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
  #191  
Old 10-21-2011, 04:14 PM
robtek's Avatar
robtek robtek is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,819
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
You don't have the real life forces on your joystick. So stick travel doesn't give you the feedback you get in the plane.
As the required forces in the spit are very low, being the "problem", i dont think that matters so much.

There is a spring in your stick, isnt it?

Also there is always ffb a possibility.
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects
Reply With Quote
  #192  
Old 10-21-2011, 09:06 PM
JtD JtD is offline
Il-2 enthusiast & Moderator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 903
Default

I don't pull 5 lb on my stick, let alone 50, which even with the low stick forces in the Spit were necessary on occasion to bring the plane to the limit.

Stick forces in the Spit were low but OK, not "the problem".
Reply With Quote
  #193  
Old 10-22-2011, 12:28 PM
TomcatViP TomcatViP is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles View Post
I'm not certain if you're agreeing or disagreeing with me, or just expounding on the design of the F-117 and B-2
hehe I agree with you. I was just complementing the answer.
Reply With Quote
  #194  
Old 10-23-2011, 05:50 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
The best way to asses the Spit instability for everyone here and its uncomfortable 3/4 inch (2cm) stick travel would be to reconfigure your joystick to allow only that travel in the pitch zone.
Remember, size does matter......



A good simulation of the Spitfire will have the aircraft twitchy or skittish and hard to precisely control in the longitudinal axis. The higher the angle of attack, the more skittish the aircraft; the lower the angle of attack, the more stable the longitudinal axis. It will take skill and constant attention to maintain a set altitude and will require small precise stick inputs to keep it from overloading the airframe on dive recovery or reaching an accelerated stall in a turn. If it does experience an accelerated stall, the stall is extremely harsh and will require immediate application of the correct control inputs ( reduce the angle of attack and increase airspeed) to keep from spinning.

It will take about 2000 feet to stop the spin and then the pilot will have recover the aircraft to flight. The correct inputs are full rudder in the opposite direction until the spin is fully recovered; Stick neutral and then slowly brought forward. The nose will come down and the rotation speed will increase until enough dynamic pressure is built for the control to be effective and stop the rotation. The aircraft will be nose down in a dive which the pilot then recovers from. The book recommends 5,000 to 6,000 foot margin to ensure a recovery from an accidental spin. Deliberate spins are prohibited because the airframe can fail under certain conditions in a spin.

Remember that the Spitfire had poor control force harmony as well. The lateral control forces have a much steeper gradient than the longitudinal. That means the aileron forces increase much faster than the elevator forces. While your elevator is very light in control forces with only a 3/4 inch travel from cruise to stall point, the ailerons require much more force to induce a given roll rate. As the Operating Instructions relate, it would require the pilot to brace his elbow in order to apply the heavy aileron force required to reach maximum deflection while being careful not to induce any elevator input.

Last edited by Crumpp; 10-23-2011 at 06:19 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #195  
Old 10-25-2011, 10:10 AM
TomcatViP TomcatViP is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JtD View Post
You don't have the real life forces on your joystick. So stick travel doesn't give you the feedback you get in the plane.
No but variable neutral zone can makes you feel as if you had to pull harder
Reply With Quote
  #196  
Old 10-25-2011, 10:16 AM
TomcatViP TomcatViP is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 1,323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
Remember, size does matter......



A good simulation of the Spitfire will have the aircraft twitchy or skittish and hard to precisely control in the longitudinal axis. The higher the angle of attack, the more skittish the aircraft; the lower the angle of attack, the more stable the longitudinal axis. It will take skill and constant attention to maintain a set altitude and will require small precise stick inputs to keep it from overloading the airframe on dive recovery or reaching an accelerated stall in a turn. If it does experience an accelerated stall, the stall is extremely harsh and will require immediate application of the correct control inputs ( reduce the angle of attack and increase airspeed) to keep from spinning.

