Jump to content
Con

The ground physics agree or disagree

Recommended Posts

2. Currently there only seems to be airfield (smooth) and field (very rought) terrain. What I'd preferr to see is a more diverse terrain simulation for smooth transitions between smooth and rough surfaces especially in airfield areas.

 

 

Indeed: wouldn't it be nice if there were some areas of the map where it was possible to land and take off. Perhaps some types of field (detectable by their colour?), or "common" areas near villages, or sandy river banks, or... Maybe mission builders could designate certain areas as "emergency airstrips", etc...

 

I suppose with maps it's always possible to layer in more complexity. The issue is probably where you draw the line!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More than two terrian types would be nice, but as you say the complexity of what we have now is better than most, but of course it can be better!

 

Oleo legs are designed for landing forces and have little damping at taxi speeds, I have felt a bit like a pogo stick when maneuvering on rough ground IRL

 

Having said that, I have observed the 'bunnyhop' online but this seems to be a visual bug linked to some A/C and not so much a physics problem, hope it can be 'smoothed' visually externally, but in cockpit own A/C it seems fine

 

Shock absorption/damping on landing maybe could be a tiny tiny bit more but I think most bounces are due to high enough speed/lift to continue to fly and AoA increase due to tail drop on touchdown

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't happen with locked tail wheel but does when unlocked for the Macchi. It also happens with the 109F4/G2 which is unlocked tail wheel on spawn but not E7 even after unlocking the tail wheel. Does not happen with the 190, P40, or I16. Looks like there might be a bug with some aircraft maybe relating to the ability to lock/unlock with the key command as it doesn't happen with all. But that is a small amount of "hopping." After further testing, it looks like that bounce for the Macchi after unlocking its tail wheel also only happens at some fields. I tested the same aircraft above there, and the ones that bounced did bounce at the same field and the ones that didn't were at the same field. Moving to a different field and it didn't happen anymore. So some specific fields cause a small tail wheel bounce with certain airplanes. That is not the bunny hopping however...

 

The bunny hopping is much more severe, it is MP/internet/lag related where entire planes bunny hop like first person shooter players in Counter Strike.

This could be the answer .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason why more ground physic modeles are nessecary for airfield areas (like "cleared snow" or "less crazy ammount of snow" in parking areras).

https://youtu.be/e7GfdFtZ7P8

And no, I didn't hold brakes :dry:

Edited by Stab/JG26_5tuka
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doesn't happen with locked tail wheel but does when unlocked for the Macchi. It also happens with the 109F4/G2 which is unlocked tail wheel on spawn but not E7 even after unlocking the tail wheel. Does not happen with the 190, P40, or I16. Looks like there might be a bug with some aircraft maybe relating to the ability to lock/unlock with the key command as it doesn't happen with all. But that is a small amount of "hopping." After further testing, it looks like that bounce for the Macchi after unlocking its tail wheel also only happens at some fields. I tested the same aircraft above there, and the ones that bounced did bounce at the same field and the ones that didn't were at the same field. Moving to a different field and it didn't happen anymore. So some specific fields cause a small tail wheel bounce with certain airplanes. That is not the bunny hopping however...

 

The bunny hopping is much more severe, it is MP/internet/lag related where entire planes bunny hop like first person shooter players in Counter Strike.

Ah ok, I see what you mean about the "bunny hopping" as I've seen that in multiplayer which is due to latency issues. In any MP game you always see that kind of "warping" where an unstable connection causes weird problems like that.

I'm not just talking about a tailwheel bug though (I just used it as a simple example), but the way the suspension is modeled regardless of SP or MP because of how it affects the aircraft while landing and taxiing. This characteristic has been present since BoS was released. Of course it is just my "gut feeling", but the odds of porpoising/bouncing while touching down in BoS/BoM are much higher because of the way aircraft suspension is modeled, and this carries over into taxiing to a degree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Snow physic is exaggerated in the parking areas and 1 meter from the taxiway you are stuck in the glue just like if you were in a deep field out of nowhere in the steppe. Should be fine tuned (just like it has been for summer and Autumn terrains.

 

Another obvious ground physics : plane crashing in water still explode just like if they were hitting the groud .. ok ... but a little "splash" or water column effect would be welcome isn't it   :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love the physics in this respect because they are a challenge and because each aircraft is a bit different ...... 

