Jump to content
Reflected

Yaw oscillation - a possible explanation?

Recommended Posts

We probably need to be careful about how we read "kicked full rudder" in a pilot quote. As for others I only fly gliders but it's probably safe to say that I sometimes feel that I have kicked in a lot of rudder, and I have, but it's not all at once. So maybe the "kick" just means a large amount, rapidly but smoothly applied, rather than 100% application immediately? Impossible to prove of course but I know I wouldn't want to do it, even putting a k13 into a spin it's not bang full rudder. I think I might fly like a girl though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

even putting a k13 into a spin it's not bang full rudder. I think I might fly like a girl though.

 

Sounds like it ;) , I've spun the K13 and deffo pushed the rudder through the floor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:) I call it sensitive flying. #flounces off#

My point remains though that instantaneous full rudder is not something normally done.

Edited by Hoots

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

My point remains though that instantaneous full rudder is not something normally done.

 

Under normal circumstances no, there is never a requirement for that much rudder, other than immediately in an engine out situation in multi engine aircraft or to deliberately induce a spin/flick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was mentioned "kicking the rudder" I always understand it like continuous full (or almost the full) deflection of rudder. Not literally the sudden "kick" from zero to 100 %. 

 

Anyway I don't think this is the problem of all German planes. 190 feels way better in respect the rudder authority. Either the rolling effect the yaw oscillations. The 109 suffers the most by both. It's sad since the 109 should be the workhorse for LW.

 

And about the Zak reaction on RoF forum. I would really like to believe him. On the other hand I have many years experience from RoF. There is a problem with Albatros D.Va performance. It's proven fact. Developers know about it, they have many sources which shows the plane in the game not even fit the Allied test of crashed planes and they too posted "it's on our list". But now after like 4 years nothing has changed. So that's why I'm skeptical a bit. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was mentioned "kicking the rudder" I always understand it like continuous full (or almost the full) deflection of rudder. Not literally the sudden "kick" from zero to 100 %. 

 

Anyway I don't think this is the problem of all German planes. 190 feels way better in respect the rudder authority. Either the rolling effect the yaw oscillations. The 109 suffers the most by both. It's sad since the 109 should be the workhorse for LW.

 

And about the Zak reaction on RoF forum. I would really like to believe him. On the other hand I have many years experience from RoF. There is a problem with Albatros D.Va performance. It's proven fact. Developers know about it, they have many sources which shows the plane in the game not even fit the Allied test of crashed planes and they too posted "it's on our list". But now after like 4 years nothing has changed. So that's why I'm skeptical a bit. 

 

FW is a nice looking plane. And thats about it. Flying it in MP and trying to use it as a fighter is equal to suicide. Performs like a brick.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And about the Zak reaction on RoF forum. I would really like to believe him. On the other hand I have many years experience from RoF. There is a problem with Albatros D.Va performance. It's proven fact. Developers know about it, they have many sources which shows the plane in the game not even fit the Allied test of crashed planes and they too posted "it's on our list". But now after like 4 years nothing has changed. So that's why I'm skeptical a bit.

The issue with the Albatros is a stain on the otherwise great success story of RoF development. I don't know why it was never fixed, if it was really just 'one of those things you never get around to do'.

 

Still, it shouldn't overshadow the fact, that RoFs story is filled to the brim with FM revisions, tweaks, fixes and new features, some of which took their sweet time to get done, but which did eventually get done, like the adverse yaw effect on Fokker D.VII ailerons, realistic synchronisation gear modeling, MG dispersion, N17 FM revision etc.

 

777 neglected to fix one obvious fault, true. Should that really tarnish their reputation for good?

FW is a nice looking plane. And thats about it. Flying it in MP and trying to use it as a fighter is equal to suicide. Performs like a brick.

No.

Edited by Finkeren
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that when you use the rudder, the wing on the side of the turn is partially masqued of air flow by the fuselage (because its inertia make that the plane continue to fly straight). It is normal that the plane is rolling.

And for the oscillations, I think this is due to the dynamic effect of the high moment of inertia of the planes. I don't know if it is well modeled, but the phenomenon does exist.

I am not a pilot in real life, so it's only my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I am not a pilot in real life, so it's only my opinion.

