PDA

View Full Version : Spitfire landing



domenlovrec
05-05-2005, 11:50 AM
hi

i'm having troubles with landing this plane. Back wheel jumps at slow speed, so i tip over end break prop. How to avoid that?

BuzzU
05-05-2005, 12:01 PM
Once you have your speed down low enough. Hold full up elevator to hold the tail down.

Don't do it too early though, or it will try and lift off.

Monty_Thrud
05-05-2005, 12:07 PM
Bring her in slowly..about 80-ish mph, try to do a 3 point landing...just dab the brakes for a couple of seconds at a time, don't just apply the brakes...keep the joystick pulled back...hope this helps http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Heres a pic of the XIV we should hopefully be getting just for some colour http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gifhttp://premium1.uploadit.org/bsamania//xiv4.bmp

mole_boy
05-05-2005, 11:51 PM
yes it can be tricky... To be afraid to use burst of the throttle, it is the best way to keep out of trouble. also your approach needs to be near perfect, make a nice long approach

AWL_Spinner
05-06-2005, 05:04 AM
Runways, I'm fine with.

I have HUGE problems landing a Mk.IXc (normal wing) in a field (I mean literally a field, not a designated airstrip, forced landings or whatever). Before the wise-*** comments arrive this is for a campaign http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Is that what the original question was referring to?

Flat terrain; standard "green" field; no-matter what the approach profile; power-on/power-off, three-point landing or mains; just above the stall or with some speed; flaps/no-flaps seemingly ALL result in a decent roll-out until a certain speed is reached and then it ALWAYS noses over, even with the elevator full-back.

Beginning to think this is just the way the current ground handling model works and am hoping for an improvement in 4.0.

Normandy map, if anyone wants to try it. Any green field will do. Hurricanes, fine. Mk.IX Spits, hmm. Post a screenie http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I've managed to stay on all three wheels ONCE, but that was still with a nose-over and a bent prop. Usually, the tail ends up in the air.

Driving me nuts....

WOLFMondo
05-06-2005, 06:41 AM
What annoys me a little is all that bounce on the tail wheel. Anyone who lives in the UK must have seen a 1000 bits of spitfire footage in archive or feature film of them landing and there tail wheels never bounce and these things used to take off and land on nothing more than flat open fields. The only real bounce is the initial touch down with the main gear.

BuzzU
05-06-2005, 10:09 AM
Originally posted by AWL_Spinner:
Runways, I'm fine with.

I have HUGE problems landing a Mk.IXc (normal wing) in a field (I mean literally a field, not a designated airstrip, forced landings or whatever). Before the wise-*** comments arrive this is for a campaign http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Is that what the original question was referring to?

Flat terrain; standard "green" field; no-matter what the approach profile; power-on/power-off, three-point landing or mains; just above the stall or with some speed; flaps/no-flaps seemingly ALL result in a decent roll-out until a certain speed is reached and then it ALWAYS noses over, even with the elevator full-back.

Beginning to think this is just the way the current ground handling model works and am hoping for an improvement in 4.0.

Normandy map, if anyone wants to try it. Any green field will do. Hurricanes, fine. Mk.IX Spits, hmm. Post a screenie http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I've managed to stay on all three wheels ONCE, but that was still with a nose-over and a bent prop. Usually, the tail ends up in the air.

Driving me nuts....

If you don't need to take off again. The best way is to belly land. It's safer.

AWL_Spinner
05-06-2005, 10:31 AM
Indeed it is, but unfortunately I want to keep the plane intact. It appears to be a curious trait of the Spitfire!

SlickStick
05-06-2005, 10:57 AM
I had posted about this awhile back in ORR. Even just rolling down a cement runway at 20km/h or less makes the back wheel hop all over.

Might as well forget about an intact field landing at just about any speed. She'll nose-over in a heartbeat (as most other planes, too).

One good thing about landings at airfields, carriers or CB runways these days, you can bend the prop and basically mangle the plane without blowing up and as long as you don't exit the aircraft, you get full credit for a successful landing.

tsisqua
05-06-2005, 04:13 PM
One word: HAWK!

Bounces like a darn kangaroo . . . the animal, not the plane. It seems that it has the same problem, namely: the tailwheel. The minute the tailwheel touches the virtual ground you have a problem. In RL, you want a three-point landing for a taildragger. I do everything in my power to keep the tailwheel off the ground as long as possible when flying the Hawk, and I am willing to bet that you have the same problem with the Spit.

