Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4
#3903726 - 01/29/14 09:56 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 42
Quax Offline
Junior Member
Quax  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2013
Posts: 42
Germany
In RL you can only judge it by the amount of rudder you need at take off and at high power low speed flight.
I am not aware of any formula to reckon its amount exactly . There are too much influences. F.e. on ground the ground itself disturbes its development. And I posted in the BoS forum, what the 109 pilots (i talked to) said about the amount needed at take off.
But I can´t say, wether the effect of the rudder or the slipstream need a little tweak. I didn´t say I can. What else do you want ? And what is your contribution ?

BTW, i really dont care about CLoD anymore. Years ago I was waiting for it. I made the vid only, because provocations of some ATAG guys in the BoS forum got on my nerves. If they don´t stop, i can think of scripted, rediculous spins for the next vid. But as i deinstalled it already, i dont want to spend the time on it.

Last edited by Quax; 01/29/14 10:19 AM.
#3903731 - 01/29/14 10:34 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 83
ATAG_Ohms Offline
Junior Member
ATAG_Ohms  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 83
ottawa
Originally Posted By: Quax
In RL you can only judge it by the amount of rudder you need at take off and at high power low speed flight.
I am not aware of any formula to reckon its amount exactly . There are too much influences. F.e. on ground the ground itself disturbes its development. And I posted in the BoS forum, what the 109 pilots (i talked to) said about the amount needed at take off.
But I can´t say, wether the effect of the rudder or the slipstream need a little tweak. I didn´t say I can. What else do you want ? And what is your contribution ?

BTW, i really dont care about CLoD anymore. Years ago I was waiting for it. I made the vid only, because provocations of some ATAG guys in the BoS forum got on my nerves. If they don´t stop, i can think of scripted, rediculous spins for the next vid. But as i deinstalled it already, i dont want to spend the time on it.


So you started a discussion with no facts or figures to back up your position and said that anyone that do not agree with you are wrong!
The more sims we have the better but starting arguments over things you have said in your above post will be hard to apply due to many influences and lack of mathematical data just seems silly. Look everyone has there likes and dislikes, you don't like CLOD that's ok and I hope that BoS does meet your expectations.I will buy BoS when it is finished and I hope it's great. Neither sim is finished , yes one should have been but isn't and one is in alpha, both are being worked on. Nothing will be perfect but that does not stop me from having fun.

#3903732 - 01/29/14 10:39 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,118
Brigstock Offline
Senior Member
Brigstock  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,118
London, England
I have no contribution. I've just read through this thread.

I can't say if it's right or not. But you seem absolutely convinced that it isn't correct in either CloD or BoS.
To the point that you argued for facts from someone who didn't agree with you.
I just wondered if there was any references material that you could show us that would prove the point.

Personally I would say, given what I've read in the forum so far, that you would only need full rudder for the first few feet on take off. As speed increases and airflow over the surfaces increased then the effect of slipstream and the need for full rudder would subside.

Which is exactly what I have found in BoS now.
When I take off in BoS if I give it full throttle for take off I have to give it full rudder until I start to pick up speed.

That might be missing in CloD, but it is a minor thing that I put down to poor ground handling in that Sim. Certainly not a show stopper or something that would stop me from playing.

#3903754 - 01/29/14 12:28 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Brigstock]  
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,955
Sokol1 Offline
Senior Member
Sokol1  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 3,955
Internet
Quote:

that you would only need full rudder for the first few feet on take off.


In the "censored" video, before brakes release (blue message on screen), throttle are moved up to ~30% (and when brakes release throttle are simultaneus slamed to 100%). This initial throttle increase cause plane nose steer to left some degrees (perhaps to align with rails - seems because other Cl+D bug, plane are not aligned with rails on respawn smile ) without move.

What these force (Torque, P.Factor, Giroscoscopic...) involved should cause this move? Or are only some script: throttle ~30% = nose left some degrees?

