Ground Loop Simulation in BOS

[AKA_Wayno]

I flew Navy fighters from 1950 until 1960, about 1200 hours total. I am a retired Boeing Test Engineer, 1960 until 1993. I have been flying Il-2 since it was originated. I have all the Il-2 simulations to date with early purchase on what is still to come. But I will not fly the Battle of Stalingrad sim until you fix "the terrible Ground loop simulation". No fighter airplane ever designed goes into a ground loop as you role out of the chocks! No heavy fighter plane has the ground loop characteristics that you have designed into BOS. I had one ground loop occur in my 20 years of flying. It happened on my first solo flight in a SNJ-5 (AT-6). In the P-40 that is simulated, it is almost impossible to get to the runway, in a "No Wind" condition , without ground looping  all the way out! Many other of the BOS planes have a similar problem and I refuse to fly such a glaring simulation error! This is a software failure on the programmer's part.  Please set it right!

 

Wayno sends...

[303_Kwiatek]

You mean taxi or take off- landing ground loop?

 

IF you mean ground loop durig taxi operations you right but i think it is problem with too weak brakes which IRL could easly stop such drift tendency.

[=621=Samikatz]

I'm not a real pilot but I have no difficulty getting planes to the runway. Just gently use the brakes when you feel the plane is getting out of hand

[LukeFF]

34 minutes ago, =621=Samikatz said:

I'm not a real pilot but I have no difficulty getting planes to the runway. Just gently use the brakes when you feel the plane is getting out of hand

 

Rudder trim, where applicable, also helps. 

[theOden]

I feel this part runs under "if it's hard to simulate let's make it ultra hard and everyone will scream - WOW it so realistic" (and [edited] not they sure did).

Ground Loop and mission editor is is top 2 what keeps me from trying this sim more than once every two months.

Edited March 23, 2019 by SYN_Haashashin
Language

[SYN_Vander]

I have always been curious about this behaviour in IL2. It seems in most planes the ground handling is inherently unstable.

What I mean is: If the tail wheel is able to move freely and you give just a little throttle so the plane moves, it will go into a turn and the turn rate will increase and increase if you don't provide any input. There seems to be no dampening/return spring on the tail wheel that would make the system stable. So when not giving any input (and no/idle throttle) I would expect the tail wheel to return to center and thus the rotation would slowly stop. Is this correct for real planes? And if so, why not make the pilot's life easier by providing a return spring???

 

That being said, it is not hard to counter this as long as you are very gentle on the throttle.

 

Edited March 22, 2019 by SYN_Vander

[RedKestrel]

I mean, maybe the ground handling is  wonky but if you're quitting the sim because of it you're missing 90% of what makes the game great.
 

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

On ‎3‎/‎20‎/‎2019 at 4:21 AM, Agathos_Deimon said:

 

Doesnt really matter. It is the slow speed ground handling per se thats off in IL2. The Spit IX i.e. will easily ground loop at the end of a perfect landing run, for no explainable reason.

 

Have you tried keeping the throttle at around 10% to 15% during the landing roll and coming to a stop with brakes.  The Pe-2 and other La (GG) (5) models seem to have the same problem.  It seems to me that airflow past the vertical stabilizer / rudder is nonexistent until a certain amount of throttle is applied.  Going below that threshold seems to return to a zero - airflow state on the rudder whilst on the ground even if the plane is rolling.

[Vig]

This is something that is a big negative to me as well.  I mean, why?  Just why?  All of this work put into something that is inaccurate and not fun, but the mission editor gets no work at all and remains complete kludge to use.  Yes, I can and have put in the effort to overcome the ground loop inaccuracy, and I have managed to make the kludgy mission editor work a little, but it is not worth the trouble.  The original IL2 was a better game, and after giving this one a lot of time I have concluded that it will never be as much fun as the original.  A big disappointment.

Edited March 21, 2019 by Vig

[Heckpupper]

3 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Rudder trim, where applicable, also helps. 