 

it's a fair opinion and I said long ago that something seems awry with inertia values, the phenomenon does exist but it is modelled incorrectly IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's a fair opinion and I said long ago that something seems awry with inertia values, the phenomenon does exist but it is modelled incorrectly IMO.

 

Acknowledged by Zak and said it will be looked into after release, when they have the manpower to look into it, is it gamebreaking at the moment? that is a matter of personal feeling, if you could adjust individual A/C curves/sensitivity, to me it would be a non issue, but with such a small team and budget a little patience is allowed, updates and bug fixes have come with this release at an astounding rate,

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

updates and bug fixes have come with this release at an astounding rate,

 

This is a subjective opinion though, you may be impressed, but many of the discussed issues are old and chronic and even after release have still not been addressed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FW is a nice looking plane. And thats about it. Flying it in MP and trying to use it as a fighter is equal to suicide. Performs like a brick.

 

Some pairs might disagree, but then to each its own. The 190 sucks as much as the Lagg sucks, as much as the 109 and the Yak sucks. And I mean as a fighter.

 

Damn, we need the Sunday Squad events rolling soon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FW is a nice looking plane. And thats about it. Flying it in MP and trying to use it as a fighter is equal to suicide. Performs like a brick.

 

Well, fighters back then were not designed for multiplayer online matches 1 vs 1 because they were intented to be used within a tactical formation. So it is difficult to really deduce experience of the war to that on a mp server.

 

Anyhow, concerning the oscillations: Before spreading again this "only German planes are affected by rubberband desease" try it yourself (offline if you don't dare to fly soviet planes online in a qm with no enemies around) and kick the rudder in a russian plane. I just did it in a Lagg and when I released it it also swayed left to right. There is defo no reason to imply that this "rubberband issue" was a result of an anti-German bias.

Edited by sturmkraehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Caveat: I'm not a pilot, so I don't know how real rudders are supposed to actually feel, but I have taken some dynamics classes while getting my MechE degree that covered oscillating systems.  Also, I have no idea what goes into creating a virtual flight model, so there's that too.

 

Below is a graph that depicts damped, critically damped, and under-damped oscillating systems.  You could probably find a youtube video that will explain it in depth but I think the graph does it justice.  

 

bode_72_timedamping.gif

 

Seems like we have a case of what some people feel like is an under-damped rudder.  The question is, could there be information out there on these WW2 aircraft that would go along the lines of the above graph?  Because I feel that would be the best way to verify.  

 

However, I fear you may be a day late and a buck short with the whole flight modeling discussion.

Edited by [TWB]dillon_biz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's overdone and pretty much resembles a similar problem with X-Plane FDM.

 

At the X-Plane forums and directly with the author, I have debated this subject several times. Also, as a glider pilot, and when I used Condorsoaring, I noticed it's tendency to exhibit this sort of yaw instability and "rubber-band" effect...

 

The main reason, I believe, is associated with short period stability and the way the FDM in IL2 BOS and other sims represents it. I was tempted to think it might be related to aircraft with slats in IL2 BOS, but I believe it affects all models, even if with different intensity.

 

Lack of true control input forces, that our hardware can't replicate, is another factor, so, I tend to use 40% of exponential in my rudder axis - it helps...

The problem with xplane is that most aircraft authors never touch the phase out settings. These settings control how much a control surface can be deflected as speed increases.

 

For some reason most people dont bother with phase out which leads to unsurprisingly bad results.

 

Xplane can produce very good fms its just so easy to do that the majority of the aircraft are terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2) Ifound this post by Zak, quoted on the RoF forums: Quote “And before we begin, let me make the rudder issue clear. As I said, we acknowledge that current implementation of rudder control is questionable. You as experienced virtual pilots feel that rudder doesn't work correctly - and we agree with you on that. We know where this peculiar sensation of Bf 109 is located and it doesn't fit the expectations (same thing as you experience, isn't it?). But IL2BOS is a simulator modeled painstakingly and with greatest attention to the most trustworthy tool that we have - maths. Current version of Bf 109 (as well as any other plane in the project) is a purely mathematical model based on all avalilable data on the original aircraft. And after the entire FM development procedure (2 months or smth, can't remember for sure now) we came to what we have now. And we CAN and we WANT to revise the FM for BF 109 because of the questionable rudder performance. But being a flight sim (not an WT, WOWP grade arcade game) IL2BOS does not allow us to switch smth off, or to grab a "rudder hypersensitivity" slider and move it to minimum. The only way to fix it is to go thru the entire Fm production process. We plan to do that. Obviously, it has to wait until Fw 190 and He 111 are finished and released to early access, and lacking game modes added too. After that we will have resources to revise Bf 109 FM. You know, it is like developing a real plane back then in 1940s - we roll out a prototype, it fails our expectations and we have to put it apart all over again to find what the problem is. That's official. Pretty much everything I can tell about the topic. And honestly, I think it gives you all a certain answer.”