It will take about 2000 feet to stop the spin and then the pilot will have recover the aircraft to flight. The correct inputs are full rudder in the opposite direction until the spin is fully recovered; Stick neutral and then slowly brought forward. The nose will come down and the rotation speed will increase until enough dynamic pressure is built for the control to be effective and stop the rotation. The aircraft will be nose down in a dive which the pilot then recovers from. The book recommends 5,000 to 6,000 foot margin to ensure a recovery from an accidental spin. Deliberate spins are prohibited because the airframe can fail under certain conditions in a spin.

Remember that the Spitfire had poor control force harmony as well. The lateral control forces have a much steeper gradient than the longitudinal. That means the aileron forces increase much faster than the elevator forces. While your elevator is very light in control forces with only a 3/4 inch travel from cruise to stall point, the ailerons require much more force to induce a given roll rate. As the Operating Instructions relate, it would require the pilot to brace his elbow in order to apply the heavy aileron force required to reach maximum deflection while being careful not to induce any elevator input.
All is said there.

But the 3/4inch value need to be assessed one more time. We can't only rely on a single NACA report. Even if NACA/NASA docs are among the most reliable sources available on the web.

If we put things back in the contest, at the time of the evaluation the US fighter industry was struggling to produce a viable pony capable to compete with Eu models.
Reply With Quote
  #197  
Old 10-25-2011, 11:28 AM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
If we put things back in the contest, at the time of the evaluation the US fighter industry was struggling to produce a viable pony capable to compete with Eu models.
Certainly.

Stability and control is one area the United States was ahead of other Allied Nations.

The United States pioneered stability and control research. It was the first to quantify the science.

In fact, both the Germans and the Japanese standards were based on Warner, Norton, and Allen's work at MIT as well as Gilruth's work at the NACA.

In 1942, an RAE engineer named Sydney B Gates made his famous (in stability and control engineering circles only, lol ) "dash around America" comparing NACA research to RAE at the time. It was primarily thru Gates efforts that the RAE eventually did adopt a standard but his efforts did not reach fruition until post war. That standard mirrored the NACA's standard.
Reply With Quote
  #198  
Old 10-25-2011, 02:33 PM
Skoshi Tiger Skoshi Tiger is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
Remember, size does matter......



A good simulation of the Spitfire will have the aircraft twitchy or skittish and hard to precisely control in the longitudinal axis. The higher the angle of attack, the more skittish the aircraft; the lower the angle of attack, the more stable the longitudinal axis. It will take skill and constant attention to maintain a set altitude and will require small precise stick inputs to keep it from overloading the airframe on dive recovery or reaching an accelerated stall in a turn. If it does experience an accelerated stall, the stall is extremely harsh and will require immediate application of the correct control inputs ( reduce the angle of attack and increase airspeed) to keep from spinning.

It will take about 2000 feet to stop the spin and then the pilot will have recover the aircraft to flight. The correct inputs are full rudder in the opposite direction until the spin is fully recovered; Stick neutral and then slowly brought forward. The nose will come down and the rotation speed will increase until enough dynamic pressure is built for the control to be effective and stop the rotation. The aircraft will be nose down in a dive which the pilot then recovers from. The book recommends 5,000 to 6,000 foot margin to ensure a recovery from an accidental spin. Deliberate spins are prohibited because the airframe can fail under certain conditions in a spin.
That sound just like was happening with me at Hawkinge about 10 minutes ago. 2000 foot recovery sounds about right. Recovery fairly conventional as you describe. CoD must be a good sim.

Last edited by Skoshi Tiger; 10-25-2011 at 02:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #199  
Old 10-25-2011, 02:40 PM
Crumpp's Avatar
Crumpp Crumpp is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 1,552
Default

Quote:
2000 foot recovery sounds about right.
To stop the spin or to recover?
Reply With Quote
  #200  
Old 10-25-2011, 03:07 PM
Skoshi Tiger Skoshi Tiger is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Western Australia
Posts: 2,197
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crumpp View Post
To stop the spin or to recover?
For the plane to stop spinning and I jammed on the throttle. Though I don't profess to be an expert, I'm sure that would be a lot of better pilots around.

I'll have a go at recording a track and see how the numbers stack up on the guages.

Cheers!
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 04:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.