insane roll rate - totally unrealistic

Hello guys ;)

The new roll rate is not easy to know if it's realist or not, I've tested the settings of iLOVEwindmills :music_whistling:

For the Roll and pitch commands:

Deadzone: 0

Saturation X: 82

Saturation Y: 82

Curvature: 14

With these settings it's more close of the old flight model but is it real I don't know.

I use the standard warthog stick, do you have other news or ideas ?

Thanks, Skull :pilotfly:

Well the real MiG-21 with its tiny wings had a fast roll rate if you actually push it. So. before it was way too docile .. In DCS we actually wank hard the stick wish normally if you could yank the dtick thst fast the plane would react the same way

I had a few real life MiG-21 pilots actually fly the bird in DCS with the Rift, and the only thing they complained about was low roll rate...

Guess the thing is much better now...

We flew FOB Vetka with only MiGs and Tigers last night and it was a joy to fly...

:thumbup:

I also like the new flight model.

It is smooth and very precise with my hotas.

And finally the missle performance is better than before ^^

I had a few real life MiG-21 pilots actually fly the bird in DCS with the Rift, and the only thing they complained about was low roll rate...

 

Guess the thing is much better now...

 

We flew FOB Vetka with only MiGs and Tigers last night and it was a joy to fly...

 

:thumbup:

Wow great to hear it's close.

But I am getting this yawing on roll and I watch the rudder they are centered

Honestly I am liking the new FM , earlier I thought it was messed up. Though I still feels there is no weight being calculated.

The best is the straight landing (not that I can land the mig without braking the gears) unlike before where the nose used to pitch a lot

FM: The "way" in which the plane feels when it flies. It has nothing to do with how easy the plane tracks or how nice it seems to fly etc... It's simply a measure of how well the flight envelope of the simulated plane tracks to the flight envelope of the real aircraft.

That said, I (like 99.9% of the other folks on this forum) have no experience flying a Mig-21. I have flown several other GA planes and I'd say the FM is certainly believable for a Mig-21. The only thing that would appear to be "off" might be a lack of intertia about the roll axis (particularly noticeable at high speed). Assumption is that there should be more inertial effect on the roll -- and even more so if the plane is fully loaded (though I have not tried that particular test).

I think the original post is misleading in the phraseology, begging unnecessary questions of the validity of the FM updates. But, I'd say there is some validity to the inertia/roll comments and it appears Dolphin has said there will be additional adjustments.

Overall, this is a superb module. Thanks M3LLC!!!

The only thing that would appear to be "off" might be a lack of intertia about the roll axis (particularly noticeable at high speed). Assumption is that there should be more inertial effect on the roll -- and even more so if the plane is fully loaded (though I have not tried that particular test).

 

I think the original post is misleading in the phraseology, begging unnecessary questions of the validity of the FM updates. But, I'd say there is some validity to the inertia/roll comments and it appears Dolphin has said there will be additional adjustments.

 

Overall, this is a superb module. Thanks M3LLC!!!

Thanks for pointing that out, it was indeed late at night after testing for several hours, I should have been more precise in my choice of words.

To clarify: the post is not about roll "rate" per say, but rather how the simulation of the involved physics when applying immediate and full (abrupt/hamfisted) lateral stick input to roll the airplane, namely the acceleration into the role, the deceleration (thanks Brixmis) once the stick is centered.

Like you my personal experience is with GA and commercial turboprops. I've never flown a MiG-21 and I suppose the hydraulic boosting system for the ailerons certainly help achieving max roll rate quickly, but...

I tested in all 3 versions of DCS (1.5 / OB / OA) and the results were the same as far as I could tell:

1. No acceleration into or out of the roll at all only "bang on" insane roll rate immediately as the PC joystick is hammered to any side.

2. No difference between heavy loaded with bombs and fuel tanks on wing pylons vs clean - same insane acceleration/deceleration to the max roll rate - I tested with 2x drop tanks on outer pylons and 500 kg bombs on the inner pylons vs clean, could not tell the difference. To me it feels that the mass on the pylons is not being taken into account properly.

3. At slow speed there is no deceleration out of the rolling momentum as if this bird has FBW that gives "opposite" control surface movement to stop the roll immediately when PC joystick is centered.

This may be irrelevant (with it possibly being possibly just a graphical representation of the aileron control surface movement speed in the sim) but regarding item 3 what was striking was that the airplane stopped rolling when the stick was abruptly centered, but I could see the aileron control surface was still moving back to the centered position.

Thanks to all for your responses, and thank you Dolphin and M3LLC for taking a look at this.

S!

