What's the wobbling thing ?

[Dakpilot]

Okay i'm going to bite

 

What is the "Clown Car" ground handling?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Agree on some of the mentioned points about oscilation and "feel of weight" in here although I might add I find the big aircrafts in BoS (He-111, Ju-87, IL-2) handle more "naturally" than the fighters (especially the Bf-109s and Fw-190).

 

What I personally find the most glaring issue (still) is the correlation of rudder input and roll reaction. This effect is presented ingame in a way the aircraft will immedently start rolling quickly into the direction you pushed the rudder into without any significant delay or inertia countering it. This makes sideslipping for example extremely hard if barely possible, because the rudder induced roll momentum is actually stronger than the aileroun induced roll momentum.

 

I tested this effect in real (glider) aircraft at "cruise speed" with similar ammounts of rudder input. Theres no horizontal wobbling at all when moving the nose with rudder and the inertia is high enough to prevent the roll momentum to turn the plane for a good sec after initiation. Even than it's only a fraction of what the aileroun is able to compensate for, even at low airspeeds.

 

There's really no point behind the way it's simulated ingame. Suprisingly enought, although still present, this absurd effect is less noticeably in RoF.

Edited November 29, 2015 by Stab/JG26_5tuka

[Guest deleted@50488]

Okay i'm going to bite

 

What is the "Clown Car" ground handling?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

This one:

 

[Dakpilot]

LoL , good one

 

I really do feel many people have too much control input on the yaw axis most of the time, a good bit of sensitivy + setting will settle things down a lot, ones own rudders/twist stick are not set 'proportionally' for every aircraft type and it is far to sensitive as standard, but what is standard for so many different input devices?

 

putting a decent 40-70 sensitivity on rudder axis (same for pitch ) is  probably much more realistic, I think people generally use too much rudder input when 'combat' flying in BoS as well, yet not enough gentle input to maintain co-ordinated flight more of the time, some will then miss that "Pitts Special" response in MP but I prefer a feel that is more 'historical'

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Sokol1]

I think what BlitzPig is meaning is that the planes in BoS feel a bit more like WWI biplanes than WWII planes. The difference (for me) is in how the plane controls 'feel'. There is much less sense of 'momentum' in the controls of BoS than in many other WWII flight sims. It's not the easiest thing to explain, but it's more of an impression you get. I noticed it immediately the first time I flew in BoS: hmmm this plane feels very 'light', more like I would expect a biplane to feel. Of course I've never flown any planes in real life so I couldn't say what was most accurate.

 

I "feel" a funny thing: after play a ~hour in BoS, if I fly in some others WWII CFS, I feel that the joystick (controller) in these need a "ton" of force to be moved, and this with a non Force Feedback joystick.     

 

I don't care about "realist feel of flight" (with a no FF stick/chair?) that people talk about, but in the end this "wobbling" make very difficult put the gunsight piper in the bandit (the CFS main objective). 

Edited November 29, 2015 by Sokol1

[BlitzPig_EL]

Okay i'm going to bite

 

What is the "Clown Car" ground handling?

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

 

Well Dak, we have been over this before in a lot of threads about the crazy ground looping that happens in this sim.

 

I know you think all is well here, so please understand I am not trolling you, or anyone else.

 

You can grease the landings in the sim and at the end of the roll out the silly game engine decides to send you for a loop, I dunno, just for a lark?  I have yet to understand why the devs think this is how it works.

 

You are rolling out, not being overly heavy on the brakes or rudder, then WOOHOO!!!! OFF WE GO INTO THE SPIN CYCLE!!!  Why?  In a real aircraft, or a car for that matter, you get physical cues that the vehicle is departing from the straight path you have chosen and you can make subtle corrections to keep everything happy, without even really thinking about it.  However in a sim, there is no feeling of G-loading, so you have NO IDEA something is going south until well after you are past the point of no return.  Visual references just come too late to save you, hence, this is something that should be smoothed out to actually make the sim more real.

 

It's another of those things that I feel are done just to make the game more difficult, because high difficulty is perceived as high realism, whether that is true or not.

