Question - why is taxiing so difficult?

[Rjel]

As awesome as it is, this sim is already easy mode in many ways, if they modelled torque to be realistic half the people flying would quit.

 

That would be representative of the wash out rate of the U.S. aviation military in WWII. I don't think most us can accept the fact we just play at being fighter jocks or hot shot bomber boys. Most of us are just wannabes that couldn't have made into the pilot ranks back then.

[Capt_Stubing]

As very interesting as that series was, the real facts are easily found without 'dramatising'  from a TV programme 

 

Conceived in '39 and introduced introduced in '40 

 

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

 

https://ww2aircraft.net/forum/threads/raf-pilot-training-hours-1940.25873/page-2

 

Raf training is very documented from 35' onwards it is not needed to resort to 'TV' clips, and as much as the above links do not give all the info, it is easily found with little effort

 

Whilst a single pilots letter to his parents can be a  fascinating insiight, the overall facts are more clear, all of which has little bearing on taildragger ground handling (at the time called 'conventional' landing gear) experience of the average Spitfire pilot .

 

True, 700hp was a bit of an exaggerated wild thumb suck of 30% power of the average fighter,   but not too unrealistic, I have had to use 100% power to initiate taxiing from standstill on dirt/grass in a 40,000lbs aircraft with 10,000hp so 30/40% in a 10,000lbs fighter does not seem too extreme

 

Cheers Dakpilot

Perhaps the quotes/stories from the folks that actually took the training and flew during that period really has no meaning.  I had zero training in my first Tail Dragger and was checked out in as little as 5 hours. Certainly it wasn't a 1500HP+ war machine but none the less you don't need 100s of hours to be proficient at taxing take offs and landings to be safe.  Back OT... 

[216th_Jordan]

Oh, the Spitfires terrific ground handling in BoS is so terribly overmoddeled!! wait. There's not Spitfire in BoS, so why use it as an Argument against the handling in the sim? Every BoS plane handles differently on the ground.

[sport02]

it was the same for landing in Bos , there was many discussions about bounce when landing but many pilots forget that their speed is too fast and if you respect the real procedure it's ok in the game .

 

what about real procedure about taxing for each plane ?

 

for me at arround 1000 rpm or less  for all planes the taxing is out problem in Bos in the most of case , and we must d' ont forget that the plane can accelerate despite this low rpm and requires to cutting the power  per moment .

 generaly in games it's difficult to estimate speed and it's necessary to Watch the speed indicator , but nonetheless  the sensibility of planes to make circles seems too much in the sim and perhaps should be tweaked , it's similar or the same with Dcs .

Edited May 5, 2016 by sport02

[1./ZG1_ElHadji]

I am one of those who think ground handling is wrong. And I have a few questions to those that claim it is realistic:

 

Why is ground handling different on the Stalingrad map (worse) compared to the Moscow map? If Stalingrad ground handling is realistic then the Moscow ground handling is wrong or vice versa. Which is it?

 

Why can I taxi a Bf 110 exactly like a Russian plane without using differential brakes or L/R throttle? I have mapped the brake to my HOTAS and use rudder input to turn. Shouldn't work like that... (Method works with the Ju88 and 109 as well).

 

I understand that ground handling was "tweaked" on the Stalingrad map to prevent muppets from taking off without taxiing to the runway. Question is wether it is realistic or not. I know what I think.

[wtornado]

Oh, the Spitfires terrific ground handling in BoS is so terribly overmoddeled!! wait. There's not Spitfire in BoS, so why use it as an Argument against the handling in the sim? Every BoS plane handles differently on the ground.

The reason is that if there was a Spitfire in the sim no one could complain about it because everyone would

be happy flying the best WWII piston fighter of WWII.

 

You do not have to over model perfection like the Spitfire just make it as its perfect self.

 

I know what I would be flying who else would fly the Spitfire?

[Ala13_ManOWar]

I understand that ground handling was "tweaked" on the Stalingrad map to prevent muppets from taking off without taxiing to the runway. Question is wether it is realistic or not. I know what I think.

If that's the reason they didn't achieve it, I can take off easily out of the field.

 

S!

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

I am one of those who think ground handling is wrong. And I have a few questions to those that claim it is realistic:

 

Why is ground handling different on the Stalingrad map (worse) compared to the Moscow map? If Stalingrad ground handling is realistic then the Moscow ground handling is wrong or vice versa. Which is it?

