yes!finally mighty wings with open beta!

im really glad to finally see proper wings on the the K in the beta version:thumbup:

Yay. Now just ROC and rudder stffening and proper speed plane can go out of Beta.;)

The 109 feels pretty good now with the recent update!

:thumbup:

There was updated on today?

There was updated on today?

Open beta update. Not live yet.

Post number 4

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=140468

Thanks for inform. I am really expecting this.

I fly it a bit but still cant like K-4 flight model. For me plane behave like it was too much unstable in pitch, it stall also quite fast ( as for a plane with slats) and roll rate is quite poor at slow speeds.

^^yes thx to the forced curvature settings aka. "stickforces" you and others applaud to! :)

Stick forces are nessesery but K-4 seemed to be quite unstable in pitch dunno if it has anything with stick force casue more heavy stick should mean more stable.

not how they implemented it...if they would keep a linear setting (joystick position=virtual stick position) until the pilot can not longer pull enough force to move the stick further, and from then on just make the virtual stick stuck still even if you at home pull your stick all the way back,...then yes, then it would be more stable, controlable(and that was the option i requested)....but thats not the case.in the 109 you have to fly with forced curvature settings which even worse, change with speed....so nothing stable about it.

with the current implementation, the virtual stick moves, even if you dont move your stick...so you cannot expect it to be stable...

After playing with the FSX version I bought yesterday I'd say it would be great to have a mix of both FDMs ...

The FSX K4 model has stiffening in all of the axis, and it works pretty much plausibly, IMHO. Then, it comes with the limitations imposed by the platform ( from fs2004 ) it relies on, but still very good.

If we could have a mix with our DCS K4, that would be just great!

I was expecting that this beta could also bring rudder stiffening ? No one mentioned that - David, does it also get affected now by dynamic pressure ?

Wings are fixed.

As the other guys pointed out the 109 feels really unstable in pitch .Slats no slats it shakes to much and wants to stall all over the place.

To me the p51 seems more controllable, stable at low speed(not in a climb).It's kinda not what I read but I guess i'll have to deal with it.

I don't have a problem shooting p51s by the hundred in Mp.But the 109 instability ruins my immersion.

After playing with the FSX version I bought yesterday I'd say it would be great to have a mix of both FDMs ...

 

The FSX K4 model has stiffening in all of the axis, and it works pretty much plausibly, IMHO. Then, it comes with the limitations imposed by the platform ( from fs2004 ) it relies on, but still very good.

 

If we could have a mix with our DCS K4, that would be just great!

 

I was expecting that this beta could also bring rudder stiffening ? No one mentioned that - David, does it also get affected now by dynamic pressure ?

Yes rudder is also affected in the same way. That is why I hope this rudder stiffening will be implemented before the plane gets out of beta.

EDIT:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/me109/me109g6-tactical.html

11. The rudder is fairly heavy but not uncomfortably so. As there is no rudder trimming device, it is necessary to apply right rudder for take-off and left rudder at high speeds.

But this is not a real hard data... if anyone has good chart about 109 rudder forces, that would be damn useful.

Yay. Now just ROC and rudder stffening and plane can go out of Beta.;)

MG151/20 nose cannon and wing gunpods too. :3

A cockpit switch also mentions... rockets? :D

not how they implemented it...if they would keep a linear setting (joystick position=virtual stick position) until the pilot can not longer pull enough force to move the stick further, and from then on just make the virtual stick stuck still even if you at home pull your stick all the way back

Errr.... But that's pretty much how it behaves now at any chosen, constant speed. I didn't notice if virtual stick movement stops immediately when max force is reached, or if there is a small curvature near the end of the range, such detail is irrelevant, though.

In the 109 you have to fly with forced curvature settings which even worse, change with speed....so nothing stable about it.

 

with the current implementation, the virtual stick moves, even if you dont move your stick...so you cannot expect it to be stable...

