PDA

View Full Version : What's with all the snap stalling OR Have you tried to do a loop?



Tachyon1000
06-11-2005, 08:49 AM
Regarding the new FM, I am noticing things that I really don't like. Other than the near obligation to buy pedals, movement in the pitch plane seem a good deal more restricted and I'd say unstable.

I have never snapped stalled so often in an elevator-assisted turn nor had so much trouble actually getting over the top of a loop with some speed remaining. It seems either that one is going to have to enter manuevers with alot more speed or perhaps all my side-slipping is slowing me down.

Now you may say, "Hey, that's just the way it is", but with these new restrictions, I'd appreciate some wing fluttering or wing dropping before I enter into a full-on end over end flip or a flat spin. This is really the major complaint I have. I can take a new FM, but there seems to be a lack of cues from the aircraft that the envelope is being reached.

stansdds
06-11-2005, 08:59 AM
High performance jet aircraft do really well with elevator assisted turns. In fact, high performance jet aircraft usually do not use the rudder much. Piston engined aircraft do not have the thrust of a jet, so coordinated turns (aileron and rudder) rule the day. Elevator assisted turns in the older piston engined aircraft are possible, but you will bleed speed rapidly and soon stall.

IL2-chuter
06-11-2005, 12:00 PM
As a pilot I'm confused by the term "elevator assisted turn". All turns are elevator assisted.

I've downloaded 4.00m but haven't installed it (yet) because the servers I fly on haven't adopted it (yet). "Snap stalls" having been mentioned (stalls in game are actually no-yaw snap-rolls without a nose drop), are they still the same, or can you get the plane to stall straight ahead (both wings, straight ahead, nose drop)? You should get a fairly straight stall with power off, and drop the wing behind up-going prop blade with power on. Ground handling is probably beyond the game (you SHOULD get a very pronounced yaw instability with wheels on the ground, depending on how far forward the wheels are from the CG(aircraft WILL NOT go straight by itself - unrelated to torque effects which compound the situation).

Keep flying http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Tooz_69GIAP
06-11-2005, 12:09 PM
Not all turns are elevator assisted. When you bank the aircraft, provided you are going at a reasonable speed, it will generally turn simply due to it's lift characteristics without any elevator input at all.

When you put in elevators, this creates drag, and you lose airspeed, and eventually will stall.

I'm sure someone can explain it a bit better, but that's the jist of it.

IL2-chuter
06-11-2005, 12:12 PM
I'm a real life pilot - the aircraft will lose altitude in a bank without elevator. Some of your level flight lift is diverted to lateral vectoring which requires additional elevator to increase the wings angle of attack to produce the required vertical component . . . (this is all assuming you're not wanting to lose altitude, which you will without elevator).


I flew my first taildragger in 1976 . . . I would just love to see taildragger handling modelled in the game. All the aircraft ground handle like trikes . . . but its a "flying" sim, right? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Stigler_9_JG52
06-11-2005, 12:35 PM
I agree with this post. The snap-stalls are not only too frequent, but seemingly scripted and arbitrary. There seems to be no correlation between how "coordinated" your turn seems to be or how lightly you pull back. Sometimes you can do a nice maneuver, and with seemingly the same input, the next time, you're snapping all over the place.

VW-IceFire
06-11-2005, 12:35 PM
Originally posted by Tachyon1000:
Regarding the new FM, I am noticing things that I really don't like. Other than the near obligation to buy pedals, movement in the pitch plane seem a good deal more restricted and I'd say unstable.

I have never snapped stalled so often in an elevator-assisted turn nor had so much trouble actually getting over the top of a loop with some speed remaining. It seems either that one is going to have to enter manuevers with alot more speed or perhaps all my side-slipping is slowing me down.

Now you may say, "Hey, that's just the way it is", but with these new restrictions, I'd appreciate some wing fluttering or wing dropping before I enter into a full-on end over end flip or a flat spin. This is really the major complaint I have. I can take a new FM, but there seems to be a lack of cues from the aircraft that the envelope is being reached.
Check your stick settings. I'm not having that problem a'tall. I'm adequately guaging what the aircraft needs and I'm stalling less.

