Big Radials P-40 tail drag modeling the worst of our options

[jcomm 5,909]

I honestly think it's difficult to blame on the devs for the peculiarities of behaviour of taildraggers, and most all other fixed wing aircraft in MFS.

Truth is the flight dynamics model in MFS at it's present state is in need of a lot of tuning, fixes, new features...

If a developer eases on the flight dynamics to make an aircraft "controllable" something is most probably being taken from realism...

Let's wait for the release of SU6, and then SU7. Both mention updates to the physics that could make things feel better.

Again I do not own other than a P40E in IL2 BoX... so I can't really comment on this particular add on, but I have the FI Spitfire IX, and even the default taildraggers in MFS feel rather arcadish overall.

 

 

 

 

Edited October 16, 2021 by jcomm

[Paul J 349]

@leprechaunlive   "lying wont get us anywhere in this debate... "         ... Whether Dillon is exaggerating or not - you'll certainly not win any forum debates by calling another member a liar.

I don't have your P40 - only the A2A version ala' FSX, etc., so I have no comment on it's habits - other than the "unstick" issue is a pretty common problem, (WACO anyone?) and it's mostly due, I reckon, to Asobo not having folks on staff who are as capable or competent as Rob Young, or the crew over at A2A, or similar at Milviz, PMDG or Leonardo or Aerosoft. Rob has done an awesome job on the Bonanza, so it is "doable", just as Working Title are fixing the nav equipment issues. 

pj

[Dillon 2,197]

2 hours ago, leprechaunlive said:

Lets just not start with that kind of misleading information, lying wont get us anywhere in this debate...

I'm wondering how you know my usage of the FS sims over the years? 😶 

Your calling me a liar which is unacceptable... 🙁 

Edited October 16, 2021 by Dillon

[leprechaunlive 1,852]

1 hour ago, Dillon said:

I'm wondering how you know my usage of the FS sims over the years? 😶 

Your calling me a liar which is unacceptable... 🙁 

Well saying that this addon REQUIRES rudder assist to take off is a lie, and is misleading. It might be true in your case, but it is certainly not a pre-requisite to make it work.  

So in that case, i think it IS acceptable 🙂. 

And because this is the internet, i guess i should point that i have nothing against anyone giving us "bad" feedback, im really not that kind of person, im very new to this, and i like to think that i can "detach" myself emotionally from the product or from msfs alltogether. Long story short, i have absolutely no strong feelings about you saying what your saying, and about you as a member. I shouldnt even have to say it, but again, this is the forum on the internet, wich is the worst medium to have a priper conversation 😀

[Dominique_K 10,137]

41 minutes ago, leprechaunlive said:

Well saying that this addon REQUIRES rudder assist to take off is a lie, and is misleading. 

 

A lie supposes an intent to deceive. I hardly think that was the case here. Dillon may (or may not !) have said something wrong and/or exaggerated but I doubt it was meant to deceive anybody ot to harm your company.  Calling him a liar is wrong.

On the issue now, I don't have your aircraft but I tend to be wary of people saying that the flight model is wrong because they can't do this or that. The Official forum is full of this kind of posts. What I certainly do not want to see are developers cranking out crowd pleasers like a couple of them are doing to serve the newbie market.  No ground loop, straight takeoff or landings etc. I'd say that if you can easily take off a warbird fresh from the download,   there is something wrong. These birds are not supposed to be easy. 

Edited October 16, 2021 by Dominique_K

[Dillon 2,197]

2 hours ago, leprechaunlive said:

Well saying that this addon REQUIRES rudder assist to take off is a lie, and is misleading. It might be true in your case, but it is certainly not a pre-requisite to make it work.  

So in that case, i think it IS acceptable 🙂. 