[Dakpilot]

In a taildragger you cannot react you need to anticipate, IRL if you are reacting it is too late

 

post # 12

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/19562-la-5-take-landing/?p=309245​

 

Watch his feet on the landing roll

 

 

Cheers Dakpilot​

​

Edited November 29, 2015 by Dakpilot

[Tomsk]

What I personally find the most glaring issue (still) is the correlation of rudder input and roll reaction. This effect is presented ingame in a way the aircraft will immedently start rolling quickly into the direction you pushed the rudder into without any significant delay or inertia countering it. This makes sideslipping for example extremely hard if barely possible, because the rudder induced roll momentum is actually stronger than the aileroun induced roll momentum.

Yes! This also, lots and lots of roll from the rudder, and as you say with no delay at all and generally more roll than yaw. Really noticed that as well!

Edited November 29, 2015 by Tomsk

[Tomsk]

Another example of something I noticed is using trim to control speed in landing. Personally I very much like to control speed with trim when landing. This works much better in BoS than in most simulations though. Normally I'd expect to have to set the trim and then 'lead' with the elevator a bit to reduce the oscillations. If you don't do that in most sims it will oscillate about for ages before settling on a speed. Even then it needs attention. Not in BoS, set the trim and forget about it. You'll get a tiny oscillation and then it'll stay totally nailed to that speed with no input. As I say it's as if the plane has very little momentum, it responds to control inputs so quickly and directly.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Interesting.

 

I just fired up the sim and did some offline T/Os and landings, flying the Yak, La5, and Bf109 F4.

 

Had no ground loops using the new (to me) summer map.

 

Very interesting.

[Dakpilot]

 Try these settings in Key Mapping/controls BlitzPig_EL

 

Set input responses to 70% pitch and yaw, 50% roll and 8% centre dead zones

 

and under  Control devices set noise filter to 0.5

 

See if your 'wobbling' is greatly reduced as an experiment, you have nothing to lose    ​

 

Cheers Dakpilot

​ 

[BlitzPig_EL]

Thanks, I'll give it a try, I know I have some noise filtering on now, but can't remember the exact amount.

[BraveSirRobin]

The only aircraft that ground loop for me are the La-5 and LaGG-3.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Thanks Dakpilot.

 

Those settings were actually quite helpful.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Question for Dakpilot...

 

When you say - 70% on picth - do you mean that we move the slider right until we see 30%, or all the way up to 70 % ( same for roll and yaw of course... ) ?

Edited December 1, 2015 by JCOMM

[KoN_]

Well Dak, we have been over this before in a lot of threads about the crazy ground looping that happens in this sim.

 

I know you think all is well here, so please understand I am not trolling you, or anyone else.

 

You can grease the landings in the sim and at the end of the roll out the silly game engine decides to send you for a loop, I dunno, just for a lark?  I have yet to understand why the devs think this is how it works.

 

You are rolling out, not being overly heavy on the brakes or rudder, then WOOHOO!!!! OFF WE GO INTO THE SPIN CYCLE!!!  Why?  In a real aircraft, or a car for that matter, you get physical cues that the vehicle is departing from the straight path you have chosen and you can make subtle corrections to keep everything happy, without even really thinking about it.  However in a sim, there is no feeling of G-loading, so you have NO IDEA something is going south until well after you are past the point of no return.  Visual references just come too late to save you, hence, this is something that should be smoothed out to actually make the sim more real.

 

It's another of those things that I feel are done just to make the game more difficult, because high difficulty is perceived as high realism, whether that is true or not.

Ground looping and the bunny hoping on taxi runways . We really need to tone this down a bit  and with the current stutter problems its a circus out there on the runways ...lol ...

 

Question for Dakpilot...

 

When you say - 70% on picth - do you mean that we move the slider right until we see 30%, or all the way up to 70 % ( same for roll and yaw of course... ) ?

i think it means all the way up to the right to 70% whitch adds a curve .

