Jump to content


Photo

JU 88 take off and taxi


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1 Knolly

Knolly
  • Member
  • Posts: 12

Posted 28 January 2017 - 08:39

Hi all,

I'm just starting to fly the 88 and I'm struggling with taxiing and take off, the thing seems to want to spin in both directions if you go off centre line even a little bit. I started off flying the 110 and have gotten pretty good at taxi and take off but the 88 seems a different beast altogether. I have watched a few videos on YouTube but I'm still having issues.

Is differential thrust a lot more important in the 88? I only have one throttle on my joystick so tend to change the engines together is there a good key mapping solution to help with this?

Any help would be appreciated.
  • 0

#2 Zippy-do-dar

Zippy-do-dar
  • Member
  • Posts: 11
  • Location:brum

Posted 28 January 2017 - 10:25

 I only have one throttle on my joystick so tend to change the engines together is there a good key mapping solution to help with this?
 

0= engines on/off

1= control on/off (left engine in cockpit view)

2=control on/off right engine

 

so i go 0 then select 1 adjust throttle (keep brakes on) then press 0 to select all engines and the throttles will be fixed with the difference in position. I take off like this in the 110 so the after take off i go 0 select 1 set throttle then select 2 and

it should bring throttle of number 2 engine in line


  • 0

#3 Knolly

Knolly
  • Member
  • Posts: 12

Posted 28 January 2017 - 17:55

Thanks I will give that a try
  • 0

#4 =TBAS=Sshadow14

=TBAS=Sshadow14
  • Member
  • Posts: 1265
  • Location:Australia

Posted 29 January 2017 - 05:47

What??

No need to mess around with throttle..

Just be gentle.

Start plane Leave prop rpm below 25%
The taxi like normal in any other german plane use the diff brakes and rudders .
same with bf110 no need to mess with props or pitch just start and taxi SLOW AND GENTLY


  • 0

                 791JFcf.jpgANn0ipP.jpg                  
/CPU: FX8350@ 4.3ghz /GPU: GTX 1060 G1 Gaming /RAM: 16GB@1875mhz
 /JOYSTICK: Saitek X-55 Hotas /PEDALS: Logitech Driving Force EX


#5 ShamrockOneFive

ShamrockOneFive
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2719

Posted 29 January 2017 - 19:03

How have you guys got your differential brakes mapped? I'm using a single button which can be challenging.


  • 0

#6 =TBAS=Sshadow14

=TBAS=Sshadow14
  • Member
  • Posts: 1265
  • Location:Australia

Posted 30 January 2017 - 00:23

yes map all 3 by default they are mapped.

but on the back of my hotas is have them mapped as pedals dont have toe brakes.
in many planes they are important for the simplest of ground procs


  • 0

                 791JFcf.jpgANn0ipP.jpg                  
/CPU: FX8350@ 4.3ghz /GPU: GTX 1060 G1 Gaming /RAM: 16GB@1875mhz
 /JOYSTICK: Saitek X-55 Hotas /PEDALS: Logitech Driving Force EX


#7 71st_AH_Scojo

71st_AH_Scojo
  • Member
  • Posts: 887
  • Location:Georgia, USA

Posted 31 January 2017 - 13:40

Here's what I do to get this sucker off the ground without turning it into a sliding boneyard:

 

Taxiing:

1) Taxi as slow as I can

2) Rely entirely on brakes during taxi

3) I switch to nose gunner view once I'm on the taxi pathway

 

Takeoff:

1) Stay in nose gunner view

2) SLOWLY increase throttle using rudder and brakes to keep her lined up (it'll be all brakes at first, but you'll feel the rudder slowly take hold soon)

3) Once the plane is rolling at a good speed and I have decent rudder authority, I quit using brakes

4) I give myself the full length of the runway before lifting off the ground(the plane comes up on two wheels very nicely and without a fully slammed weight, it may actually get into the air itself if you're using flaps)

5) Reduce engine throttle and rpm so you're in climb mode

6) If using flaps, purposefully put it in a shallow and steady climb. Get your speed up and get a good height before raising flaps

7) Upon raising flaps, pull that stick back until you cant feel your man bits anymore so you don't hit the ground

8) Reassure your nose gunner that the scary dip towards the trees was all a part of the plan without letting him see the sweat marks all over your uniform


Edited by 71st_AH_Scojo, 31 January 2017 - 13:43.