 

I think it is old Zack post wrote before He-111 and Fw 190 relase.  Since these time rudder in Bf 109 was changed in BOS - if you dont remember before 109 made flick rolls with rudder kick,  now it was changed and 109 is making just roll with full rudder usage.

 

So you dont have to wait for changes :)

Edited by Kwiatek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I try to fly the 109 and i do feel it oscillates a lot , trying to pin down a moving fighter with the gun sight bouncing all over the place is very frustrating job , and i don't fly that different on BOS than i do in any other Sim , seems strange to me . the rubber band effect that the 109 has , i have flown the Russian fighters too and they seem not to oscillate as much and  the gun sight picture  is more stable . if you get what im saying . I hope things improve .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For God's sake please stopp comparing sims with other sims. Makes no sense at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S!

 

 Wooden tailfin, to save precious metal and also better control of yaw. Attachment of the wooden tailfin required a 35kg ballast in the engine compartment of the Bf109G-6 and FiAF changed back to metal tails if possible. Saved in weight. Bf109G-2, 4, 6, 8 used DB605A-1 rated 1475hp at take off 1.42ata. More info here..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daimler-Benz_DB_605

 

Interestingly, dive tests in the spring of 1943 on an F with early G wings were done to test the enlarged fin tip.  The original fin lost directional stability over 650 km/h and with the new fin maintained directional stability up to the aircraft's full throttle terminal dive speed of 906 km/h, although it did lose some stability about the longitudinal axis (roll) due to a typical, if uncorrected, slight skid to nose right (cambered fin* pushing tail excessively left) which caused "conoeing".  It was anticipated at this time that the taller fin would become standard on all G as soon as production could be fully converted over to it.  Bombing and the myriad number of small sub-contractors prevented this for some time.

 

*The cambered fin was basically a wing sticking straight up with the upper, curved surface on the left and flatter, lower surface on the right side.  This was in contrast to the usual propwash correction method of simply pointing a symmetrical fin a degree or two off to the left (or toward the up going propeller blades).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The nose bouncing all around with slightest touch is killing the game for me. I cannot take more that one or two sorties before I shut it off. If it won't be fixed then, well, I guess that's my tough luck. I will spend my spare time playing something else. A shame really.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And about the Zak reaction on RoF forum. I would really like to believe him. On the other hand I have many years experience from RoF. There is a problem with Albatros D.Va performance. It's proven fact. Developers know about it, they have many sources which shows the plane in the game not even fit the Allied test of crashed planes and they too posted "it's on our list". But now after like 4 years nothing has changed. So that's why I'm skeptical a bit. 

 

As far as I know, we haven't seen a similar statement from the devs regarding the Albatros like what they said about the 109 rudder.  It's helpful that they've explicitly acknowledged they are not happy with the result in the 109 FM either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i've had this issue since the beginning & could only modify it in Custom settings which I can't do in Campaign mode.I have also noticed that I get something like it in straight ahead flight :i get a strong 'bounce/swing to the right & correction back with no input & then I have to try to correct.This happens with no one else in the sky ,while approaching the back of an enemy formation & frustratingly enough when lining up shots with aircraft or ground targets.I've never known what to make of it- air disturbances, wind,slipstream,torque effect.I've used two different joysticks & its still there.I know it has to be FM but 777 is very slow to correct it.I like this sim alot but this yo=yoing has got to be maddening for newbies...I know it is for me.

ace2-1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i've had this issue since the beginning & could only modify it in Custom settings which I can't do in Campaign mode.I have also noticed that I get something like it in straight ahead flight :i get a strong 'bounce/swing to the right & correctioncorrection back with no input & then I have to try to correct.This happens with no one else in the sky ,while approaching the back of an enemy formation & frustratingly enough when lining up shots with aircraft or ground targets.I've never known what to make of it- air disturbances, wind,slipstream,torque effect.I've used two different joysticks & its still there.I know it has to be FM but 777 is very slow to correct it.I like this sim alot but this yo=yoing has got to be maddening for newbies...I know it is for me.