 

Why can I taxi a Bf 110 exactly like a Russian plane without using differential brakes or L/R throttle? I have mapped the brake to my HOTAS and use rudder input to turn. Shouldn't work like that... (Method works with the Ju88 and 109 as well).

 

I understand that ground handling was "tweaked" on the Stalingrad map to prevent muppets from taking off without taxiing to the runway. Question is wether it is realistic or not. I know what I think.

1.Wheb applying rudder and hittibg the vrake button the game will automaticly put more brake pressure on the side you push rudder to. Thats no physical incorrectness but simplification for people without rudder pedals.

 

2. Moscow map prpbably has different landscape. Either way I agree taxiing feels better on Moscow and wojldnt mind them copyibgng the settings over to Stalingrad.

 

3. Rough terrain is modeled quite good, whats wrong currently is the snow mechanics (big aircraft get stuck too easily). Another issue is thaz there are only 3 terrain types as for now, means prepared runway, rough terrain and ice. Would ve nice to get spme intermedium ones to make ground handling mechanics more detailed and surface dependent.

[SharpeXB]

1.When applying rudder and hitting the brake button the game will automaticly put more brake pressure on the side you push rudder to. Thats no physical incorrectness but simplification for people without rudder pedals.

That's how the brakes in some planes (All Russian, MC202) actually work, apply the brake lever or button on the stick and then moving the rudder pedals directs the braking to either side.

Edited May 5, 2016 by SharpeXB

[1./ZG1_ElHadji]

Which you should be able to do ManOWar. I just read a book based on interviews with German WWII aces written by Swedish historian Lt Col Jan Forsberg (he also conducted the interviews). In one chapter Hans-Ulrich Rudel describes scrambles with 109's and 87's taking off in all directions straight from the parking area. So it should definatly be doable.

 

About the book:

 

It is called "Luftwaffes Elit" (The Elite of the Luftwaffe) and it is written by Jan Forsberg who is a teacher at the military academy in Stockholm. The book is based on interviews he made with Hans-Ulrich Rudel, Heinz Knoke, Hajo Herrmann and Tom Thomas. Forsberg met Rudel the first time in 1980, Knoke in 1984, Thomas in 2007 and Herrmann in 2008 and he became friends with several of them which resulted in more than one interview. Very interesting read but I don't think that book has been translated to any other language.

That's how the brakes in some planes (All Russian, MC202) actually work, apply the brake lever or button on the stick and then moving the rudder pedals directs the braking to either side.

 

But it is not how taxiing in German planes with differential brakes should be done... As Stuka mentions above, it is a simplification for gameplay reasons. That makes me wonder what else has been added to Il-2 for gameplay reasons which isn't realistic.

[JtD]

Since taxiing was supposed to be done with tail wheel unlocked on the Fw190, and there are videos of Fw190 turning on run- and taxiways with speeds of up to around 40, would someone mind showing me a video taxiing at 30-40 km/h with tail wheel unlocked through several 90° turns in BoS?

[Dakpilot]

Which you should be able to do ManOWar. I just read a book based on interviews with German WWII aces written by Swedish historian Lt Col Jan Forsberg (he also conducted the interviews). In one chapter Hans-Ulrich Rudel describes scrambles with 109's and 87's taking off in all directions straight from the parking area. So it should definatly be doable.

 

About the book:

 

It is called "Luftwaffes Elit" (The Elite of the Luftwaffe) and it is written by Jan Forsberg who is a teacher at the military academy in Stockholm. The book is based on interviews he made with Hans-Ulrich Rudel, Heinz Knoke, Hajo Herrmann and Tom Thomas. Forsberg met Rudel the first time in 1980, Knoke in 1984, Thomas in 2007 and Herrmann in 2008 and he became friends with several of them which resulted in more than one interview. Very interesting read but I don't think that book has been translated to any other language.

 

But it is not how taxiing in German planes with differential brakes should be done... As Stuka mentions above, it is a simplification for gameplay reasons. That makes me wonder what else has been added to Il-2 for gameplay reasons which isn't realistic.