  • 0

Of all my accomplishments I may have achieved during the war, I am proudest of the fact that I never lost a wingman.                                           — Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, GAF

I mean, I had fast motor cars and fast motor bikes, and when I wasn't crashing airplanes, I was crashing motor bikes. It's all part of the game.      — Sir Harry Broadhurst, RAF, 12 victories WWII

Fighting in the air is not sport. It is scientific murder.                                                                                                                                                    — Captain Edward V. 'Eddie' Rickenbacker, USAS


#8 F/JG300_Gruber

F/JG300_Gruber
  • Member
  • Posts: 682

Posted 31 January 2017 - 18:40

Scojo's advices are good.

 

For taxiing, the slower the better. A ground crew should be able to follow you by jogging next to your plane. Faster is too fast.

Direction during taxiing is made with brakes. The 88 was known to have good brakes and an useless rudder on the ground. This is pretty well modeled in the game. 

 

On my own take off procedure :

I always use flaps for take off.

I set the elevator trim between 80 and 100% depending on weight and temperature

I open the throttle not too quickly, but not too slowly either. There is some kind of "soft spot" where when you increase throttle at the right speed, the plane almost go straight by itself needing very few correction.

I push reasonably on the yoke to raise the tail. Once the tail is raised, I use the rudder to correct the trajectory, but as long as the tailwheel is on the ground I rely almost exclusively on the brakes.

Take off speed is 200km/h. Sometimes I'm taking off sooner if lightly loaded but 180km/h is the bare minimum for the plane.


  • 0

5ISaUYS.pngnwwkBNc.png


#9 71st_AH_Scojo

71st_AH_Scojo
  • Member
  • Posts: 887
  • Location:Georgia, USA

Posted 31 January 2017 - 18:51

I open the throttle not too quickly, but not too slowly either. There is some kind of "soft spot" where when you increase throttle at the right speed, the plane almost go straight by itself needing very few correction.

I'd be interested in knowing how many "mississippis"(seconds) you count going from 0% throttle to 100% throttle. I don't think I've found the sweet spot yet as I still have to heavily rely on wheel brakes almost until my tail goes up in the air


  • 0

Of all my accomplishments I may have achieved during the war, I am proudest of the fact that I never lost a wingman.                                           — Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, GAF

I mean, I had fast motor cars and fast motor bikes, and when I wasn't crashing airplanes, I was crashing motor bikes. It's all part of the game.      — Sir Harry Broadhurst, RAF, 12 victories WWII

Fighting in the air is not sport. It is scientific murder.                                                                                                                                                    — Captain Edward V. 'Eddie' Rickenbacker, USAS


#10 =TBAS=Sshadow14

=TBAS=Sshadow14
  • Member
  • Posts: 1265
  • Location:Australia

Posted 31 January 2017 - 20:15

no need to use gunner view.. just move cockpit camera forward and to the left then you have a clear enough view ahead of cockpit to taxi and line up on targets


RE

 

I'd be interested in knowing how many "mississippis"(seconds) you count going from 0% throttle to 100% throttle. I don't think I've found the sweet spot yet as I still have to heavily rely on wheel brakes almost until my tail goes up in the air

RESET the cruise trims then i need minimal rudder input and a little brake usage to keep straight then i raise the tail @ 75-125kph
the Rotate @ 200-250kph..

Best in this plane is a Zero flaps take off if you know how.


