Has the spit turned into a lady?

Is it just my imagination or has the spit found some lady like features on landing? Since the finial release the wing tipping seems to require less correction on touchdown and rollout or am I getting better...lol

You're getting better. It gets easier because you don't need as much conscious concentration as you did before. Controlling the Spitfire has become something like muscle memory. I don't really think about it much anymore. I just land!

Except grass fields. I have to concentrate when landing on those.

You're just getting better ;)

A few days ago I flew it and thought the same, then tried the clipped wing version yesterday and had a nasty landing. I've actually been having way more rudder problems now than I used to. Add just a bit of left rudder to start a turn, then immediate full right deflection, and my nose rate to the left increases, only to be stopped by aggressive braking. On touchdown I've had total lack of rudder authority at all, with my pedals maxed opposite deflection but the nose refusing to correct.

Sorry to disappoint you but: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=217751

A few patches ago landing and takeoff got much much easier due to reduced side friction on the tires of the WWII aircraft. Easier than it should be. Thankfully Yo-Yo is going to take another look at it though.

Damnit!!! :)

Wow. Honestly, I never noticed a difference. I guess I don't fly as much (trying to moderate my computer use). Never noticed a difference.

I don't fly the 109 very often too. But if this change makes it more realistic, I don't see how the video in the thread you linked here (the V2 landing) was realistic at all. That landing was outrageous. There needs to be more drag on the wheels there.

Did this only affect the 109, or all the props?

All of them. Not realistic at all. No way you would ever get away with it.

However...I can land the Spitfire on the grass 9 times out of 10 now, compared to 1 put of 4 before. Landing the Spitfire in soft terrain, anything but flat was immensely difficult before. But now...I still think it's too easy, but it can be toned down a notch. I don't do grass field landings often in the Spitfire, and I finally picked it up again today, and it was pretty easy.

So, while I think that ED was headed in the right direction, they could take a couple steps backwards. I'm no real taildragger pilot though. This is just one commoner's point of view. ;)

Yes the side friction in grass was also too high before making it more difficult than irl but on runways it fit quite well.

I think your observations stem mostly from the fact that probably most of you never really handled a real aircraft on takeoff / landing...

I surely never handled a taildragger IRL, but as a glider pilot, having flown many types of gliders, I assure you that landing and taking off under x-wnd in some gliders can be really tricky, and, no sim I have ever used can even by far represent the feel of it, and ask for the same inputs used IRL, because, among other factors that start with modelling the transition between flight and ground physics, to the absence of feedback ( the so called seat of pants ) totally distort the experience we get in a desktop flightsim.

And guys, having "long" sticks can help, looks to me as a sometimes subjective claim! I've used a quite fancy cockpit setup and while I did notice a difference from my cheap T16000 + Saitek RCS I can no where say it is much closer to RL...

So, a developer IMO should cut / relax on those effects that are really not going to cause to the virtual pilot the necessary physical / sensorial feedback allowing to properly cope with it.

The key to success is finding the best compromise between filtering the unnecessary, that would make it too and irrealistically difficult, or make it feel arcadish...

I honestly feel that the latest updates have brought DCS to an excellent level of "possible" realism. Certainly far from arcadish, probably possible to fine tune a bit more, but pretty much satisfactory.

I think your observations stem mostly from the fact that probably most of you never really handled a real aircraft on takeoff / landing...

 

 

I surely never handled a taildragger IRL, but as a glider pilot, having flown many types of gliders, I assure you that landing and taking off under x-wnd in some gliders can be really tricky, and, no sim I have ever used can even by far represent the feel of it, and ask for the same inputs used IRL, because, among other factors that start with modelling the transition between flight and ground physics, to the absence of feedback ( the so called seat of pants ) totally distort the experience we get in a desktop flightsim.

 

 

And guys, having "long" sticks can help, looks to me as a sometimes subjective claim! I've used a quite fancy cockpit setup and while I did notice a difference from my cheap T16000 + Saitek RCS I can no where say it is much closer to RL...

 

 

 

So, a developer IMO should cut / relax on those effects that are really not going to cause to the virtual pilot the necessary physical / sensorial feedback allowing to properly cope with it.

 

 

 

The key to success is finding the best compromise between filtering the unnecessary, that would make it too and irrealistically difficult, or make it feel arcadish...

