PDA

View Full Version : 4.01...Crash-Test and Splash!



Takata_
06-15-2005, 02:47 PM
S~! mighty simmers
As interesting the new FMs' are, the ultimate question for anybody flying blue, red or any color is, "to what extent is the new code improving the 3.04 old one?"

Beside all those great new features - no doubt that 4.00/4.01 is one step forward from 3.04 -
we pointed in many other topics some "issues" affecting gunnery, triming and general handling. To make it short, many planes, blue or red are showing COG unstability with the new FMs' and coordinated flight is somewhat difficult to achieve.

It won't be an issue if Oleg's designed it on purpose, but without control, nobody could be sure of that.

To test it, I have set a mission on Crimean Map wilch is very simple and that anybody can reproduce. The mission goal is to land a plane with no fuel gliding 10 km above the sea and trying to reach the runaway. Engine off, FMs' should not be affected by the new "torque" effect and it will show the new flight dynamics better... but it looks like torque still produce some effects even with engine off!

Some planes handle very well, like the P-38 and all P-40 models: for example, the P-38 with engine feathered is still able to loop above the runaway... but!... barely any Spitfire won't be able to land and will crash into the sea before crossing the coastline!

Some planes are showing a lot of instability that may not be trimed out and the consequence is that they are bleeding a lot of energy... It is interesting to turn off the "torque effect" and see what will happen when the plane fail to land.

I don't have enough time to test all the planes and I'll be very interested if some of you would try it and put some feedback about that.

here is the mission:

[MAIN]
MAP Crimea/load.ini
TIME 12.0
CloudType 0
CloudHeight 1000.0
player usa0100
army 1
playerNum 0
[Wing]
usa0100
[usa0100]
Planes 1
Skill 1
Class air.P_40SUKAISVOLOCHHAWKA2
Fuel 0
weapons default
[usa0100_Way]
NORMFLY 44000.00 96000.00 1000.00 300.00 &0
NORMFLY 44000.00 106000.00 1000.00 300.00 &0
[NStationary]
[Buildings]
[Bridge]
[House]

The best is to launch it from the Full Mission Builder using the "play" option in menu. It makes it easier to change the plane tested.

Takata

Atomic_Marten
06-15-2005, 02:56 PM
Good stuff there. You should really post this into ORR.

Takata_
06-15-2005, 03:03 PM
hmm.. I think I am in ORR.. no?
lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Atomic_Marten
06-15-2005, 03:53 PM
Originally posted by Takata_:
hmm.. I think I am in ORR.. no?
lol http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Geez.. sorry mate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif. I have mystiped it.. had ORR and GD window open, and have superseded these two. One http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif for me..

stathem
06-15-2005, 05:23 PM
Sounds fun.

Sorry to be numb, can you give a quick explanation of how to create the mission with that text data ?

WWMaxGunz
06-15-2005, 06:54 PM
Those planes were designed to run with power, not gliding.
So the rudder is set a bit angled as are wings to deal with propwash and torque at cruise
speed. The airframe counters the torque then which is why there is trim in most planes
and in planes without like rudder of 109's it is missed enough to be noted.
So you cut the power and glide, now there are zero of the effects the frame is specially
twisted to counter and you say what?

Takata_
06-15-2005, 07:01 PM
Originally posted by stathem:
Sounds fun.

Sorry to be numb, can you give a quick explanation of how to create the mission with that text data ?

ok,
1- open the Full Mission Builder,
2- select the Crimean Map,
3- do nothing else and save it
for example, save it here: Missions>Single>US>Test>Test401.mis
4- close the game, follow this path and open the file "Test401.mis" with your your notepad.
5- copy and paste the text above on it and that's yet. (the other file named "Test401.properties" is for briefing and is empty).
6- now, come back to FMB and open the mission again... play it from FMB and change plane from there.

I hope it's clear

Takata

Takata_
06-15-2005, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Those planes were designed to run with power, not gliding.
So the rudder is set a bit angled as are wings to deal with propwash and torque at cruise
speed. The airframe counters the torque then which is why there is trim in most planes
and in planes without like rudder of 109's it is missed enough to be noted.
So you cut the power and glide, now there are zero of the effects the frame is specially
twisted to counter and you say what?

