I had this part in mind

this is about P-51D losing wings at the slightest sign of non-trimmed turn

What I wanted to show is that P-51 doesn't lose wings just like that, you need some serious abuse of plane to lose wing.

In other words there is no plane in a game that will lose a wing at slight turn.

I can make ntrk version of a track but trk is better for device link analysis because more data is stored in it. In our case most important variable is GForce which is not recorded in ntrk.

FC

Good work FatCat!

What you're hearing with things like "slightest turn" is the characteristic whining sound
of the common clueless loser.

quote:

Originally posted by Bremspropeller:

quote:

Is that possible?

Yep, G is a function of speed and AoA.
A highly-effective elevator will get you high Gs in no time.

When your CoG is very near your CoL then it doesn't take as much elevator to pivot the plane
on pitch axis as another with less leverage given to the tail, which is more stable.

P-51 in IL2 pays for the easy elevator in stability.

quote:

Originally posted by M_Gunz:
characteristic whining sound
of the common clueless loser.

A really wonderful insight Gunz.

Why is everything so bloody personal with you?

Well I'm laughing when I say that so I hope you've got your picture right.

quote:

When your CoG is very near your CoL then it doesn't take as much elevator to pivot the plane on pitch axis as another with less leverage given to the tail, which is more stable.

M_Gunz,

Your concept should read:

When your CoG is just forward of your CoL then the pilot does not have to exert as much force on the stick to move the elevator.

This does not effect the angular velocity at which the elevator can move the nose through degress. That is a function of the ratio of control surface area to horizontal stabilizer area.

All the best,

Crumpp

For a plane that supposedly "won the war", it sure has some weak points in this sim......I have had rare occurances of the wings ripping off like this, but not many. Usually in a tight dive i try not to excellerate too fast, by tapping combat flaps or throttling back a notch. Maybe your wing took a bullet hit and made it weak? If that be the case Oleg and crew certainly got the damage modelling down to an almost complete science in some areas

quote:

Originally posted by FatCat_99:
I had this part in mind

this is about P-51D losing wings at the slightest sign of non-trimmed turn

What I wanted to show is that P-51 doesn't lose wings just like that, you need some serious abuse of plane to lose wing.

OK... so I did serious abusing on the track?
I have nothing more to add.

quote:

Originally posted by M_Gunz:
What you're hearing with things like "slightest turn" is the characteristic whining sound
of the common clueless loser.

I can't believe that you may go that low to say that.

Well, Mister... good for you that you're so full of knowledge!

ummmerrrrahhhh fifteen....."G"

quote:

Originally posted by DKoor:

quote:

Originally posted by M_Gunz:
What you're hearing with things like "slightest turn" is the characteristic whining sound
of the common clueless loser.

I can't believe that you may go that low to say that.

Well, Mister... good for you that you're so full of knowledge!

For over 10 years I've been on flight sim forums.
When I read complaints about whatever sim it is there's one kind that just lump into a group.
In every last case the problem description is built on and around exaggeration, and usually wrong to boot.
In every last case it's emotion-driven.
In most cases the complainer does the same one or two things over and over.
In all cases the complainer has not really looked for a way out or around or looks at themself as the source.
Oh no, the game is wrong. I know how to....... whatever.
And whatever it is, it's impossible or inhuman for anyone to do.
The slightest is in over half of those though speed bleed is more often than wing snap.

Few people post about losing fine control in the heat of battle.

What do you say about people who get all into a "this needs fixed" upset-state over things
you know better than and have read multiple threads about?
What do you say to people who come up all nasty about planes that -can't- be turned without
spinning when you can turn the same ones till greyout and blackout?
What do you say when 3 to 10 others jump on and take up the cry? And I DO mean cry.
What about when it's on the chat as the excuse du jour?

What do I or anyone else owe these people besides the care and sensitivity that they have put
behind their "the game is screwed up"/"my favorite plane is porked" posts?

The slightest stick movement my six.

Snap rolls (rolls out of the main axis) will do that - it puts excessive loads on the wing roots.
They were forbidden on some WW2 fighters.
Not sure if this is modeled in the game, or if the P-51 was one of those.

quote:

Originally posted by Kettenhunde:

quote:

When your CoG is very near your CoL then it doesn't take as much elevator to pivot the plane on pitch axis as another with less leverage given to the tail, which is more stable.

M_Gunz,

Your concept should read:

When your CoG is just forward of your CoL then the pilot does not have to exert as much force on the stick to move the elevator.

This does not effect the angular velocity at which the elevator can move the nose through degress. That is a function of the ratio of control surface area to horizontal stabilizer area.

All the best,

Crumpp

Sometimes you need a bit longer lever arm to move the boulder at all, and then speed isn't so
much the point as moving the thing at all, right?