 

I'm trying to be patient and hope this is fixed. Nose wobbles all over, trim is a complete PIA without using the rotery wheels, unlocks bla bla bla, if I were completely new to this genre/game i'd be pissed that I spent north of $50/on this game.

 

I want to like this game so much, but I spend more than half my time in game trying to fly straight and level. It is disheartening, but I am optimistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue with the Albatros is a stain on the otherwise great success story of RoF development. I don't know why it was never fixed, if it was really just 'one of those things you never get around to do'.

Still, it shouldn't overshadow the fact, that RoFs story is filled to the brim with FM revisions, tweaks, fixes and new features, some of which took their sweet time to get done, but which did eventually get done, like the adverse yaw effect on Fokker D.VII ailerons, realistic synchronisation gear modeling, MG dispersion, N17 FM revision etc.

777 neglected to fix one obvious fault, true. Should that really tarnish their reputation for good?

 

No.

 

Rise of flight is my favorite game, so I don't want to trash it. albatross is not the only fault. It is embarrassing how they have let the performance of the alb ( too slow and unstallable) camel (too fast) pfalz (too slow but unstallable and with ultra docile qualities) and other faults persist.

 

Honestly if I was working there and had a passion for this genre I'd come in on my own time and fix it if there wasn't budget. We all do that kind of thing in our jobs just due to pride, I have no idea why they don't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys,

 

As you are all aware, some planes in BoS have an especially low yaw stability. When you use the rudder, the plane doesn’t yaw smoothly like a ship in the water, but springs/ oscillates left and right, as if it was fixed on a rubber band. It causes heated debates between RL pilots. Some say it’s  very unrealistic, some others say it is plausible, it’s just that we’re not flying real planes with such huge control movements.

 

I don’t know what to believe (I fly gliders in real life), but I think I might have come up with an explanation why it MIGHT be realistic.

 

When you apply a big amount of rudder suddenly, the speed of the outer wing increases, and along with it the lift and drag it produces. The extra lift can be accounted for the rolling motion, and I think it’s the sudden extra drag on the outer wing that counteracts the yaw induced by the outward lift generated on the rudder & stabilizer.

 

Can this be it? Or am I talking total nonsense? (which is very well possible)

 

I’ve learned to fly the 109 with small and gentle movements, so I hardly ever notice this springing movement, or oscillation, but it’s certainly a feature that is way more pronunced in BoS than in other sims.

 

What do you think?

 

Sounds like an explanation straight out of "Stick and Rudder."

 

Still, I humbly believe that the oscillations in this game (mostly the rudder, but pretty much all flight controls in the 109) are a bit off.

 

I've applied anything from a small rudder input to a "stomp" in many aircraft. I've stomped on the rudder to slip an aircraft, I've stomped it to enter and exit spins, I've stomped it during stall recoveries, I've stomped it to change formation positions, and I've stomped it during BFM engagements. 

 

I've never seen an aircraft's rudder behave even close to the sensitivity and oscillations exhibited in BoS.

 

We can argue that, because we don't deal with overcoming slipstream forces in a sim (because God knows my CH pedals are as soft and lame as anything), that the sensitivity is the result of our computer-input. This still doesn't explain the insane oscillations we see. 

 

DISCLAIMER: I love this game. If you're a diehard fan or a dev, please don't take what I'm saying as anything other than constructive criticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S!

 

 The "oversensitive" rudder, especially in the Bf109F and G, is pronounced only at speeds above take off. During take off run the rudder works like a charm, you can do precise corrections to keep the plane straight, and have to use quite big deflection to do so. Just wait when you get airborne and pick up any speed, then it begins to do this. I have tested so many times that not even willing to repeat it all again, but in short: Bf109 bounces sideways like crazy from even the slightest touch of yaw input. As small as even registering a control input making the rudder on 3D model move. I use no curvature etc. Whatever is going on in the FM is making the planes act like they are attached to rubber bands, not going through a mass of air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think this is an issue that have it's roots in using ROF engine. It's how ww1 ROF planes behave.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

S!