I'm off to do some touch-n-go's in a Spit, now. I've got to see if its the same, since I seldom fly her, I didn't know that another plane had this problem.

Tsisqua

VW-IceFire
05-06-2005, 04:20 PM
It was corrected once and then it appeared again. The tailwheel produces more bounce than it should...used to be on the Zero too.

Landing off of designated fields is generally bad for most planes...asume there to be small ditches, rocks, and the like in the way. Best solution is to ditch it with gear up (thats the pilot manuals method).

On normal fields....approach slowly, drop landing flaps in the last moments, as the gear hits the ground cut throttle...let it roll. Apply brakes sparingly...and hold the elevator so that its keeping that tail on the ground.

Waldo.Pepper
05-06-2005, 09:30 PM
Landing off of designated fields is generally bad for most planes...asume there to be small ditches, rocks, and the like in the way. Best solution is to ditch it with gear up (thats the pilot manuals method).

Agreed.

Hey I must be in a good mood or something! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

It should be near impossible to land wheels down in any old field, and guess what? It is.

Thanks Oleg.

Still I wish ground handling were fixed.

BuzzU
05-06-2005, 09:55 PM
I just wasted a bunch of time landing out in the field with wheels down.

Holding the tailwheel down is not the answer, because the minute it hits a bump it noses you over. The trick is to hold it off the ground as long as you can until you're slow enough to not let it bounce you over. It's a balance act to hold off the tailwheel and not hit the prop.

LeadSpitter_
05-06-2005, 11:58 PM
they need to rework alot of aircrafts ground handling p40 for example i16 i153 b239 wildcat etc.

And the offrunway pogo stick is ridiclous looks like the planes are pimped out with hydrolics, I guess its done to make people use runways but map hosts can always put up fences trees etc, would be nice if it was reworked especially for czechwars where you see people try a pickup up and havr 5 planes crashed http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

F19_Ob
05-07-2005, 01:55 AM
In the early days there was no problems landing or taking of from the field = not runway.
But as I remember people complained about that and it was changed.

It would be really cool though with some desinated patches of ground or big squared grassy and dirt fields since many of the russian, german , finnish well the rest too, operated a lot from such fields.

Both the spit and 109 could take off from mud-klogged fields in pretty bad condition, and they were perhaps the two most sensitive planes for it.
Seen them take off in bad conditions on old filmfotage, and a modern spit on a very bumpy grassfield.

Other than that I think its realistic if the pilot is forced to do a wheels up landing in the field in general.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

AWL_Spinner
05-07-2005, 07:02 AM
Ok, I can see the point that landings out in the country should be difficult but a) having massive tailwheel sensitivity is an odd way to go about it and b) there is some beautiful looking groomed flat terrain on some of the land meshes, and it's ripe for creating makeshift satellite airstrips in the full mission builder.

If this isn't possible then so be it but I'm off to try BuzzU's suggestion about holding the tail off. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

x6BL_Brando
05-07-2005, 09:18 AM
The takeoff from grassy fields is one I've wrestled with while making coop's. Among other experiments, I've tried placing AI's set to take off from makeshift strips. Perhaps unsurprisingly a J8A or Gladiator will do it, whereas an I153 will just sit on the grass and never even start its engine. However, I've made dozens of live attempts at getting the Gloster airborne from the same place but never got off the ground once http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif I have landed it there successfully - but the Chaika will almost always nose over. I'll try out a few more AI's and report back.

Re: the Spit - well I thought that "the Spitfire bounce" was part of real-life history! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I find the key to a successful landing is approach speed. If one's touchdown is at more than 75 KIAS, then it's too fast, and keeping the tail up a while is needed. Touchdown at the correct low speed should be accompanied almost immediately by retraction of flaps - that was stressed by instructors. A lurch around the longitudinal axis while on the ground could cause substantial damage.

The ground texture in FB is not necessarily wrong...even plain old grassy fields were first cleared of stones and molehills and agricultural debris, and had the deeper holes filled and compacted by the ground staff. Any field that hadn't been cleared would probably have a stack of nightmare scenarios lurking in the turf. I agree that it would be great to be able to drop a grassy airstrip into a map in the same way that PF's experimental runways work.

Roll on BoB!