Sokol1








Last edited by Sokol1; 01/29/14 12:31 PM.
#3903765 - 01/29/14 01:18 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,790
Smokin_Hole Offline
Member
Smokin_Hole  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 1,790
This discussion about over/undermoddeling is misplaced or more accurately, misguided. The amount of rudder required for a given model will vary greatly depending on weight, CG, rate of throttle advancement even altitude and temperature. If you modeled my own airplane I wouldn't necessarily be able to tell you if you got the amount of rudder required right. I have no idea how much rudder I have displaced. I only know that my right leg begins to shake after about 10 minutes. The flight controls in virtual flying are far too different than real to make a comparison from a pilots perspective. The only way to judge for sure is to compare the virtual plane vs real under identical conditions and loading and measure control displacement as observed from the actual surfaces, not what the pilot thinks he remembers from the last time he flew. Give this one up.

#3903807 - 01/29/14 03:07 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
TheBlackPenguin Offline
Member
TheBlackPenguin  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 138
Originally Posted By: Quax

BTW, i really dont care about CLoD anymore. Years ago I was waiting for it. I made the vid only, because provocations of some ATAG guys in the BoS forum got on my nerves. If they don´t stop, i can think of scripted, rediculous spins for the next vid. But as i deinstalled it already, i dont want to spend the time on it.


It was just one of them from what I can tell, who really has a history of trolling 777/Jason for reasons I don't really honestly know, but there really was no need to go and try to do the same over on ATAG as it can potentially make the situation worse with tit for tat responses going back and forth.

Honestly, actions such as that tend to backfire on the project you're trying to promote.

#3903857 - 01/29/14 04:43 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: LukeFF]  
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 72
ChiefRedCloud Offline
Junior Member
ChiefRedCloud  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2011
Posts: 72
Canton, Georgia, USA
Originally Posted By: LukeFF
Originally Posted By: Jaws2002
They sunk the first boat, with all who bought into it onboard, in order to get everyone to buy the second, less capable, but more profitable boat.


No, it was killed off because it was at the time an unmanageable mess and a financial sinkhole.


I don't disagree with this either Luke, but do you reckon there was NO way to salvage a potentially good product and run with it? Even IF, as it seemed to occur, firing everyone and putting a new team on it? But then perhaps I'm just dreaming.


R.E.D. (Retired Extremely Dangerous
#3903902 - 01/29/14 06:16 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: TheBlackPenguin]  
Joined: May 2013
Posts: 42
Quax Offline
Junior Member
Quax  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: May 2013
Posts: 42
Germany
Originally Posted By: TheBlackPenguin

It was just one of them from what I can tell, who really has a history of trolling 777/Jason for reasons I don't really honestly know, but there really was no need to go and try to do the same over on ATAG as it can potentially make the situation worse with tit for tat responses going back and forth.


I agree. But he just got too far by calling me mentally handicapped.
(maybe I took that too "personal" .... and it was not "one" ATAG guy) He got a warning, but no ban for that. You see how liberal the BoS moderators are. I didn´t insult anyone, but he banned me immidiately on his forum cheers ...not that this bothers me biggrin

Last edited by Quax; 01/29/14 06:22 PM.
#3903963 - 01/29/14 07:52 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: ChiefRedCloud]  
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 49,716
Jedi Master Offline
Entil'zha
Jedi Master  Offline
Entil'zha
Sierra Hotel

Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 49,716
Space Coast, USA
Originally Posted By: ChiefRedCloud
Originally Posted By: LukeFF
Originally Posted By: Jaws2002
They sunk the first boat, with all who bought into it onboard, in order to get everyone to buy the second, less capable, but more profitable boat.


No, it was killed off because it was at the time an unmanageable mess and a financial sinkhole.


I don't disagree with this either Luke, but do you reckon there was NO way to salvage a potentially good product and run with it? Even IF, as it seemed to occur, firing everyone and putting a new team on it? But then perhaps I'm just dreaming.