And because this is the internet, i guess i should point that i have nothing against anyone giving us "bad" feedback, im really not that kind of person, im very new to this, and i like to think that i can "detach" myself emotionally from the product or from msfs alltogether. Long story short, i have absolutely no strong feelings about you saying what your saying, and about you as a member. I shouldnt even have to say it, but again, this is the forum on the internet, wich is the worst medium to have a priper conversation 😀

To your lower point it's true things can get misinterpreted on posts where people can take away a whole different meaning than what your trying to say.  I did not mean to infer that 'assist' was 'required' for takeoff in this bird.  I had never tried it at the time of that writing to even know.  I was saying I've never had a developer tell their customer base to default to in sim hand holding because of the difficulty of normal operation.  I wouldn't have a problem if it was just difficult but sliding sideways down a dry grass strip when the bird decides to veer to the left isn't what I would call realistic but that's just me I guess.  When you see that in the sim the developer suggest using 'assist' is what got me.

Again, can't say it enough to be clear one doesn't need 'assist' to takeoff as I've done it many times myself.  Without it you can have some weird situations if the aircraft get's away from you but to each his own.  I hope this clears this up.  Also I don't believe just because it's an old plane automatically means difficult in normal operation.  Challenging yes to what we're familiar with but not insanely so.  I wish I had real world experience to back that up.  All I can go by is the official training documentation and online training videos available.

Edited October 16, 2021 by Dillon

[TacomaSailor 191]

Once it turns to the left it's game over no matter what your inputs are.

The statement above is, in my opinion, the crux of the issue.  IF (IF!) I dance the pedals successfully I can takeoff in a somewhat graceful fashion.   

BUT, once the P-40 nose swings even a degree or two to the left and I stomp hard on the right pedal - the plane just keeps swinging left and is totally out of control.   The plane feels like it just instantly gains momentum to the left after a few degrees rotation - and then all is lost and none is recoverable.

I can takeoff straight ahead fairly consistently but it does seem very unusual that allowing just a few degrees rotation left results in a crash.  Is that realistic?

[Chock 17,769]

1 hour ago, TacomaSailor said:

I can takeoff straight ahead fairly consistently but it does seem very unusual that allowing just a few degrees rotation left results in a crash.  Is that realistic?

I think the problem in this instance is that it could potentially be realistic for a fighter aeroplane to behave in this way because of the sudden unleashing of torque when you either throttle up quickly, or if you release the brakes when fully throttled up whilst there is little in the way of directional momentum to keep it pointing down the runway, thus necessitating a rapid bootful of rudder to stop the rot immediately. To illustrate why this is the case, it is worth noting that most WW2 fighter aeroplanes can exhibit enough torque if you throttle them up quickly when airborne, that doing so will instigate a torque roll opposite to that of the propeller rotation, the rate of this sudden roll will be quick enough to make the down-going wing exceed its maximum angle of attack, which will make it go into a spin, being much like the effect of a snap roll.

Bearing this level of power in mind which can make such a thing possible, what absolutely is realistic in this regard, is that once you lose it with a taildragger which can exert a massive turning force with its propeller strong enough to cause a torque roll asymmetric stall, there is a very likely possibility that it will want to swap ends, and if this happens at low speed, whilst there will be some rudder authority from the propwash, it may very well not be enough rudder authority to get things back under control. It's not helped by the fact that despite not having outward-retracting gear like the Spitfire and the Bf-109, the P-40B does still have a fairly narrow track and the fact that the P-40B is one of the short-tailed P-40 variants too, doesn't help its longitudinal stability either.

In truth the P-40B actually had a pretty low power to weight ratio compared to most contemporary fighter aeroplanes, but this is relative to other very powerful aeroplanes of course; compared to your average Cessna spam can it is vastly more powerful, which is why pilots who were put on it typically had quite a lot of hours on other types getting the hang of keeping taildraggers under control, such as the Stearman, before they were let loose on more powerful and less forgiving fighter aeroplanes. Even then this kind of thing could catch fairly experienced pilots out, as evidenced by the vast number of Bf-109s which were damaged in abortive take off rolls by pilots more used to the earlier less powerful variants, who then jumped into an E model and tried to take off in the same way that they had done with a C or D variant and found the thing going off the runway, digging a wing in and getting wrecked. The same is true for the Spitfire; a large number of these were struck off charge as damaged beyond repair before WW2 even got going, and at that time most pilots who wrecked these aeroplanes were RAF pilots who'd been flying taildraggers for years. This is in fact one of the reasons why the Hurricane was sent to France in 1939 rather than the Spitfire; with its inward-retracting gear, it had a much wider track than most other fighters and was therefore easier to operate from rough airfields. Difficult as it may seem to believe, quite a few Hurricane pilots objected to their Squadrons being converted to fly Spitfires, and this was one of the reasons why.