  • 0

                 791JFcf.jpgANn0ipP.jpg                  
/CPU: FX8350@ 4.3ghz /GPU: GTX 1060 G1 Gaming /RAM: 16GB@1875mhz
 /JOYSTICK: Saitek X-55 Hotas /PEDALS: Logitech Driving Force EX


#11 SharpeXB

SharpeXB
  • Founder
  • Posts: 2802
  • Location:Dallas, TX

Posted 14 February 2017 - 02:45

I had some trouble on takeoff until I realized I was just not holding the tail down long enough. Keep the stick full back until you reach a decent speed for the rudder to become effective.
  • 0
Velocity Micro PC | Asus Z97-A | i7-4790K o.c.@4.7GHz | Corsair H80iGT Liquid CPU Cooler | 32GB DDR3-1600MHz Memory | EVGA GTX 1080 Ti SC 11GB | 240gb Intel 520 Series SSD | 850 W Corsair PSU | Windows 10 Home | Samsung U28D590D UHD 28” Monitor | Bose Companion 5 Speakers | CH Fighterstick | Ch Pro Throttle | CH Pro Pedals | TrackIR 5

#12 =TBAS=Sshadow14

=TBAS=Sshadow14
  • Member
  • Posts: 1265
  • Location:Australia

Posted 14 February 2017 - 05:05

Just add power slower and it goes straight..

ALSO TAXI WITH LESS THAN 25% PROP RPM.
Like i said above


  • 0

                 791JFcf.jpgANn0ipP.jpg                  
/CPU: FX8350@ 4.3ghz /GPU: GTX 1060 G1 Gaming /RAM: 16GB@1875mhz
 /JOYSTICK: Saitek X-55 Hotas /PEDALS: Logitech Driving Force EX


#13 216th_Retnek

216th_Retnek
  • Founder
  • Posts: 331
  • Location:Old Europe

Posted 09 March 2017 - 00:19

Most important factor to me is a reduced prop pitch at the beginning, 77 to 87%, makes it much more easy. Brakes at the beginning, but as soon as I gain rudder authority, I increase to 100 % pitch. Flaps in "start" and 30 % elevator trim. I sometimes find this "optimum throttle increase sweet spot", too, perhaps 3 to 4 sec until full throttle. But it changes too much as the conditions change, dirt strips vs. concrete runway f.e.

 

Imho the start handling of the Ju 88 in IL2-BoX has to be improved, even if one starts with reduced pitch. The large thrust of the paddle propeller blades seems to be too strong for the obvious lack of directional stability. If the tail gets an impulse it swings around with unstoppable energy while the main wheels, still running with weight on a dry concrete runway, behave like ski on a icy snow piste.

 

From a Finnish report about the Ju-88 start characteristics:

-----------

"... Control column was kept centered to prevent tail wheel reaction. Oil temperature had to be followed especially in the summer and take-off should be made with out unnessary delays. Before take of fuelpumps were engaged and flaps lowered to 25 degrees.

Throttle was opened carefully, as Jumo was a fast accelerator. If rpm rose over 2600, propellor pitch had to be pulled backwards. JK tried to turn to left quite strongly, and for that reason pilots often pushed left throttle ahead of the right one. Nose was slowly pushed to horisontal level, wheer the plane was let to accelerate to 170-185kmh; push required quite a lot of power like did the pull to lift the airplane up. During start trim would be rotated backwards. According to the manual take-off distance with 12.5 ton mass was 570m and over 20m high obstacle 1280m; but on our soft fields (Finland) it often was much longer than that. In practise the take-off couldn't be aborted on our 1000-1200m long fields but in the very beginning of take-off, critical stage being in the half way of the field.

After taking off climbing was continued in a shallow angle for the speed to build up to 200kmh and over - over the theoretical one-engine climb speed. Power was dropped to the 30 minute area 2400rpm/1.25ATA. Wheels were braked and pulled in right after the take-off (max speed 265kmh). In the 9 lamp instrument the highest 3 lights turned on when wheels were up and wheel control switch was returned to "0" position when hydraulic pressure was 85-95ATA. Retracting landing gear took 18-20 seconds. Flaps were pulled in at safe altitude because plane would drop when doing it. Climbing speed was set to 250kmh."

--------------


Edited by 216th_Retnek, 09 March 2017 - 00:20.

  • 1

#14 6./ZG26_5tuka

6./ZG26_5tuka
  • Tester
  • Posts: 3884
  • Location:Germany

Posted 09 March 2017 - 10:21

Best sources for procedure are always real manuals.