Hmm... obviously, you didn't try it. Just cut the engine off withn different planes and glide, you will see that some are on rail, like all P-40s', and others are barely non-flyable, like all Yaks and Spitfire for example... A huge difference like that seems a bit weird even if the engine was mounted angled with the fuselage. They are still supposed to fly.

I presume it was still possible to coordinate a plane gliding... just try it!

Takata

stathem
06-16-2005, 12:10 PM
Originally posted by Takata_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by stathem:
Sounds fun.

Sorry to be numb, can you give a quick explanation of how to create the mission with that text data ?

ok,
1- open the Full Mission Builder,
2- select the Crimean Map,
3- do nothing else and save it
for example, save it here: Missions>Single>US>Test>Test401.mis
4- close the game, follow this path and open the file "Test401.mis" with your your notepad.
5- copy and paste the text above on it and that's yet. (the other file named "Test401.properties" is for briefing and is empty).
6- now, come back to FMB and open the mission again... play it from FMB and change plane from there.

I hope it's clear

Takata </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yep, np, thanks for that Takata

WWMaxGunz
06-16-2005, 10:31 PM
I'll have to give it a try.

Questions are can you feather the props on any of those planes and do any auto-feather.
If the prop doesn't either feather or stop then it's a big brake tied to turning the
engine. You can find that through a number of sources including John Deakin on avweb
although that article is a bit hard to find. Running the engine idle leaves enough
power for non-electric CSP's to be coarse pitched at least, and present the least drag
where engine off if they don't feather (I think only the big planes did, maybe I'm
wrong there and it'd be interesting to know which planes could.) and had hydraulic
CSP's then the prop would go instantly to fine pitch and the highest drag possible.
P-40 and some others used Curtiss Electric CSP's which had different behaviour and
used electric power to control the pitch, could stay at desired pitch even with engine
off at least till the battery went and then hey, they'd stay where they were.

So whatever happens, it only leads to *asking why* instead of *claiming error*.

Cool, huh? Oleg has taken us deep into "the planes were really different" territory.
Correspondingly there becomes more and more to know about the planes you would fly and
those you would fly against. I think that's real, especially the "know your plane"
part. The days of treating all but the grossest aspects of the planes in a sim as
being the same are gone as long as the detail levels stay so high or higher.

GR142-Pipper
06-17-2005, 12:22 AM
Originally posted by Takata_:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
Those planes were designed to run with power, not gliding.
So the rudder is set a bit angled as are wings to deal with propwash and torque at cruise
speed. The airframe counters the torque then which is why there is trim in most planes
and in planes without like rudder of 109's it is missed enough to be noted.
So you cut the power and glide, now there are zero of the effects the frame is specially
twisted to counter and you say what?

Hmm... obviously, you didn't try it. Just cut the engine off withn different planes and glide, you will see that some are on rail, like all P-40s', and others are barely non-flyable, like all Yaks and Spitfire for example... A huge difference like that seems a bit weird even if the engine was mounted angled with the fuselage. They are still supposed to fly.

I presume it was still possible to coordinate a plane gliding... just try it!

Takata </div></BLOCKQUOTE> There's also another issue that is an expectation. If you have rudder trim, there should be enough available to truly trim the aircraft. Sounds obvious enough but there's a catch. Try this one (at different power settings).

- Fly the aircraft straight and level at different airspeeds/altitudes.

- If the plane only has rudder trim, slowly trim it so that the aicraft is flying straight (no course changes).

- Now check if the aircraft is actually flying straight and NOT just maintaining course while also in a side-slipping condition (check the trim ball as well as hop out to externals and have a look at the outside view). If it's STILL side-slipping while maintaining heading then the aircraft would be considered to be mis-rigged in trim. This is an easy test to determine if the correct amount of trim is available for use to maintain course while NOT side-slipping.

As an aside, I did test the P-40E Field Mod and the Yak-3P as you suggested. As you stated, the P-40E did trim out beautifully but the Yak did not. In this case, I would say that the Yak is "mis-rigged" because it can't be trimmed without also having side-slip. I doubt the real Yak suffered from this. The good news is that it's a simple programming matter to fix.