We don't know the numbers, but what if hypothetically it was going to take X man hours to turn ROF's engine into BOS and it was going to take 2X man hours to make BOM? Or maybe a lot of BOM was done, and the amount would've been closer, but going BEYOND BOM was going to take more than switching would?

Such as you spent $20k building a $25k car, and after spending $10k to build the next one, you realized you could either spend $10k to finish it or spend $10k to build a new design which would then only cost $10k to make more of in the future, it would make sense to abandon the $20k design for the $10k one. Sure, maybe the $20k one looks nicer to some people, and maybe it had some extra features, but it wasn't sustainable.

Again, I'm just running a thought experiment here, but I find it perfectly reasonable, absent looking at their internal finances, that they found the old way a money pit and they needed a clean break.



The Jedi Master


The anteater is wearing the bagel because he's a reindeer princess. -- my 4 yr old daughter
#3903964 - 01/29/14 07:55 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Smokin_Hole]  
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 788
NattyIced Offline
Member
NattyIced  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 788
Originally Posted By: Smokin_Hole


Lay on the floor on your back. Seriously, do it! Now hold your right foot forward and your left foot 6 inches back simulating your upright control input. Now make enthusiastic airplane noises as you roll over on your stomach carefully maintaining your foot configuration. Notice that your rudder input has reversed relative to the earth. Spiraling slipstream has followed your roll because it followed your now inverted vertical stab. The prop disk meanwhile never changed. If p-factor played a significant roll your rudder would need to be reversed in order to continue to overcome it. Hope that helps.


I was thinking propwash and thought that's what you meant, yes you are correct on p-factor due to the downward prop and the aircraft being inverted.

#3904062 - 01/29/14 10:42 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Jedi Master]  
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 88
Jaws2002 Offline
Junior Member
Jaws2002  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 88
Ontario, Canada.
Originally Posted By: Jedi Master
Originally Posted By: ChiefRedCloud
Originally Posted By: LukeFF
Originally Posted By: Jaws2002
They sunk the first boat, with all who bought into it onboard, in order to get everyone to buy the second, less capable, but more profitable boat.


No, it was killed off because it was at the time an unmanageable mess and a financial sinkhole.


I don't disagree with this either Luke, but do you reckon there was NO way to salvage a potentially good product and run with it? Even IF, as it seemed to occur, firing everyone and putting a new team on it? But then perhaps I'm just dreaming.


We don't know the numbers, but what if hypothetically it was going to take X man hours to turn ROF's engine into BOS and it was going to take 2X man hours to make BOM? Or maybe a lot of BOM was done, and the amount would've been closer, but going BEYOND BOM was going to take more than switching would?

Such as you spent $20k building a $25k car, and after spending $10k to build the next one, you realized you could either spend $10k to finish it or spend $10k to build a new design which would then only cost $10k to make more of in the future, it would make sense to abandon the $20k design for the $10k one. Sure, maybe the $20k one looks nicer to some people, and maybe it had some extra features, but it wasn't sustainable.

Again, I'm just running a thought experiment here, but I find it perfectly reasonable, absent looking at their internal finances, that they found the old way a money pit and they needed a clean break.



The Jedi Master


The guys at 1C got the World of tanks, world of planes, war thunder, bug.
They realized they can make a lot of money on regurgitated old engines, with crap physics, small maps, played by people not interested in a simulation, but an easy flying game.

So instead of letting the team to fix clod, for a little more money, they decided to completely drop it, and switch to a similar game, that can make them more money.
777 had the perfect engine to do that. Cool looking planes, credible FM, so Il-2 fans don't drop it completely from the start.
Flight sim fans don't realize the whole idea of BOS is to reeducate them into playing simple, cheap, but profitable games. A lot of the game play ideas in BOS are taken straight from War Thunder and the like. Unlockable skins, unlockable weapons, simplified menu, simplified damage model, empty maps.

