How realistic is the turn radius of the NGX (I'd better say: are turn radii)?I'm asking because in the past, and right up until now, I have difficulties when performing real world approaches like Santos Dumont (the one with the ~180 deg turn in front of some hills) or Innsbruck (includes a 180 deg turn as well): In all the videos on the 'net, those approaches look like a relatively easy to do thing. When I try to do the same in FSX, I'm about to crash into the mountains or miss the runway extension line even with full possible bank and minimum speed. Besides, I need to pull like crazy on the stick when doing such maneuvers, looks like an MS FS problem.It's a nasty problem that I had from day 1 of my FS experiences. I thought I ask the experts if the bank radius that the NGX flies are realistic, before I try my maneuvers in that plane(s).

Turn radii are simply a mathematical function, so it would be independent of the NGX, really. Given a constant bank angle, higher speeds result in a wider turn radius. On the other hand, given a constant speed and a required radius, the bank angle must increase.So, what are the speeds you're seeing on the videos, and what speeds are you using is the question.

Edited February 9, 201214 yr by scandinavian13

Compare these two videos:

The real world video looks much more "relaxed" and "slower", whereas the NGX driver has troubles not missing the runway and the NGX flies in a more "stressy" manner.Apart from the visibility differences, the FSX video has much more of a stress factor. That's what I mean with turn radius, see how it's in real life and compare that to what the NGX driver does.I guess in real life, flying those big planes is much easier than in FSX...

Lol, What do you compare? Real cockpit and noob sim flying?

I guess in real life, flying those big planes is much easier than in FSX...

Good guess

Edited February 11, 201214 yr by Jet_Airliner

The real video was a very proceduralised operation flown by professionals. In the FS video, the turn to final looked to be far inside that of the real one resulting in a much shorter final leg and a late rollout on top of that. End result is an unstable approach to an already difficult runway. They make it look easy beacause again they are professionals.

Bottom line is the FS example is poorly done. He looks too low for a start!!Another problem that is hard to see is that the FS world is too small. Sure, it may fly like it is 26000 miles in circumference, but it is scaled too small. This is evident when you start trying to scale a map to fit the FS world - the FS world is distorted and "not right", making turns like this very difficult. The FSX aircraft is in a tighter turn much longer than the real aircraft, highlighting this phenomenon nicely. Ever noticed how the user aircarft in FS is larger than the rest of the world objects? It is larger by ~1.18 times. Get the 747 and park it next to AI aircraft, or even static aircraft part of add-on airport scenery. The user aircraft is always larger.One issue MS addressed slightly in FSX was the vertical scaling. You are now further away from the surface of the planet for any given altitude. It is why mountains look too flat in FS because the scaling is wrong.Best regards,Robin.

I think Kyle's comment re speed is correct. If you look at the visual approach procedure following the instrument approach on IAL 1 for LOWI there is a max IAS of 159 knots indicated with 25 degree max bank on the 0.9 NM radius turn east of the aerodrome. If you look at the 180 degree turn onto 08 that is of a similar radius. So I guess speed control may help.

Anyone got the charts for Santos Dumont? I'll try flying it.Best regards,Robin.

The real world video looks much more "relaxed" and "slower", .

It does because whoever flies the NGX is doing extremely poor job in terms of aircraft control and general airmanship. The NGX is not at fault, the pilot is.

Anyone got the charts for Santos Dumont? I'll try flying it.Best regards,Robin.

http://www.aisweb.ae...artas&lingua=enJust type SBRJ in the "Indicadores de Localidade" box and press enter. Then, on the top of the board with the charts, click once on "Tipo" and it'll organize the charts per category. Just click on the name of the chart you want (letters in blue) and it'll open a new tab in you browser with the chart you selected.In this website, btw, you can find plates for most aerodromes in Brazil and VFR and enroute charts for the entire the national territory, both low and high altitude.

Edited February 11, 201214 yr by barfra1995

Just jumped in and flew. I didn't use more than 15 degrees of bank angle to get it around the corner to final. Turn south at D7.2 and ensure you've got the speed under control and at 1300 ft barometric. You want to be no faster than 150 kts on that final turn; I flew it at 142 kts flap 40.Easily accomplished, and it looks just like the RW video.Best regards,Robin.

Exactly. I'll say it again: it all about speed.I can say that without even watching either video. Half because turn radii are constant, given constant speed - a 747 at 250 knots/25 degrees will turn the same as the Concorde at 250 knots/25 degrees - and half because most Flight Sim vids on YouTube are poor attempts at anything...

...a 747 at 250 knots/25 degrees will turn the same as the Concorde at 250 knots/25 degrees......and half because most Flight Sim vids on YouTube are poor attempts at anything...

+1Physics.It is about acceleration in the turn. The following examples only count for level turns. All bets are off for climbing/descending as the acceleration rate is altered.In a level turn using 30 degrees of roll the vertical acceleration is 1/cos(30) = ~1.15 gTo pull 9 g in a level turn you need to roll arccos(1 / 9) = ~83.6 degrees2.5 g in a level turn is arccos(1/2.5) = ~66.42 degreesIt is this increase in vertical acceleration that pulls the jet around the corner. If you just rolled 30 degrees and maintained a vertical acceleration of ~0.886 g (the gravity vector shifts as you roll the aircraft), the nose would just drop and you wouldn't turn.The other point is that as you pull into the corner, you increase AoA. This increase in AoA gives the additional lift required to maintain level flight through the turn. If you pull harder than required, you start to climb, if you don't pull hard enough, you start to descend, as the aircraft generates more lift or less lift, respectively.I don't think it needs spelling out that you require an increase in thrust during the turn, because you increased drag due to the higher AoA and are bleeding energy as a result of the turn (it takes energy to change vector). It is common for pilots new to jet aircraft to understate the power requirement in a turn and thus lose speed whilst turning as they didn't anticipate the engine spool up time required. If you find you bleed speed in a turn, add more power sooner (at the start of rolling), to allow for spool time. By the time the turn is established the power should be there.A point not often modelled correctly in FS is the spool time from low power. This can be a real gotcha, and is why the engine is never spooled below flight idle, in order to maintain core RPM at the higher end of the response curve (It is why at takeoff you spool to a intermediate power setting before releasing the brakes and applying TOGA - the spool-up can be asymmetric and cause directional control problems especially on wet/slippery runways; once they are running at this intermediate power setting they tend to accelerate together).Turn radius is a bit trickier, but here goes:Turn Radius = V^2 / (11.26 * tan(RA))where:V is the velocity in knotsRA is the roll angleSo if we are flying at 150 kts, and use 15 degrees of roll (as per the test flight I did earlier), my turn radius was:150^2 / (11.26 * tan(15))= 22500 / 11.26 * 0.577= 22500 / 6.501= ~3461 ft (or ~0.56 nm).That means I need to be laterally offset from the airport by ~ 1.1 nm for a 180 degree turn.A quick rule for lateral distance for a 15 degree roll angle and 180 turn is thus:150 kts = ~2 nm200 kts = ~4 nm250 kts = ~7 nm300 kts = ~10 nmApproximately halve the distances for 30 degrees of roll.Hope this helps you fly visual approaches a little easier. :)Best regards,Robin.

Also worth mentioning is the concept of a coordinated turn. This refers to having the proper amount of rudder deflection so that the plane neither slips or skids in the turn. Without enough rudder deflection, the radius of the turn will increase. All of the formulas above are correct, but they all also assume a coordinated turn. When tight manuevering for obstruction clearance is required, a coordinated turn can become critical.