GR142-Pipper

Takata_
06-17-2005, 12:22 PM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
- Fly the aircraft straight and level at different airspeeds/altitudes.

- If the plane only has rudder trim, slowly trim it so that the aicraft is flying straight (no course changes).

- Now check if the aircraft is actually flying straight and NOT just maintaining course while also in a side-slipping condition (check the trim ball as well as hop out to externals and have a look at the outside view). If it's STILL side-slipping while maintaining heading then the aircraft would be considered to be mis-rigged in trim. This is an easy test to determine if the correct amount of trim is available for use to maintain course while NOT side-slipping.

As an aside, I did test the P-40E Field Mod and the Yak-3P as you suggested. As you stated, the P-40E did trim out beautifully but the Yak did not. In this case, I would say that the Yak is "mis-rigged" because it can't be trimmed without also having side-slip. I doubt the real Yak suffered from this. The good news is that it's a simple programming matter to fix.

GR142-Pipper

It looks like the trim is not working very well for ailerons and rudder (and I'm not talking about the Bf-109... lol). I'm starting to test all the planes with a different mission. I won't even try to make a dead stick landing, only flying straight with no engine is a very difficult task by itself. I'll record the distance covered and I'll note how the trim is efficient for each plane.

Takata

WWMaxGunz
06-17-2005, 05:56 PM
I do see a load of torque in planes with engine off and yes, much more in some.
It seems maybe to be by engine power or maybe by engine compression and number and size
of prop blades, the few I tried with more of those had it worse. Spit IXc very much!

I gave up trying to correct with trim. I think that trim only goes so far IRL by plane
anyway and Oleg does have that kind of information.

Interesting to me was engine off and slow the plane enough to stop the prop, it wants
to roll one way (left in the Spit for example) but if you let the speed get up enough
to start turning the prop and engine (with engine cranking sound, pre-ignition) then
the torque reverses and it wants to roll right in the case of the Spit. If you have
the plane trimmed for one and it goes to the other then you are a bit screwed if it
wasn't for the insta-neutral-trim. And I really mean, goes to the other -- the roll
is about as hard the other way, requiring opposite side stick.

P-40E has I guess much less engine or lower compression, fewer and noticeably thinner
prop blades.

Speeds I was able to keep the props stopped ran up as high as 360+ but generally I was
gliding with stick perhaps as much as 1/3rd over to one side which translates to 10%
or so pilot strength with my current roll axis settings. Perhaps with the Spit, 20%.
You can't go by stick angle, or at least I sure can't.

BTW, I can't find the ball in the Spit IX. I didn't check the floor though. Is it
behind something else? Flying the P-51 I am impressed again and again how extremely
useful it is to have a ball right there on the gunsight post, it has to be an advantage
to aiming in combat and why weren't more planes having that?

This torque has got to be deliberate and when 1C does that and if it's not about something I
know a lot better than this, I'm not going to call foul or join anyone else doing it.
It does seem a lot and yes, I think it's a good idea to ask about it but with respect and
ability to accept what answer there may be.

Takata_
06-17-2005, 08:28 PM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
It seems maybe to be by engine power or maybe by engine compression and number and size
of prop blades

If you set the prop pitch to zero percent or feather the prop when it's available, you should not have any force from the engine when it's turned off. Even with the auto pitch, the engine should not be an issue when gliding. It's look like an effect for engine start that continue once in flight, but whatever you do, you can't get rid of that.



I gave up trying to correct with trim. I think that trim only goes so far IRL by plane
anyway and Oleg does have that kind of information.

Trim is completly off as far as I can test, and it worked very well in previous release. Those trim-tabs are supposed to work from zero power to full throttle. Obviously, many planes are not able to center the ball, and in most case, the strongest force is on the ailerons (really looks like a torque effect, even when the plane is not compressing anymore and the prop not moving at all). Those forces are so strong that I can't even reach my keyboard to trim the plane as I'm too busy to struggle with my controls to keep it in the air.



Interesting to me was engine off and slow the plane enough to stop the prop, it wants
to roll one way (left in the Spit for example) but if you let the speed get up enough
to start turning the prop and engine (with engine cranking sound, pre-ignition) then
the torque reverses and it wants to roll right in the case of the Spit. If you have
the plane trimmed for one and it goes to the other then you are a bit screwed if it
wasn't for the insta-neutral-trim. And I really mean, goes to the other -- the roll
is about as hard the other way, requiring opposite side stick.