There was never a question of CLOD not being fixable. Team fusion fixed most issues it had, half blind, with no access to the code. At this point runs great and it can do things no other flight sim will do in the next ten years.

1c just decided we have to be reeducated to play something we don't really want, because it makes them more money.
They could have made the same money fixing COD and milking that engine for the next 10+ years. That engine could do it.

Now we are stuck with two regurgitated, old, limited engines. ROF engine and DCS engine. Both are hopelessly obsolete in certain areas.

This is what we'll have....for the next ten years or so.

#3904073 - 01/29/14 11:18 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Jaws2002]  
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 788
NattyIced Offline
Member
NattyIced  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 788
Originally Posted By: Jaws2002

The guys at 1C got the World of tanks, world of planes, war thunder, bug.
They realized they can make a lot of money on regurgitated old engines, with crap physics, small maps, played by people not interested in a simulation, but an easy flying game.

So instead of letting the team to fix clod, for a little more money, they decided to completely drop it, and switch to a similar game, that can make them more money.
777 had the perfect engine to do that. Cool looking planes, credible FM, so Il-2 fans don't drop it completely from the start.
Flight sim fans don't realize the whole idea of BOS is to reeducate them into playing simple, cheap, but profitable games. A lot of the game play ideas in BOS are taken straight from War Thunder and the like. Unlockable skins, unlockable weapons, simplified menu, simplified damage model, empty maps.

There was never a question of CLOD not being fixable. Team fusion fixed most issues it had, half blind, with no access to the code. At this point runs great and it can do things no other flight sim will do in the next ten years.

1c just decided we have to be reeducated to play something we don't really want, because it makes them more money.
They could have made the same money fixing COD and milking that engine for the next 10+ years. That engine could do it.

Now we are stuck with two regurgitated, old, limited engines. ROF engine and DCS engine. Both are hopelessly obsolete in certain areas.

This is what we'll have....for the next ten years or so.



[admin edit: no personal attacks]

The map itself isn't even complete, let alone missions designed for it - the game in total is less than 50% complete and months until release.

And DCS is on it's way to a new engine - EDGE.

CloD's engine shares the EXACT SAME ground handling model as the best simulation out there - War Thunder, which is ironically copied from the previous Il-2 series. Il2:Tokyo drift as it were. Yeah, that engine is full of something, but being the best it's not.

[admin edit: no personal attacks]


#3904110 - 01/30/14 12:43 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,024
Chivas Offline
Senior Member
Chivas  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,024
B.C. Canada
DCS is integrating a new "graphic engine" called EDGE into its old DCS "game engine". WarThunder has its own game engine but borrowed the FM code from the old IL-2, and has probably rewritten the old IL-2 FM a few times since then. I'm sure that BOS, COD, WT game engines, and content will be improved for years, much to the delight of some of their users.


Last edited by Chivas; 01/30/14 12:44 AM.

Intel core I7 4790K @ 4.4
Asus Maximus Hero VII Motherboard
16 gigs DDR3 2133
EVGA GTX980Ti
Oculus Rift
LG 37" LCD
BLack Mamba III Joystick
Cougar Throttle/X55 Throttle/Saitek Levers
Saitek Pro Rudder pedals
Voice Activation Controls
#3904128 - 01/30/14 01:51 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: ChiefRedCloud]  
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,234
LukeFF Offline
Veteran
LukeFF  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,234
Redlands, California
Originally Posted By: ChiefRedCloud
I don't disagree with this either Luke, but do you reckon there was NO way to salvage a potentially good product and run with it? Even IF, as it seemed to occur, firing everyone and putting a new team on it? But then perhaps I'm just dreaming.


There was no way to salvage it in a financially reasonable manner, no.

