking we all are trolls (professional ones definitely) and we don't try to debate anything. Still your manners weren't the best to start with and as explained before, we have seen sooooooo many people behaving exactly the same as you right now that I'm sorry, but I won't try any more. Search for yourself, read for yourself, and maybe, just maybe, you learn something for yourself before coming here to "claim" anything.

 

 

Nice to meet you, bye :bye_2: .

 

No I dont claim it cant fly and as I said it is not related with the OP. I don't say anything. It was just a "Look ma! I can fly with one wing" Just wanted to share with people, including you, judging me for complaining because I can't fly it.

 

As always if I say white you will say black.


Edited by Europa
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I dont claim it cant fly and as I said it is not related with the OP. I don't say anything. It was just a "Look ma! I can fly with one wing"

 

As always if I say white you will say black.

Not at all mate, you said white to start with, we tried to explain why it is white but not so white and only seems like, but you seem to keep with it without reading (do you even read what is written?) or make the slightest effort to understand there is reasons and available papers on the subject (you can read them) used to build the module saying it is like it is and there's no more of it.

 

 

BTW, you said before "I was making fun of you", which I wasn't or it wasn't my intention at all but you read it like that so again seems you weren't very "receptive" no matter what is explained or information is posted. So well, if you already made your mind and think like that it's fine. Your problem, but don't expect we keep here for ever trying to make you understand what's going on behind the curtains :thumbup:.

 

 

S!

"I went into the British Army believing that if you want peace you must prepare for war. I believe now that if you prepare for war, you get war."

-- Major-General Frederick B. Maurice

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That one is after the later posts not the original. Don't manipulate like cheap newspapers.

 

Right. So your second comment in this thread, where you still claim that it's unbalanced, isn't really a claim after all because you now say so, meaning you're not actually claiming anything. Thanks for clearing this up mate :D


Edited by msalama

The DCS Mi-8MTV2. The best aviational BBW experience you could ever dream of.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flying this plane in DCS since 2015, but only occasionally for sightseeing tours (so most of the time with default 80% fuel + full MW50) I wasn't aware how big of a difference MW tank + high fuel load makes in shifting the CoG back.

 

Today, for the first time since the purchase I decided to try how it handles with MW tank empty and 40% of fuel. Whoa... Suddenly the plane doesn't want to baloon immediately after liftoff and with full down trim + cruise ATA settings + auto prop can fly hands off all the way up to 405-410 indicated. Why the hell didn't I try this earlier :D?


Edited by Art-J

i7 9700K @ stock speed, single GTX1070, 32 gigs of RAM, TH Warthog, MFG Crosswind, Win10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...