3 hours ago, sd_flyer said:

ou forgot to mention that real rudder and yoke has pounds of pressure associated with physical sensory feedback. Also in light airplane you also have verity of cable tension that can affect feel of controls greatly! While we are trying to contemplate control reaction in sim we have to understand that we are limited by range of motion of our peripherals and spring tension they come with. There is no way sim controls will ever feel exactly like real aircraft!   Yes people can tweak to simulate this feeling but it's based on personal exeperience.

May be because I was simmer way before I got my first pilot certificate, so I understand sim limitation and compensate lack or real feedback  with a light touch. In other words, I adopt, calibrate and transform my sensory respond to sim. And therefore, none of airplanes in the sim feel twitchy to me.  And it works same way in DCS, IL2, XP11 and in MSFS. But it just me and it can't work for everyone  

Yep, I mentioned there can be 10 to 40 pounds of pressure for displacement. I started out in flight sims myself and was shocked at how much pressure is on the controls regardless of natural or artificial. My first landing in a cessna was after being qual'd in heavies. My first landing was a bit firm! I was taken back on how much back pressure was used for landing. The second time around, the guy I was with was like keep pulling keep pulling, you know that hold it off thing. I was so accustomed to jets where I add my initial 2 to 3 degree attitude change and lightly pulsed the yoke to keep the that attitude till the mains touched and the ground spoiler handle made that zip noise. 

2 hours ago, robert young said:

Fs2020 is showing FOUR TIMES the realistic roll rate in best possible conditions. FOUR TIMES! 30% out is rather extreme. But 400% too fast is very extreme. This has NOTHING whatever to do with control setups, but I fear I'm going to go blue in the face trying to get this across.

\Official\OneStore\asobo-aircraft-e330\SimObjects\Airplanes\Asobo_E330

flight_model.cfg

[FLIGHT_TUNING]
cruise_lift_scalar = 1
parasite_drag_scalar = 1
induced_drag_scalar = 1
flap_induced_drag_scalar = 1
elevator_effectiveness = 1
elevator_maxangle_scalar = 1
aileron_effectiveness = 2  // <-- lower this to reduce roll rate
rudder_effectiveness = 1

Hook

 

Edited September 11, 20205 yr by LHookins

23 minutes ago, G550flyer said:

Yep, I mentioned there can be 10 to 40 pounds of pressure for displacement. I started out in flight sims myself and was shocked at how much pressure is on the controls regardless of natural or artificial. My first landing in a cessna was after being qual'd in heavies. My first landing was a bit firm! I was taken back on how much back pressure was used for landing. The second time around, the guy I was with was like keep pulling keep pulling, you know that hold it off thing. I was so accustomed to jets where I add my initial 2 to 3 degree attitude change and lightly pulsed the yoke to keep the that attitude till the mains touched and the ground spoiler handle made that zip noise. 

I do find this interesting. For those with force-feedback enabled sticks and yokes, does MSFS try to replicate this effect? Usually FF is used for gimmicky stuff, but it the "stiffness" of the stick responded to the speed of the aircraft in a way similar to real life, that would be pretty cool.

If real aircraft had the control sensitivities of MSFS2020, autoland would be the only legal method for which transport category aircraft could land.

6 hours ago, eslader said:

I noticed that too. I was wondering if maybe the tire friction was somehow being simulated with the aerodynamic model, which might explain why the rotation changes as the friction component "turns off."

 

Well, in regard to the friction, here is what one would see. You would feel more weathervaning moments as the aircraft tends to pivot around the center and the area where the tires grip the runway in strong cross winds. It would eliminate the on ice feelings you get in some sims. It shouldn't impact your rotation rate since friction is minimized between the wheel and axle. Spinning wheels can have an impact as the gear is retracted, especially ones that retract along the roll axis. You have to brake them to prevent gyroscopic forces as they are retracted. Normally once the gear handle is raised, a restrictor forces some of the return hydraulic fluid into the brake lines to stop the wheels from spinning. Here is my typical experience during real world rotation.

To start, aircraft are trimmed for a desirable rotation rate and to naturally achieve a V2 attitude engine out. Typically you will hit V2 or V2+10 around 35ft AGL. On a normal takeoff all engines, I start my rotation at the VR call. I aim for a smooth 3 to 4 degree per second rotation. Initially, as I relax that light forward pressure and start to pull, the jet doesn't want to move.As the nose start to rise, I am also starting to relax pressure. Since she is trimmed for V2, the nose is starting to gain the natural tendency to rise because I am faster than V2 now. Some where halfway or so through rotation, I am subconsciously starting to thumb in nose down trim to have it capture V2+10 attitude. If engine out, you will notice it's a little more force required because you are not making that transition to keep the nose from going too high. In the G5/G550, it's more dramatic because it's over powered and will be at V2+20 by the time you are reaching proper attitude. Now, here is what I experience in the sim.

