Jump to content

ground physics


Recommended Posts

Things are possible right now (taking off without taking care of keeping the plane aligned with flight vector) that are absolutely not possible IRL, no plane would slide like that without the tire at some point adhering and making the plane flip.

 

Yes, when you strictly follow good takeoff procedure (ie, you already master how to takeoff), you won't probably notice anything wrong.

It's when you relax on your procedure that you start seeing the plane doing wrong things. The more you relax, the more wrong you see, until you relax so much that you don't touch the rudder anymore in K4 during takeoff and still see your ride slide to the sky. In between strict and relaxed procedures are all variations of "trying to follow the procedure correctly" (typically, what a new pilot coming to K4 will do) which will nearly all end up in a successfull take-off and will probably never teach proper procedures. One cannot really know which of his takeoff is really the best if they all work, can he?

 

We're not talking about taking the K4 to absurd extremes of its enveloppe. Just not strictly following the normal takeoff.

And it's the same for landing.

 

This change was done apparently because lack of feedback in Spitfire was the cause of too many wing tipping, from what I understood.

Words have been passed to dev to re-check the values and re-assess if needed to have a better middle-ground.

I'll wait for news (and ask for news if none in patches to come), but I'd also like to ask if that was really the only possible fix for the issue. Isn't it possible to somehow add feedback (sound, vibration, etc...) so that virtual pilot feels the need to keep plane centered better, instead of allowing him to slide?

Whisper of old OFP & C6 forums, now Kalbuth.

Specs : i7 6700K / MSI 1070 / 32G RAM / SSD / Rift S / Virpil MongooseT50 / Virpil T50 CM2 Throttle / MFG Crosswind.

All but Viggen, Yak52 & F16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even want a middle ground, I want the old model back, even as an option is fine. This has me thinking back to a landing I made when I was getting my PPL. A slight mistake with the rudder at the last minute led to a bit of side load at touch down which was accompanied by a heavy jolt and screech. This sliding around behavior just isn't right. More than that the reason for it, to try to make DCS more accessible to the novice, concerns me. It seems like a step back from the very thing that got me interested in DCS in the first place, that it places the pursuit of realism above all other considerations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even want a middle ground, I want the old model back, even as an option is fine. This has me thinking back to a landing I made when I was getting my PPL. A slight mistake with the rudder at the last minute led to a bit of side load at touch down which was accompanied by a heavy jolt and screech. This sliding around behavior just isn't right. More than that the reason for it, to try to make DCS more accessible to the novice, concerns me. It seems like a step back from the very thing that got me interested in DCS in the first place, that it places the pursuit of realism above all other considerations.

 

 

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, wasn't it always "No compromise of realism for accessibility"?

 

Especially the reason that was given.

 

There are many things in an aircraft that I can't feel in a sim .. so where does it stop? Lets "soften" stall behavior, black outs, etc etc next???

 

Please give us the old ground physics back and implement the new ones along auto-rudder and take off assistance as an option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even want a middle ground, I want the old model back, even as an option is fine. This has me thinking back to a landing I made when I was getting my PPL. A slight mistake with the rudder at the last minute led to a bit of side load at touch down which was accompanied by a heavy jolt and screech. This sliding around behavior just isn't right. More than that the reason for it, to try to make DCS more accessible to the novice, concerns me. It seems like a step back from the very thing that got me interested in DCS in the first place, that it places the pursuit of realism above all other considerations.

 

Was it similar to this video Rolds? I post this video one page back.

 

Move to 2:30 if you want to skip

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO you can't compare a paper weight, low wing loading, high wing Super Cub etc. with a high comparable high weight, high wing loading, low wing WWII fighter.

 

Furthermore if e.g. a strong crosswind is really strong, every airplane tends to drift:

 

i7-7700K 4.2GHz, 16GB, GTX 1070 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I must have been smoking some stuff, because last night I tried hard to "feel" those "relaxed" ground physics you're all talking about and the 109, as well as the Spitfire ( the only two I tested ) are just about as difficult as I can remember from previous versions ?

 

 

I surely can takeoff describing an "arc" if I do not use rudder at all, provided I'm on "open field" and no obstacles. But on open fields at least in the Caucasus map, the soil easily causes bumps, and the wing tips that I was used to...

 

 

Landing without dancing on the rudder in the Spitfire, or in the 109 if I forget to lock the tailwheel is certainly still a no go.

 

 

 

 

And, please look at the way the 109 performs it's first landing on this video:

 

 

 

 

or here:

 

 

If anything has changed, it surely changed for the better IMO. I can reproduce such landings in DCS easily, and not necessarily crash, wing tip or ground loop...

 

 

So, what the heck are ya talking about guys ?

 

 

P.S.: My experiments were run with the MW tank emptied, and fuel set to 65% in the 109, and 65 % fuel in the Spitfire too.

On both aircraft no amno loaded.


Edited by jcomm

Flight Simulation is the Virtual Materialization of a Dream...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

are u really comparing airliners with a 109?

show me a video of a real 109 with this behaviour, resembling what MAD_MM did with the 109 in dcs..then we are talking.

Looks similar to the real P-51 'landing'. Did you read my 2nd reply to MAD_MMs video? Looks the 109 FM needs to be adapted for the new friction model.

i7-7700K 4.2GHz, 16GB, GTX 1070 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

short cut grass can be slippery...thats what i was talking about in the op....that they should revisit off-field landings. because imo the meadows were too sticky....but concrete certainly not. now meadows behave more or less ok-ish(still too slippery) in my opinion, but the concrete and dirt fields are slippery that they resemble a wet runway at best.

but thats not the point.