 

As to whether they are realistic or not I'm not really sure as the only plane I have taxied on finely cut grass IRL is a Cessna 152

 

I have had a bit of trouble if i put a wheel in the dirt or snow and have got stuck, mainly in heavier aircraft and been swearing but is it real I don't know and will we truely ever??

 

I just like the challenge and think that it might be a tad like 5% over done

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When taxiing IRL in taildragger locked tailwheel is judiciously used when going straight due to the very same issues observed in game

 

It is a very hard position for a developer, all (most?) people are wanting more advanced FM and fidelity, however sometimes when presented with it, it is actually not that much fun and has a very intimitating learning curve

 

Most pilots had 200hrs minimum of high quality instruction before being let loose in the type of aircraft we have in BoS not even considering the probable thousand hrs of ground school

 

The balance for expectation to be able to jump straight into high performance aircraft and fly reasonably competitively without a lot of practice/training is a tricky one

 

Personally I feel there are other options if wanting a more 'relaxed' FM/ground handling learning curve, and keeping BoS on the more realistic sim side is the way to go even if more practice is needed, when that learning curve is breached the satisfaction is very real

 

The answer is having easily found instructions/explanations/tutorials to ease the learning curve, and make training fun

 

Even as a thousand hr pilot when first trying original IL-2 with a basic twist joystick I found the transition to be not so straight forward due to unfamiliar controls and lack of 'sitting in a cockpit' with everything to hand so to speak, and an amount of re-learning a 'sim' was needed

 

Cheers Dakpilot

 

I'm not totally disagreeing with everything you wrote but I can assure as a real pilot with "Tail Dragger Time"  what we have in the game is a bit over done.  I've noticed it's gotten better over time.  I don't mind having some sort of learning curve but if it's modelled incorrectly then it should be fixed.  Also you do realize Hurricane and Spitfire Pilots only had about 20 hours of instruction before being turned lose.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not totally disagreeing with everything you wrote but I can assure as a real pilot with "Tail Dragger Time"  what we have in the game is a bit over done.  I've noticed it's gotten better over time.  I don't mind having some sort of learning curve but if it's modelled incorrectly then it should be fixed.  Also you do realize Hurricane and Spitfire Pilots only had about 20 hours of instruction before being turned lose.

 

Sorry, but that 20 hrs spitfire pilot 'myth' has been thoroughly repeated over the years until considered a real story, it is possible that a few pilots at one point in time only, maybe one week, had only 10hrs on type

 

There is plenty of actual RAF training documentation available, I think the 20hr quote came from a wartime newspaper/magazine article

 

Having owned 2400hp taildraggers and spent a lot of my career operating from rough strips, I would say the ground handling is more right than wrong, sure there are improvements to be made, and I am sure they will come, pretty much all of the changes with each patch have been positive

 

Cheers Dakpilot

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fern,

 

I bloody told you not to take those screenshots from my last missions and make them public!

Edited by PitbullVicious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Too springy. Needs dampening.

Edited by JimmyBlonde
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agreed... I applaud the new handling over different types of terrain, but it just needs a little tweaking to make it 'right'...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like it as is , except from the external view, it is over exaggerated in that regard. It has finally ended the cross runway takeoffs and ultimately the crashing into those using the runway. It kills all the immersion the way it was, startup and full throttle and away they go. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's perfectly fine. It you do the proper actions it's all good. Ground loop is a real thing and requires a lot of experience irl, I think it's great that it's implemented. Haven't had one for ages in Il2, and when I do it's cause I'm sloppy.

Edited by Turban

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I just fired up IL2 BoS for the first time in a long time, and I gotta say, the ground handling is now hugely improved.

 

My intent was mostly to test to see where things are regarding the "wobbling" issues, but I found myself mostly doing takeoffs and landings and enjoying this updated aspect of the sim. I didn't spend much time off-road, but the handling of the Bf-109 on a prepared surface was, finally, very believable. Nearly all of my hours are in tricycle gear aircraft, but what I experienced tonight reminded me of the time I've spent flying a friend's Super Cub in Alaska. It was very fun.

 

On the other hand, I bailed out of a 109, and watched it impact at roughly 75 degrees nose low. It lost a wing, and then suddenly transitioned to sliding for around 100 m across the snow. I understand that Michael Bay explosions shouldn't always be expected, but based on the energy the plane had when it impacted, I'd seriously expect it to be a total wreck. The sliding was a bit silly, but something I can live with. 