I really doubt it has been designed on purpose.


BTW, I can't find the ball in the Spit IX. I didn't check the floor though. Is it
behind something else?

There is none in British planes, but there is a gauge for that.

Takata

WWMaxGunz
06-18-2005, 07:38 AM
I really don't know what fighter props if any could be feathered.

Range of motion is not that many degrees in every modern prop I've seen written about,
like less than 30 degrees travel.

You also had a situation where engine off, most props that don't feather go to the flat
stops and full fine. It makes them easier to start and run when sitting on the ground.
It's also a design feature that if the prop mechanism fails, it fails to fine by springs.

For hydraulic props the adjustment mechanism relies on fluid pressure against a spring
and that pressure is only made by the turning engine.

John Deakin who does the Pelicans Perch column at AVWeb notes that a stopped prop has
much less drag than a turning one but compared to feathered he doesn't say as the advice
was for small GA planes and what to do when the engine quits.

I'd say send tracks in with questions. Like, is this the right amount? More chance of
answers that way.

Takata_
06-18-2005, 10:08 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
I really don't know what fighter props if any could be feathered.

- Yes it is possible, in game you have to use the default key shift+1 to feather your propeller (mean 0% prop). For multi-engined planes, there is a special key for that. In real life, I guess it's the same (but you have to bind different keys... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif).


You also had a situation where engine off, most props that don't feather go to the flat stops and full fine.
- In game, the pitch doesn't change, you are still able to control it and feather the prop. This is not an issue.


For hydraulic props the adjustment mechanism relies on fluid pressure against a spring and that pressure is only made by the turning engine.
- With some planes, you are supposed to set the propeller pitch to maximum efficiency for landing, even if your engine is turned off. That should be related to what you said. On the other hand, I really doubt about those 'compression forces' we are experiencing in game, because if those forces were so strong, how the hell a pilot will be able to make a dead stick landing?


John Deakin who does the Pelicans Perch column at AVWeb notes that a stopped prop has
much less drag than a turning one but compared to feathered he doesn't say as the advice
was for small GA planes and what to do when the engine quits.
- Sure, if you want to glide for a longer distance, you'll have to feather the propeller.


I'd say send tracks in with questions. Like, is this the right amount? More chance of
answers that way.
- My main concern at the moment is not Oleg, and I'll make no tracks because it's so easy to reproduce. What I'm doing is quiet simple and the major issue is trim related. General aileron and rudder trim efficiency is really poor and some planes are dangerously unstable during the same flight-test condition.

So first, I wan't to compare the whole planeset, to provide him with the data. He'll decide if there is something to look at or if the test looks fine. It's just a simple remark and he's the designer of the sim. Whatever he's doing, I'll deal with it.

Takata

WWMaxGunz
06-18-2005, 03:09 PM
By compression forces I mean engine compression, the pressure inside the engine cylinder to
push the piston completely down. A prop turning in air has to exceed that force inside the
stopped engine in order to keep it turning. The stopped engine serves as a brake for the
prop and absorbes energy there. The free turning prop also absorbs energy beyond mere drag
of the blades. Even a fixed blade prop will present a lot less drag stopped than turning.

I think I will find what key I have for feathering (I've reassigned many to make some things
easier.) and see if it makes any difference or I get a prop feathered message. If I don't
see a difference I will think that very probably the prop is not feathering.

One thing I really wish that 1C would do is compile a rundown plane by plane of some kind of
mini-tech pages, what functions are where and ranges, mixture and boost settings and alts,
default weapons and ammo, proper takeoff, cruise and climb settings; the kinds of information
needed if we are to fly each one right. It is hard to "learn to fly!" when we have not access
to what information is required to do so. 1C should have this data if only for conducting
proper beta tests and it should be in usable form for distribution to the testers even if it
is not all in one place.