Exactly the above post. Very good representation of the "problem". I am using SAU STAB for all my flights to get the feel of what is was supposed to be.

I like the new model tiny wings mean a lack of Roll inertia, like a lot of pilots I have T38 time capable of 720 degrees a second. It feels like instant response. The problem for us I believe is our input device. No variable force feedback and a short stick leads to problems

I like the new model tiny wings mean a lack of Roll inertia, like a lot of pilots I have T38 time capable of 720 degrees a second. It feels like instant response. The problem for us I believe is our input device. No variable force feedback and a short stick leads to problems

I don't think so:

2. No difference between heavy loaded with bombs and fuel tanks on wing pylons vs clean - same insane acceleration/deceleration to the max roll rate - I tested with 2x drop tanks on outer pylons and 500 kg bombs on the inner pylons vs clean, could not tell the difference. To me it feels that the mass on the pylons is not being taken into account properly.

 

3. At slow speed there is no deceleration out of the rolling momentum as if this bird has FBW that gives "opposite" control surface movement to stop the roll immediately when PC joystick is centered.

Jets can indeed roll at 720° rate, but not instantly like it is now. There is actually something to tune for the roll inertia. Controllers are not to be blamed.

There has to be at least little inertia even the if the wingz are small what say ? no weight

The one thing missing from this thread is evidence. Opining that there should be more roll inertia is not going to change someone's mind.

I haven't seen a single diagram, data set, or detailed physics-based argument in this thread.

The one thing missing from this thread is evidence. Opining that there should be more roll inertia is not going to change someone's mind.

 

I haven't seen a single diagram, data set, or detailed physics-based argument in this thread.

I'm inclined to agree. The other thing is that the guy who is doing the FM updates is a Mig 21 pilot in real life. I also feel that there is not enough roll inertia but this is just what I *think*. However, placing some 500kg of bombs under the wings should make it roll slower and add significant inertia, I haven't tested this yet but it is a sanity check. Software bugs happen, afterall.

Yes it's not easy to know if this new roll rate if better than old version, for the moment I use the settings from manual:

I haven't seen a single diagram, data set, or detailed physics-based argument in this thread.

This post would be helpful if such things existed for the MiG-21… :doh:

However there are some videos and the fact that payload currently does not affect the simulation (I haven't tested that myself) to support that something is wrong.

Data logging was performed by the dev-pilot though. Only he knows the truth.

I had the chance to meet a MIG-21 pilot yesterday. He told me about "inertia coupling":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia_coupling

"Inertia coupling is a potentially lethal phenomenon of high-speed flight in which the inertia of the heavier fuselage overpowers the aerodynamic stabilizing forces of the wing and empennage. The problem became apparent as single-engine jet fighter aircraft were developed with narrow wingspans, that had relatively low roll inertia relative to the pitch and yaw inertia dominated by the long slender high-density fuselage"

With empty racks the 21 was prone to this if the pilot initiated a roll with a rate higher than 90 degrees per sec, because the rolling inertia of the heavy fuselage couldn't be overcome with the light wings - as far as I understood. This was also the case with the F-104 with empty wingtip-tanks.

I had the chance to meet a MIG-21 pilot yesterday. He told me about "inertia coupling":

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inertia_coupling

 

"Inertia coupling is a potentially lethal phenomenon of high-speed flight in which the inertia of the heavier fuselage overpowers the aerodynamic stabilizing forces of the wing and empennage. The problem became apparent as single-engine jet fighter aircraft were developed with narrow wingspans, that had relatively low roll inertia relative to the pitch and yaw inertia dominated by the long slender high-density fuselage"

 

With empty racks the 21 was prone to this if the pilot initiated a roll with a rate higher than 90 degrees per sec, because the rolling inertia of the heavy fuselage couldn't be overcome with the light wings - as far as I understood. This was also the case with the F-104 with empty wingtip-tanks.

Do you mean the yaw happening with the roll ? I have that issue

Sometimes it feels like a yaw departure

Do you mean the yaw happening with the roll ? I have that issue

 

Sometimes it feels like a yaw departure

No, yaw happening with the roll is adverse Yaw, quite common and not to dangerous.

I mean something really dangerous and uncontrollable, a departure from normal flight, kind of like a spin, but a special one. This pilot had only 2 IR missiles = light wings, when, inside a cloud started a sudden roll. All hell broke loose. His plane was rolling and pitching as if he kept the stick full left forward, constant negative g-s, and the axis of the rotation was an even larger barrel, from 2km to 4km of altitude, up and down, round and round.

He stopped it by letting go of the stick and centering the ball with the pedals.

