Does Asobo is working on issues with FM and taildraggers? Do you know something about it? This is serious issue and from one year after I dont see significial improvements with this. The problem is general and applies to basically all models, but it is most noticeable with taildraggers. It will only get worse because the Ju-52 is coming and it will continue to be bad.

The problem is that here, in principle, the rudder does not work, but it suddenly starts to work with almost full power above 40 kts. This is very noticeable with the crosswind when you start to unrealistically to go right or left. It's not about technique in the sim. It just doesn't work that way. The rudder should gradually counter to the wind - gradually, not suddenly like we have in MSFS. Here the take off looks the worse than in other sim like in P3D, FSX, MSFS, IL-2, DCS ... and is completely unrealistic. Even the tailwheel lock does not help for take off or landing with this surprising drift. You can read more about this issue on SOH: http://www.sim-outhouse.com/sohforums/showthread.php/125004-What-is-it-with-MSFS-and-taildraggers Here is example of issue and with data monitoring:

So, is a topic about it on MSFS Forum, haw many votes has this issue? It start to drive me crazy sometime .... 😞

Thx!

Edited September 6, 20214 yr by YoYo

So, someone knows something? They will work about improvments for FM?

There is an issue, especially with the transition from table based ground physics to the actual flight physics -  but how bad it is depends a lot on what aircraft you fly.

For example the Carendo WACO taildragger is an absolute monster to takeoff and land but the c140 also a taildragger just pootles along settles down and 3 points every landing in a lady like fashion without a problem,  even with a goodly amount of crosswind.

There are probably different reasons for the not plausible way taildraggers, but not only, behave the way they do in MFS. It's also true about some prop effects which are totally tamed inflight, like I tested with the FI Spitfire.

On ground ASOBO applies a trick, reducing the actual x-wind component at lower taxi speeds, plus that from 0 to 100 instant effect on the tail surface as soon as a given speed ( I guess around 40 knot ) is reached... These together with the admitted inherited Legacy ground physics, combine to achieve what I consider to be the poorest ground physics ever experienced in an MS flightsim...

Hope they find the opportunity to address it.

Edited September 7, 20214 yr by jcomm

3 minutes ago, jcomm said:

There are probably different reasons for the not plausible way taildraggers, but not only, behave the way they do in MFS. It's also true about some prop effects which are totally tamed inflight, like I tested with the FI Spitfire.

On ground ASOBO applies a trick, reducing the actual x-wind component at lower taxi speeds, plus that from 0 to 100 instant effect on the tail surface as soon as a given speed ( I guess around 40 knot ) is reached... These together with the admitted inherited Legacy ground physics, combine to achieve what I consider to be the poorest ground physics ever experienced in as MS flightsim...

Hope they find the opportunity to address it.

It will be „fun” if they will release Reno Air Race DLC without changes of this. High powered engines on new airctraft will be devastating ….

When I look at the weather panel in the YouTube clip, it appears that the wind is set as coming from the north at 20 kts, gusting to 200 kts. Is that correct or am I misinterpreting that setting? If it is gusting at 200, should I expect that this would create a problem by itself?

Thanks.

18 minutes ago, jrw4 said:

When I look at the weather panel in the YouTube clip, it appears that the wind is set as coming from the north at 20 kts, gusting to 200 kts. Is that correct or am I misinterpreting that setting? If it is gusting at 200, should I expect that this would create a problem by itself?

Thanks.

I suspect the 199 on the chart is an error.   

He seems to have set it to 20 knots at 90 degrees to the runway gusting down as low as 1 knot every 30 seconds. So basically going from zero up to 20 knots and back to zero at 90 degrees to the runway several times a minute. I am not sure if that is what the OP intended but that is a pretty crazy crosswind for a Cessna unless you were very good and really on your game.

 As the c172 has a maximum demonstrated crosswind around 15 knots or so that is potentially a divert situation in real life as you firstly would be going from full rudder to neutral and back to full rudder again several times a minute.  You may also be voiding your insurance attempting to land in that much crosswind.  (Airliners are different, they are much heavier and can handle crosswinds up around 50 knots. )

Though, that said, the ground handling in game does have issues.

Edited September 7, 20214 yr by Glenn Fitzpatrick

A discussion about the rudder effectiveness in MFS has not much sense to me if the poster doesn't specify the rudder controller used (pedals, twisting joystick keyboard or mouse). 

I quite often fly taildraggers (Xcub, Corsair and Spit') and I do not see in LW, within the accepted crosswind parameters for each aircraft, that kind of extreme behaviour.  

MFS has a bit to improve but the critics seem  excessive to me.  

If you hit both brakes and full trotttle and move the rudder you see the aircraft move left or right.

the same goes for the elevator. So I would say that they are effective (sort of) even at o kts.

Rudder effectiveness varies in game.

For example the XCub and the Jabiru are both rated around 14 kts demonstrated in real life. 

However the XCub in game has the rudder authority to handle closer to 20 knots whereas the jabiru only seems good for a bit over 10 maybe 12  knots at best.

This of course makes the Jabiru the plane of choice when live weather throws wind at you as the light weight means it is tossed around like a rag doll and the slightly limited rudder authority really keeps you on your toes  😄

31 minutes ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

I suspect the 199 on the chart is an error.   

He seems to have set it to 20 knots at 90 degrees to the runway gusting down as low as 1 knot every 30 seconds. So basically going from zero up to 20 knots and back to zero at 90 degrees to the runway several times a minute. I am not sure if that is what the OP intended but that is a pretty crazy crosswind for a Cessna unless you were very good and really on your game.

I certainly can't say that's wrong, but it's an odd way to express a gust in terms of a negative wind. I wonder if this has fooled the game somehow, because the graph scale and the wind indication at the top seem to agree about the high maximum speed wind. MSFS may need to do a validity check on the gust and wind speed combo to ensure that the gust is always greater than the steady wind component, i.e., in this case set the  steady crosswind component to zero and the maximum gust to 20. I have never seen a wind report that was 20G0.

For a year, I flew out of KPAO, where the afternoon winds were always across the runway. Lots and lots of crosswind practice in a C172. A gusting crosswind of 20 kt would have been very challenging, and I would expect that the combination of ground friction and low speed FM would be beyond the abilities of a desktop sim, but that's just my guess.

5 minutes ago, jrw4 said:

I certainly can't say that's wrong, but it's an odd way to express a gust in terms of a negative wind. I wonder if this has fooled the game somehow, because the graph scale and the wind indication at the top seem to agree about the high maximum speed wind. MSFS may need to do a validity check on the gust and wind speed combo to ensure that the gust is always greater than the steady wind component, i.e., in this case set the  steady crosswind component to zero and the maximum gust to 20. I have never seen a wind report that was 20G0.

For a year, I flew out of KPAO, where the afternoon winds were always across the runway. Lots and lots of crosswind practice in a C172. A gusting crosswind of 20 kt would have been very challenging, and I would expect that the combination of ground friction and low speed FM would be beyond the abilities of a desktop sim, but that's just my guess.

Yeah something is seriously out of whack. The video shows 20G200 which matches the 199 in the chart at the bottom but the settings show 20 knots gusting down to just 0.1 knots .

In any case, this is far from a "Typical gusty takeoff". Perhaps the OP would like to try this again, setting the wind speed to zero and the gusts to something like 10 kts. More realistic might be wind 10 and gusts 20, which already would be very challenging in the real world for light aircraft. 

I hope MSFS fixed these issues as well. Essencial for realistic flying GA planes, not only TailDraggers, affects all, you will get a huge scare whenever there is a strong crosswing blowing.

 It isnt fixed in 1.19.8.0 😞