 

What does the rudder or rudder trim have to do with taxing? Neither of those are effective at taxing speeds.

[LukeFF]

5 hours ago, 4./JG26_Onebad said:

Neither of those are effective at taxing speeds.

 

Oh, yes they are.

[56RAF_Roblex]

One of the worst planes for veering to one side on landing and ground looping is the Spitfire but I have seen modern day display pilots confirm that this is not true, even when they first started flying it and were not experienced.   More importantly though,  someone asked yesterday if the Spitfire stall behaviour was unrealistically benign in BoX as it does not drop a wing with full flaps near the stall so I Googled it and found the following comments from the National Advisory Commission for Aeronautics who tested the Spitfire in 1942 and specifically looked at how it behaved around the stall.

 

 " The Spitfire did not exhibit any marked rolling or yawing tendencies either at contact or in the landing run."   (page 6)  also " The airplane exhibited no dangerous ground-looping tendencies in landing. " (point three of Conclusions page 9)

 

http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/NACA-Spitfire-V-Stalling.pdf

Edited March 22, 2019 by 56RAF_Roblex

[303_Kwiatek]

I think most problem with ground loops and expecially during taxi are caused by too weak breakes. 

 

As i mentioned i never such problem IRL during taxi with heavy 1000 HP taildrager like i have in BOX.  I could stop quite easly ground loop by press  brake but in BOX it is impossible -  i mean during taxi operations.   Also it could be similar affected by ground loop during landing run ( when plane slowiest down the runway).

 

Of course most taildraggers IRL are voulnerable to ground loop expecially during landing with crosswinds condtions or with wrong flare and touchdown  ( with some drift) so landing in taildragger need much more attention then forward whell planes.

[SCG_motoadve]

1 hour ago, 303_Kwiatek said:

I think most problem with ground loops and expecially during taxi are caused by too weak breakes. 

 

As i mentioned i never such problem IRL during taxi with heavy 1000 HP taildrager like i have in BOX.  I could stop quite easly ground loop by press  brake but in BOX it is impossible -  i mean during taxi operations.   Also it could be similar affected by ground loop during landing run ( when plane slowiest down the runway).

 

Of course most taildraggers IRL are voulnerable to ground loop expecially during landing with crosswinds condtions or with wrong flare and touchdown  ( with some drift) so landing in taildragger need much more attention then forward whell planes.

I think it was a lot more challenging before for landings and take offs, and many people were complaining it was too difficult, so they changed it.

The majority of customers are gamers more than flight simmers, and developers are trying a balance.

Brakes are definitely too weak.

Ground handling weird and landings non eventful and super easy, where even wind direction does not matter at all.

Looks like this is what gamers want, and simmers are left wanting more unfortunately.

[RedKestrel]

38 minutes ago, II./JG77_motoadve said:

I think it was a lot more challenging before for landings and take offs, and many people were complaining it was too difficult, so they changed it.

The majority of customers are gamers more than flight simmers, and developers are trying a balance.

Brakes are definitely too weak.

Ground handling weird and landings non eventful and super easy, where even wind direction does not matter at all.

Looks like this is what gamers want, and simmers are left wanting more unfortunately.

I wouldn't call landings uneventful, depending on the plane. I've ground looped from too much yaw on rollout often (especially in MiG-3) , broken gear, bounced too high, 'floated' from ground effect, etc. I've had crosswinds completely muck up landings - maybe its simplified a bit but landing in a crosswind definitely changes how you have to do things - I definitely have to compensate for it. The only plane I've found easy to land is the P-39.

The weak brakes I'll agree with. With full brakes its nearly impossible to nose over. I've only done it once.

[SCG_motoadve]

3 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

I wouldn't call landings uneventful, depending on the plane. I've ground looped from too much yaw on rollout often (especially in MiG-3) , broken gear, bounced too high, 'floated' from ground effect, etc. I've had crosswinds completely muck up landings - maybe its simplified a bit but landing in a crosswind definitely changes how you have to do things - I definitely have to compensate for it. The only plane I've found easy to land is the P-39.

