C152 gauging the quality of the flight model

[Andreas Stangenes 1,628]

Q8 pilot tries to gauge the quality of the flightmodel of the cessna 152 in this video: 

However, I find the video a bit confusing. First of all, he clearly states that he is not a c152 pilot, but continues to say that the stall characteristics of a clean, power off stall is not realistic. However, several commentators claim to fly the 152 in real life and say the airplane stalls like that. 

Further more, he talks about how the weather should affect the handling of the model on the ground, but I'm not sure what it is he wants to see to make it more realistic. Should it be slower to start and stop, or what? I normally enjoy his videos, but unfortunately, this video left me more confused than enlightened. 

 

[Rimshot 1,135]

What I do miss in the stall without flaps is the auto recover moment of the aircraft. I would expect the nose to drop a little at a certain point, but it never does...

[ca_metal 2,015]

3 minutes ago, Rimshot said:

What I do miss in the stall without flaps is the auto recover moment of the aircraft. I would expect the nose to drop a little at a certain point, but it never does...

Maybe wrong inputs made by Q8. I'm not sure he let the plane recover itself.

[Rimshot 1,135]

Just now, ca_metal said:

Maybe wrong inputs made by Q8. I'm not sure he let the plane recover itself.

Even when keeping the yoke pulled back that drop of the nose should happen. I'll have a go at it myself after release.

[sd_flyer 6,034]

It's stalls fine. What he is doing is "falling leaf" like maneuver because I guess he has auto coordinated rudder assist. In fact I think 152 is the best aircraft overall in MSFS 🙂

[sd_flyer 6,034]

2 minutes ago, Rimshot said:

Even when keeping the yoke pulled back that drop of the nose should happen. I'll have a go at it myself after release.

Not necessarily!

[andrecarli737 177]

I'm currently flying a C152 every weekend. Stalls seems incredible accurate. I won't take this man words, he recovered a stalled dropped wing using opposite aileron, irl I would probably be reproved by the CFI 🤣

[robert young 2,897]

Here's an actual C152 stall (best clip is around 3 minutes in). Note, as speed decreases all controls become floppy, with less and less authority. As the stall approaches there is roll instability. A distinct nose drop (with partial wing drop) happens immediately the yoke is pulled right back. This is how a C152 flies. I see no connection between the video below clip and the sim video above. Sorry.

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by robert young

[Chock 17,769]

When people say 'they fly a C152', this does not mean it was the same as another C152 someone else flew, so you can expect some discrepancies in opinions on how it flies. Even discounting the fact that some of what you think about a particular aeroplane type you fly is subjective, with well over 7,000 of the things built over nearly a decade, and this in two different countries, to expect them to all handle exactly the same is unrealistic.

Later 152s have a different engine with different compression, all of them have a Lycoming 235, but that engine has changed quite a bit over the years since it was first built in WW2 and is still being made today; later models of that engine are of slightly lower rated horsepower, but better tolerances in modern production mean these might actually put out more efficient power than the older ones. There is a modification you can make to the 235 engine which ups the horsepower by about ten percent as well, not forgetting there are different props fitted to various models and you can even mod the engine to use auto fuel.

The 152 Aerobat version (which is the one I've actually had a go on) has a beefed up airframe stressed for aerobatics and you can remove the doors on that one too which is great for photography. Some 152s have modified wingtips which reduce the stall speed and characteristics of the stall and up the cruise speed a bit, and you can fit extra fuel tanks which also alter the flight characteristics a bit. You can even have a taildragger version. In later years it was also built in Reims, these are the F152 versions, and they are slightly different and more likely to be found in Europe than the ones built in Kansas. Differences include a revised nose cowling. 

There are numerous STOL mod which can be fitted to the 152 and some of these can reduce the stall speed to such a low level that you'd be hard pressed to actually read it accurately on the ASI given the angle of attack the thing finally gives up flying at.

Last but not least. I would think it is likely that Asobo, being a French company, probably had a Reims Cessna as their study aircraft, and these are a bit different to the Kansas-built ones in subtle ways.

Don't forget too that light aeroplanes fly differently with you solo or with two people on board and this can affect wing drop in a stall and even which direction you will most likely autorotate in a spin.

 

Edited August 7, 2020 by Chock

[snglecoil 1,828]

I'm generally a patient and easy-going guy, but that video really hit a raw nerve for me....evaluating the flight modeling by the ground handling characteristics. Really?!? And someone really needs to explain that a plane's flight characteristics don't really change because it is wet.

Oh, oh, oh and not to mention that I think this guy is a pretty heavy X-Plane user...and so if he's basing his expert opinion on a plane's ground handling characteristic on his experience with X-Plane. I think I see the problem

Edited August 7, 2020 by snglecoil

[andrecarli737 177]

About the first stall, he did what a 2nd type stall, as we call it here in Brazil. You can notice that the horizontal line of the instrument panel is aligned with the horizon, so it's not a sudden and harsh stall. If you keep pulling the yoke back without using ailerons it will fall with nose up, that's inevitable, just as it happens in the video. The 3rd type, it's a violent one where the nose is dropped and the left wing tends to drop, and he dind't demonstrated this one.

[robert young 2,897]

2 minutes ago, snglecoil said:

I'm generally a patient and easy-going guy, but that video really hit a raw nerve for me....evaluating the flight modeling by the ground handling characteristics. Really?!? And someone really needs to explain that a plane's flight characteristics don't really change because it is wet.

To be fair he was commenting on the rudder and (excessive and touchy) yaw while on the ground. I think that is a fair comment. Ground handling is part of a flight model.

[LHookins 3,102]

3 minutes ago, andrecarli737 said:

The 3rd type, it's a violent one where the nose is dropped and the left wing tends to drop, and he dind't demonstrated this one.

That's the one I'm familiar with from the Cessna 150.

Hook

[Chock 17,769]

Personally, if I was going to test the flight model on the ground and the effect weight has on the ground pressure inertia, I would not have done so with a six knot tail wind in the sim and a building blocking that wind for the first test and not for the second one.

[snglecoil 1,828]

Rob, I have the utmost respect for you, but the ground handling characteristics, especially during a taxi as he was demonstrating, are not a significant measure of a the flight model. The twitchy rudder during the take off and landing roll is mainly attributed to controller sensitivity settings.

You'll be happy to see that the team has identified inaccurate inertia as one of the issues it is currently refining. I'm not saying the flight models are perfect in MSFS, I'm saying this video is filled with uninformed opinion based on experiences with other flight simulators.