#3904129 - 01/30/14 01:55 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Jaws2002]  
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,234
LukeFF Offline
Veteran
LukeFF  Offline
Veteran

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 11,234
Redlands, California
Originally Posted By: Jaws2002
So instead of letting the team to fix clod, for a little more money, they decided to completely drop it, and switch to a similar game, that can make them more money.
777 had the perfect engine to do that. Cool looking planes, credible FM, so Il-2 fans don't drop it completely from the start.
Flight sim fans don't realize the whole idea of BOS is to reeducate them into playing simple, cheap, but profitable games. A lot of the game play ideas in BOS are taken straight from War Thunder and the like. Unlockable skins, unlockable weapons, simplified menu, simplified damage model, empty maps.

There was never a question of CLOD not being fixable. Team fusion fixed most issues it had, half blind, with no access to the code. At this point runs great and it can do things no other flight sim will do in the next ten years.


You are so far off-base I'm not even gonna waste my time trying to refute what you wrote, other than to say I got a good laugh from your "a little more money" comment.

#3904134 - 01/30/14 02:15 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: ChiefRedCloud]  
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,806
Bearcat99 Offline
Senior Member
Bearcat99  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,806
USA
Originally Posted By: ChiefRedCloud
Originally Posted By: Bearcat99
This video lost me completely when the tree went through the cockpit @ 1:34.. Igt's bad enough top have phantom trees to begin with.. but when they start ghosting through the pit...


Bearcat I hope you don't mind a novice (yea still, in my opinion) pilot reflecting on your comment. I respect your thoughts on the trees and even Quax's, as I do most everyone's opinion. However I don't, personally, make the trees not having collision factors as a game stopper. I realize the problem or issues with the trees. And even when in RoF it seems odd that trees will turn to follow my flight but this does not stop me flying it.

In CloD I set my mind to the fact that I do not want to hit any trees on take off, landings or evasions at low level. This is after all a flight simulator and not a ground simulator. To have it all would be nice, but alas we settle for what we can get.

BoS has a ways to go from it's Alpha stage and may end up being a jewel in the flight sim communities crown. It might not. To state ones opinion is a good thing. But anyone who chooses to beat another person over the head with their opinion is, in my opinion, out of place.

Since we ALL have the option of choosing what we play it should be no problem. But alas it would appear that some take exception to this. That is a shame.
And Bearcat, only the tree part was directed at you. Please don't misunderstand me.


Yeah well I can dig it and FWIW .. make no mistake about it.. I am not slamming CoD an d I think it is great in spite of the trees.. but for me a flight sim is a total package... so I can take CoD for whatg it is worth .. which on it's own merits thanks to TF is not too shabby at all.. but the trees will always be a I dampener to me.. just like the trunkless trees in IL2.. which BTW I still enjoy... but all the emotion over the video was lost on me when the tree went through the cockpit.. CoD does what it does well.... but BoS will not be the ... how was it stated...

Quote:
The guys at 1C got the World of tanks, world of planes, war thunder, bug.
They realized they can make a lot of money on regurgitated old engines, with crap physics, small maps, played by people not interested in a simulation, but an easy flying game.

Flight sim fans don't realize the whole idea of BOS is to reeducate them into playing simple, cheap, but profitable games. A lot of the game play ideas in BOS are taken straight from War Thunder and the like. Unlockable skins, unlockable weapons, simplified menu, simplified damage model, empty maps.

1c just decided we have to be reeducated to play something we don't really want, because it makes them more money. They could have made the same money fixing COD and milking that engine for the next 10+ years. That engine could do it.

Now we are stuck with two regurgitated, old, limited engines. ROF engine and DCS engine. Both are hopelessly obsolete in certain areas.


... that is quoted above. Which is ... so ridiculous as to be totally laughable.. We will see where CoD, BoS and even DCS WWII are all 5 years from now.. I can't speak on DCS yet because there is not enough on it yet.. but I will be willing to bet that in 5 years both sims will be farther along than CoD.. even if is still being played and enjoyed by a few hundred folks.