 

This would very much be dependant on each individual Airfield layout, at an established 'WWI' style prepared grass airfield designed to take off into whichever way the wind direction was, this can be easily achieved, and BoM has some very nicely produced airfields of that type

 

At a more traditional runway and prepared taxiway type airfield, taking off in any direction should be very hazardous, as in real life, aircraft do not make very good cross country vehicles at all

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[BlitzPig_EL]

About the Stalingrad vs. Moscow map ground handling differences...

 

I suspect that the Moscow autumn map has a friction modifier that is actually designed as "autumn" where as the "friction modifier" values on the Stalingrad maps, summer or winter, are all set for winter conditions.

 

One of the friends of the Pigs has noted since he came back to flying wit us that the the ground handling is very reminiscent of Rise of Flight.  The aircraft all feel like canvas kites, not heavy by comparison WW2 aircraft.  This is something I have maintained since day one.  For whatever reason, on the ground or in the air, the DN engine that was originally built to model WW1, is struggling with translating the proper handling of heavier and much faster aircraft.

[sport02]

   Handley Page 0-400 6000 kg  with total charge is not exactly an light plane

[BlitzPig_EL]

And it was ridiculously modeled at first.  Remember the threads about it being able to keep flying if the wings outside the engines were shot off?

 

I do.

 

This game engine has always had issues translating heavy aircraft FMs into believable by the user actions, I'm not alone in thinking this either.   Can I, or anyone else show definitive proof of this?  No.  Without hacking the game, and being able to understand the coding, there is no way to know for sure, the devs will certainly never admit such a problem, if it is real.

 

But, IMHO, it is a very plausible explanation for some of the oddities experienced in the FMs.  It also explains, perhaps, why the lightest fighter in the sim, the I 16, is in some ways the easiest aircraft to fly, and has an FM that is very believable.

Edited May 5, 2016 by BlitzPig_EL

[SharpeXB]

In one chapter Hans-Ulrich Rudel describes scrambles with 109's and 87's taking off in all directions straight from the parking area. So it should definatly be doable.

 

The ability to do that would depend on the airfield and ground. Certainly in the snow this would be impossible or suicidal. Taking off in a combat loaded plane, even on a good runway is dangerous. Plenty of pilots were killed or seriously injured by a blown tire or patch of water.

The behavior by many players in this game would in the real world, result in a court martial. No real pilot would take off straight from the parking the way the noobs do in BoS.

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/21985-question-wol-admins-regarding-runway-behavior/?p=355160

 

But it is not how taxiing in German planes with differential brakes should be done... As Stuka mentions above, it is a simplification for gameplay reasons.

Are you sure? The rudder with enough airflow would steer the plane by itself regardless. And then there's still the prop effect. Edited May 5, 2016 by SharpeXB

[sport02]

And it was ridiculously modeled at first.  Remember the threads about it being able to keep flying if the wings outside the engines were shot off?

 

 

 

 it was a bug , nothing to do  with the engine game

[Ala13_ManOWar]

Which you should be able to do ManOWar. I just read a book based on interviews with German WWII aces written by Swedish historian Lt Col Jan Forsberg (he also conducted the interviews). In one chapter Hans-Ulrich Rudel describes scrambles with 109's and 87's taking off in all directions straight from the parking area. So it should definatly be doable.

Well yes, technically you should be able but IRL not all the countryside is suitable and not all the aeroplanes are prepared to do so. Also remember about that "all directions" they used circular airfields to be able to do so, here in BoS we only have runway airfields available.

 

S!

[tovarisch]

Taxi is really difficult since last version. Specially big aircraft (Pe2) get stuck on the ground if you are a second out of the path, and this is really annoying. I do not think this is realistic. Also landing is weird and dangerous with so much bouncing.

I imagine, in real life no one would like to fly such airplanes if landings were like that. But I am sure devs. will adjust these things. All in all, the game is awesome and an excellent job.

On the other hand, the game looks much more smooth and fluent for low specs computers like mine. So I appreciate it.

Edited May 5, 2016 by tovarisch

[SharpeXB]

Bouncing upon landing is also the result of bad technique and lack of practice. Once again. Watch the 1940s training films linked on the forum here to understand the correct procedure.

[Capt_Stubing]

Oh, the Spitfires terrific ground handling in BoS is so terribly overmoddeled!! wait. There's not Spitfire in BoS, so why use it as an Argument against the handling in the sim? Every BoS plane handles differently on the ground.