Max force on controls changes with speed. So does the extreme position of the stick in real airplane, with constant force applied by the pilot. That's how it seems to work in DCS now. How can one NOT model it that way for non-FFB sticks?

I imagined it just like this when I read it.

(only now I got enough time to make this D: )

EDIT: I cannot into of youtube forum tags.

Yes rudder is also affected in the same way. That is why I hope this rudder stiffening will be implemented before the plane gets out of beta.

Nope.

Nope.

So you want to say that the rudder was not affected by any stiffness... Do you have any data?

Errr.... But that's pretty much how it behaves now at any chosen, constant speed. I didn't notice if virtual stick movement stops immediately when max force is reached, or if there is a small curvature near the end of the range, such detail is irrelevant, though.

 

 

 

 

Max force on controls changes with speed. So does the extreme position of the stick in real airplane, with constant force applied by the pilot. That's how it seems to work in DCS now. How can one NOT model it that way for non-FFB sticks?

:doh: try read again

So you want to say that the rudder was not affected by any stiffness... Do you have any data?

i think Kurfürst means that its not yet implemented

So you want to say that the rudder was not affected by any stiffness... Do you have any data?

I don't think it was a deflection limiting factor, so like the (practically non-existent) elevator "stiffness" on the Spitfire or P-51, there isn't anything to model.

Especially considering that (i) there is no source indicating such rudder stiffness, quite the contrary its either reported to be light or moderate (ii) considering the vastly larger muscle force of legs compared to human arm on the stick and the K's Flettner tabs on the rudder (iii) not being any advantage to fully deflect the rudder at high speeds anyway, which can be even dangerous.

In short imho there was no stiffness to model in the first place and even if there was, there would be little point to model it.

I don't think it was a deflection limiting factor, so like the (practically non-existent) elevator "stiffness" on the Spitfire or P-51, there isn't anything to model.

 

Especially considering that (i) there is no source indicating such rudder stiffness, quite the contrary its either reported to be light or moderate (ii) considering the vastly larger muscle force of legs compared to human arm on the stick and the K's Flettner tabs on the rudder (iii) not being any advantage to fully deflect the rudder at high speeds anyway, which can be even dangerous.

 

In short imho there was no stiffness to model in the first place and even if there was, there would be little point to model it.

Then you have not seen the report I have shown.

Also, there is not a single thing that " there would be little point to model it." It is a sim. So simulation must be complete. For any plane. If we continue to look at this like you, we can abandon making sims alltogether because it has "little point to model it".

Let me quote again:

EDIT:

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.o...-tactical.html

"11. The rudder is fairly heavy but not uncomfortably so. As there is no rudder trimming device, it is necessary to apply right rudder for take-off and left rudder at high speeds."

This means the pilot is capable of telling difference between planes he has tested. Now again, we don't know what "fairly heavy" means. We need rudder curves.

The 109 right now has increase in roll rate that it still can match P-51 at high speed due to lack of rudder stiffness alone.

If you are such an expert you should fully know that what we have feels wierd not only for a 109, but for any plane.

Also Mark Hannah's report:

The rudder is effective and of medium feel up

to 500km/h. It becomes heavier above this

http://www.eaf51.org/newweb/Documenti/Storia/Flying_%20109_ENG.pdf

Then you have not seen the report I have shown.

 

Also, there is not a single thing that " there would be little point to model it." It is a sim. So simulation must be complete. For any plane. If we continue to look at this like you, we can abandon making sims alltogether because it has "little point to model it".

Ok then model elevator stiffness for the P-51... because its also described 'heavier'. :doh: I suppose for the pilots used to the Spitfire everything bar the ailerons were heavier, because for some reason the ppl at supermarine always aimed at delicately light controls.

The 109 right now has increase in roll rate that it still can match P-51 at high speed due to lack of rudder stiffness alone.

And I presume it shouldn't, because..?

Its still unclear wheter you want mushed control reaction (force effecting the time required to reach deflection) or limited control reaction (force too high to overcome).