[Dakpilot]

Yes that is what i am saying, set it to 70% as you see in the visual on the setting page as above

 

I do not say that 70/70/50 (P/Y/R) and 50% noise filtering is perfect, simply that it is a good starting point and demonstrates that the oversensitivity (wobbling) can be tuned out

 

Once your aircraft is stable a bit of fine tuning will get the sweet spot you are comfortable with

 

Many people say 'curves' are wrong and refuse to even consider using them, however rudder input on an FW190 was not linear, in the design a bell crank was used to give less movement at smaller inputs and vice versa, so using a 'curve' setting is the only way to set it up historically/authentic

 

It is also said that you lose 'fidelity' at the outer sections of joystick movement, but in reality when you are in the 'final 30/40%' of joystick movement it is usually only in a case of moving towards full deflection, the accuracy you need is usually always in the first 50% of movement and small inputs.

 

Ideally we would all be using 60cm FFB joysticks mounted on the floor, and there would be no complaints,  but that is unrealistic ?, so toning down the speed of input to a more historical proportion on our desk joystick is the only option.
to have a basic setting that corresponds to the myriad of available input devices is also not a realistic expectation

 

I do hope that the ground handling is not 'dumbed down' to match expectations from other sources, keep to the prepared taxi ways and reasonable historic speeds and most is fine, obviously there is always room for improvement, nothing can be perfect

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[SharpeXB]

This has been posed before a few times, but for anyone who wants to know about the issue of using curves, here's the best explanation in an old post from the 777 team. Some of this is particular to RoF but the basics are universal to flight sims.

 

http://riseofflight.com/forum/topic/2564-about-wrong-elevator-position-and-pitch-sensitive/?p=22055

[Guest deleted@50488]

Ok,

 

I will try those settings !

[=LD=Penshoon]

 

Yes that is what i am saying, set it to 70% as you see in the visual on the setting page as above

 

I do not say that 70/70/50 (P/Y/R) and 50% noise filtering is perfect, simply that it is a good starting point and demonstrates that the oversensitivity (wobbling) can be tuned out

 

Once your aircraft is stable a bit of fine tuning will get the sweet spot you are comfortable with

 

Many people say 'curves' are wrong and refuse to even consider using them, however rudder input on an FW190 was not linear, in the design a bell crank was used to give less movement at smaller inputs and vice versa, so using a 'curve' setting is the only way to set it up historically/authentic

 

It is also said that you lose 'fidelity' at the outer sections of joystick movement, but in reality when you are in the 'final 30/40%' of joystick movement it is usually only in a case of moving towards full deflection, the accuracy you need is usually always in the first 50% of movement and small inputs.

 

Ideally we would all be using 60cm FFB joysticks mounted on the floor, and there would be no complaints,  but that is unrealistic ?, so toning down the speed of input to a more historical proportion on our desk joystick is the only option.

to have a basic setting that corresponds to the myriad of available input devices is also not a realistic expectation

 

I do hope that the ground handling is not 'dumbed down' to match expectations from other sources, keep to the prepared taxi ways and reasonable historic speeds and most is fine, obviously there is always room for improvement, nothing can be perfect

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

I would not use any sensitivity curve on axis that has trim tabs. As you add trim to the control surface you move it's neutral position away from the middle that has the increased precision from the curve. 

[andyw248]

This has been posed before a few times, but for anyone who wants to know about the issue of using curves, here's the best explanation in an old post from the 777 team. Some of this is particular to RoF but the basics are universal to flight sims.

 

http://riseofflight.com/forum/topic/2564-about-wrong-elevator-position-and-pitch-sensitive/?p=22055

 

Thanks for re-posting this link, very interesting read!

[SharpeXB]

I would not use any sensitivity curve on axis that has trim tabs. As you add trim to the control surface you move it's neutral position away from the middle that has the increased precision from the curve.

 

Actually no. If you have RoF where most of the aircraft don't have trim controls, what you get is the opposite effect. The planes need to be trimmed in order for the curve to work. If you are holding the stick forward to fly level, as in RoF, you're pushing the axis outside the center range where the flat part of the curve is. Since you can trim the planes in BoS this isn't a problem. But in RoF an S curve for the pitch axis needs to look like this. The center of the S is adjusted downward to "trim" the plane. Part of the above 777 explaination deals with this effect, the aerodynamic center and spring center are not the same. It was written before RoF had these custom adjustments and why they were added.