We do have a P-51 with a lot of leverage for the elevator. And at high speeds it takes very
little +AOA to make a lot of extra lift, right?

OTOH the P-51 isn't so great at low speeds for some odd reason.

quote:

Originally posted by FatCat_99:
I had this part in mind

this is about P-51D losing wings at the slightest sign of non-trimmed turn

What I wanted to show is that P-51 doesn't lose wings just like that, you need some serious abuse of plane to lose wing.

In other words there is no plane in a game that will lose a wing at slight turn.

I can make ntrk version of a track but trk is better for device link analysis because more data is stored in it. In our case most important variable is GForce which is not recorded in ntrk.

FC

Its not really so much of the turn...but if I make a sudden motion on my stick, at high speed, in a Mustang, it will probably shed a wing. I've since learned to limit such motions and pretend that the plane has a solid elevator like a 109

I realize its the 15G limit across the board for all planes and that its just that some types are more capable of exceeding the 15G structural limit than other types. It seems that the Mustang can exceed this limit with a slight but rapid motion on the stick. I say it seems because I haven't measured it. I think we do have some data on that somewhere.

I think it'd be nice if it weren't so easy to load 15G straight away like that. But every plane has its vice I guess...this one is particularly deadly. To be fair I've broken wings off a number of planes...the Tempest is not nearly so bad but if you're going fast and you pull back hard...and I mean full travel...then yes you can snap the wing. With the Mustang you don't need nearly as much travel with the stick. Thats just the hard part that I have trouble with

quote:

Originally posted by VW-IceFire:
I realize its the 15G limit across the board for all planes and that its just that some types are more capable of exceeding the 15G structural limit than other types. It seems that the Mustang can exceed this limit with a slight but rapid motion on the stick. I say it seems because I haven't measured it. I think we do have some data on that somewhere.

I get away with more stick movement at 500kph and less as opposed to 600kph and more.
In really high speed dives, 800kph and over, if I'm having an off day I can lose parts way
before I should -- but that's me and I know it since I don't have all bad days.

By using about 50% filter I do fly smoother. I could go for more.

What I learned from GA pilots is to move the control some and wait for the plane to start
moving in that direction before moving the column more. It keeps my control movements
close to what is happening is the best I can say it. Start the turn, develop the turn,
finish the turn. If the nose starts slowing down then don't just pull harder, those kinds
of things. Ditto for pulling up. And yet I am not a super pilot compared to those who
have taken the course and got the license, they just wax my butt.

quote:

Originally posted by SterlingX:
Snap rolls (rolls out of the main axis) will do that - it puts excessive loads on the wing roots.
They were forbidden on some WW2 fighters.
Not sure if this is modeled in the game, or if the P-51 was one of those.

If memory serves me correctly, the P-51 had what they called a "de-boost" tab on the rudder, cause if you snaprolled it, it tended to tear the tail off. I watched that on a Jeff Ethell checkout ride on a P-51.

quote:

Snap rolls (rolls out of the main axis) will do that - it puts excessive loads on the wing roots.

But you'd not snap a wing during the snap-roll.
It would just inflict structural damage on your wing-root.
If the crew-chief realizes that, anything will be fine - he'll change the part and you'll pay him a couple of beers.

If he doesn't well, your bad - you'll propably lose a wing during the next hard maneuver.
A hard landing might as well tear a wing off (as long as you gear is placed below the wing, not below the fuselage).

quote:

Sometimes you need a bit longer lever arm to move the boulder at all, and then speed isn't so much the point as moving the thing at all, right?

That is exactly what is going on M_Gunz. You're not moving the "boulder" any farther. The lever is longer so the force required moving it the same distance is less.

Remember whenever you take an airplane above Va, you can break the airframe with full control deflection.

Here is the warning from the P51D POH:




BTW, note the force reversal. That is a dangerous thing in an airplane. It's more common than engineers would like but nonetheless it is not a good thing especially at high velocity. This means of stick forces move from pull force to a push force or vice versa to maintain the same condition of flight.

In other words if you are pushing to ease out of the dive and you hit that reversal point, you are now applying input force in the opposite direction from where you want to go. Instead of slowly recovering from the dive, you are now increasing the load factor in the recovery.

All the best,

Crumpp

<edited to add part about force reversal>

quote:

But you'd not snap a wing during the snap-roll.

Maybe or maybe not. There is a good possibiity you would never even see the damage so that there is nothing to repair.

Especially without the aid of modern NDT.

Very likely though you would experience some damage. That damage has a very real possbility of causing the airframe to fail under much lower loads the next time.

Here is a warning to the Luftwaffe pilots. The words were sent out German pilots but those words apply to all airplanes:

quote:

Further, once an aircraft has been forced over maximum speeds beyond the limits of elasticity in a vital part without a fracture resulting, the fracture can occur much sooner in a later heavy loading.

All the best,

Crumpp