New Fulcrum PFM is very susceptible to PIO and excessive bounce.

The MiG-29 does not have an FBW system like modern fighters. It's a hybrid. And its unstable.

Without FBW it can't be unstable, not even relaxed stability. It's a 'classic' stable design. She's simply very responsive. :)

The upward force of the bounce is far more excessive than the force imparted by a slightly heavy landing. If the thing is landing that heavily then something will give - it won't bounce 50 feet into the air & do a half forward roll imho. In my case, the problem is not the stick or the curves - it's the setup of the aircraft. I'm not fussed enough to waste time on it any more - there are plenty of modules that work as intended.

The upward force of the bounce is far more excessive than the force imparted by a slightly heavy landing. If the thing is landing that heavily then something will give - it won't bounce 50 feet into the air & do a half forward roll imho. In my case, the problem is not the stick or the curves - it's the setup of the aircraft. I'm not fussed enough to waste time on it any more - there are plenty of modules that work as intended.

The front wheel bounce is ridiculously strong. They never fixed that and not many are willing to acknowledge this. It's also hard to get SME opinion on this because no sane pilot would ever done that IRL. So you're more likely to get responses teaching you how to land properly than admitting the bug.

It's a study sim and it should simulate also the stupidest things the virtual pilot does to the aircraft. This I can back up. But if you're saying this just to whine and still refuse to learn how to land the Fulcrum properly I will not back you up, sorry.

I had lots of troubles with that bouncing issue too, I find this also extremly annoying, I highly doubt that this is realistic behaviour, as no other module is that extreme.

The effect of a heavy landing has to be a broken gear, or bursted tires but not doing the cobra manouver like the Mig29 in this case always does.

Here's a very short pattern, didn't have any time for practise. Just to show that she's not too difficult to land smoothly.

29_pattern.trk

The little bit of landing practice I did with it was after several folks had already refined the process. I emulated them, landing as gently as possible and had no significant issues with anything. I think very often people are simply forcing a landing that should have been aborted, or thinking 'max descent rate' is somehow the goal rather than 'nearly 0ms' on touchdown.

I have seen some videos online of real Fulcrums and the nose DOES seem a bit bouncy on them when pilots brake on taxi or land a bit rougher, but these are rare and not very severe as... you know... they're trained professionals so presumably they don't make 'noob mistakes' like that often.

I have seen some DCS vids of the MiG bouncing back into the sky when it probably should have collapsed the gear or something, in which case it needs tweaking. Regardless, neither is 'game breaking' and people doth cry in their beer a bit much. Note : not game breaking means its low priority and they're likely to focus on something more relevant for the time being. And something that's only an issue when you've scrubbed a landing is an excellent example of 'not priority'

Without FBW it can't be unstable, not even relaxed stability. It's a 'classic' stable design. She's simply very responsive. :)

Yes she is a stable design if you put the CG where we would if flying an RC model. But Mikoyan incorporated a pitch dampening system to counter the unstable pitch axis. The twin tails help her stay more stable in yaw. She didn't get FBW until the M model.

And by the way, I am still learning how to land this bird. I sometimes land harder than expected. It's a challenge. But when you get it right, it's nice.

I don't understand why people are having problems with the nosegear on landing since you are not supposed to land in a 3 point attitude or on the nosegear.

But even if you touch down on the mains, lowering the nosegear too fast can result in a serious high bounce. Just take a look at this RW MiG-15 bounced landing.

This one could have easily ended in a disaster.

Looks like he's was a bit fast, doesn't it?

Looks like he's was a bit fast, doesn't it?

Both fast and high...fairly hard drop to the ground.

Judging by the pitch attitude and vertical speed just before the flare, the rather large flare movement and the tail clearance on touchdown, I'd say that he was rather too slow than too fast.

Judging by the pitch attitude and vertical speed just before the flare, the rather large flare movement and the tail clearance on touchdown, I'd say that he was rather too slow than too fast.

:) Guess we’ll have to agree to disagree. Don’t think the flare slowed him down enough.

Don’t think the flare slowed him down enough.

You flare to break/reduce the ROD. Speed reduction, if at all, is just a secondary effect.

Actually IRL in most planes you have to take care that the speed doesn't decrease too much during the flare. E.g. a 5kts speed reduction is considered average with many jets.

The way I see it is that he flared slightly too late, hit hard, bounced once, and the high residual speed made him leave the ground again.

He came too fast.

He came too fast.

Again, have checked the pitch attitude and the tail clearance at touchdown? Another 5-10kts less and he would have had a tail strike.

I really don't why this landing makes the impression that he was too fast.

