Hi all, I've been flying the PMDG 1900 for a while now and I must say that it is probably one of the more stable aircraft that I have flown in terms of FS flight dynamics. One thing that surprises me though, is that, when negotiating a turn ( either high or low rate ), very little rudder input (read: almost nil) is required for coordination. Although I'm not complaining, especially since it makes the aircraft easier to fly, I'm wondering if this is a realistic representation of how the real aircraft flies.Thanks in advance for all responses and commentsJ.C. (MYNN)

I've been wondering that too. Since the rudder is quite effective in inducing yaw on its own, I've assumed that's why...but?Best,sg

Just look at all the appendages added out back! The increased surface area caused by the raised roofline caused all sorts of stability problems when the aircraft was first designed, so I expect it's quite likely the real deal doesn't require much in the way of a boot to maintain co-ordinated flight. Not so much belt and braces, more belt, braces, zip and zip-tie!But have you got the yaw damper on or off? That makes a big difference in a lot of FS aircraft where the YD effect is exaggerated.Allcott

G'day JCI cannot think of one aircraft i have flown where the application of rudder is required going into a standard turn.All modern aircraft have aerodynamic features which allow bank without the need of directional rudder to avoid an out of balance situation.Gliders on the other hand use heaps in the direction of bank to maintain balance.Modern GA/Airline aircraft do not use rudder while turning in normal flight.Hope this helps clear up the myth about modern aircraft and the use of rudder.All the bestDarren

G'day Darren, Is this really the case with all GA aircraft , e.g. cessna 172s or other GA aircraft used for training nowadays? BTW, most GA aircraft in FS that I have flown(yaw damper disengaged) do require a substantial amount of rudder for coordinating turns, so if this is the case, maybe this will need to be revisited by microsoft when FS10 rolls around.J.C. (MYNN)

Darrens sweeping generalisation is simply not correct. Aircraft fly differently, some will require rudder to initiate a turn, none to maintain it. Others will be the exact opposite. Most will be somewhere in between. Some even require opposite rudder to keep the ball centred or the bank angle from developing.But it is true that increasingly, modern GA are using all sorts of aerodynamic and computer `tricks` to lesson the need for rudder to start or maintain a co-ordinated turn. Allcott

I can second that. Real aircraft do require rudder... different examples *of the same model* may even require quite different rudder inputs in the same situation. The aileron input required to maintain a coordinated turn can be considerably different too. Not to mention that rudder trim systems are notoriously inconsistent...That said, even a very simple mechanical linkage between the aileron and rudder can improve the characteristics of an aircraft, and these are becoming quite common in GA aircraft.Large airliners usually have yaw dampers and/or fly-by-wire, and so pedal input is more-or-less reserved for crosswind landings and ground handling.

Remember guys that the higher speed of the plane the lower rudder angle is required to get needed results.