ground physics

ok..dont know if its only affecting the 109, but something as been changed in regards of ground physics...i first noticed it when i landed somewhere in the weeds without tail-wheel lock...it seemed all of a sudden super easy, whereas before it was really challenging...imo slightly too much.

 

 

but now when i then landed on the runways, it became apparent that its messed up pretty bad now. in fact its really obvious already when taxi at slow speeds... nobody else noticed this yet, or does nobody care anymore? :lol: im really surprised nobody brought this up yet.

 

i can slam the thing down on the ground in a complete grabbed/slipped atittude without being punished whatsoever. not even a slight wing-drop not to mention tilting of the plane. the plane could now compete in a drift race, lol. i assume they messed up either the side friction of the wheels, or they changed the friction of the ground itself. imo, the state it is in now, has little to do with simulation.

 

 

 

anyway...i would have a request DEAR DEVS or MODS who could pass this to the DEVS...before u just revert it to the previous state with an upcoming patch, please have a closer look again at the groundphysics OUTSIDE of runways with UNLOCKED tailwheel...i see these broken physics now as a chance to actually not only get it back to the old state, but to improve them.

Edited August 7, 2018 by birdstrike

Open the special options and ensure you don't have auto rudder or takeoff assistance on. Sounds like you do.

nope i dont...i disabled that bs on the first day the aircraft was released and never touched it again...but i also checked yesterday if it re-activated by itself due to the latest patches...but these arcade options are still all disabled. so thats not the problem

Edited August 7, 2018 by birdstrike

Have you even tried it out?

 

 

 

Brakes only - no rudder in the following video.

There is definitely something wrong here ..

 

 

 

Edited August 7, 2018 by NineLine
removed deleted quote

Bud, maybe something is getting lost in translation but you're the one who's coming off hostile and angry.

 

That definitely looks a bit on the funny side. Try posting your video in the Bugs and Problems forum along with a .miz and a .trk; preferably a single player runway start. Keep it as simple as possible so the devs can easily reproduce the issue, and try to keep the snark to a minimum. You'll find you get a lot more attention that way.

She flys for me.fine and dandy

 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

I have noticed on bad landings anyway that the war birds will skid sideways now instead of automatic ground barrel rolls. So in my opinion it's an improvement

 

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

Just tried it. Definitely something weird going on! The wheel fiction is off, the aircraft doesnt dig in on one wheel anymore. You can basically tokyo drift with the thing now. :D

That's perfect physics for when it's raining and you have very worn out tires on a concrete runway tho.:D

Posted it on the bug section.

Posted it on the bug section.

 

 

:thumbup:

ok because of the new groundphysics by ED, and their opinion that they are fine now for the 109, imo to my surprise, i decided to create my own groundphysics :) which i believe are way more plausible for a taildragger, and especially for one like the 109...and to be honest, i think even they are already way way more forgiving than the real thing is i assume.

 

here they are. i invite every 109 jockey to try these out. they are slightly more forgiving than the previous incarnation by ED, but still its no tokio drift ride. i also welcome ED to try them to get an idea about what at least 1customer thinks is acceptable in terms of challenge vs realism.

 

with these settings, i managed 2 out of 2 field landings with unlocked tailwheel. runway landings are also not a problem, but both on the dirt runways and on the concrete runways of normandy, this suspicious sliding all over the place is gone now.

 

i didnt test it in too much detail for now, as in the cockpit view, it looked and felt believable...but i will likely have a closer look at this again in outside views, and look more closer at the tailwheel behaviour to see whether there is something dodgy going on...

 

the structure of this mod is already JSGME friendly for easy removal.

109GroundHandling.zip

Edited August 17, 2018 by birdstrike

I gave it a short try yesterday

 

Two takeoffs and one landing

 

1. I fully blow the engine. My bad.

2. All fine here

 

I don't think that the ground handling is bad. Eventually the tailwheel lock was not engaged for the T/O ;)

I gave it a short try yesterday

 

Two takeoffs and one landing

 

1. I fully blow the engine. My bad.

2. All fine here

 

I don't think that the ground handling is bad. Eventually the tailwheel lock was not engaged for the T/O ;)

 

the default ground physics are lacking any friction right now. i know, i cant convince everybody, but in my opinion, the default ground physics are really really bad right now...at least for the 109.

It is horrible, here is a short video I did to show that you basically can't crash on landing anymore:

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIKGZfuOOnU

 

 

I find this step back from realism, and the reasons given for it, very disappointing. If the new physics are needed for some players then please make it an option.