 

You missed the point entirely.  It was argued people need to train to taxi various aircraft.  The point I brought up in which someone shouted BS was the fact Spitfire Pilots had very little training during BoB.  The links I provided had a TV show which brought 4 different pilots to go through the same type of training the pilots had before they fly a real spitfire.  The show's source is the Imperial War Museum and they interview several Spitfire pilots and they talk at length about their experience.  It was well put together and worth watching.

 

Moving forward...  As it has been mentioned it could be the game engine has a problem with the way aircraft are modeled (ground handling) given they started out with WWII airplanes.  Either way taxing is odd in this sim.

[LukeFF]

 

 

One of the friends of the Pigs has noted since he came back to flying wit us that the the ground handling is very reminiscent of Rise of Flight.  The aircraft all feel like canvas kites, not heavy by comparison WW2 aircraft.  This is something I have maintained since day one.  For whatever reason, on the ground or in the air, the DN engine that was originally built to model WW1, is struggling with translating the proper handling of heavier and much faster aircraft.

 

Sorry, but that's still pure supposition. 

[SharpeXB]

Everything you need to know about handling these planes is here

http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/12346-basic-flight-non-combat-training-films-the40s/?do=findComment&comment=234161

Watch, learn and practice before complaining that the game is broken.

Edited May 5, 2016 by SharpeXB

[LukeFF]

I imagine, in real life no one would like to fly such airplanes if landings were like that.

 

Watch from 12:00 onwards, and watch how much that plane bounces on landing. And remember, this was a training film.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBoDaD-om5k  

[SharpeXB]

Then there's this classic bad Spitfire landing. Whoopsydaisy!

 

Edited May 5, 2016 by SharpeXB

[LeRocket]

if the ground handling is suppose to be similar in BoS as RoF, then i don't think the argument against ground handling would be hard =/= realism. rise of flight is very easy and simple to drive around on the ground. just throttle up, point and go.

[Dakpilot]

Since WWI bernoulli's principle has not changed, a pound and a kilogram weigh the same and the physics of flight have not changed, the FM is math based and I don't believe a 'WWI' algorithm was included in DN engine to give a "special" feel

 

The bug of aircraft flying with parts of wings missing is a visual graphic damage issue, with the FM not representing what was visually seen, graphic error not DN FM error

 

Whatever the reason experienced for 'lightweightness' is due to the way control inputs are translated, to simply say DN engine was from a WWI sim therefore the aircraft will fly like WWI kites, I feel is a red herring and a great underestimation of the complex FM and physics

 

There are many things that can be improved but continuing to use the "WWI Sim roots" as a reason/excuse for criticism by suggesting an inherent built in limit in the game engine, I feel is not very productive or constructive, and just repeated from toxic CLoD/RoF/BoS very early arguments/days without any form of real science behind the subject.

 

Flying the HE-111 gives a great sense of weight and inertia using the same DN engine, just my 2 cents 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Cloyd]

...a pound and a kilogram weigh the same...

 

Well, there's the problem! Somebody used the wrong units! A pound and a kilogram DO NOT weigh the same!

 

Just kidding Dak, I know what you meant. But when I first read it I was a little taken aback.

 

Cloyd

[1./ZG1_ElHadji]

The bouncing is pretty serious even when taxiing. Look at the planes behind me in this video. We are talking about an aircraft weighing around 5.1 tons here (empty - the planes in the video have a full tank, ammo and bomb load) leaving the ground with all three wheels while taxiing. Video captured during a InWar mission on the Stalingrad map a few weeks ago.

 

 

Here is me trying to takeoff in a Bf 109, also on the Stalingrad map. Full torque, no brakes and the plane wouldn't move.:

 

 

Something IS wrong with ground handling on the Stalingrad map. At least in relation to certain aircraft.

[216th_Jordan]

ElHadji, the bouncing in Multiplayer is only visible to other players that exaggerated. It has got to do with bandwidth and lag, set your Internet to 4mb download for example and you will see way less of that (If the server can handle that amount of traffic on all players.).

[SharpeXB]

ElHadji, the bouncing in Multiplayer is only visible to other players that exaggerated. It has got to do with bandwidth and lag, set your Internet to 4mb download for example and you will see way less of that (If the server can handle that amount of traffic on all players.).

That was really bugging me too till I discovered this solution!

