Spin characteristic prop planes in DCS or rather spin proof.

I think that something is not right with all prop planes spin charactersitic in DCS.

I got P-51, D-9 and now K-4. I made some test of stall and spin all of these planes and i found that all of them behave very similar in stall/spin area or i have to say all of them are rather spin proof.

Mostly after stall occurs and you keep stick back planes made 1/4 of flick roll then suddenly stop roatation and recovery byself even with stick still full back. With stick full back planes making repeatable mechanical 1/4 flick roll then sudden stop. All behaves in similar manner. I think all of these planes lack of some spin interia here. It looks really unnatural.

Even idiot plane like C152 is not such spin proof IRL. C152 could make nice spin only in climbing turn at slow speed with pilot error ( last year was exacly such accident in my country - pilot didn't have time to recover plane was made one full spin before crash).

Similar situation is also with flick rolls with prop rotations. Planes reacts strangly - suddenly stop in the air like it was a invisible wall there. The same with spin into direction of prop rotation.

I tried for comparsion F-86 Sabre and i think it is much better simulated. In hard turns after stall with stick back planes get into spin and got much more interia then DCS prop planes. F-86 Sabre got another problem - always flick into opposite way then rudder kick - but i suppose it is something with very weak rudder effectivness in Sabre or with different charactersic)

As i real life aerobatic pilot ( Zlin 526) i think that prop planes in DCS still need some rework reagarding stall/spin characterstic. Yes in DCS there is nice stall buffeting but there is lack of spin interia.

These is really annoying thing in DCS flight phycis engine for me and truly speaking it is dissapointment as prop planes behave in the DCS air.

Could it be that DCS engine is more likely for jet planes?

A bunch of mates and me performed some test about that, one of them also aerobatic pilot (actual Spain's subchampion intermediate level in Z50) and a couple more RL pilots including me. We don't know exactly how to behave. Aerobatic mate who is better trained on subject knows perfectly procedures and he isn't able to get a full developed spin, not to mention making it a flat spin. Anyway it isn't impossible, you can change some conditions, fuel load to change CG, and so, and sometimes you can get a spin but it's really difficult.

I would really like to know real model out of envelope characteristics and if some FM change is expected about that. I think sooner FM's (with P-51 at least) were better at this.

S!

I think ED team is lack of some experience RL aerobatic pilots who could advice something here expecially in stall/spin characteristic.

Truly speaking i think modern pilots can't probably have posibility to check WW2 warbirds in such condtions like spins, flick rolls which surly are prohibited in such planes.

The Dora and P-51 both spin normally. The Bf-109 should be rather difficult to get to spin as it has LE slats.

Well modern or jet pilots shouldn't have a problem. Here is my aerobatic mate performing a stall - spin - flat spin - spin again - recovery following C101 handbook (sorry in Spanish), so a modern jet pilot should be able also. Something like this shown is impossible right now in prop modules,

S!

Are we sure comparing a really light aerobatic plane to a fairly heavy (over twice as heavy?) fighter is a good comparison?

 

 

Exacly more heavy planes should got more interia.

Try for comparsion F-86 in DCS in hard turns with full stick back and see how planes react.

Try the same with all prop planes in DCS. They react very "mechanical" and not natural at all. Only repeatable mechanical quarter of flick roll then suddenly stop.

Even worse situation is when you try to make flick roll with prop rotation way.

The C101 is using an SFM right now, its not comparable in any way...

I know, I know, but it's just an example on how it can be and procedures for it. Heavy WWII fighter indeed should be bad behaved in spins and stalls when in there, even in some conditions a flat spin may be impossible to recover. Anyway I look for some reading and actual pilots say, P-51 at least, is possible to spin and recover nicely. Right now it's something weird and sometimes you cannot get it.

S!

Well modern or jet pilots shouldn't have a problem. Here is my aerobatic mate performing a stall - spin - flat spin - spin again - recovery following C101 handbook (sorry in Spanish), so a modern jet pilot should be able also. Something like this shown is impossible right now in prop modules,

 

 

 

S!

Yes it looks that jet planes behave more natural in DCS air then prop planes even with simpler flight model.

The Dora and P-51 both spin normally. The Bf-109 should be rather difficult to get to spin as it has LE slats.

Can't agree here. As a real life pilot and if you got some aerobatic experience you should notice that DCS planes behave strange and not natural regarding spin characteristic ( im not talking only about clasical cross controls spin).

109 should be more difficult to spin but not spin proof - slats on ailerons area casue more controlability at high angle of attack and rise critical AoA but still after pass it plane should spin normaly like any other one.