Attached File  Ju-88_rollen.jpg   195.28KB   0 downloads  Attached File  Ju-88_start.jpg   228.71KB   0 downloads Attached File  Ju-88_Start2.jpg   191.22KB   0 downloads

 

Most important points we get from that:

 

Taxiing:

- should be performed with help of differential thottle and rudder

- wth heavy loadouts the aircraft should be taxied with great caution and slow speed

- turning on ground should be limited

- turning on one wheel is forbidden

- brakes should be spared to prevent overheatign (not implemented ingame)

- elevator should be left in center position for taxiing

 

Takeoff:

- flaps to start position (25°)

- RPM lever to max

- swiftly increase throttle up to 'Start' position to get takeoff power (1.4 ata / 2600 RPM)

- overreving with throttle advance should be countered by a (temporary!) reduction of the RPM lever controll

- the aircrafts tendency to turn should be countered with (differential) engine power

- aircraft should be brought to horizontal attitude slowly and steadily

- only when reaching the min takeoff speed as appropiate for the chosen loadout start pulling back slightly to lift off

 

Some more things from my side:

- Reducing RPM on ground to 25% does no good and is inappropiate. Instead leave it at 100% and monitor your RPM gauge closely (1200 for taxiing at constant speed, 1500 for accelerating / turning). If the aircraft tries to break away you can counter it by applying a burst of throttle and using breaks + rudder to stop it.

 

- Set your trim properly before takeoff. The cruise setting is far to front heavy and will require high stick deflections for takeoff and climbing. In general I advise to use ~ -80 to -100% trim for takeoff and climbing depending on loadout  (the tailheavy trim range of the 88 is referred to as 'takeoff and climb' setting in the manual). That way you don't have to pull crazy to get it off the ground especially with heavy loadouts.

 

- If you have a shorter runway it's better to hold your brakes, throttle both engines up to takeoff power and release brakes when the aircraft starts rolling for maximum acceleration


  • 2

  YdcExnd.jpg Ju 87 D-3 4K Skin Template
Beta Tester Ju-52 Early Supporter Ju 52/3m g4 4K Skin Template


#15 =TBAS=Sshadow14

=TBAS=Sshadow14
  • Member
  • Posts: 1265
  • Location:Australia

Posted 09 March 2017 - 11:57

LMAO Thats a real life document..

Brakes dont overheat ingame
Also 88 just as easy to taxi as 111, 87 , 109. Just Dont use Rudder and just use diff brakes only Even easier.

Also Trim should not be set to Cruise for Take off.
Set Trim to take off for take off ..

:|


Edited by =R4T=Sshadow14, 09 March 2017 - 11:58.

  • 0

                 791JFcf.jpgANn0ipP.jpg                  
/CPU: FX8350@ 4.3ghz /GPU: GTX 1060 G1 Gaming /RAM: 16GB@1875mhz
 /JOYSTICK: Saitek X-55 Hotas /PEDALS: Logitech Driving Force EX


#16 6./ZG26_5tuka

6./ZG26_5tuka
  • Tester
  • Posts: 3884
  • Location:Germany

Posted 09 March 2017 - 12:30

LMAO Thats a real life document..

And the ingame one is modeled after real live documents.....your point is?


  • 0

  YdcExnd.jpg Ju 87 D-3 4K Skin Template
Beta Tester Ju-52 Early Supporter Ju 52/3m g4 4K Skin Template


#17 StG77_Kondor

StG77_Kondor
  • Founder
  • Posts: 184

Posted 09 March 2017 - 14:21

And the ingame one is modeled after real live documents.....your point is?

Don't waste your time with this one mate. 

Thanks for the original manual btw.


  • 1

Wir sind die schwarzen Husaren der Luft,

Die Stukas, die Stukas, die Stukas!


#18 71st_AH_Scojo

71st_AH_Scojo
  • Member
  • Posts: 887
  • Location:Georgia, USA

Posted 09 March 2017 - 14:45

I think he may be implying that you can cut corners in the game. And that's true considering in the Sim we don't have to worry about the legality of following procedure or worry about the sustainability of our planes.