Edited December 1, 2015 by SharpeXB

[=LD=Penshoon]

Actually no. If you have RoF where most of the aircraft don't have trim controls, what you get is the opposite effect. The planes need to be trimmed in order for the curve to work. If you are holding the stick forward to fly level, as in RoF, you're pushing the axis outside the center range where the flat part of the curve is. Since you can trim the planes in BoS this isn't a problem. But in RoF an S curve for the pitch axis needs to look like this. The center of the S is adjusted downward to "trim" the plane. Part of the above 777 explaination deals with this effect, the aerodynamic center and spring center are not the same. It was written before RoF had these custom adjustments and why they were added.

Well I just tried it out to be sure, in the yak with 50% nose down trim the pitch range looks like this with 100% curve: 

As you can see the stick gets displaced away from the center where the added sensitivity is, not by as much as I though but I still would not like to have different sensitivity for different directions of the axis? 

[Guest deleted@50488]

Hmmm, very interesting....

 

So, let's see if I understand it correctly:

 

1) In IL-2 BoS, if you bring up the joystick sensitivity menu you can see the effects of having applied trim to the axis ? Does it mean that menu is dynamic and adapts to the trim settings being used ???? Whow!

 

2) and... should the 1) be true, does it make a difference if you're flying or parked ?  Because if it does it sounds correct to me, since on most aircraft applying trim will result in control deflection as dynamic pressure builds up, and if the aircraft uses a stabilator, then it'll be displaced no matter if you're flying or standing still.... so again the graphic makes sense to me and there should be no problem in setting up curves instead of letting the input remain linear...

 

I gues it's different in RoF, because there the curves can actually be asymmetric  ( never tried playing around with it - seldom use that GREAT ww1 sim... )

[Reflected]

I definitely feel the weight of aircraft, except when on the ground. Even perfect 3 pointers bounce, especially with the P-40. Also ,when taxiing on uneven ground, the planes don't jsut wobble, they actually bounce at the slowest speeds too. I think it has to do with ground physics, not weight, though.

 

As for the wobbling: JTD pointed out it is due to the propwash. The propwash is one of the best and worst parts of this game. It makes it stand out from other sims, but introduces unique "bugs", such as the instability, or - I think - the flap behavior.

[F/JG300_Gruber]

I think that the main problem has to do with the way aircraft, all of them, although some ( those with wing slats particularly ) show it even better, exhibit a strange oscillation when perturbed from their stable flight state.

And it's not only due to prop effects, because it's there even if you kill the engine !

 

Put any of the aircraft, fighter or bomber, flying straight & level, cruising for instance, properly trimmed for whatever speed and power settings you have them running at, an then make a sudden input to your stick, nose up or nose down, it doesn't matter, and let it center immediately again.

 

There is a sense of the aircraft being tied to a rubber band, which I never liked ( still don't ).

 

Some way along the various patches it got less intense than when I first noticed it, but it's still a strange oscillation. It's not the phugoid! It's a short period oscillation that starts immediately after the aircraft is perturbed in pitch.

 

The same applies to yaw.

 

We can play with the generic ( unfortunately not individual ) stick curves, but we can't get away from it ...

 

The inverted spin we get into when pushing the stick of the Fw-190 is also still there, and very unrealistic IMO...

 

It's work in progress, the Dev Team is doing their best to please the user community, and I enjoy the sim very much, because other features overcome this limitations...

 

But regarding the feel of "lightness" of the aircraft, I don't feel that to be true, specially from my RL flying experience. Quite on the contrary, the inertias appear to be very nicely modeled, as well as for instance control stiffening effects due to increased dynamic pressure.

 

Some thoughts of mine,

 

I'm also a pilot IRL, and I agree that planes are much more wobbly than those we fly nowadays.