Edited October 16, 2021 by Chock

[TacomaSailor 191]

In order to gather more data - I takeoff while in an external view watching from aft of the plane on the center line and close enough to see rudder and tail wheel details.

I ease in the throttle so that I am at 40" at 50 mph and have no problem keeping the nose and tail aligned with the center of the runway. BUT - when the tail wheel comes off the ground the heading relative to the centerline becomes critical.  At that point the throttle has been advanced to 45". 

IF I have the proper amount of rudder correction and have kept the plane heading straight - it is fairly easy to climb off the runway and fly straight on the runway heading. 

IF I have allowed any small amount of turning to begin as the tailwheel comes up - the plane snaps left and becomes very difficult to manage.  

Is it realistic that the small amount of drag which occurs with the tailwheel on the ground is enough to counter all the torque such that misapplication of rudder results in a snap to the left when the tail wheel ground drag diminishes?

As I've said - I can manage a pretty smooth takeoff but the consequences of a very small heading deviation at 50 to 60 mph seems quite severe. 

 

Edited October 17, 2021 by TacomaSailor

[Fielder 3,661]

On 10/16/2021 at 10:52 AM, Dominique_K said:

 

On the issue now, I don't have your aircraft but I tend to be wary of people saying that the flight model is wrong because they can't do this or that. The Official forum is full of this kind of posts. What I certainly do not want to see are developers cranking out crowd pleasers like a couple of them are doing to serve the newbie market.  No ground loop, straight takeoff or landings etc. I'd say that if you can easily take off a warbird fresh from the download,   there is something wrong. These birds are not supposed to be easy. 

I'm another person that doesn't want to see developers cranking out crowd pleasers that are too easy to fly either. But neither to do I want to see developers releasing sim addon's that are an order of magnitude harder to fly than the real aircraft that it is supposed to model.

But some people do love exactly that sort of release. To them it makes for a very entertaining difficult challenge, in other words a fun game. But what it is not is a realistic simulation. It can be as far removed for reality as the arcade game.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dominique_K 10,137]

20 hours ago, Fielder said:

 .

But some people do love exactly that sort of release. To them it makes for a very entertaining difficult challenge, in other words a fun game. But what it is not is a realistic simulation. It can be as far removed for reality as the arcade game.

 

I will not tread in the deep ruts of a path worn out by tireless simmers on forums before aka game vs simulation 😄. But I find you paradoxical😉. Apology in advance if I misunderstood you.

Lets start by supposing that you never drove a  real warbird (neither did I). You call  a simulation a WB  that you can handle  after downloading  but you call her a game when you can't. 

I don't have the BR P-40 but I had some exchanges recently at the FS forum about the G-91. People were complaining that she was a b*tch to take off and land after SU5. And, of course, this was the developer's fault ! I  do not have any problem with the Gina. Practising numerous take off and landings may help. The numbers are not exactly what they should, business as ususal, but she flies ok.  I add that driving a WB without rudder pedals, with a twisting joystick or, horresco referens, a XBox controller explains certain things.

 I remember the same when the FI Spit' and MV Corsair came along.

 Conclusion ? None really. Dev are not perfect, nor is the MSFS modeling of a takeoff roll but some aircraft are  dangerous to fly, specially during transition between ground and air. And the dev should reflect this in the product.