[sport02]

yes the problem  is with  lag in multiplayers ,

 

 independently of that ,  @EIHadji for your plane ; I take the problem on  the other side :

for me is not a problem with physics of  the plane , the boucing depending with how the ground is modelised , also in game the ground is more difficult than we usually know , it's a choice of the developers to have this bad and difficult ground .

for 109 perhaps a bug sometimes , I have a situation with the ju88 ( not finish ? ) , motors off  , the plane  going in circle indefinitely , it's stop only when I use the brake !!

Edited May 5, 2016 by sport02

[1./ZG1_ElHadji]

ElHadji, the bouncing in Multiplayer is only visible to other players that exaggerated. It has got to do with bandwidth and lag, set your Internet to 4mb download for example and you will see way less of that (If the server can handle that amount of traffic on all players.).

 

I guess that makes sense to some degree. Will I see less bouncing if I decrease my DL from 10 to 4? The funny thing is that when I play with the same people on the Moscow map I never see any bouncing like that.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Luke, it is my supposition, and quite a few others as well.  One of the BlitzPigs flew Jaguars with 6 Squadron RAF, and his first comment upon flying BoS for the first time over the weekend was that these aircraft fly like they don't weigh anything.

 

Currently it is the only thing that makes any sense out of the FMs in BoS/BoM, in regards some of the more controversial aspects of aircraft dynamics, both in the air, and on the ground.

If you can shed some factual light on this, I'm open to a calm, enlightening discussion of it.

 

I come here to ask questions and to learn, it's the only reason I raise these issues.

[sport02]

and others real pilots say that it's good , it's discussion without end , actualy a french helicopter in dcs develloped with a real pilot and another one as play said fm are bad

Edited May 5, 2016 by sport02

[Capt_Stubing]

Let's take a poll from the RL Pilots in this forum...

[216th_Jordan]

I guess that makes sense to some degree. Will I see less bouncing if I decrease my DL from 10 to 4? The funny thing is that when I play with the same people on the Moscow map I never see any bouncing like that.

 

Hmm, it should be better with 10mb/s. I think this is more of a server sided problem then (like based far from your place). Thats the only thing that would make sense to me as I don't have that jumpy behaviour online on any map. (30ms ping on WoL for example)

 

@Blitzpig

 

What does that mean: no weight? Stall your plane and you will very fast feel that it does have weight and quite a lot of it. I never understood that "argument". How and when should planes have no weight? For me they often even seem too heavy (emphasis on 'seem'). Anyway, weight is one of the simplest calculations in this engine, or any physics engine. (I hope we agree on this one) So I thought maybe you meant something else with 'no weight', like a specific behaviour, but I can't quite figure it out.

Edited May 6, 2016 by 71st_AH_Jordan

[Pharoah]

Let's take a poll from the RL Pilots in this forum...

 

as I've said before, we have to remember this is a GAME. I'm assuming none of us are trained military pilots and/or trained in the actual operation of these a/c. Its a game. My point is, there should be more focus on what you do when you're in the air (managing your engines, trying to get to the target, dropping bombs accurately, dodging flak, getting home and landing safely..bumps and all)...NOT wasting valuable time trying to taxi. It is a frustrating experience when you go through the startup procedure and taxi out only to get bogged down in mud/snow and then end up going around in circles trying to get out of it...or being one of 3 stuck behind someone doing the exact thing (happens usually at the start of missions on MP servers). People (esp fighters) still take off straight. Why waste your time? I fly bombers 100% of the time so I need to be on firm ground so I will persevere but I'm just saying it shouldn't be made to be that difficult.

 

You can't have 'the taxiing must be realistic' and yet press 'Ctrl E to start engines'. wtf?

[SharpeXB]

and his first comment upon flying BoS for the first time over the weekend was that these aircraft fly like they don't weigh anything.

 

If you want the developers to consider revisions to the FM, you have to provide input that's more specific than "like they don't weigh anything". What exactly does that mean? The climb rate is too high? The roll rate is too fast? Which aircraft?

And you'll need to provide specific data to support your claim. The team has better things to do than constantly revise the FM based on some undefined opinion of one player. They do listen, but only if you provide the information in the correct manner.

[BraveSirRobin]

Let's take a poll from the RL Pilots in this forum...

 

There are probably very few RL 109, Yak, or other such pilots qualified to respond to that poll.