 

at least the 109 already drifts at taxi speeds all over the place if u want it to.and even if u try to avoid it, u notice a slight drift all the time even at slow speeds...thats impossible in real life.

 

besides p51 has a very wide landing gear in vertical position...a similar video exists about a yak i believe. (btw thx for the p51 video, dont remember that i have seen it before)

whereas a 109 as a very narrow but more importantly v shaped gear, which makes thing even more worse.

 

show me a video of a 109 doing that thing without tilting. i remember a couple of videos where restored 109s have only very little yaw and already lift one gear almost tilting a wing on the ground....its a different beast than a stable p51.

 

 

Did you read my 2nd reply to MAD_MMs video? Looks the 109 FM needs to be adapted for the new friction model.

 

i agree with that


Edited by birdstrike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

...imo the meadows were too sticky....but concrete certainly not. now meadows behave more or less ok-ish in my opinion, but the concrete and dirt fields are slippery that they resemble a wet runway at best.

I can tell you from own experience that even dry runways are usually 'slippery'. ;)

i7-7700K 4.2GHz, 16GB, GTX 1070 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO you can't compare a paper weight, low wing loading, high wing Super Cub etc. with a high comparable high weight, high wing loading, low wing WWII fighter.

 

Furthermore if e.g. a strong crosswind is really strong, every airplane tends to drift:

 

 

The the video was about the tire bite, nothing to do with anything else. The side loading lifted the wheel off the ground in that video.

 

This one's better

 

Right at the end, there is a little slip and he is fighting it.

 

 


Edited by David OC

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(again im talking about 109. i didnt test the other aircraft so far)

Since especially the 109 landing gear is rather unique I wouldn't use the 109 as a reference for testing the new friction model.

i7-7700K 4.2GHz, 16GB, GTX 1070 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The the video was about the tire bite, nothing to do with anything else. The side loading lifted the wheel off the ground in that video.

 

 

This one's better

 

Right at the end, there is a little slip and he is fighting it.

 

 

 

nice vid...shows not much or hardly any drifting, but the fighting against it for good reasons...u see the tendency of the wings lifting if not acting correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just took the Spitfire up and it's not bad I guess. I think it could be one or two notches to far now on the greasy side, of say 5 notches. Unless it's one of those really greasy runways.

i7-7700K OC @ 5Ghz | ASUS IX Hero MB | ASUS GTX 1080 Ti STRIX | 32GB Corsair 3000Mhz | Corsair H100i V2 Radiator | Samsung 960 EVO M.2 NVMe 500G SSD | Samsung 850 EVO 500G SSD | Corsair HX850i Platinum 850W | Oculus Rift | ASUS PG278Q 27-inch, 2560 x 1440, G-SYNC, 144Hz, 1ms | VKB Gunfighter Pro

Chuck's DCS Tutorial Library

Download PDF Tutorial guides to help get up to speed with aircraft quickly and also great for taking a good look at the aircraft available for DCS before purchasing. Link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry for posting in this thread. Won't happen again.

 

no, everybody's input is appreciated, but telling me to not use the 109 as a reference in the 109 forum confuses me. :)

 

in general, what i believe what happened now with the new groundphysics, is that they just adjusted the friction of the wheels of the different aircraft, rather than adjusting the friction of the ground itself...(at least i saw that they reduced the friction of the 109s wheels by far in the FMOptions.lua file)...

 

and i think thats exactly the problem...imo groundhandling on concrete was fine before with the 109, and resembled very closely the real life videos we have on youtube of 109s...

whereas grasslandings where off. grass was too sticky. at least if we can expect what we see in the sim...rather short grass and not cornfields with 2meter tall crops, or a wet swamp, which would be a totally different outcome. what we see are meadows. and if its sunny wheather, we should expect it to be a dry meadow with relatively solid underground.

i think rather than adjusting the friction values of the wheels of the aircraft, they should have have adjusted the friction values of the different grounds themselves...because the difference between the different ground types was/is off imo. and if they now just change the values of the wheels, they can never get both to work correctly.


Edited by birdstrike
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just took the Spitfire up and it's not bad I guess. I think it could be one or two notches to far now on the greasy side, of say 5 notches. Unless it's one of those really greasy runways.

 

Hmm you can punch the Spit now sideways on the Runway, pretty unrealistic feel for me aswell...

But on the Rollout it's unforgiven then before the Patch, and the Wing drop is pretty difficult to control on low Speeds thats confuse me little bit what was the purpose to change the Friction Model?

And the Spitfire is now so ok ish no perfect, but we have now 109 190 so far thats was before fine now complete out of order..

Changed the Wrong thing?

Once you have tasted Flight, you will forever walk the Earth with your Eyes turned Skyward.

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

9./JG27

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think rather than adjusting the friction values of the wheels of the aircraft, they should have have adjusted the friction values of the different grounds themselves...because the difference between the different ground types was/is off imo. and if they now just change the values of the wheels, they can never get both to work correctly.

Sounds plausible.

i7-7700K 4.2GHz, 16GB, GTX 1070 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't even want a middle ground, I want the old model back, even as an option is fine. This has me thinking back to a landing I made when I was getting my PPL. A slight mistake with the rudder at the last minute led to a bit of side load at touch down which was accompanied by a heavy jolt and screech. This sliding around behavior just isn't right. More than that the reason for it, to try to make DCS more accessible to the novice, concerns me. It seems like a step back from the very thing that got me interested in DCS in the first place, that it places the pursuit of realism above all other considerations.

 

couldnt say it any better. thx for this post :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...