 

For example, taxiing in the 88 for me is 30% or so throttle, full RPM, and I just use brakes. Then for takeoff I briskly increase throttle to full and use brakes to keep aligned if I need it before my rudder gains authority. I also almost always take off with no flaps unless I'm really heavy.

 

Obviously none of what I do follows that document and I think the humor shadow is finding is rooted in the fact that our methods work so well for us but are so far off from the document.


  • 0

Of all my accomplishments I may have achieved during the war, I am proudest of the fact that I never lost a wingman.                                           — Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, GAF

I mean, I had fast motor cars and fast motor bikes, and when I wasn't crashing airplanes, I was crashing motor bikes. It's all part of the game.      — Sir Harry Broadhurst, RAF, 12 victories WWII

Fighting in the air is not sport. It is scientific murder.                                                                                                                                                    — Captain Edward V. 'Eddie' Rickenbacker, USAS


#19 216th_Retnek

216th_Retnek
  • Founder
  • Posts: 331
  • Location:Old Europe

Posted 09 March 2017 - 15:19

Best sources for procedure are always real manuals.

...

That's fine in general, but the Luftwaffe and Junkers both might have had good reasons not to tell the full truth in the manuals. Manufacturers generally are not known to point on the weak side of their products and the Luftwaffe was not interested in frightening the young pilots additionally by presenting harsh warnings in the handbook. So I like reports written by third-party-pilots, like the Finnish pilots did for the German planes and procedures. In general they were allied and showed a positive attitude, but they had to write a honest handbook for their fellow pilots not allowing to hide the bad sides.

 

But I don't think there has been a need for a harsh warning - the Ju-88 was a mass product (ca. 15000 build) and it simply had to be sufficient friendly not to kill young, unexperienced pilots. There are hundreds of reports and in general the pilots concluded the Ju-88 had to be "treated with respect". But a Ju-88 being that erratic, volatile and dangerous like it is modelled in the early take-off-phase in IL2-BoX now, such a crate would have been (in)famous.

 

Imho the flight-model for the Ju-88 in IL2-BoX is still "work in progress" for the take-off-behaviour. And to a certain degree it will remain that way - no offence against the developers here. Such models are a result of complex multi-factor calculations and a lot of compromises. Finally it's an ART more than anything else to make it "feel right" for "most of the sim-pilots". The dev's always have to find a balance pleasing the hardcore crowd with realistic, "demanding" flight models while enjoying the casual pilots with a fine blend of characteristics typical for each plane. It won't sell with the need to practice for 10 hours just to master a first take-off.

 

We've seen such progress and fine-tuning several times during the last patches / updates, f.e. improving the ground handling of several Russian planes very much. I have to gain more experience with the Ju-88 taking-off under different conditions, at the moment she behaves erratic and unpredictable during take-off. I'm not that green, so I allow myself to point on it as a possible problem. Maybe the Ju-88 is modelled incomplete, maybe I don't understand the relevant parameters and have to try harder. Like that long-burner "flight model of Fw-190" - it might last years - if there are new data or compelling arguments the developers do respond and improve. And that's a fine tradition running from the first Il2-sim until now.


Edited by 216th_Retnek, 09 March 2017 - 20:40.

  • 0

#20 71st_AH_Scojo

71st_AH_Scojo
  • Member
  • Posts: 887
  • Location:Georgia, USA

Posted 09 March 2017 - 15:41

Expert mode should always be as close to reality as possible. It should in no way be intentionally dumbed down.

 

Normal or Easy mode, I don't care as I will never play them


  • 0

Of all my accomplishments I may have achieved during the war, I am proudest of the fact that I never lost a wingman.                                           — Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, GAF

I mean, I had fast motor cars and fast motor bikes, and when I wasn't crashing airplanes, I was crashing motor bikes. It's all part of the game.      — Sir Harry Broadhurst, RAF, 12 victories WWII

Fighting in the air is not sport. It is scientific murder.                                                                                                                                                    — Captain Edward V. 'Eddie' Rickenbacker, USAS


#21 6./ZG26_5tuka

6./ZG26_5tuka
  • Tester
  • Posts: 3884
  • Location:Germany

Posted 09 March 2017 - 16:14

That's fine in general, but the Luftwaffe and Junkers both might have had good reasons not to tell the full truth in the manuals. Manufacturers generally are not known to point on the weak side of their products and the Luftwaffe was not interested in frightening the young pilots additionally by presenting harsh warnings in the handbook. So I like reports written by third-party-pilots, like the Finnish pilots did for the German planes and procedures. In general they were allied and showed a positive attitude, but they had to write a honest handbook for their fellow pilots not allowing to hide the bad sides.