Also, no need for rudder pedals for me...I've discovered that the < and > keys are great for maintaining rudder control even on planes without trim.

Vlad381
06-11-2005, 12:53 PM
I find one wing drops dramatically at very low speed with full power (this happens to me usually if I'm scrambling to take off, or if im pushing it to out-turn something) There is notable yaw instability on the ground. All this is just realistic as far as I can see, and no problem to me.

I get "snap-stalls", but like I said, only if I'm really pushing the plane. You can usually predict these by watching the vapour trails on the wingtips.

As for rudder pedals, my Joystick has a 3rd axis, it twists to control yaw http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

NonWonderDog
06-11-2005, 01:25 PM
I don't know what you're complaining about, honestly. It feels a whole lot better to me. I hardly stall at all when fighting anymore, even when trying to turnfight in a FW-190. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

I'd check your stick settings. The default 10 20 30 ... 100 settings work pretty well, but I like something a bit more peppy. I find the "slow" stick settings to be uncontrollably fast when doing anything but flying straight and level; they sacrifice high-deflection control for slow controls towards the center.

I'm sure no one will believe me, but I find these stick settings to be most controllable throughout the entire range of motion:

1X=0 20 40 60 80 85 85 85 90 95 100 10
1Y=0 20 40 60 80 85 85 85 90 95 100 10
1RZ=0 5 20 40 65 90 100 100 100 100 100 10


Try taking the biplanes up for some aerobatics. The Cr. 42 works especially well. You can even do tailslides now! The horrible snap-roll "stalls" of the past are completely gone.

GRYPHON_401Cdn
06-11-2005, 01:54 PM
Elevators are used in any turn. Proof: in a turn you need 1G in the vertical to avoid losing height. You also need *some* accelerative force towards the center of the turn otherwise you arent turning. The vector sum of those accels is greater than one in the aircrafts pitch plane. Therefore you need elevator in any turn. Of course, if the ac is trimmed improperly for straight and level, you wont even notice in a gentle turn.

The left wing drop on takeoff is torque reaction that hasnt been corrected with enough rudder.

Stalling characteristics of ac vary greatly; some give a warning with buffet, others dont. Some drop a wing, others start to enter a spin immediately - high power will definitely aggravate that tendency. Try some stalling practice at various turnrates and speeds and powers. Fun.

To do a loop correctly, dont pitch up too hard at the beginning. Reduce the pitch rate over the top, and increase it again as you go from vertical to level. The real challenge here isnt stalling but keeping the loop straight by compensating with rudder for torque over changing airspeed. Thats not easy without good external references. Pick some ground markers and pick a starting alt, and practice that a few times.

FM is good. Enjoy.

RAF pilot 1985-2000

Petey78
06-12-2005, 04:29 AM
In my limited experience of full sized aircraft flying and my RC scale model flying experience, I believe that this patch has really improved the realism of the FM. IL2-chuter gave an excellent explanation of the physics of turning and it's corresponding bleed on lift efficiency, similarly GRYPHON's description of rudder input during looping is also very useful. These guys are experienced RL pilots, listen to them if you want the truth regarding realism. Far from making the aircraft more prone to snap rolling at the stall, I've found that the stall warning has been heightened in 4.0 and the feeling of the necessity of co-ordinating turns is amplified. Now snap stalls only occur when I want them to and not with the repetative monotony that they did before the patch. In RL, I've only ever performed a full takeoff and climbout in two taildraggers, a Grob 109B motor-glider and a 1944 Piper J3 Cub, both far removed from WWII piston engined fighters but from what I can tell, the torque modelling has improved the feel of the ground handling. The spongey bounciness is gone from the runways and taxiways but takeoffs from unprepared ground have beecome tougher without nosing over. It was heartening last night, my first try of 4.0 online, not to be destroyed by an team-mate careering across the airfield, disregarding the runways.