Start where you are. Use what you have. Do what you can.
#3904151 - 01/30/14 03:11 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,024
Chivas Offline
Senior Member
Chivas  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 4,024
B.C. Canada
I doubt very much that COD will be far behind BOS or DCS in five years. In a few months we will have two combat theaters to fly with the COD game engine. In five years there could be a few more. While it will still be many months before the first theater is built for BOS or DCS. COD already has a very complex WW2 game engine, with features according to TF, still in the original code that haven't been enabled yet. The COD game engine will only get better as average computers improve, and TF optimizes and adds content.

Yes the part time Team Fusion crew will be competing against full time development crews, but Team Fusions unpaid crew could grow much larger than a paid development crew with no worries of affecting the bottom line. COD is becoming an awesome sandbox as TF develops the tools necessary to further improve the product. BOS could pull ahead if they release decent tools for a mod community to expand their product. It will be at many months before we know how BOS will handle complex WW2 scenarios, online, offline, and if there will be satisfactory tools for a mod community.

That said I was very impressed how quickly the ROF game engine was built, and know they must have some very talented people. Either way, within the next five years we will have atleast a couple of Eastern Front theaters from BOS, and atleast a couple of western front theaters from COD to fly. Its too early to tell if the DCS WW2 sim will get out of the starting gate, but its still quite possible people who enjoy the DCS P51, will soon be flying the FW190, over the new EDGE terrain, while they wait further progress from DCSWW2.


Intel core I7 4790K @ 4.4
Asus Maximus Hero VII Motherboard
16 gigs DDR3 2133
EVGA GTX980Ti
Oculus Rift
LG 37" LCD
BLack Mamba III Joystick
Cougar Throttle/X55 Throttle/Saitek Levers
Saitek Pro Rudder pedals
Voice Activation Controls
#3906105 - 02/02/14 09:39 PM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,674
EinsteinEP Offline
Just a Noob
EinsteinEP  Offline
Just a Noob
Senior Member

Joined: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,674
Tucson, AZ
Wow. A thread about flight models that turned into personal attacks. How could this have happened?</sarcasm>

There are some good discussion points in here, some great links, and the potential for an enlightening discussion on the differences between propeller torque and p-factor. I also see a lot of unnecessarily hostile posts. If your livelihood depends on other people having the same opinion as you, you probably should spend less time on the internet.

I don't mind the speculation and discussion of opinion regarding Cliffs of Dover, but there are other threads in which to have those discussions. Let's stay OT here, please - there's more than enough to follow anyways! wink

Keep it calm, civil, and respectful.


Shoot to Kill.
Play to Have Fun.
#3906203 - 02/03/14 02:38 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,475
Uriah Offline
Senior Member
Uriah  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,475
Kansas City, Missouri - USA
So back to the point of the 1st post that I take that BOS does a nice job with slipsteam and torque. I wonder is say I fly a plane in a steep climb an near the top of the climb I cut the engine down and then when plan is near to a stop if I gun the engine will the tail be kicked around so I can get my nose facing the opposite of the climb.

I am not a good enough pilot to figure it out.


As far as these two games COD and BOS, neither gives me the wave of bombers and their fighter escort like the old EAW did.


Race you to the Mucky Duck!
#3906259 - 02/03/14 05:14 AM Re: Slipstream Model in CloD and Bos [Re: Quax]  
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 556
shadylurker Offline
Member
shadylurker  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 556
1,159HP

+ 400Hp

I'm not surprised an e4 torques left for a few seconds and straightens out with airspeed, is the tailwheel locked?

Im not suprised an E4 with 400HP more would sit there and loop with an unlocked tailwheel.

DCS p51 holds pretty straight if you are easy on it, locking the tailwheel.

Page 3 of 4 1 2 3 4

Moderated by  CyBerkut, RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
10 years after 3/8/2014
by NoFlyBoy. 03/17/24 10:25 AM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0