In my opinion manufacturer recommendations / manuals and pilot reports go hand in hand. There's no reason in valuing one moer than the other since pilots did learn their "stuff" from these manuals to begin with. It's a bit overctiticised to me to say Junkers did hide the negative aspects of the aircraft since the manual does contain some warnings and remarks some of the issues also present ingame.

I have to admint I didn't fly the 88 for a month and might not be 'up to date' but I have not expirienced anything with it severe enought to indicate there might be an error in the FM (despite me not having a split thottle which I've hered makes it much more controllabel). It remembers me of the old 'can't land the Ju 88' times when people argued it was wrong because they couldn't land it properly. Turned out those people were just using a wrong techniqe and after following the 'real live document' instructions landings weren't so bad anymore.

I think he may be implying that you can cut corners in the game. And that's true considering in the Sim we don't have to worry about the legality of following procedure or worry about the sustainability of our planes.

Not only legality but also technical issues (if brakes overheat they can get stuck or damage the rubber wheels) but I agree with you. Still, despite there probably being more efficient ways to do it ingame, it's helpfull to know more about how the real aircraft was supposed to be operated to get a better picture of how it works.

Edited by 6./ZG26_5tuka, 09 March 2017 - 16:24.

  • 0

  YdcExnd.jpg Ju 87 D-3 4K Skin Template
Beta Tester Ju-52 Early Supporter Ju 52/3m g4 4K Skin Template


#22 216th_Retnek

216th_Retnek
  • Founder
  • Posts: 331
  • Location:Old Europe

Posted 09 March 2017 - 17:57

... despite me not having a split thottle which I've hered makes it much more controllabel ...

I use such a split-throttle configuration, rudder-pedals with brakes and a yoke. Tried a lot of combinations, starting from handbook procedures and reports - in short: no joy with "real" procedures. Imho there's no need for frustration or too much self-doubt, at the moment it's just a weak point within the sim.


  • 0

#23 71st_AH_Scojo

71st_AH_Scojo
  • Member
  • Posts: 887
  • Location:Georgia, USA

Posted 09 March 2017 - 19:19

Not only legality but also technical issues

I said sustainability as well


  • 0

Of all my accomplishments I may have achieved during the war, I am proudest of the fact that I never lost a wingman.                                           — Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, GAF

I mean, I had fast motor cars and fast motor bikes, and when I wasn't crashing airplanes, I was crashing motor bikes. It's all part of the game.      — Sir Harry Broadhurst, RAF, 12 victories WWII

Fighting in the air is not sport. It is scientific murder.                                                                                                                                                    — Captain Edward V. 'Eddie' Rickenbacker, USAS


#24 [CPT]Pike*HarryM

[CPT]Pike*HarryM
  • Member
  • Posts: 508
  • Location:Paso Robles, CA

Posted 09 March 2017 - 19:45

I've tried diff throttle to steer in various planes, never had any success, very hard to control. I set it up to counteract the pull (10% or so more on one engine) then use brakes to steer. 


  • 0

kxHDtZx.jpgvfXwFyV.jpg


#25 71st_AH_Scojo

71st_AH_Scojo
  • Member
  • Posts: 887
  • Location:Georgia, USA

Posted 10 March 2017 - 11:43

I've tried diff throttle to steer in various planes, never had any success, very hard to control. I set it up to counteract the pull (10% or so more on one engine) then use brakes to steer. 