 

I think it depends on plane. I have been in the turboprop trainer FiAF had and there was no tendency of bopping sideways when rudder was used, not even in the piston engined trainer. Slight movement was exactly that, a slight movement. Not a sudden jerky movement seen in BoS even from slightest input and the insane tendency to roll the plane almost as fast as with ailerons?! Sometimes planes feel like they are attached to rubberbands from nose, tail and wingtips. Slightest movement and wobblety wobble it goes.

I completely agree with this. I have a few hours in Spanish Air Force prop trainer (and that was a long time ago) but I don't remember the AC being so unstable.

 

But again T-35 Pillan is only a trainer, way slower and with thicker wings than BFs or LAs

Edited by Chipi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK, thank you for all your replies. So, in conclusion, while the oscillating effect is not entirely unrealistic, it is totally overdone. This has been acknowledged by the devs as well, a while ago.

 

In my opinion FM-s are the core of a flight sim, and so many of us are requesting these revisions because we all have high hopes and faith in BoS. If I were a developer, ironing out these anomalies would be No.1 on my priority list - as they did with the FW - but then again, I'm not a programmer, I have no idea how this works, and they might be fixing this as we speak ;) Also, I understand that BoS doesn't work with parameters, but the FM is a result of pure math, so finding the source of this might be very, very time consuming and complicated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, I understand that BoS doesn't work with parameters, but the FM is a result of pure math, so finding the source of this might be very, very time consuming and complicated.

FMs are purely build out of parameters. Again maths are good and define a great art of aerodynamics and mechanics but we're talking about an unrealistic envirounment requiring unrealistic parameters to work well.

You simply can't build a working FM with your head stuck in math books as bad as it might sound. You have to take it out for practise, analyse it's issues and apply corrections to your parameters in order to make it work, especially the purely virtual ones.

Not even civil plane manufacturers can calculate their plane's performance and aerodynamics exactly. It's important to notice that and be willing to adopt to it, which counts for every flight sim.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just flown three F-4 sorties in SP campaign using 50% rudder sensitivity and a 4% deadzone in the settings menu, as recommended by a previous poster, and the difference is enormous. The aeroplane still feels very sensitive to the rudder, but you feel as though you are in control.

 

No comment about all the roll/yaw issues, but for any user who is just frustrated with trying to fly the 109s, this is a huge help.

 

But I do not know if this will do strange things to my Lagg....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have also noticed that I get something like it in straight ahead flight :i get a strong 'bounce/swing to the right & correction back with no input & then I have to try to correct.This happens with no one else in the sky ,while approaching the back of an enemy formation & frustratingly enough when lining up shots with aircraft or ground targets.I've never known what to make of it- air disturbances, wind,slipstream,torque effect.I've used two different joysticks & its still there.I know it has to be FM but 777 is very slow to correct it.I like this sim alot but this yo=yoing has got to be maddening for newbies...I know it is for me.

My hero! I've been completely puzzled by these sudden jolts in straight ahead flight, going over my settings and all control devices and doing whatever I can to reproduce the issue, but no luck. I thought I was going mad. Is this a known issue? Have you or someone else submitted tickets about it? I'm going to try to get it on video some day, but no luck so far...

 

OK, thank you for all your replies. So, in conclusion, while the oscillating effect is not entirely unrealistic, it is totally overdone. This has been acknowledged by the devs as well, a while ago.

Are you referring to the answer about the 109 rudder behavior or something else? I think the mention of correcting 109 rudder efficiency was about stuff that was already in the game so I don't know how much changes to expect in the future. Of course, the flight modeling is constantly ongoing work, but it would be nice to hear what the devs think about these issues currently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

FW is a nice looking plane. And thats about it. Flying it in MP and trying to use it as a fighter is equal to suicide. Performs like a brick.