As I power down the runway, after a hundred knots or so, the nose is already trying to rise on me. Now, of course in the real jet, the bumps and bouncing down the runway may cause the nose to rise. In fact on those bumpy runways, you hear the nose lift a little by nose wheel sound and thud of the strut. You add that slight forward pressure to minimize this. Now, how well is the aircraft in the sim modeled? who knows. Hopefully this was brought up in testing. Once I reach rotate and relax pressure, the nose is already trying to rotate on it's own. As I relax pressure again to keep it from rising too fast, it suddenly stops rising after lift off causing me to pull back on the yoke again. It's like it's two different flight models on the ground and in the air.

Again, hopefully this is being brought up or will other developers have to design these flaws out if able.

V/r

Rick 

         

Another perspective on the "twitchy" issue is the impact of wind, which to me, with very limited light GA experience, way over done in the sim.

Flying the 172 at 5,000' AGL in a 10-knot wind (G 15)  coming from the about 30° to port of the nose (from the Left front quarter) - the plane is jumping all over the place while the autopilot tries to stay on track/altitude. 

IAS is +/-5 knots and heading is +/- 6° and that motion is CONSTANT! 

I have little doubt all my passengers would be airsick and the poor airframe would be getting really tired with all that sharp motion.  The heading changes by 5° in less than one-second, which seems quite unreasonable.

Have any RW 172 pilots a comment about this characteristic?

I just noticed another thread about this issue and can verify that my CH pedals and yoke are not providing any inputs during the twitching.  I run the CH Manager on a separate monitor and can see the numeric (0 - 255) values for each axis and they seldom change and if the do it is my one digit.  

 

Edited September 11, 20205 yr by TacomaSailor

28 minutes ago, Keto Ketchup said:

I do find this interesting. For those with force-feedback enabled sticks and yokes, does MSFS try to replicate this effect? Usually FF is used for gimmicky stuff, but it the "stiffness" of the stick responded to the speed of the aircraft in a way similar to real life, that would be pretty cool.

You bring up a good point. First time I used one, I didn't like it because you had to keep your hand on the stick to keep it active. It also would kick during landings. I am used to feeling it in the seat and back along with the sounds and rattles from the cabinets. But, not in the yoke. That would be awesome to have a yoke that would do that. Two settings for constant or variable. Here is a tale to put it in perspective.

One day I was headed home from Germany to New Jersey after 3 weeks of flying around Europe. The leg before, the AP failed on us. We had about 5 pilots onboard because we had 24 hour duty days so we were augmented. Our regs said that we were limited to 12 hours of our 16 hour scheduled duty day with the pitch axis failed. The leg was only 9 hours to cross the ocean. Who needs AP we thought.....wrong!!! It was fun initially hand flying up to altitude. After about 18,000ft, it got old real quick. At cruise, we started a program to constantly cycle each guy about 30 minutes or so each across the pond. The yoke is rigid and after constantly trimming and putting in inputs, you got sore quick. At least during low level flights, you are busy and sight seeing for an hour or so. You could also turn on the AP and AT and just use heading select until you hand flew across the drop zone. We were up at the high 30s dodging storms, fighting dutch roll and getting worn out hand flying for 9 hours. I vowed to never be that foolish again!!!

On 9/10/2020 at 2:37 PM, KenG said:

 Basically Asobo threw some numbers into their spaghetti monster looked at what they got out of it and when the Alpha and Beta guys complained put some of the aerodynamics from FSX back into the game.

Great words that state the obvious:).

On 9/10/2020 at 3:25 PM, Chock said:

...Be aware that there is a reason why not everyone is a world-class aerobatic pilot, doing them well to competition standard takes a good deal of skill and even more practice. They're fun to do and if you get the chance for real I'd recommend it because you'll like it, but be prepared to to be a bit disappointed that you are not instantly brilliant at it!

Or never good at all. There were some really talented and crazy guys back in the days I played racing games. They used to tweak the setup and had some phenomenal skills. like driving cars on two wheels. I used their setups, but never managed such two wheel stunts.

YouTube #1

YouTube #2

I can imagine flying aerobatics might be the same difficult.

 

Thanks at Robert Young for posting the aerobatics cockpit video. This shows to me, there is no sense even in just trying FS after having watched the in-game videos of the Aviat plane.

Edited September 11, 20205 yr by BigDee

11 minutes ago, G550flyer said:

You bring up a good point. First time I used one, I didn't like it because you had to keep your hand on the stick to keep it active. It also would kick during landings. I am used to feeling it in the seat and back along with the sounds and rattles from the cabinets. But, not in the yoke. That would be awesome to have a yoke that would do that. Two settings for constant or variable. Here is a tale to put it in perspective.