I did a few touch and go yesteray in a cessna 152 and I still agree that it is more stable than planes in BoS

 

Now I don't have any explanation for the phenomenon but there is two things that might partially explain this :

 

First the wing loading. Take The stuka or the 111 for example, both of them are considered to have a "light" wing loading in WW2 standards but if you do the maths, you will find that even lightly loaded (no ammo/ weapons and just a few hundred kg of fuel) both of them have a wing loading around 110 kg/m²

 

Now take a Cessna 152 or a piper PA-28, at their full load condition, wing loading is only 55 and 65 kg/m². Almost twice as much !  So unless we manage to get our butts in a real warbird, there is not many chances we will be able to see how wing loading affects handling.

 

 

Second is the size of the vertical stabilizer. Modern stabilizers are bigger, taller and have more surface than the planes in BoS. This must be doing a lot to increase stability on the yaw axis and possibly in reducing the induced roll on rudder input, as today, planes are made to be as safe and stable as possible. Back in the days, this was not always the case and in the case of a powerful fighters with big prop wash and engine torque, it may be even worse.

 

Just look at those pics for comparison :

 

 

 

When I was doing stalling exercises for my PPL, when flying near stall speed, there the plane gets wobbly as well, and start to feel closer to those moddeled in BoS, so maybe wing loading and vertical stab size have something to do with all this. 

[F/JG300_Gruber]

Also : Have a look at this :

 

 

He clearly says by experience that his 111 (Casa built) is an unstable plane that wanders all over the place if you don't pay attention all time. 

 

This is in complete contradiction to many testimony from WW2 pilot I came across saying that the He111 was considered as being stable, forgiving and having a safe behaviour even on flying on a single engine, and many pilots liked her for that.

 

 

Obviously, ww2 planes are not built to the same standards and references for stable/unstable planes are much different now.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

The 109 was reported to have a (compareably) bad stability around the vertical axis. Mainly due to it's small stabilizer and prop wash disturbing the stream around it.

 

Persoanlly I noticed only a bit of rubberbanding in BoS so far. Sure, it is still there at times, but less noticeably (sometimes when the plane stalls out of sudden controll input and falls back to it's initial angle regaining lift a similar effect like rubberbanding occurs).

[Guest deleted@50488]

The 109 was reported to have a (compareably) bad stability around the vertical axis. Mainly due to it's small stabilizer and prop wash disturbing the stream around it.

 

Persoanlly I noticed only a bit of rubberbanding in BoS so far. Sure, it is still there at times, but less noticeably (sometimes when the plane stalls out of sudden controll input and falls back to it's initial angle regaining lift a similar effect like rubberbanding occurs).

 

Exactly that 5tuka!

[SharpeXB]

Well I just tried it out to be sure, in the yak with 50% nose down trim the pitch range looks like this with 100% curve: 

As you can see the stick gets displaced away from the center where the added sensitivity is, not by as much as I though but I still would not like to have different sensitivity for different directions of the axis?

 

That's my point. Since you've put the plane out of trim, you're pulling back on the stick to compensate. Imagine if then you tried to pull even more on a target, you're outside the reduced response zone created by the curve.

If the plane is trimmed you're not needing to touch the stick to fly level and the S curve works.

The trim setting in BoS doesn't affect the pitch response in the menu.

[=LD=Penshoon]

That's my point. Since you've put the plane out of trim, you're pulling back on the stick to compensate. Imagine if then you tried to pull even more on a target, you're outside the reduced response zone created by the curve.

If the plane is trimmed you're not needing to touch the stick to fly level and the S curve works.

The trim setting in BoS doesn't affect the pitch response in the menu.

I'm not touching the stick in that shot, that is the neutral resting position of the stick with 50% nose down trim at ~500kph indicated and it's forward of the center position where the added sensitivity of the axis is. Pushing the stick gently forward in that situation gives me a big instant negative pitch response while I need to pull a lot to make the nose rise above the horizon. Pretty sure that with no curve & flying trimmed & level in trim tab equipped planes response is equal in both directions. 

 

This discussion makes my brain tired and I'm a bit ill so maybe I've got something wrong but I'm pretty sure the end result for me is if I use a curve on trim tab planes like yak, bf110, p40 and so on I need to re-trim the plane a lot more as speed changes. This might just be for ffb stick maybe. 