High speed roll coupling is certainly not something to be messed with.

(Forgive the foul language of the test pilot!)This is your standard roll coupled departure.

[Youtube]wZNaQuUGluk#t=35s

Upon reaching a certain roll rate, the aerodynamic stabilizing forces are overpowered by inertial destabilizing forces. This causes the nose to swing away from the roll axis, further increasing the inertial forces. This can be seen if you roll at high AoA, the nose and tail want to be perpendicular to the roll axis (flat spin), so AoA will increase.

Well, this could be a nice feature to have

FM is so much better now.

Seems like the FM has been taken to the extreme opposite in the roll axis.

 

My observations:

 

1. No acceleration into or out of the roll at all only "bang on" insane roll rate immediately as the PC joystick is hammered to any side.

 

2. No difference between heavy loaded with bombs and fuel tanks on wing pylons vs clean - same insane roll rate.

 

3. At slow speed there is no de-acceleration out of the rolling momentum as if this bird has FBW that gives "opposite" control surface movement to stop the roll immediately when PC joystick is centered.

 

I am familiar with the data of 400 something deg per second - this relevent to a clean aircraft at combat speed and after the roll is fully developed.

 

Sorry but for me the MiG-21 goes back to the hangar until this is fixed.

 

S!

Dear Folks,

I'm not a forum-ranger, but this last patch makes me break my silence. I've been using the Mig-21 bis for a couple of weeks. First on a regular monitor, then with the Oculus Rift. I was very satisfied with the FM. At the beginning I had issues with the controlling, particularly with the landing. But after setting up my joystick, reading the manual and questioning real MiG-pilots, I managed to "fly" the machine. Her behaviour was kinda real, I got used to it and landed each time with no problems.

When I first faced the new patch I couldn't believe the behaviour! I had to double-check my settings, if there is some kinda "arcade" function activated. But after reading relevant posts I had to accept that they made a MiG-looking Retaliator-style GAME out of a simulator.

My second shock was to see how many users are satisfied with the new patch. They are happy to be able to land the plane instead of damaging the gears and stuff. If this flight behaviour stays, they will surely be happy with a GAME that has MiG-21 looks but "Retaliator-style handling". This is NOT a simulator with this rolling behaviour.

Not only the rotating speed, but the sharpness is very annoying. You don't have to make the constant tiny corrections with the roll. It's like a FBW plane. Sterile and game-ish. It cuts through the air, and doesn't swim in it. No feelings at all, at least for me!

I'm very sad! This MiG-simulator really moved my heart, since we have a MiG-21 pilot in the family who flew different variants of the 21 for 35 years and I stared at the sky longing into the cockpit of these wonderful machines. I was very pleased to have it, even if only virtually. I had no opportunity to ask him about this FM, but I surely will and I'll tell you his judgement. Until then I give You mine! This is NOT a MiG-21 as it is now. If you have concerns about the rolling, watch this video about the constant corrections I'm writing about:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-cEdwgYdAw

This is the Lancer version, that is smoother and more advanced than the bis was, but I hope You know what I'm talking about.

Stability/agility will be improved for the next updated. We had no time to allocate to tune it better concerning the more important patch preparation we had to do.

Hi!

Sorry for the inconvenient question, but are You stating that You issued a patch "having no time to allocate to tune it better"?

Is this rolling behaviour among the prepared improvements for the next update or it's meant to satisfy those who had troubles to LEARN landing and handling of the previous FM?

If the new policy of Leatherneck is to satisfy more users with a simplified handling, do You plan to offer a different, more realistic FM for those who would like to have a more realistic FM?

At the end of the manual for the MiG-21 LN issued a long list of experts, engineers and real pilots involved in the development. When LN implements such a radical change in the FM are they involved and asked again? This actual handling is not a slight change, but it's a completely different plane we have for the time being.

Thanks for Your answers in advance!

Is this rolling behaviour among the prepared improvements for the next update or is meant to satisfy those who had troubles to LEARN landing and handling of the previous FM?

 

If the new policy of Leatherneck is to satisfy more users with a simplified handling, do You plan to offer a different, more realistic FM for those who would like to have a SIMULATOR-like FM

I think you are over-thinking this, this can't be any 3rd party or ED policy, the common policy is to tune the FM as close as possible to the real deal. Nothing less is accepted by the community or ED themselves.

No one is trying to satisfy a part of the community by making the plane more arcade.

Dolphin is an active Mig-21 pilot so if he say the the FM is right I think we can trust him.

Right now he said the tuning was not finished, they gave us what they had time to do so wait the next patch ;-)