One day I was headed home from Germany to New Jersey after 3 weeks of flying around Europe. The leg before, the AP failed on us. We had about 5 pilots onboard because we had 24 hour duty days so we were augmented. Our regs said that we were limited to 12 hours of our 16 hour scheduled duty day with the pitch axis failed. The leg was only 9 hours to cross the ocean. Who needs AP we thought.....wrong!!! It was fun initially hand flying up to altitude. After about 18,000ft, it got old real quick. At cruise, we started a program to constantly cycle each guy about 30 minutes or so each across the pond. The yoke is rigid and after constantly trimming and putting in inputs, you got sore quick. At least during low level flights, you are busy and sight seeing for an hour or so. You could also turn on the AP and AT and just use heading select until you hand flew across the drop zone. We were up at the high 30s dodging storms, fighting dutch roll and getting worn out hand flying for 9 hours. I vowed to never be that foolish again!!!

It bring memory of my ferry flights (no autopilot of course). And also  time when I learn that yoke can give  blisters! LOL 

1 hour ago, LHookins said:

\Official\OneStore\asobo-aircraft-e330\SimObjects\Airplanes\Asobo_E330

flight_model.cfg

[FLIGHT_TUNING]
cruise_lift_scalar = 1
parasite_drag_scalar = 1
induced_drag_scalar = 1
flap_induced_drag_scalar = 1
elevator_effectiveness = 1
elevator_maxangle_scalar = 1
aileron_effectiveness = 2  // <-- lower this to reduce roll rate
rudder_effectiveness = 1

Hook

 

Yes, that is a global damping section of roll rate and also contains the same for other controls. 'Been tweaking these files (which are largely unchanged) for 22 years! These parameters are exactly the ones found in Fs98, Fs2002, Fs2004, FSX, FSX-SE, and P3d v1/2/3/4/5, as are almost all of the other params, except some rather useful ones have been deleted.

Edited September 11, 20205 yr by robert young

Just landed Cub at KHAF. 159 ft total distance. It does land like real airplane to me. I pulled stick all way aft until it settled. See ACARS data

1 hour ago, robert young said:

Yes, that is a global damping section of roll rate and also contains the same for other controls. 'Been tweaking these files (which are largely unchanged) for 22 years!

"Damping?"

When I find something wrong, I don't complain bitterly about it.  I find it and fix it if I can, then I publish the fix.  Why aren't you doing the same?  I didn't publish that for you, as you should already know how to fix it.  I published it for others who might want to improve the handling of that aircraft.

I suggest as a first attempt at a fix changing the 2 to a 1.  Do any fine adjustments needed from there.

aileron_effectiveness = 1   // was 2

Hook

1 minute ago, LHookins said:

"Damping?"

When I find something wrong, I don't complain bitterly about it.  I find it and fix it if I can, then I publish the fix.  Why aren't you doing the same?  I didn't publish that for you, as you should already know how to fix it.  I published it for others who might want to improve the handling of that aircraft.

I suggest as a first attempt at a fix changing the 2 to a 1.  Do any fine adjustments needed from there.

aileron_effectiveness = 1   // was 2

Hook

I appreciate that, but your post appeared to be a direct answer. Apologies if I misunderstood.  I HAVE told others here how to do temporary fixes, both via numerous PMs and posts, so I am not just firing off complaints, and I am working very hard on a mod (now over 120 hours work) but it is a complete makeover so it is taking time to do properly. I'm not publishing it until it is as perfect as it can be. The rest of my posts are about persuading others that I think they are wrong when they say the f/ms are fine. They are entitled to their views but this is a forum for opposing views.

14 minutes ago, LHookins said:

"Damping?"

When I find something wrong, I don't complain bitterly about it.  I find it and fix it if I can, then I publish the fix.  Why aren't you doing the same?  I didn't publish that for you, as you should already know how to fix it.  I published it for others who might want to improve the handling of that aircraft.

I suggest as a first attempt at a fix changing the 2 to a 1.  Do any fine adjustments needed from there.

aileron_effectiveness = 1   // was 2

Hook

 

Those values are just multipliers for things like roll_moment_roll_damping. You'll get better results changing those values to the same as what the 'new' value is in the legacy display for FM tuning in-game.

2 minutes ago, L3m0n said:

 

Those values are just multipliers for things like roll_moment_roll_damping. You'll get better results changing those values to the same as what the 'new' value is in the legacy display for FM tuning in-game.

Agreed, but as a quick fix the flight tuning section is fine and useful for those not familiar with the syntax of other parameters. It does no harm and is a decent global tweak.