[SharpeXB]

For me, no matter what the trim is set to, if I let go of the stick it will center in that response screen. Maybe check your stick calibration. Are you using the in-game trim or a wheel on your stick? The trim wheels like are on my CH stick will change the stick input, so I don't use those. Something is pulling your stick back in that screenshot.

 

Oh are you using FFB? That might explain it. I am not.

Edited December 2, 2015 by SharpeXB

[Yogiflight]

Hi Penshoon,

I am using forcefeedback, my sensitivities are 90% and 80% and in the response screen I am also in the middle, so I also think it might be wrong calibration of your stick or trim on an axis, for my trim is on keys.

[Blutaar]

Hi,

i noticed the same effect with an FFB stick, it was on a IL2 and it was so anoying.

If you trim the plane, the stick will move so better no curve on FFB sticks on planes like IL2.

Same effect on DCS Blackshark or Huey, when you trim the chopper the stick will stay at the trimmed position but the center will not move to the new trimmed position and this sucks if you have curves.

[GP*]

Planes are not too heinously unstable during normal maneuvering IMO. For me, the problem has always been during more aggressive maneuvering -- it feels like aircraft in this sim are too responsive to control surface deflections. The nose position (with respect to both pitch and yaw) diverges too much from the actual flight path of the aircraft (i.e. too great an alpha and/or beta is introduced).

 

I, along with a handful of others, mentioned this over a year ago, but it was brushed off as hating on the sim at the time. I'm glad a level headed conversation about it has developed.

Edited December 5, 2015 by Prefontaine

[4thFG_Cap_D_Gentile]

Planes are not too heinously unstable during normal maneuvering IMO. For me, the problem has always been during more aggressive maneuvering -- it feels like aircraft in this sim are too responsive to control surface deflections. The nose position (with respect to both pitch and yaw) diverges too much from the actual flight path of the aircraft (i.e. too great an alpha and/or beta is introduced).

 

I, along with a handful of others, mentioned this over a year ago, but it was brushed off as hating on the sim at the time. I'm glad a level headed conversation about it has developed.

Agree fully.

I believe that the different planes are programmed to more or less rubber banding (wobbling), to simulate differences between them. which probably is enough for most flight simmers that don't have any stick time in RL. It is ugly though and a game killer for me. Too bad actually, pretty expensive deal.

[Guest deleted@50488]

Should be fixed or tuned down - really!

 

I have tried DAKPILOT's suggested curves, but it's a no go for me. I have a T.16000, hence no FF, but still find it doesn't help, and in fact even get's things worse because during dogfight I am forced to further deflect my controls, and the wobbling turns even more obvious to me :-/

 

I tried a few online dogfights this morning. Everything feels so great about the sim, but I don't like when I see such things as:

 

- The awful wobbling;

- The absence of pre-stall buffeting where it should be, probably replacing the wobbling;

- The way pitch stability is modeled ( simplified I guess ), and I observe positive pitch stability on aircraft and flight states where there should be neutral pitch stability - I actually can't find one with neutral pitch stability for pitch up and positive stability for pitch down inputs ( the P40-E being a good example IRL... ) for instance...

 

For me, together with the wobbling, the absence of proper pre-stall buffeting is another negative aspect of the FDM in IL-2.

 

On the other hand, I've seen some threads pointing out that on most aircraft, "yaw-on-roll" is overdone. I actually find it almost perfect the way it is. There should probably be, on some specific aircraft though, some further stiffness in rudder inputs with increasing dynamic pressure, preventing such sudden yaw inputs to happen, but other than that, I find the rolling due to rudder deflection plausible the way it is modeled...

 

Another area where I believe much has been done and tuned and now feels very good to me is overall ground physics / handling. It is really a pleasure to taxi and takeoff of BoS aircraft, although there's probably way too much yaw stability on some of the models, like the E7, where I would expect the takeoff roll to require a lot more of foot work...

Edited December 5, 2015 by JCOMM

[Guest deleted@50488]

Just started a poll....

