[ALREADY REPORTED]Hornet still drawn to the ground in low level flight ???

is this bug still present ??? instead of ground effect, I noticed that the hornet still suffer from being sucked to the ground in very low level flight ?

I tried the F-16C and F-5, and they are not subject to this ?

do the dev know about this ? its present from the first release.

It appears a 'ground suction' effect is present at high speeds, and natural, which I think to remember DCS implemented, for the F18 at least, but someone might confirm f I remember this correctly. Wanting to approach and hit on a SAM at over 500 kts at 10ft you have to be conscious this ground effect is there, or die.

I heard when the MiG-29 PFM came out, that this is a characteristic of certain planes with tailplanes below the wing. It’s buried in one of the MiG-29 PFM threads. I only had the Hornet for the free weekend so I know me posting here isn’t super helpful especially when I don’t have the link. Just wanted to chime in since I’m sure not everyone here read every post about the MiG-29 PFM. I would be very interested in a response by Yo-Yo

Yeah it is still there lol After a flight a few hours ago I was thinking about coming on to gripe about it. Saved me the ink.

this is a characteristic of certain planes with tailplanes below the wing

I read that thread - it seemed to make sense.

Anyone with some relevant actual experience in a position to contradict this ?

If not, shall we stop complaining about it ?

its being addressed as bug long time ago, its known...just noone seems to cares to fix it.

an example video for the doubtful ones (just searched for it , there will be better ones for sure) :

i really hope ED comes out of theyr financial troubles so maybe they start to care again about theyr already released modules.

its being addressed as bug long time ago, its known...just noone seems to cares to fix it.

 

 

 

an example video for the doubtful ones (just searched for it , there will be better ones for sure) :

 

 

 

 

i really hope ED comes out of theyr financial troubles so maybe they start to care again about theyr already released modules.

Really big bug...

Waiting to be fixed til the begining...

It is so annoying to die like this every time.

2 more weeks to wait to fix it...

I heard when the MiG-29 PFM came out, that this is a characteristic of certain planes with tailplanes below the wing. It’s buried in one of the MiG-29 PFM threads. I only had the Hornet for the free weekend so I know me posting here isn’t super helpful especially when I don’t have the link. Just wanted to chime in since I’m sure not everyone here read every post about the MiG-29 PFM. I would be very interested in a response by Yo-Yo

Well it make perfect sense then.

It basically act the opposite way a ground effect vehicle (like the Ekranoplan) work.

Here is a video to show and explain it a little :

First you have to understand than an aircraft with wings and tailplane or canard and wing is controlling its pitch attitude by changing the balance of lift between the wings and the tail/canard.

A self stable ground effect vehicles (GEV) work in a really simple principle, the tailplane is higher than the main wings and is made to provide lift.

What happen is when the GEV get closer to the ground, the main wing because of the ground effect becoming stronger, will generate more lift than the tail, creating the same effect as if we pulled the stick, it will have a nose up tendency, making it regaining its designed altitude.

On the contrary when the GEV get too high, the main wing loose lift as the ground effect reduce and the tail who was already partially or totally out of ground effect won't lose as much lift, meaning the main wing is now providing less lift than the tail, so the GEV will have a nose down tendency.

Both self stabilizing the GEV so it stay on its designed cruise altitude without colliding with the water or climbing too high and stalling without any human or any system input.

Basically an aircraft with the tailplane lower than the wings will have the opposite effect, being closer to the ground, the tail is more effective, meaning that it will generate more lift, and for the same speed, being closer to the ground will cause a nose down effect.

If the flight computer, or the pilot don't compensate for that, the aircraft will probably crash, it would take a really specific configuration so that the main wings counter enough the nose down and avoid crashing when being really close to the ground to avoid that.

The question is, does the flight computer of the real Hornet trim the aircraft by usings its weight distribution (fuel, payload etc) and its airspeed, or does it counteract any pitch effects when the stick is neutral.

If this is the first, and I guess it is as the second one would create bad behaviours when the stick is slightly moved out of neutral, then the computer need to be coded to take into account the ground effect, and considering that aircrafts aren't designed with extremely low flight for fun in mind, it won't surprise me if it don't have any code for that except maybe when the gear is out or potentially when flaps are half/full.

So if in DCS the aircraft have a nose down tendency when in ground effect (even a small one) then this is basically this effect reproduced, but if the aircraft don't show ANY pitch change and the aircraft simply loose altitude, or even require a higher nose up attitude to keep the altitude constant, then this is a bug.

Note that the nose down tendency might be really small, not seeing it doesn't mean it is not here.

Was about to post a question about this. My only problem is that I have never flown an F-18, so I don't know what is realistic. But it feels weird that it should get sucked into the ground when all other planes in the sim (that I've tried) do the opposite. You can also feel it when passing low over a ridge or the carrier that the plane jolts down.

If it is a bug, I hope it gets fixed, as I've lost more than one Hornet to this.

Well, if anyone can find a video of a F-18C cruising at wingspan height without crashing maybe they'll change this. I could swear I've seen it before.

Well, if anyone can find a video of a F-18C cruising at wingspan height without crashing maybe they'll change this. I could swear I've seen it before.

Well, I think I found the lowest one.

Well, I think I found the lowest one.

Yup, I think that does it...

From the few meters we can see the airplane, it does have a clear nose up attitude.

It would take a video where it flies at constant height far enough to see if it needs that attitude to counter the nose down effect or not.

That video is cool, but it doesnt help to answer the question what the FCS does or doesnt.

Was not the strange ground effect put in as a quick fix for sliding around on the carrier? Maybe I remember it wrong... anyways low flying in the Hornet is a big no-no for me. Not that I care atm as I have a new Viper to mess around with ;) Mohahahah :lol:

Was not the strange ground effect put in as a quick fix for sliding around on the carrier?

It was not, this behavior is present from day one of the beta.

@Demongornot - thanks for the insights, that's interesting indeed!

its being addressed as bug long time ago, its known...just noone seems to cares to fix it.

 

an example video for the doubtful ones (just searched for it , there will be better ones for sure) :

 

i really hope ED comes out of theyr financial troubles so maybe they start to care again about theyr already released modules.

Could you clarify this post please? What is your source for the claim you are making?

Posts like these highlight to me why everybody is screaming bloody murder the second ED works on anything other than the F18.........baseless rumours created by a lack of English language comprehension skills, or the complete and total misunderstanding about what Early Access means.

Posts like these highlight to me why everybody is screaming bloody murder the second ED works on anything other than the F18.........baseless rumours created by a lack of English language comprehension skills, or the complete and total misunderstanding about what Early Access means.

:thumbup:

well, lets turn the question, where is the proof that this happens on a real hornet ?

one source that maybe you will accept, is this forum:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=213372

marked as "REPORTED" and not differently (like "not a bug").

now if you're still doubtful, i suggest just go to ask to C.W.Lemoine who actually flew the F18c.

well, lets turn the question, where is the proof that this happens on a real hornet ?

 

one source that maybe you will accept, is this forum:

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=213372

marked as "REPORTED" and not differently (like "not a bug").

now if you're still doubtful, i suggest just go to ask to C.W.Lemoine who actually flew the F18c.

Oh, I'm not disputing the Hornet ground effect bug......I'm asking for your sources about ED's financial problems. Or are you creating rumours for sh*ts and giggles?

Well, I think I found the lowest one.

I froze the vid at 0:13. My jaw dropped and I could not believe my eyes.

well , Landing gear height ? less ?

i'm sure some F18 hater will try to confute also this, LOL !

for the masses…. elevators seems to be actually few degrees pointing up....pushing the tail up so to contrast ground effect pushing the nose up