Yeah, differential throttle has always been a no-go for me. No matter how gingerly I operate it, it's too difficult. I only use it if it's necessary because of wind during taxi


  • 0

Of all my accomplishments I may have achieved during the war, I am proudest of the fact that I never lost a wingman.                                           — Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, GAF

I mean, I had fast motor cars and fast motor bikes, and when I wasn't crashing airplanes, I was crashing motor bikes. It's all part of the game.      — Sir Harry Broadhurst, RAF, 12 victories WWII

Fighting in the air is not sport. It is scientific murder.                                                                                                                                                    — Captain Edward V. 'Eddie' Rickenbacker, USAS


#26 Dakpilot

Dakpilot
  • Founder
  • Posts: 3864
  • Location:Afrika

Posted 10 March 2017 - 11:59

I've tried diff throttle to steer in various planes, never had any success, very hard to control. I set it up to counteract the pull (10% or so more on one engine) then use brakes to steer. 

 

 

Don't tell em Pike

 

youtube.com/watch?v=bhY-Y0I8DkY

 

On a more serious note, (and yes I know there is a difference between Cprl and Cptn Pike :) ) even after a shortish break I find I am incredibly rusty even when I was vaguely proficient

 

 Differential throttle steering is also one of those things that it harder to learn in the sim than IRL and I get rusty at this also

 

Practice with the correct info is the key, with incorrect info practice is not very beneficial and even frustrating and detrimental.

 

I see many people comment (I am generalising about no-one in particular, and about many aircraft, and many threads)  "if this aircraft was that hard it would never be passed into combat use" however all real pilots had serious training, with correct info, and a large infrastructure of knowledge around him.

 

As FM gets more fidelity flying gets harder (or at least has much more depth and need for knowledge, I really wonder if each aircraft should have a sticky, heavily edited and moderated just for info, the new IL-2 wiki would be a good source/home but to keep it 'correct' would be a large amount of work.

 

The video's and advice given by Han in DD # 137 regarding Mig-3 are a good example, and would be great to have for every aircraft, organized and Stickied with their own thread, I feel this kind of easily accessible info would be great for Vet and newcomer alike.

 

There are many 'techniques' that do work fine in the sim, even though not correct, however they often teach bad habits that can adversely affect other aircraft handling (notwithstanding the occasional FM bugs that need to be weeded and sorted out) 

 

I think I have rambled off topic enough, but thanks for all the info, need to get back into Ju-88 when I have some time!

 

Cheers Dakpilot


  • 1

i5 3570K at 4,46Ghz//H100i//P8Z77-I-DELUXE//16GB 1600mhz ram//Galax GTX970 4GB EXOC//Samsung Evo840 128gbSSD x2//LG 49" 3840 X 2160//MSFFB2// Saitek throttle quadrant//Win10-64bit


#27 =TBAS=Sshadow14

=TBAS=Sshadow14
  • Member
  • Posts: 1265
  • Location:Australia

Posted 11 March 2017 - 13:01

My point is brakes in game do not overheat yet, Tyres do not wear out.

Abuse both brakes and tyres as much as possible so you can taxi as fast and clean as possible without colliding into other players


  • 0

                 791JFcf.jpgANn0ipP.jpg                  
/CPU: FX8350@ 4.3ghz /GPU: GTX 1060 G1 Gaming /RAM: 16GB@1875mhz
 /JOYSTICK: Saitek X-55 Hotas /PEDALS: Logitech Driving Force EX


#28 216th_Retnek

216th_Retnek
  • Founder
  • Posts: 331
  • Location:Old Europe

Posted 11 March 2017 - 17:46

 

...

I see many people comment (I am generalising about no-one in particular, and about many aircraft, and many threads)  "if this aircraft was that hard it would never be passed into combat use"

...

regarding Mig-3 are a good example

...

Hm, I have to disagree at the points cited above. Even the US in WW2 with the most relaxed, long lasting and in-deep pilot training had to learn it the hard way (Marauder and Corsair): war planes for a massively enlarged air force must handle friendly and forgiving. The Me-109 was famous for her dangerous behaviour, too - but the Germans never stopped building that plane simply because of the expected production losses during the switch-over to another plane. They paid with hundreds of killed pilots for a sticking with a plane not suited for an extended air force. The Seafire is another example - war planes produced in masses have to have an easy handling.

  The weak points of the mass build war planes are well known, the painful work to stay in formation with the B-24 f.e.is noted often. The Ju-88 was a mass product, too. And it isn't famous for complex take-off procedures or being dangerous during take-off in general.