[Sokol1]

The trim setting in BoS doesn't affect the pitch response in the menu.

 

Same here, the (Bf 109) trim all up or down dont alter the (non FFB) joystick position in Controls "Inputs" curves, no mater if flying or on ground, with or without that "AI autopilotot for level flight"...

Edited December 5, 2015 by Sokol1

[Cavemanhead]

Well, I believe the complain is about the way some / or all aircraft in BoS react to perturbations to their axis of pitch, roll and yaw, and this has to do with static and dynamic stability, and is influenced by many factors, in special prop effects in the case of these powerful fighters.

 

Pick the G2, for instance. Ste a situation where you're flying straght & level at say, 3000m, trim it properly and use 1,1 ATA.

 

Now push, or pull the stick and immediately release it to neutral, and watch the reaction of the aircraft to that perturbation.

 

Most of these aircraft exhibited neutral stability characteristics, wanting to stay with the "new pitch" inn this case, others were stable and tried to return to their trimmed speed / AoA... But the way you see it happening in BoS is a bit on the wobbling side... There's  slight sense of it being tied to a rubber band.

 

I've asked myself if this could be somehow overdone. It also affects the other axis, mainly yaw, but then again for instance the P-40e was known to be unstable in yaw ( hence the modifications that took place when the p51 was designed... )...

 

I believe the devs once replied to this complaints with a reasonable answer - the propwash effects were the main cause, and indeed if you repeat the same "perturbation" tests with your engine at negative propwash speed values or the engine off, you'll get different results. The effect is indeed prevalent at high propwash speed settings ( high power and slow speed... )

 

I have ended up accepting it the way it is, and have made many tests on my gliders ( IRL ), but a glider does not have a prop at in the nose :-) so, my results can't really be taken as a reference...

 

And... I am not even going to bring into this theme another sim, because that would end in a sim vs sim debate - useless because both have their strong and weak points, like anything in Life, but in the end, among all I have used so far, it's BoS / BoM the one I still find closer to what I believe must be the reality ...

 

 

I think that the main problem has to do with the way aircraft, all of them, although some ( those with wing slats particularly ) show it even better, exhibit a strange oscillation when perturbed from their stable flight state.

And it's not only due to prop effects, because it's there even if you kill the engine !

 

Put any of the aircraft, fighter or bomber, flying straight & level, cruising for instance, properly trimmed for whatever speed and power settings you have them running at, an then make a sudden input to your stick, nose up or nose down, it doesn't matter, and let it center immediately again.

 

There is a sense of the aircraft being tied to a rubber band, which I never liked ( still don't ).

 

Some way along the various patches it got less intense than when I first noticed it, but it's still a strange oscillation. It's not the phugoid! It's a short period oscillation that starts immediately after the aircraft is perturbed in pitch.

 

The same applies to yaw.

 

We can play with the generic ( unfortunately not individual ) stick curves, but we can't get away from it ...

 

The inverted spin we get into when pushing the stick of the Fw-190 is also still there, and very unrealistic IMO...

 

It's work in progress, the Dev Team is doing their best to please the user community, and I enjoy the sim very much, because other features overcome this limitations...

 

But regarding the feel of "lightness" of the aircraft, I don't feel that to be true, specially from my RL flying experience. Quite on the contrary, the inertias appear to be very nicely modeled, as well as for instance control stiffening effects due to increased dynamic pressure.

 

 

Your posts are spot on.

 

I've flown a WWII Trainer and a Yak 52, Cessna 152, and a 172 IRL and I can relate to everything you said (I thought I'd written the post!).  There is just way too much rubber-banding effect around the pitch and yaw axis (the yaw is definitely the worst)...  Other than that, I think the handling is pretty good - one of the better FMs I've flown in the last 20 years...  I've tried mixing out the yaw with sensitivity as much as possible, etc. to help get the feel to be more like how it should feel...  It appears to be a limitation with the flight model (I've only flown the 109 G2 so far)...  Most other things are done reasonably so I tend to forgive the shortcomings...

Edited December 6, 2015 by Caveman