 

Again, I'll have to spend more time analyzing the ground physics, but my first impressions were very positive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another reason why more ground physic modeles are nessecary for airfield areas (like "cleared snow" or "less crazy ammount of snow" in parking areras).

https://youtu.be/e7GfdFtZ7P8

And no, I didn't hold brakes :dry:

 Ruder man, the propulsion was lineal and both wells are stoked so it will not work,but when applying ruder to any direction you'll concentrated that to a single point of contact to ground, then you will get it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ruder man, the propulsion was lineal and both wells are stoked so it will not work,but when applying ruder to any direction you'll concentrated that to a single point of contact to ground, then you will get it.

Tried that, didnt work, man. Nice try though.

 

Btw. The only thing thaz eventually git me moving was applying full power and rocking the stick back and forth so the plane would begin to oscillate.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should it really require 50%+ power to get the plane moving on a taxiway?

Not here  :mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 The ground handling IS fine. But what isn't fine is how the plane is bouncing off the ground the entire time during taxi at any speed. I've recorded many times and just watch in aww when at the slowests speeds the tail is constantly bouncing up off the ground, unrealistically.

 

Here's a video of a bf109 laking off, flying, and landing. Skip to the landing part and you get a better glimpse of the taxi. Notice how the tail wheel is not bouncing up off the ground violently, and this guy was going faster than you can in BoS without risking a ground loop. Yes, it was bouncing, but it wasn't bouncing off the ground 4 inches at a time. That is just absurd.

 

 If the extreme ground bouncing was dulled to a more realistic effect, the great ground handling would shine through.

Edited by [MYK]Mikeypro83
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aside from the taxi up  to takeoff which is another great example of how it's SUPPOSED to be, if you skip to the landing, you can see the pilot having to adjust after touchdown to keep the plane straight, due to landing on uneven ground. What you don't see is the tail constantly bouncing off the ground violently like in BoS. You can see the only time the tail wheel bounces visually off the ground is when the plane hits the uneven ground, which makes sense. However, it stops and stays on the ground after that, with little, quick bounces, but nothing dramatic like in BoS.

 

 

 

Edited by [MYK]Mikeypro83
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think this is an issue at all with ground physics but the way shock absorbers are modeled. As it is now (and some real pilots agreed on that matter) they've too much spring action.

 

Interestingly I lately flew a couple of sorties in WT and noticed that they've also modeled shock absorbers (not nessecarily realisticly). It makes a huge difference when landing an aicraft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IT is not only the springs, it seems like the plane are rolling in a catapult. I have no idea on how a game is made, if this is FM or the game engine itself. The bouncing when you are on grass is not that bad with cockpit view but looking at other doing the same it looks like the planes weigh are about 1 ounce they bounce up to a meter in the air with little to none speed.

The parameters you need to be within landing the most challenging planes are very limited, it is like all or nothing. In the LaGG you have either a successful landing or a total disaster. I do not mind realism, but compared to DCS this should be a bit easier

Edited by EG14_LuseKofte
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i like the ground handling except the part where 110s and 111s just tip over the moment you try to move on a non prepared surface

Edited by I./JG3_Asgar
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a little bit of real world footage ...

 

https://youtu.be/u9BqmW4KIdw

 You missed the point of my posts and the videos I displayed in them. This is not about a bounce during takeoff.

 

OP does talk about ground handling, but I think his, and everybody's ground handling issue is a result of the over-done ground bouncing of the wheels that is causing it to seem like taxiing is uncontrollable. When the tail wheel is constantly bouncing up off the ground during a slow taxi on what you assume to be prepared ground for aircraft, you lose that much control of your direction on the ground. That is why I think the ground handling is great, but the exaggerated bounce is ruining it. You can see from those RL videos of 109s that I posted, during taxi the tail wheel does bounce, but it is small, quick and doesn't leave the ground 2-6 inches at a time. Then viewing my comparison video of a taxi in BoS, you can see the tail wheel do just that, and very floaty.