It is horrible, here is a short video I did to show that you basically can't crash on landing anymore:

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIKGZfuOOnU

 

 

I find this step back from realism, and the reasons given for it, very disappointing. If the new physics are needed for some players then please make it an option.

 

 

i agree with u :thumbup:

there are already options like take off assistance and autorudder.....so why force these dumped down physics on people who like to keep it real? i dont understand it. :mad:

I did a whole bunch of landings today, no issues. I cannot find anything wrong with the ground handling.

 

 

When you land, you should have the tailwheel locked and you should land on all wheels at the same time. I tend to flare it quite long until i let it settle.

 

 

I haven't tested on paved runways, as I fly normandie.

^ M. you seem to not understand what the thread is about. It's NOT about what happens when you land right, it's about what happens when you land wrong. Did you actually read the now locked thread on this subject in bugs section?

 

Anyway, apparently NL aked Yo-Yo to re-invesigate this aspect, so it's not like what we have now is the ultimate "right" version. For the time being the tires react very different under lateral load compared to Spitfire - we'll see if any further tweaks get implemented.

The first landing shows just how much bite there is, even on this light weight aircraft. I don't mind ED pulling back a little to make it "practical" because of our physical limitations with flight simming. We just don't want to go to far and end up like that other ww2 game:D

 

Start at 2:30

 

:mad:

 

As an option in the options tab, okay. But forcing this ridiculous looking behaviour on everyone is totaly the wrong way.

 

I really can't believe Yo-Yo gave his ok on this.

 

There are enough simple FM/ground handling games one can play. DCS should not go this way.

Fox

I can't really comment on what behaviour is more realistic, but i strongly disagree that the old handling had to be fixed, solely because it was "too difficult".

 

I could land the 109 with the old physics in any situation WITHOUT proper PEDALS, just using the rocker-axis on my hotas.

I did not take long to learn it either. It is (has been) indeed challenging, maybe even difficult, but i find the notion ridiculous, that it was just too hard to do, given that the 109 was infamous for many fatalities during landings.

 

AS I explained above, the ground handling has been reworked as it was TOO easy to scrap a wing tip, Nick Grey stated that you lose a lot not having the sensation in your backside on things like take off and landing.

May i suggest, that Nick Grey probably spends more time in real aircraft, than in the sim? I am pretty sure, that for dcs you not only learn the aircraft, but you also learn to "read" the sim as good as possible without the additional feedback you would get in the real thing.

If you look what very good simmers can pull of in dcs or any other simulators, you understand that "gamers" can to some extend substitute the missing input.

Same goes for sim-racing, where "simmers" often outclass professional drivers, assumedly because they better adjust to the "missing" feedback.

 

I would therefore strongly advise to go with physical realism first and have everythign else optional!

Thank you!

Edited August 18, 2018 by twistking

I can't really comment on what behaviour is more realistic, but i strongly disagree that the old handling had to be fixed, solely because it was "too difficult".

,,

I would therefore strongly advise to go with physical realism first and have everything else optional!

Thank you!

 

 

I strongly agree with the above statement.

 

The old ground physics felt very good, and was one of the even very strong points of DCS as opposed to competing simulators, where you actually seemed to have this "slip on the ground" feeling.

 

Please bring the old ground physics back.

I strongly agree with the above statement.

 

The old ground physics felt very good, and was one of the even very strong points of DCS as opposed to competing simulators, where you actually seemed to have this "slip on the ground" feeling.

 

Please bring the old ground physics back.

 

 

I actually find it more realistic now. Even with the reported skidding.

 

 

The soft fields in the Caucasus map aren't teh best example. Non-paved rws in Normandy do a much better job IMO.

 

 

The K-4, D-9, P51 and Spitfire are certainly still "tricky" to operate if the correct handling is not used.

As far as I and everyone else I know can tell, non paved runways in Normandy have always used the same physics as the paved ones on the other dcs maps. Not really a great example.

 

They really aren't. Takeoffs and landings are manageable now that you would never be able to get away with IRL. Just a few days ago on the BS server I floored it out of the hangar in the 109, went bouncing up over the hill there, came back down the other side and took off without so much as a scratch.

Oh,

 

 

@DefaultFace - I didn't try that :-) I usually just try what I would do IRL ...

 

 

But if it works that way, something must have been relaxed indeed...

Edited August 20, 2018 by jcomm