 

I disagree with you. I fly 190 on LD Heavy metal server and according to my experience it's pleasant and nice plane to fly. Definitely better than both 109s. But I think it depends on personal preferences. If you like dogfight on slow speeds then 190 is a death trap. If you can hold the fight at +350 km/h then the FW is unbeatable plane. Luckily nine out of ten virtual pilots think that dogfight means turning (either horizontal or vertical) at speed less than 300 km/h and mostly on stall speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with you. I fly 190 on LD Heavy metal server and according to my experience it's pleasant and nice plane to fly. Definitely better than both 109s. But I think it depends on personal preferences. If you like dogfight on slow speeds then 190 is a death trap. If you can hold the fight at +350 km/h then the FW is unbeatable plane. Luckily nine out of ten virtual pilots think that dogfight means turning (either horizontal or vertical) at speed less than 300 km/h and mostly on stall speed.

Nah:) I fly BnZ exclusively and excessively. 190 is junk in it. But hey. Like you say. About personal preference.

But one this i HAVE to disagree: Performance is MUCH worse than 109s in ALL aspects. Energyretention, acceleration, climbrate, levelspeed.

OK Max divespeed is a tad higher. I give her that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It rolls better, is much more stable and has better fire power plus loads of ammo. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It rolls better, is much more stable and has better fire power plus loads of ammo. 

Also stays in coordinated flight much easier, better dive acceleration, better visibility, more durable, bigger bomb load.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have just flown three F-4 sorties in SP campaign using 50% rudder sensitivity and a 4% deadzone in the settings menu, as recommended by a previous poster, and the difference is enormous. The aeroplane still feels very sensitive to the rudder, but you feel as though you are in control.

 

No comment about all the roll/yaw issues, but for any user who is just frustrated with trying to fly the 109s, this is a huge help.

 

But I do not know if this will do strange things to my Lagg....

I thought I had tried everything...but apparently missed this simple combination...and viola it does seem to work.Much better control in my favorite 109 & makes a difference in the previously almost uncontrolable 190. I 'd say close but not quite as good as 109s in CloD and that is a big improvement. Many thanks!

Enemyace_zps9dd7c523.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My pleasure! Now I have had time to think about it, my understanding is that the 109s were known for poor lateral stability (cylindrical fuselage, small vertical stabilizer) and high rudder response (large rudder area with a large moment).

 

So sensitivity and difficulty of keeping the gunsight on target with the ball centred is what you would expect and what pilot accounts confirm.

 

Also why should they not roll with rudder input? All the RoF planes do this: in fact this is the correct way to start a turn in these planes, airlerons are for fine control only. As a long time RoF pilot used to flying my favourite N17 (which had no vertical stabilizer at all) I find flying the 109 fairly intuitive!

 

It would be astonishing, OTOH, if a hot rod fighter behaved like a modern trainer which is specifically designed with high stability. I also observe very little "rubber banding" except what you would expect when making a new input (since moving a control surface to neutral is just as much a control input as the original deflection. Anyone who has sailed a dingy will have seen this: you have to oversteer a little in a turn to get the heading that you want when you centre the rudder. I am really surprised that anyone would find this odd.

 

Anyway with the suggested rudder settings I have found the spikiness due to my pedals' increments and lack of force feedback is less of an issue and now that I have tested it in a Lagg I can say that there is an improvement there too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

my understanding is that the 109s were known for poor lateral stability (cylindrical fuselage, small vertical stabilizer) and high rudder response (large rudder area with a large moment).

 

109's poor stability came from the undersized tail fin, and that actually means a small rudder with less effectiveness.

 

 

 

I also observe very little "rubber banding"

 

Not so very little but the real rubber banding issue is in pitch.

 

 

 

Anyone who has sailed a dingy will have seen this: you have to oversteer a little in a turn to get the heading that you want when you centre the rudder. I am really surprised that anyone would find this odd.

 

Maybe, but anyone who has flown an aircraft know it works differently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DD_bongodriver

I will take your word on points 1 and 2 but 3, hmmm

http://kurfurst.org/Tactical_trials/109E_UKtrials/Morgan.html

Here is extract from report on detailed testing on Me109 (E I think)

If the rudder is suddenly displaced through half it's maximum travel, airlerons fixed, the aircraft swings through about 8 degrees and at the same time banks about 5 degrees in the direction of the applied rudder...(edited) On releasing the rudder the nose swings back fairly quickly and the aircraft does an oscillation in roll and yaw which gradually dies out...

So it does not keep going straight when you centre the stick and it does indeed "bounce back"! :P

 

Anyway, I know you always like to have the last world so I am off for a night out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...