rpkiller
06-18-2005, 05:40 PM
This is probably not all that relevant but...
I have been into scale r/c modelling for a long time (since I was 9 - am now 36)... anyway, one day about 10 yrs ago a very good friend (and experienced competition r/c flyer) of mine reduced a 1/3 scale spitfire to matchwood following a sudden engine cut out. The plane simply spiralled a bit then dropped quickly after the engine failure striking the ground with sufficient force to completely write off the painstakingly created airframe (took him 2 years to build). All he would say afterwords is that 'spitfires really don't glide' - the sudden difference in torque causing a quick drop to one side and a fairly heavy fall/glide before striking the ground. This may partly be down to the differences in mass/loading of a model aircraft, but maybe (just maybe) spitfires really didn't glide all that well - as far as i'm aware my friend made the spitfire aqs closely to real life parameters as he could.

Anyway, just a little anecdote, I'm certainly no expert and have never flown a real life aircraft, though continue to fly scale r/c models.

rp

GR142-Pipper
06-19-2005, 12:45 AM
Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
(...snip...)Interesting to me was engine off and slow the plane enough to stop the prop...(...snip...) As an aside, in real life the props on fighter and attack aircraft don't stop rotating just because the engine is off. This typically only occurs with those aircraft with fully featherable props as found on transports, bombers, etc.

GR142-Pipper

Takata_
06-19-2005, 08:52 AM
Originally posted by rpkiller:
This is probably not all that relevant but...
I have been into scale r/c modelling for a long time (since I was 9 - am now 36)... anyway, one day about 10 yrs ago a very good friend (and experienced competition r/c flyer) of mine reduced a 1/3 scale spitfire to matchwood following a sudden engine cut out. The plane simply spiralled a bit then dropped quickly after the engine failure striking the ground with sufficient force to completely write off the painstakingly created airframe (took him 2 years to build). All he would say afterwords is that 'spitfires really don't glide' - the sudden difference in torque causing a quick drop to one side and a fairly heavy fall/glide before striking the ground. This may partly be down to the differences in mass/loading of a model aircraft, but maybe (just maybe) spitfires really didn't glide all that well - as far as i'm aware my friend made the spitfire aqs closely to real life parameters as he could.

Anyway, just a little anecdote, I'm certainly no expert and have never flown a real life aircraft, though continue to fly scale r/c models.

rp

Yes, it is relevant because, in game when you are gliding a spit, if you don't feather your propeller, you will recieve huge opposite forces each time the engine will compress as the engine want to re-start from your propeller power. It makes you roll from one side to the other.

No feathering key is allowed for Spitfire, but you can set your propeller manually at zero percent - as I already stated twice. It is mandatory now with 4.01, because when this happend, you lose altitude and control or crash directly into the ground.

But I have no idea if this was the Spit behavior in real-life, this added to unstability make this plane really dangerous to glide.

Takata

WWMaxGunz
06-20-2005, 12:23 AM
Originally posted by GR142-Pipper:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by WWMaxGunz:
(...snip...)Interesting to me was engine off and slow the plane enough to stop the prop...(...snip...) As an aside, in real life the props on fighter and attack aircraft don't stop rotating just because the engine is off. This typically only occurs with those aircraft with fully featherable props as found on transports, bombers, etc.

GR142-Pipper </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yeah I dunno the warbirds and never saw that portrayed anywhere. A couple years ago I was
reading John Deakins' Pelicans Perch column at AvWeb and he wrote about GA singles gliding
with the engine stopped. He mentioned that if you are very high and the nearest field is
a long way off then you can pull up till you're almost stalled and the prop will stop,
giving you less drag. But the maneuver wastes some of your alt so it's a tradeoff thing.

The props will stop in PF at speed depending I think on engine power. Whether that's
right or not, I don't have data on so right there is an Ask Oleg kind of thing. There is
a bug thread but he's pulled out docs and what that's surprised me and others before.

The behaviour is hard to deal with gliding, no doubt about it! Even in a 400 kph glide!
Sorry Takata but I haven't tried to feather em yet. Idling the engine and cutting pitch
all the way down to 0% has gotten me some good runs without the plane trying to turn over.

I can only hope yer right about this and get through, otherwise landing on a dead engine
is going to be a tossup. I've done it a few times now... I think the flaps help, maybe
the gear but I tend to come in a bit fast due to misjudging the strip.