The weak brakes I'll agree with. With full brakes its nearly impossible to nose over. I've only done it once.

Compared to real planes landings are very easy.

[RedKestrel]

4 minutes ago, II./JG77_motoadve said:

Compared to real planes landings are very easy.

I'll have to take your word for it. But wind absolutely affects landings in game. Maybe not as much in real life, but its there.

[Talisman]

Perhaps there is some difference with the best use, or replication of use, of brakes, between us all.  For example, using a key or button press for brakes might not be as good as using an axis.  With no real world force feedback from the brake lever I don't see how we can expect to be able to operate brakes like a real world pilot would.  Also, axis controls may subtly  differ in input depending on PC/HOTAS hardware.  Bottom line is, it is hard for a PC pilot to judge and feel brake inputs like a real pilot would.  I would suggest that this is harder for us PC pilots, but less dangerous than the real thing risked by real world pilots.

 

The fact that, in the main, I can perform good landings with no ground loop shows tells me that it is my PC pilot error when I get it wrong and end up with a ground loop.  I suggest that the ground loop thing, both on landing and during taxi, is an issue from time to time due to the vagaries of PC and flight simulation hardware inputs, lack of real world force feedback and sometimes, casual desk PC piloting with no risk. 

 

Happy landings,

 

Talisman

[SCG_motoadve]

CJ 6 Nanchang, Cessna 182, Pilatus PC 12, Cessna 172, Carbon Cub, Husky.

Very active, fly 3 to 5 times a week, aerobatics and bush flying.

 

Look at the windsock in IL2 sometimes its straight which means 20kts or more, in the game you can come land with a tailwind no problem.

Or taking off with a 20kt tailwind, no problem.

 

You dont want to even try that in real life.

[ACG_KaiLae]

Actually from experience in the mission editor, what the windsock says and what you think it says isn't the same thing. Actual wind is about 1/2.

 

 

Edited March 22, 2019 by ACG_Kai_Lae

[SCG_motoadve]

To be fair, Il2 FM is the best IMHO, and no sim has landings right, even the big million dollar airliners (my cousin is a captain for a major airline and he says those sims are amazing but the landing not too realistic).

 

Maybe too many variables to compute to create realistic landings.

[ZachariasX]

10 minutes ago, II./JG77_motoadve said:

Maybe too many variables to compute to create realistic landings.

It is probably out of scope anyway, even for the „big“ class D full motion sims. So why bother. I am fortunate that I could sit in several such sims and it is my impression that the actual touchdown is not something that is invested too much effort in. I mean the shakes and noises are there, but not how the tyres bite traction. With todays front  wheel planes, you can land like a pig and you somehow often get away with it. Just check out those youtube airliner crosswind landings. In tail draggers, even with such wonderfully benign ones an the Cub, you better watch the wind direction AND you straighten her out before touchdown, else a sommersault is likely.

[SCG_motoadve]

1 minute ago, ZachariasX said:

It is probably out of scope anyway, even for the „big“ class D full motion sims. So why bother. I am fortunate that I could sit in several such sims and it is my impression that the actual touchdown is not something that is invested too much effort in. I mean the shakes and noises are there, but not how the tyres bite traction. With todays front  wheel planes, you can land like a pig and you somehow often get away with it. Just check out those youtube airliner crosswind landings. In tail draggers, even with such wonderfully benign ones an the Cub, you better watch the wind direction AND you straighten her out before touchdown, else a sommersault is likely.

This is he same thing my cousin told me , actual touchdown is not something that is invested too much effort in the Airliners simulators.

 

I tried DCS, the Yak 52 (I fly a CJ6 Nanchang for real, which is very similar).

FM was good, but landings , I was making 300ft landings in the Yak 52 one after the other, which is very unrealistic, touch down and pavement its like glue, and plane stopped super quick.