 

There is a contrast between the Ju-88 and the Mig-3 take-off: the Mig-3 is difficult, but predicable - so one can learn. The Ju-88 imho is not until there is at least some rudder regime. I don't know if the procedures one needs in IL2-BoX to take-off with a Mig-3 follow those used in WW2. If I follow the procedures from WW2 to take off with the Ju-88 in Il2-BoX I have a great chance to damage the plane.


  • 0

#29 LukeFF

LukeFF
  • Tester
  • Posts: 5050
  • Location:Redlands, California

Posted 14 March 2017 - 17:16

In one of the Black Cross / Red Star books, a former Ju 88 pilot said the plane could be a bit of a "diva" and as such one that could get away from the pilot's control if one was not especially careful. Personally, I don't see anything at the time with the way that it's modeled that contradicts that assessment.


  • 1

#30 Geleitzug

Geleitzug
  • Member
  • Posts: 501
  • Location:Cockpit

Posted 14 March 2017 - 17:59

In one of the Black Cross / Red Star books, a former Ju 88 pilot said the plane could be a bit of a "diva" and as such one that could get away from the pilot's control if one was not especially careful. Personally, I don't see anything at the time with the way that it's modeled that contradicts that assessment.

 

Fully agreed with that - for take-off one has to be very careful with power (just slightly increase thrust) and touching the brakes for correction of the direction. Always gently touch the brakes - a little too much and the diva will swerve...

 

I personally take-off as follows (and in most cases it works :biggrin:):

 

Very important: always ensure first that the RPM and power/throttle input is selected for both engines simultaneously ! - most of my take-off crashes at the beginning were a result of the fact that I have - unintentionally of course - selected only one engine for the RPM input...

 

- line up on runway and make sure that the tailwheel is positioned straight-on

- set flaps to "start" position

- use full brakes and keep them

- cooler/radiators full open (100%)

- set RPM to 100%, carefully increase power to ~ 60%

- release both brakes and let the plane roll, carefully increase power to ~ 95%

- use brakes (gently) for eventual corrections up until plane's tail get's up and the rudder get effective (from there on use rudder for correction)

- rotate at approx. 190 km/h and advance with with a small climb rate only - the first goal is to gain speed quickly

- immediately after rotation retract gear

- do not retract flaps before you have reached an alttitude of min. 500m as uplift is reduced thereby and plane will drop a bit  

- obey the power and RPM limits, so immediately after gaining a considerable alttitude and speed (> 200 km/h) reduced power and RPM to "climb power"

- ensure that your speed does never fall below ~ 180 km/h as the stall speed limit is ~ 170km/h and at this speed the "diva" will inevitably side-slip and crash


Edited by Geleitzug, 14 March 2017 - 18:06.

  • 0

 


#31 71st_AH_Scojo

71st_AH_Scojo
  • Member
  • Posts: 887
  • Location:Georgia, USA

Posted 15 March 2017 - 11:09

In one of the Black Cross / Red Star books, a former Ju 88 pilot said the plane could be a bit of a "diva" and as such one that could get away from the pilot's control if one was not especially careful. Personally, I don't see anything at the time with the way that it's modeled that contradicts that assessment.

I agree. Hasty take-offs in that plane always have a great chance to go haywire for me even though I now have lots of successful take-offs in it.

 

As far as dumbing down taxi and take-off, in a sim you also have the ability to practice as much and as hard as possible. Another reason I favor full realism for expert mode. If you can't cut it, crash some planes and learn how.


  • 0

Of all my accomplishments I may have achieved during the war, I am proudest of the fact that I never lost a wingman.                                           — Colonel Erich 'Bubi' Hartmann, GAF

I mean, I had fast motor cars and fast motor bikes, and when I wasn't crashing airplanes, I was crashing motor bikes. It's all part of the game.      — Sir Harry Broadhurst, RAF, 12 victories WWII

Fighting in the air is not sport. It is scientific murder.                                                                                                                                                    — Captain Edward V. 'Eddie' Rickenbacker, USAS





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users