 

 

I honestly feel that the latest updates have brought DCS to an excellent level of "possible" realism. Certainly far from arcadish, probably possible to fine tune a bit more, but pretty much satisfactory.

i have to disagree with pretty much everything of the above. the things u suggest, is the typical approach of all the other "sims" i abandoned for this very reason and came to dcs.

and i think there are many more people with real life flying experience than u might expect on this forum.

i have to disagree with pretty much everything of the above. the things u suggest, is the typical approach of all the other "sims" i abandoned for this very reason and came to dcs.

and i think there are many more people with real life flying experience than u might expect on this forum.

+1 (although I´ve not completely abandoned all other sims :D)

That 109's landing was ridiculous though. Unless the tires are not rubber, it should have had a wing strike or worse. If you haven't seen it, it's a couple posts up in the locked thread DefaultFace linked.

That 109's landing was ridiculous though. Unless the tires are not rubber, it should have had a wing strike or worse. If you haven't seen it, it's a couple posts up in the locked thread DefaultFace linked.

not only the 109 video...did u see the spit video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UfCRM2fgcHg

I have now. Man. That just looks wrong. On the first bounce, fine. But when it didn't yank the Spitfire to the side, and it continued to slide horizontally as if on ice on its narrow undercarriage. I don't buy it. You don't need to fly a real taildragger to see that there is something wrong with that.

i dont think it would even withstand that first bounce at that angle in real life. either the landing gear collapsed or the tire bursts before flipping over...thats what i would expect to happen...dont believe a real spit would get away in 1 piece with such a landing.

I think your observations stem mostly from the fact that probably most of you never really handled a real aircraft on takeoff / landing...

Well actually I have. Not a huge amount, and also mostly gliders but even if I hadn't, everyone who has ever driven a car on asphalt knows that rubber tires like that don't usually behave like hockey pucks on ice (under normal conditions, no rain/Ice etc).

So, a developer IMO should cut / relax on those effects that are really not going to cause to the virtual pilot the necessary physical / sensorial feedback allowing to properly cope with it.

I can understand where you and others are coming from with this but I still have 2 issues with it:

1: DCS devs and forum mods have for years preached that DCS is the most realistic thing out there, no exceptions whatsoever. No compromises will be made, deal with it and practice. Why the sudden change of heart?

2: How far does it go? Especially when you relax it so much so that people can make such ridiculous errors as in the video, how can you still claim this is a simulator and not an arcade game? There are plenty of things in the sim I "can't feel". Shall we make the Mustang turn a little better because I don't "feel" like I can swat 109s from the sky like on the History channel?

I would understand if that happened on a wet day on mud but on asphalt? not so sure, then again i supposed i've become accustomed to drifting a Cessna onto the runway using rudder and power for fear of getting the brakes caked.

As far as ground handling foes for the spitfire i think the CW has not been affected to greatly but i haven't flown it a lot so my opinion shouldn't be used there, for the non cw im not too sure, i have got the landings down well enough to pull a 3 pointer off but the wing tip issue seems to only occure at much higher speeds now, maybe its muscle memory telling us to correct or maybe we're not going balls to the walls power on take off.

I noticed a change some time ago and I also hoped that I had just figured out the Spit behaviour during takeoff, although I suspected a change in the flight/ground model. For me, taking off was really hard, while now I can do it quite relaxed; landing also seems a little easier but I haven't noticed a very big change.

TBH I have seldom looked at the plane from the outside while landing, so when I saw the aircraft turning that much I thought that the tailwheel was just turning like the wheel of a shopping cart. Maybe the reason for which in the video it doesn't turn much and it starts sliding is the centering behaviour described here in the "Tail Wheel Castering" paragraph. In post #5 of that thread the OP says that he is "an aviation engineer, and have experience taxiing and operating Spitfires on the ground", so it looks reliable.

Honestly I really can't feel like questioning this flight/ground model because I don't think I have the experience to do so, but one of the sticky threads in the Spitfire section of this forum is "Essay, PART 1: Why taildraggers are tricky and how to overcome it!"; I expect most of the Spit users to have read it. On the first post, the writer said that he is a very experienced traildragger instructor and also this: «I wanted to reassure those of you who are finding the ground handling difficult, that what you are experiencing is quite normal and to be expected. I’ve read several posts which question the overall difficulty levels involved and how they are modelled. Some suggest that the DCS Spit (and other TW aircraft) are perhaps too difficult. On balance, I think that they are pretty representative of what real world TW ops are like, and here’s why…».

Now we still have a sticky thread in which someone reliable says that the ground/flight model is proper but it has changed so much... .

I personally prefer to crash 3 times out of 5 in a realistic way then succeeding with an easier model.