Edited by [MYK]Mikeypro83
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BOS is the only sim I've ever flown that makes the ground handling realistic,taxing a tail dragger isn't easy in real life and requires a separate endorsement from a regular pilots license. Then you add that most of the engines in this game develop over 1000hp and you expect them to be easy to taxi. They have already dumbed the taxi physics down from the beta. It takes practice. Just for reference I'm a real world pilot who owns a Yak-52 and has flown tail draggers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 it looks like the planes weigh are about 1 ounce

 

This.

 

This has been the root of my dissatisfaction with all the physics modeling in this title from the beginning.  It's why the ground handling is off, and why the planes all wobble about in the air.

 

And I still firmly believe it has everything to do with the fact that the game engine was developed for WW1 kites, and not for heavy by comparison WW2 aircraft.

 

I now await Luke FF's disparaging comments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say I like and enjoy the ground handling.. I mean, after all those front line airfields where often terrible in their conditions and probably bumpy as heck.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I now await Luke FF's disparaging comments.

 

Show some proof backing up your claims, and the team will consider what you have to say.

 

Now please, tell me how that was disparaging. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct, not disparaging, I offer apologies.

 

As to proof?   No way that is possible as we cannot see under the hood of the game.  It is however a very good explanation for the handling issues that the sim has had since day one, and frankly the only one that makes any sense, not only to me, but to a lot of other people that have tried the sim, found this aspect of it wanting, but can't be bothered to come here a post it and be told they are wrong, with no proof, or plausible explanation coming from the developers.

 

It works both ways Luke.   I know as many real pilots with tail dragger and high horsepower experience who think that things are amiss, as there are here that claim all is well.

 

I guess there isn't much that those of us who disagree can do about it other than uninstall and walk away...   Which is a pity don't you think?   The genre is on the rocks, yet everyone on both sides are so dug into their positions that I feel there is no hope of it ever being resolved, and the genre will just fade away...

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing is, feelings and emotions aren't going to change anything. You and your friends can feel all they want that things aren't right, but that's not going to change anything - especially as long as there are real-world pilots on the other side who feel things are right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The genre is on the rocks, yet everyone on both sides are so dug into their positions that I feel there is no hope of it ever being resolved, and the genre will just fade away...

 

You don't have to walk away if you're not happy with this game.  You can always develop a game that "feels" the way you believe it should feel.  Or find someone else who can do it.  But don't be surprised when you find something else wrong with their game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sound like a broken record sir.   Same comments for everyone that disagrees with your take on things..  "Make your own sim".

 

Oh well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You sound like a broken record sir.   Same comments for everyone that disagrees with your take on things..  "Make your own sim".

 

Oh well.

 

That's because it's your only option.  Your complaint is that this game doesn't feel right.  When you're asked for data, you don't have any.  What other options do you think that you have?  

 

BTW, it's not my take on things.  I have no input in the development of this game.  I also don't have a lot of options if I manage to convince myself that this game doesn't feel right.  I don't like CoD, and I'm not sure if DCS is ever going to have an appropriate map.  So this is it.  There really aren't any other options.  

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I do know they are going to look at the pogo sticks action from some of the planes; so don't worry about it until they announce it.

 

We were told they would look into to a little later..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are correct, not disparaging, I offer apologies.

 

As to proof?   No way that is possible as we cannot see under the hood of the game.  It is however a very good explanation for the handling issues that the sim has had since day one, and frankly the only one that makes any sense, not only to me, but to a lot of other people that have tried the sim, found this aspect of it wanting, but can't be bothered to come here a post it and be told they are wrong, with no proof, or plausible explanation coming from the developers.

 

It works both ways Luke.   I know as many real pilots with tail dragger and high horsepower experience who think that things are amiss, as there are here that claim all is well.

 

I guess there isn't much that those of us who disagree can do about it other than uninstall and walk away...   Which is a pity don't you think?   The genre is on the rocks, yet everyone on both sides are so dug into their positions that I feel there is no hope of it ever being resolved, and the genre will just fade away...

I'll admit the boucing is way over done but the solution is to not taxi in the unprepared part of the airport. It's only when you go off the runway or taxiway that you get in ruff spots. So I'm having a hard time seeing the issue, as for how the planes taxi and take off while on stable ground I think is quite realistic. The 109 in game is hard to land because the real 109 was aswell as many as half of the 109 lost in ww2 were destroyed in ground accidents either taking off or landing. These aren't Piper Cubs they are high performance fighters so one can not expect the ground handling to be docile like a Cub's.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...