Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover > Technical threads > FM/DM threads

FM/DM threads Everything about FM/DM in CoD

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 09-24-2012, 10:11 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

How about this has already been simulated in one FM and works very well.

It is not that hard to do.


Quote:
It was a quick test which I would like to see others repeat although I did go to great lengths to ensure I was trimmed as stable as possible hands-off.
I would like to see others repeat it too. It does not take any elaborate set up.

From level flight, pull back and let go. The FM will return to trim speed.....

It is that simple.

Just like the Spitfire in the game is immune to overstress damage, it is statically and dynamically stable.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 09-24-2012, 11:01 PM
ACE-OF-ACES's Avatar
ACE-OF-ACES ACE-OF-ACES is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: NM
Posts: 2,248
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bongodriver View Post
Even with a FFB stick the game will not recognise the user has taken their hands off the stick and therefore it will still assume it is just being held in whatever position the stick ends up, try it, move a FFB stick without covering the sensor to activate FFB and you can still make inputs, the game will just not simulate stick-free.
Agreed.. Sadly, Crumpp is so vested in this 'story', that he will ignore these facts and simply double down on the 'story' and ignore all these facts as if they were never mentioned.
__________________
Theres a reason for instrumenting a plane for test..
That being a pilots's 'perception' of what is going on can be very different from what is 'actually' going on.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 09-25-2012, 07:06 AM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

I see Crumpp's posting the phugoids and spirals on the Spitfire again (35th time?). So I'll just repeat what NACA leading WW2 aerodynamics test engineer - all fighter aircraft of the era which were tested displayed instability in the phugoid and spiral mode. Put the R.A.E. chart from the Hurricane testing next to the Spitfires and you'll appreciate the Spitfires stability in these modes.

And Crumpp, before you post it a perceived 36th time, can you please remove your wrong labels? A plane going into stall in the first cycle is not stable.
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 09-25-2012, 02:22 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
Hurricane testing next to the Spitfires
Absolutely, by careful flying, a skilled Spitfire pilot can match the precision found in a stable aircraft.

That is not the issue.

The issue is the Hurricane does not require such attention to achieve and hold a precise acceleration. The Hurricane is stable.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 09-25-2012, 04:52 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Thumbs down

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
Absolutely, by careful flying, a skilled Spitfire pilot can match the precision found in a stable aircraft.
It's stick free behaviour.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 09-26-2012, 02:37 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
It's stick free behaviour.
What are you talking about???

The Hurricane abrupt turn as recorded by the NACA is stick fixed. The Spitfire abrupt turn as recorded by the NACA is stick fixed.

The RAE stability measurements for general stability characteristics are stick free.

In both the RAE and NACA measurements, the Spitfire was longitudinally unstable with unacceptable characteristics.

That is why they added the inertial elevator to fix the longitudinal instability.

What is the issue? Why is blatent fact so hard to understand?

All the smoke, mirrors, and baloney put out about "it is normal" and "all fighters of the day" acted like that is pure fantasy.

If there was not a problem, then they would not have fixed anything!!!

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 09-26-2012, 02:40 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Answer the question JtD:

Why did they modify the aircraft with an inertial elevator?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 09-26-2012, 02:46 PM
fruitbat's Avatar
fruitbat fruitbat is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S E England
Posts: 1,065
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
Answer the question JtD:

Why did they modify the aircraft with an inertial elevator?
Heres a question.

If they realised that they needed it for the MkV which no one disputes, why did they not come to the same conclusion for the Mk I in 1939?

It wasn't new tech.

And it has SFA to do with NACA, since they added Bob weigths to the MkV before NACA ever got there Spit V to test.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 09-26-2012, 03:15 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
why did they not come to the same conclusion for the Mk I
The Mk I recieved an inertial elevator in July of 1941.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 09-26-2012, 03:32 PM
fruitbat's Avatar
fruitbat fruitbat is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: S E England
Posts: 1,065
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
The Mk I recieved an inertial elevator in July of 1941.
Did it, what Mk I's were those then.

Mk I was out of service and MKII's and Mk V's in service then.

I know what your desperately using as your source for that claim, and its one of the hundreds of modifications listed in Morgan and Shacklady, which coincidentally were all the modifications that were applied to the MKV, which led to need of Bob weights due to CoG being changed, AFTER BoB.

Again i ask you, if it took the RAE 2 months do decide that they needed bob weights on the Vb, why 3 years for the Mk1 in your world?

Last edited by fruitbat; 09-26-2012 at 03:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 06:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.