BTW even very forgive and stable plane as it is Cessna 152 could suprise pilot with unintentional spin behaviour. Nothing even comparable with WW2 warbirds.

Can't agree here.

As a real life pilot....I know what a spin is Kwaitek. :music_whistling:

I just checked it again. Spiral slipstream is a tad overdone. The Dora spins fine power Off to the left and right.

Power on it spins to the right but left will not spin because the slipstream keeps it from entering.

This same subject came up 3 weeks ago and the aircraft did not act like this. Power on to the left was difficult but not like it is now.

It's in beta stage in some areas still, so in spin too.

 

Be patient please. :)

I hope so Yo-Yo really hope so casue all prop planes in DCS behave to mechanical and unnatural regarding spins characterstic and mostly are too spin proof.

Crump could be right that slipstream is overdone and these block spin interia and spin tendency of these planes.

Im mean all prop planes in DCS not only K-4.

It looks that jet planes dont have these problems in DCS so maby they behave more natural ( i still wonder about rudder effectviness in F-86 and opposite direction spin charactersic - but it defnitly feel more spin interia then prop planes)

It's in beta stage in some areas still, so in spin too.

 

Be patient please. :)

No problem. Thanks for the quick reply!!!

It's in beta stage in some areas still, so in spin too.

 

Be patient please. :)

S!

Well, I once got into a veritable spin in the P-51D while following another plane at relatively low altitude. Went quite a few turns until I could recover just above the ground.

That was on the Virtual Aerobatics server where all weapons are disallowed, though. No gun/cannon ammo would shift the CG rearward and be more conduvice to spinning.

Do you know what is the distinctive feature of P-51 accelerated stall mentioned in reports?

Yes i know read all manuals :)

I should note that DCS P-51 feels much more realistic and natural then Fw 190 D-9 and K-4. I think about spin proof mostly here about D-9 and K-4.

I checked it again and P-51 has much better spin interia. Get into spin with stick full back at stall in turns, and flick rolls are possible to do.

Of course Fw 190 D-9 and K-4 are way off here.

I hope as you said that there were still in beta and it would be adjusted in close future.

As i real life aerobatic pilot ( Zlin 526) i think that prop planes in DCS still need some rework reagarding stall/spin characterstic. Yes in DCS there is nice stall buffeting but there is lack of spin interia.

 

Have you sampled other flight sims?

Having personally flown and spun a Cap 10, I find DCS is the closest it gets compared to other sims like FSX, IL-2 1946/CLOD. Maybe nothing can be 100% perfect, but I find DCS is the closest than anyone else.

I have managed many flat spins. You need to input opposite aileron to the rudder you're holding to enter the spin.

Do you know what is the distinctive feature of P-51 accelerated stall mentioned in reports?

AFAIK a wing dropped and, if the pilot kept pulling back on the stick, the P-51 fell into a spiral dive. According to the P-51D Pilot Training Manual, as soon as the pilot released the controls, the nose dropped and the Mustang recovered from the stall almost instantly (see attachment).

AFAIK a wing dropped and, if the pilot kept pulling back on the stick, the P-51 fell into a spiral dive. According to the P-51D Pilot Training Manual, as soon as the pilot released the controls, the nose dropped and the Mustang recovered from the stall almost instantly (see attachment).

Yep but power on stall are much more violent these is different story then power off.

The same power on spins are not recomended and are far more dangerous then power off.

When you read these P-51 instructions you will see that power on spins are not welcome to recover until your power will be not cut.

Instuction says that with power on spin ( from 2 to 5 ) after cut throttle it is need about up to 6 spins turns before recovery and you could lose even 9000 ft.

Yep but power on stall are much more violent these is different story then power off.

 

The same power on spins are not recomended and are far more dangerous then power off.

 

When you read these P-51 instructions you will see that power on spins are not welcome to recover until your power will be not cut.

 

Instuction says that with power on spin ( from 2 to 5 ) after cut throttle it is need about up to 6 spins turns before recovery and you could lose even 9000 ft.

Definitely nasty. And snap rolls were also prohibited, because even attempting a snap roll would lead straight into a power-on spin.

Come to think of it, there weren't many WW 2 fighters in which high-speed snap rolls could be performed safely; P-40s could execute snap rolls at <140 mph; perhaps some of the Japanese or Italian fighters?

Have you sampled other flight sims?

 

Having personally flown and spun a Cap 10, I find DCS is the closest it gets compared to other sims like FSX, IL-2 1946/CLOD. Maybe nothing can be 100% perfect, but I find DCS is the closest than anyone else.