dodgenath
06-12-2005, 05:00 AM
Hi,
I haven't downloaded the leaked patch as im waiting for the legit one, but it seems that anyone with a basic understanding of physics and vectors in flight,and those who have flown in real life, understands the effects of the new FM, and loves it.
The majority of people i see here complaining about trim and torque and such things have no idea about forces involed in flying and the primary and secondary effects of control inputs. of course you need elevator to maintain hight in a turn, and rudder input to maintain aircraft balance. The higher the engine power is, the more pronounced the counter reaction needs to be to keep the plane 'balanced'.
I have just started flying lessons, and reading lots of books on the theory of flight and how it is sustained. I have flown two different aircraft so far, being a piper warrior and an archer. The archer has more power and the amount of rudder pressure to keep it straight on take off is far more than the smaller warrior. I could only imagine the slipstream created by a ww2 fighter when powering up/down.
Cheers

JaggedRaven
06-12-2005, 06:40 AM
Hi, I'm a real life pilot...and I have to say "I'm lovin' every minute of it Jerry!!!"

To me the aircraft handle well...you'd expect a bit of squirrliness and unpredictability while flying...even in perfect conditions with little or no wind you will still feel buffeting that results in violent stalls if you yank back on the stick or pull harsh maneuvers...trust me, I've done it in Air Force trainers...almost bought it too. True there's not that much buffeting near the top of stalls...but then sometimes there just isn't in real life either...and you get similarly violent stalls afterward. Standing on the tail is much harder to do and makes this game more challenging. I like what I see.

turnipkiller
06-12-2005, 07:26 AM
I have never flown an aircraft in real life but I am going to stick my neck out here and make an assumption. I think the problem with alot of the stalling and such with this sim is the fact that there is no feel for what is happening. I am sure that alot of people who have piloted an aircraft will say that you can feel the aircraft when it is about to do something, like it will shudder before a stall.
A bad comparison is driving a car. Go into a corner at 30 mph, no problem, but try the same corner at 60 mph, and you feel the car skidding or at the very least, you can feel yourself being forced sideways. Put a small hill in the corner, and you feel the car trying to leave the ground and the sideways force as well.
I would think that most experienced fighter pilots who flew in combat would know exactly what their ac was going to do at any given moment just by the feel of it.
Unfortunately, we can't have ourselves pressed into our chairs with 3G pressure trying to evade an enemy ac, nor can we feel our ac slipping as a manoever is made.
I will say that I have not downloaded the new patch yet, (dialup sucks), but this doesn't really matter, since this is a problem no matter what patch a person has. Just my own opinion, flame away. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

raisen
06-12-2005, 05:59 PM
I have no real world flight experience (going for an initial trial lesson in the next few months in fact)so all of my opinion is entirely subjective.

I believe another forum user mentioned something to the effect that aircraft in game ver 4.00 now appear to have "weight" modelled differently, and I do agree with that opinion that it seems more convincing. Stall behaviour has definately changed, but for some reason I seem to be stalling accidentally a heck of a lot less. When assaulting the edges of the envelope stalls appear to be sharply defined, frequently "vicious" (although the Hurricane in particular seems very benign), but there does seem to be enough feedback to work out what's going on.

One of the posts in this thread expressed an opinion that the stall seemed scripted, I have the opposite opinion.... What I think that I've seen in the Hurricane II, LA 7 and Spitfire V felt subjectively to be pretty ...... organic, for want of a better expression, if I made inputs to the controls the behaviour was modified in ways that seemed to make sense. The stall seemed to develop in response to changes in AOA and airspeed, without the canned feel of early IL2 scripted departures for FW 190 A's and P39's. I was very impressed by the new FM's, I was convinced/sold on the impression that I was actually flying an accurate simulation of a bloody great metal machine. I am aware though that I have no real worl GA, let alone WWII real world experience at all.

Last ver 4.00 test hop so far was a P51D, which my reading indicates should be a bit tricky on full tanks. It seemed tricky but certainly not impossible. With a fuel load around 50% it seemed to fly crisply and exhibit the vicious stall characteristic that I'd read about in so many technical documents... ie as airspeed bleeds off, and AOA goes up beyond a critical point you get a truly nasty departure, wing drop and spin that takes altitude to recover. Right up to the moment of stall it seemed to be giving feedback.