Again, have checked the pitch attitude and the tail clearance at touchdown? Another 5-10kts less and he would have had a tail strike.

I really don't why this landing makes the impression that he was too fast.

Upon touchdown, the nose wheel doesn't seem high, which makes me think a tail strike was not even close to happen. I still feel it was a late flare, and the fact that the plane didn't stay on the ground after coming down from its bounce makes me think there was too much residual speed. Hence, "he came in too fast". I have almost zero hour in the mig-15 module and have not watched any other videos of mig-15s landing IRL, but the above explains my view. :)

I have almost zero hour in the mig-15 module and have not watched any other videos of mig-15s landing IRL, but the above explains my view. :)

I wouldn't even remotely think to compare the DCS MiG-15 to the real one!

Regardless how smooth the landing is, the RW MiG-15 landing gear seems to induce bounces:

Why are you looking at the nosewheel? The low tail position is the limiting/critical factor.

You flare to break/reduce the ROD. Speed reduction, if at all, is just a secondary effect...

Of course you flare to reduce speed or, rather, velocity--speed and the direction it's heading. Even if we disagree as to why he bounced, I think we agree that his vertical velocity (your ROD) was still too fast right on down to the point of touchdown.

...

Why are you looking at the nosewheel? The low tail position is the limiting/critical factor.

He's looking at the nosewheel because it's attached to the same airplane as the tail. And I agree with him that it doesn't seem much, if any, higher off the runway than majority of Mig-15 landings I've seen on YT. The tail is, indeed, the limiting factor and it is parallel to the runway because his pitch during the flare is roughly 7° which is about right. The only reason the tail gets anywhere near the runway in that sequence is because of the severe compression of main gear due to the hard landing. I'd say it was a pretty good save from a landing that was a bit high and fast.

Of course you flare to reduce speed I think we agree that his vertical velocity (your ROD) was still too fast right on down to the point of touchdown.

 

The tail is, indeed, the limiting factor and it is parallel to the runway because his pitch during the flare is roughly 7° which is about right. The only reason the tail gets anywhere near the runway in that sequence is because of the severe compression of main gear due to the hard landing.

It seems that the misunderstanding partially comes from your misleading/non standard choice of the words speed and fast.

When you say fast, this means only IAS/TAS/GS in aviation. If you are talking about V/S, ROD or sink rate, it's either low or high.

We agree that the sink rate was higher than usual on short final, but the pitch attitude was normal.

The result of this combination is a higher AoA = lower IAS.....that's what I wrote right in the beginning.

Concerning the tail strike; Again, if he would have been another 5-10kts slower!

I mentioned the nosewheel because it has nothing to do with a bounce or 'correct' touchdown speed as long you don't land on the nosewheel or you do a three point landing.

In fact, the faster you are at touchdown, the lower usually the sink rate and the probability for a bounce is even lower.

I love watching you engineering types fight. Makes me want to throw a sliderule or compass down and see which one survives ;)

I love watching you engineering types...

That's (almost) an insult. LOL. I'm a pilot and not an engineer and I'm basing my comments almost exclusively on my +17000hrs flying experience.

That's (almost) an insult. LOL. I'm a pilot and not an engineer and I'm basing my comments almost exclusively on my +17000hrs flying experience.

17,000 hours in the cockpit is a lot of experience. That's impressive! What types have you flown if you don't mind my asking?

That sounds more than it actually is ;). Almost one third was flying long range on the 767.

Apart from this, basically everything, from small open cockpit gliders via 1-4 engined turboprops to various jets.

...my +17000hrs flying experience.

Impressive! :) Though it pales in comparison to my nearly +600,000 hours as a layman. OTOH I suppose your experience is more topic appropriate than mine. :)

this ridiculous PFM need an official video guide by the developers and also an official setup by default for your joystick curve profile. When people do not show good feedbacks about something then the final product was wrong made.

First OF ALL let’s make very clear, that build a physic flight model (PFM) as disappointed and not well accepted by general public like this have a very direct impact in the real life tactical purpose of this fighter. This fighter was made to be deploy all around the front line with the capability of take off and landing in roads. If the developers build a physics flight model that are not allowing THE GENERAL PUBLIC to perform a well made landing even in airfields what we gonna expect for the real life tactics AGAIN by the general players. The not well accepted landing features have been killed the real tactics of this fighter...

Meanwhile they keep busy to video show how to smile well in F-18. This is nasty. Su-27, Mig-21, L-39, Mig-19, Mig-15 are landing user friendly while the most dangerous front line fighter of the planet get a new physics in game that kill the well made for the user player...?