 This is exactly why I didn't buy the Stearman. This aircraft is a known ground looper in real life but the product available for MSFS doesn't reflect this feature. 

Edited October 18, 2021 by Dominique_K

[AlexlinnMT 2]

I also picked this bird up the other day. I came across this trying to see if other people were experiencing the same issues I was. I spent hours this weekend trying to get this thing to track well enough to get down the runway. As soon as the tail is about to come up the nose with shoot left. Full right rudder will not correct it even with full back stick.After doing some testing I have found as soon as the air speed reaches 40 the plane swings to the left. You can roll at 30% power straight as an arrow for a mile but as soon as your air speed hits 40 your done even with your tail still on the ground. I am no expert but it seems like there is an issue with the model here.  

[Dominique_K 10,137]

OK guys. I understand the frustration. Been here too with other aircraft. And something I learned is that before criticizing the model and the developer, you gotta do your homework including practicing a lot.

 Maybe the following can help. This is how Dudley Henriques explains how to take off a P-51. A Mustang is not a P-40 but  carefully reading this tutorial  will help you to take off with any taildragger WB.

A Tutorial for Mustang Takeoffs - The A2A Simulations Community

I want to underline few things in what he says in view of what have been said in this thread.

1/ The takeoff roll a very complex event control wise. There are several forces in play and they vary in intensity at various airspeeds as your speed increases.  You use rudder and aileron.  

2/ Many  P51 pilot who didn't have a working knowledge of this airplane were killed in taking her off . Hence my conclusion that if a simcraft is easy on a newbie, it is just a crowd pleaser. 

3/ The 51 is a whole new airplane as it passes 30 inches. Exactly what some complain about in this thread !  

 As Dudley wrote "the P51 is NOT your vanilla GA light airplane". Nor is the P-40.   As I said upthread, this is not a plea in favor of BR product that I do not own. Her developers are able to do that. It is sharing my experience of flying WB for a long time and the tremendous help that people like Dudley Henriques can be.

EDIT and yes, I still botch some of my take off 😋 !

And do NOT practice with a crosswind !

Edited October 19, 2021 by Dominique_K

[Dillon 2,197]

17 hours ago, Dominique_K said:

I will not tread in the deep ruts of a path worn out by tireless simmers on forums before aka game vs simulation 😄. But I find you paradoxical😉. Apology in advance if I misunderstood you.

Lets start by supposing that you never drove a  real warbird (neither did I). You call  a simulation a WB  that you can handle  after downloading  but you call her a game when you can't. 

I don't have the BR P-40 but I had some exchanges recently at the FS forum about the G-91. People were complaining that she was a b*tch to take off and land after SU5. And, of course, this was the developer's fault ! I  do not have any problem with the Gina. Practising numerous take off and landings may help. The numbers are not exactly what they should, business as ususal, but she flies ok.  I add that driving a WB without rudder pedals, with a twisting joystick or, horresco referens, a XBox controller explains certain things.

 I remember the same when the FI Spit' and MV Corsair came along.

 Conclusion ? None really. Dev are not perfect, nor is the MSFS modeling of a takeoff roll but some aircraft are  dangerous to fly, specially during transition between ground and air. And the dev should reflect this in the product.

 This is exactly why I didn't buy the Stearman. This aircraft is a known ground looper in real life but the product available for MSFS doesn't reflect this feature. 

Hey Dominique, I hear your point but when your tires have no traction on dry pavement as if your on ice you can't explain this away as the difficulties of handling warbirds.  

[Dillon 2,197]

16 minutes ago, Dominique_K said:

As I said upthread, this is not a plea in favor of BR product that I do not own. Her developers are able to do that. It is sharing my experience of flying WB for a long time and the tremendous help that people like Dudley Henriques can be.

EDIT and yes, I still botch some of my take off 😋 !

And do NOT practice with a crosswind !

Please for the sake of us all (since your commenting in this thread) get this aircraft so you can see for yourself what we are talking about... 

Edited October 19, 2021 by Dillon