That was a disappointment after the claims DCS make about  being realistic.

[Bert_Foster]

" (I fly a CJ6 Nanchang for real, which is very similar) " .......  but markedly superior

[SCG_motoadve]

Just now, Bert_Foster said:

" (I fly a CJ6 Nanchang for real, which is very similar) " .......  but markedly superior

Actually yes, and very fun airplane. 

Edited March 22, 2019 by II./JG77_motoadve

[[DBS]TH0R]

Agreed with OP. The brakes in this sim and ground physics are borderline hilarious. The brakes are of no use at all unless doing crawling speed. Even then, their power is questionable. As if planes were taxiing on ice. I am referring to the planes with differential braking.

 

Wishing this gets fixed in near future. After spotting problems, this is the number one issue that kills the immersion for me. Since day one this sim was released.

 

We got that excessive bouncing fixed. There is yet hope for this.

 

 

Edited March 22, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[bzc3lk]

10 hours ago, II./JG77_motoadve said:

I think it was a lot more challenging before for landings and take offs, and many people were complaining it was too difficult, so they changed it.

The majority of customers are gamers more than flight simmers, and developers are trying a balance.

Brakes are definitely too weak.

Ground handling weird and landings non eventful and super easy, where even wind direction does not matter at all.

Looks like this is what gamers want, and simmers are left wanting more unfortunately.

[KoN_]

I would listen to the real pilots than any gamer . With such experiences it shouldn't go unnoticed . The spitfire on snow . Is ground loop . 

[[DBS]TH0R]

I do hope this isn't the case, catering to the gaming masses rather than flight simmers who strive for accuracy... Do a proper gaming mode then, not the 'gamey' flight sim.

[BlitzPig_EL]

On 3/22/2019 at 12:18 AM, LukeFF said:

 

Oh, yes they are.

 

But trim has no effect in the real world at taxi speed.  Ground handling has been utterly wrong since release, and all because a very vocal, and ill educated group of people still think harder is more real.  Real is more real, this needs to be hammered home to the dev team for as long as it takes to get this gamey nonsense fixed.  One of the old BlitzPigs taught aerobatics, and probably has more hours logged in antique aircraft than anyone on this forum, he tried to taxi  in the sim, closed the program and has not touched it since.

 

The ground handling is wrong. Period.

[[DBS]TH0R]

23 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

 

But trim has no effect in the real world at taxi speed.  Ground handling has been utterly wrong since release, and all because a very vocal, and ill educated group of people still think harder is more real.  Real is more real, this needs to be hammered home to the dev team for as long as it takes to get this gamey nonsense fixed.  One of the old BlitzPigs taught aerobatics, and probably has more hours logged in antique aircraft than anyone on this forum, he tried to taxi  in the sim, closed the program and has not touched it since.

 

The ground handling is wrong. Period.

 

I can totally relate. Made me rage quit the game several times. The differential brakes simply don't work. Unless we are all taxiing on ice. ?

Edited March 26, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[Trooper117]

We 'game the game' to make things workable, and just because we manage ok it doesn't mean that it's 100 percent realistic...

knowing that however, doesn't mean that I want to bin the game, it's still enjoyable regardless.

I might be going out on a limb here, but I suspect all my flight sim 'games' are not 100 percent realistic either... 

[BraveSirRobin]

Rage quitting because the ground handling is wrong is probably a good indication that an anger management class would not be a complete waste of money.

[ZachariasX]

21 hours ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

I can totally relate. Made me rage quit the game several times. The differential brakes simply don't work. Unless we are all taxiing on ice. ?

It is easier in the game than in a real taildragger. It is easy with all aircraft in the game. Lock your tail wheel. Land straightened out. And don't speed when taxiing.

 

If you do it wrong, a sommersault is what aircraft do.

Spoiler

 

Especially taildraggers:

 

[[DBS]TH0R]

2 hours ago, ZachariasX said:

It is easier in the game than in a real taildragger. It is easy with all aircraft in the game. Lock your tail wheel. Land straightened out. And don't speed when taxiing.