The P51 in previous patches didn't make the same impression at all. I'm not a pilot, but I thought the old FM did seem a little odd.

I have been priveleged to be flown on my hols no less than 3 times Pablo Mason, ex RAF character extraordinaire..... maybe that counts http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Raisen

LEXX_Luthor
06-12-2005, 06:48 PM
How does New FM behave under various difficulty settings. I ask because...

dodgenath::
...it seems that anyone with a basic understanding of physics and vectors in flight, and those who have flown in real life, understands the effects of the new FM, and loves it.

The majority of people i see here complaining about trim and torque and such things have no idea about forces involed in flying and the primary and secondary effects of control inputs.
Is New FM extreme enough to require lower difficulty settings for some? And if so, do lower difficulty settings work?

dodgenath
06-13-2005, 02:15 AM
A good question, like i said i haven't got the patch yet, waiting for the officail.
Isn't the idea of IL-2 series to be as realistic as possible? Thats why most love it, because it chanllenges them to learn new things. The way i see it, the new FM is just another challenge to overcome and master, and since it proves to be far more realistic than the previous model, im all for it.
Dumbing down the FM options isn't what i do. If i suck at it ill just keep trying.
The same with Falcon4, i once tried turning some dificulty settings down, only to find that the game was very unstable, mainly because beta testers only tested at the realistic level which forced me to learn the hard way.

cheers

Flakenstien
06-13-2005, 03:22 AM
Some good posts above http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
Although I'm not a professional pilot I have flown many types of aircraft from Cessnas to a DC3 and this patch (finally got it to keep from being the disadvantage, lol) is AWESOME!!
It is true most of the complaint post about stalls, tourque blah blah blah are coming from those with no real life flight experiance let alone in a actuall WWII warbird, closest I have flown to a actual warbird is a T6.
You must have a basic understanding on how flight is possible in order to base opinion on what is and isnt correct with the FM, and the above post provide some of that.

Problem is there are just to many want to be aviation experts here that don't have a clue as to how a real airplane flies http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif lol

WWSensei
06-13-2005, 04:30 AM
If you are snap stalling a lot in the new FM, as others have said, I can almost guarantee you need to adjust your stick settings. I had to adjust my pitch and rudder settings with the new patch and find the flying immensely more enjoyable in 4.0 than 3.04.

Like some others, I too, have flown everything from a C-152 through the F-16 including seat time in a B-25J and T-6 Texan. While I'm sure there are a few aircraft with minor nits here and there overall this FM is much closer to the real thing than previous efforts.

I wish there was a way to rig a sling for my butt to feel side slips better but that ain't Oleg's fault. ;-)

raisen
06-14-2005, 04:03 AM
I think I've found an obviously "canned" effect in AI FM. I've managed to fly about a couple of maps with a variety of planes and last night it was FW 190A and horde of B17's. Good news, the PC can handle it.

What I noticed though, was that an awful lot of AI's that suffer damage to the tail of the aircraft get convincingly more ragged as they attempt to fly on, yawing and pitching all over the place. Finally they all seemed to execute an arbitrary "back flip", regardless of what the AI had been doing immediately prior to loss of control.

The good news is that the same thing hasn't happened with any of the aircraft I've fiddled with so far. Modelling of stall behaviour does look a bit different for human players. Most likely this is a short cut to reduce demand for system resources - after all it's about the player and their experience not the AI.....

I have noticed some differences with the AI, and not all of them good by any means. They seem to have some difficulty flying at low level, terrain collisions are hazard on all maps. Average AI's seem to have their work cut out getting off the ground reliably.

Raisen

raisen
06-14-2005, 04:09 AM
..... following on from above.... Don't take the AI comments as negative. The AI was always a royal pain with 3.04. Mid air collisions don't seem to be as common in 4.0 (at least I haven't seen any yet).

Raisen