 

I have managed many flat spins. You need to input opposite aileron to the rudder you're holding to enter the spin.

A2A's P51d for FSX does a remarkable job at replicating stall and spin characteristics of the p51d (as comproved by a few RL p51d pilots, including Dudley Henriques who told me it was probably the closest he ever found in a sim...), and as accusim progresses, solving outside of the sim core not only engine modeling but also a good deal of the flight dynamics, it is getting better :-)

Aircraft in il2-BoS also spin very convincingly, and I actually put this sim in the 1st place regarding the complex region of post-stall behavior of some ww2 fighters modeled there - none of which is included in DCS though...

Regarding DCS, I am waiting EDGE to try it again, but last time I used the P51d at the ACG Server, it did spin plausibly ?

The stutters and lag on MP sessions really spoil the otherwise enjoyable feel that DCS ww2 models bring to their users :-(, and as I give my first steps in Simulated Combat Flight, it's a pain first to identify other aircraft, and then to manage the stutters whose origin is somehow erratic, but apparently related to the rendering of tracers ?...

Well, some of you mention something changed with the latest betas... One change was obvious, but in the positive side, and affected all prop aircraft - that weird deflected propwash effect that was causing prop aircraft to head downwind and roll the downwind wing under x-wind conditions... ), and I also have found along the various patches during the last year that the p51d became more and more docile during landing and takeoff, not wanting to slide sideways like it did before, etc....

All prop aircraft still appeared ( last time I used DCS ) to overdo the P-Factor effect. This is particularly notorious in the K4, where from level or climbing situation, if you hit the right rudder to center the ball, the aircraft pitches noticeably up! In the old times I even remember observing the nose of a p51d that was falling from high altitude, after engine seizure, at near vertical dive, with it' prop frozen, wobble around, in a clockwise motion ( if I'm not wrong it was CW ), and this all had apparently to do with the same p-factor that makes the P51d, and the other props very "unstable" and wobble-intensive right after takeoff, while we do not gain enough speed...

Lot's of things to fine-tune, preferably with the advice from RL pilots like here :-)

Im not sure if any FSX or A2A plane could be even comparable regarding flligh physics to DCS or BOS. Avionics and system of planes are at high level but flight model was arcade in FSX engine. Even A2A planes can't change it too much.

These is how i remember when i tried some time ago A2A P-51 and some other planes.

Definitely nasty. And snap rolls were also prohibited, because even attempting a snap roll would lead straight into a power-on spin.

 

Come to think of it, there weren't many WW 2 fighters in which high-speed snap rolls could be performed safely; P-40s could execute snap rolls at <140 mph; perhaps some of the Japanese or Italian fighters?

Power off stall are tested by pilots for normal operations purposes like landing ( slow speed approach),

What is more important to fighter expecially WW2 is stall and spin behaviour with power on stall and spin. In combat situation at high angle of attack stall and spin could happend ( or even were do intentionaly). True that most fighters forbiden in manuals to do intentional spins and snap rolls but it only show that such things were dangerous expecially at low level not only for construction of a plane but also casue much harder to recovery.

I think what is lack in DCS prop planes is exacly power on spins interia. P-51 is more natural here ( but still quite easly to recovery even with power on spins). D-9 and K-4 is fall behind. Yo-Yo said that there is still beta so i hope we will some improvements here. I hope also he don't forget to check D-9.

Im not sure if any FSX or A2A plane could be even comparable regarding flligh physics to DCS or BOS. Avionics and system of planes are at high level but flight model was arcade in FSX engine. Even A2A planes can't change it too much.

These is how i remember when i tried some time ago A2A P-51 and some other planes.

Depends... Accusim is improving :-) and less dependent on FSX's core, which, by itself, isn't really anything that bad, provided one knows how to use / tweak it ... But I agree DCS and BoS flight dynamics are superior in some aspects... Systems modeling, even engine modeling, that's a different story, IMHO... you can still easily chop the power in your p51d, even on a cold engine, with no consequences, and you can run the engine on ground or in the air at low power settings, for prolonged periods of time without risking any spark plugs fowling... the kind of detail, among other things, you get on those FSX models...

Again I would like to emphasize that I find P-Factor overdone in DCS prop aircraft... Do I have precise data ? Of course not, but I have plausible observation of it's effects, and IMO, P-Factor shouldn't play such an important role under some circumstances like some of those I mentioned above in my previous post in this thread... ( * )

( * ) it's really asymmetric loading of the prop disk effects I'm talking about, just before anyone thinks I'm using this term without even knowing what I am talking about :-)