 

If you do it wrong, a sommersault is what aircraft do.

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Especially taildraggers:

 

 

Rage quit was the term I used for effect.

 

You say it is easier in-game, the OP says it is much harder. I agree with OP. I can and have no problems taxiing in this sim. Just hate the implementation of it, where differential brakes don't or hardly work at all. Whether you locked your tail wheel or not.

[ZachariasX]

48 minutes ago, [DBS]TH0R said:

 

Rage quit was the term I used for effect.

 

You say it is easier in-game, the OP says it is much harder. I agree with OP. I can and have no problems taxiing in this sim. Just hate the implementation of it, where differential brakes don't or hardly work at all. Whether you locked your tail wheel or not.

It was not my intention to dispute your personal assessment of the current situation. I mean, it is clear that the brakes are slightly tame. If that works against your practise, sure. It's diffcult then.

 

But that this makes things hard for taxiing is slightly strange to me. If the brakes were effective, there would be many people nosing over or spinning out, especially with certain planes. Also it means that you don't have one wheel locking up while braking and the other still turning, something that can be nasty.

 

Taxiing is really straight forward. If you have your tailwheel locked (you should really only release it to push your plane around on the apron) you can drive those planes like cars by using differential brakes and rudder. But for this you really need to lock your taiwheel and THOU SHALT NOT PIVOT TURN! If the brakes had a hard and prompt bite, it would be more delicate to do. Just keep it straight. If the plane starts to swing around, you lost your game. Especially in the real world.

 

Ground handling is really the opposite of "good flying practise". On the ground, you need quick, hard adjustments. The aircraft is too inert for little adjustments in control as you would do in the air. Once you got used to that difference in control, it's easy and it is irrelevant if it takes you 200 or 300 meters for a fullstop after touchdown.

 

Besides, in this sim people get away with "ground operations" in a way that would bend a lot of metal in the real world and you would never dream of doing if you sat in a real cockpit.

[[DBS]TH0R]

Can we compare sims here? I guess not, thus I will restrain myself.

 

First of all, I have all the bells and whistles hardware wise (MFG Crosswind rudder pedals, TM Hog centermounted etc.). With this setup, there are planes that simply cannot turn in one direction, i.e. are very hard or near impossible to do. Be it with minimal, max, intermediate power or "power spikes" combined with rudder input. Trust me, I've tried it all. Feels like these pedals are wasted on this sim.

 

109 in particular has it bad. It should be difficult yes, but when using manual propeller pitch, locked tail wheel, full right rudder and toe brake combined with small amount of power or power spikes doesn't do the trick - I'm all ears. I've even tried stick forward to ease the pressure of the tail, since that plane in particular is tail heavy (there also in-cockpit videos on YT how it should be done, G4 "Red 7" IIRC). Tell me what I am doing wrong. Happy to learn new stuff.

 

That plus super easy ground loops you can get into with no effort at all. Even when doing everything by the book. And yes, I do know you need to "dance with the pedals" in a Spitfire before you slow down after landing. I am not talking about those physics.

Edited March 27, 2019 by [DBS]TH0R

[Guest deleted@50488]

This thread has brought to memory the easy ride in the Spitfires ingame, where we can apply full brakes without fearing a prop strike. This isn't for sure as it is IRL...

 

Also, the way the tailwheel lock is rather ineffective in the 109s at taxi speeds suggests that there may be a problem with something like the sideways and rolling friction coefficients. Just a thought...

Edited March 28, 2019 by jcomm

[Cpt_Siddy]

I have been avoiding this problem by just taking off from the spawn. Very convenient way to take off. 


 

[Blackhawk_FR]

I would upvote this hundred of time. 

 

Already put a suggestion to increase efficiency of brakes, to make taxiing more realistic and, not the least: EASIER.

 

Somes also say rudder trim help... How?