Author Topic: WB's torque, and AH lack of.  (Read 1847 times)

Offline Glasses

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1811
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #15 on: February 28, 2001, 12:05:00 AM »
I have not flown any WW2 aircraft, but I do fly real airplanes and a 180HP engine causes a considerably large amount of what we call left turning tendency, even though it is a Tricycle landing gear and not conventional,which makes these effects more noticeble in the ground.
,
 Of course performance of each aircraft and aerodynamically speaking or the way the air behaves around the structure of the plane differ from what I fly, I imagine it took a great amount of effort to maintain coordinated flight in high AoA at high power settings.  Before it was close to authentic it took great concentration specially in 109s to land the planes and once you were about to land you had to make sure you accomplished that landing since putting the throttle all the way forward could flip your aircraft and endanger be it your virtual or real life. This probably has been mentioned before but many people died in training due to the torque effects in slow flight. You could say trimming might help you relieve some of the correction but it will still be considerable that you require moving the flight controls to correct this IMO this could make vertical flight as some pilot said "you meet another kind of people in the vertical".

------------------
Glasses---I may have 4 eyes ,but you only have one wing.
-----15 Spanische Staffel----
Tis not important how one goes,but who goes with you.

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #16 on: February 28, 2001, 12:53:00 AM »
Ugh.. dont pick on 109 please...
In the past it had a super torque that kept it from flying level with autopilot.
you had to be at least 250mph for autopilot to keep from drifting.

Offline lemur

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #17 on: February 28, 2001, 01:01:00 AM »
Hmmm.

It seems like the little Cessna 152 I was flying (prepping for my checkride, woohoo) today has worse torque / stall manners than most the planes I fly in here.
First I'd like to see worse consequences from uncoordinated stalls. Then we can talk about torque effects.

But yeah, the torque effects should be worse (but not much worse.) I've seen a well balanced (i.e. well coordinated) Marchetti do a power-on stall and instantly spin like a top.

Still, having said all that, I like the lower torque effects in AH over the killer effects in WB. Less realistic, but way more fun.

~Lemur



Offline senna

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1318
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #18 on: February 28, 2001, 01:58:00 AM »
I would have to agree. When I first started with AH, I loved the touque in the FM and found it challenging to fly. I said to myself, wow this is even more realistic in  feeling that WB. Cool. I would personally like to see the torque effects return to the FM.

Perhaps AH could have some FM settings such as:

Enable torque effects.
Enable etc...


-- senna

Offline Glasses

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1811
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #19 on: February 28, 2001, 02:05:00 AM »
In regards to what I fly it is an Archer III Lycoming engine 180HP lo wing.

------------------
Glasses---I may have 4 eyes ,but you only have one wing.
-----15 Spanische Staffel----
Tis not important how one goes,but who goes with you.

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #20 on: February 28, 2001, 02:11:00 AM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by senna:
I would have to agree. When I first started with AH, I loved the touque in the FM and found it challenging to fly. I said to myself, wow this is even more realistic in  feeling that WB. Cool. I would personally like to see the torque effects return to the FM.

Perhaps AH could have some FM settings such as:

Enable torque effects.
Enable etc...


-- senna

More torque really would be nice, when I hardly notice any torque...
there could be also more E bleed, I think.

Offline paintmaw

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 216
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #21 on: February 28, 2001, 03:18:00 AM »
I'm happy with this FM , but the hog could flip itself over if firewalled to hard
nicknamed "ensign eliminator"

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #22 on: February 28, 2001, 03:40:00 AM »
Torque where are you man?! Pull yerself away from the bong and get back in here!

Offline Voss

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1261
      • http://www.bombardieraerospace.com
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #23 on: February 28, 2001, 05:11:00 AM »
Let's just up it by a factor of ten and see how we like it?  

------------------
***-*-

Offline Duckwing6

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 324
      • http://www.pink.at
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #24 on: February 28, 2001, 05:51:00 AM »
paintmaw .. try that:

Full Flaps down, Gear down, then make an approach to landing at just above stall speed, the buzzer going all the time, then just before touchdown do the following:

a) slamm throttle to firewall
b) pull back on the stick to arrest sink rate (or even go to climb attitude)

Tell me the results
DW6


[This message has been edited by Duckwing6 (edited 02-28-2001).]

Offline Fishu

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3789
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #25 on: February 28, 2001, 06:50:00 AM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by Duckwing6:
paintmaw .. try that:

Full Flaps down, Gear down, then make an approach to landing at just above stall speed, the buzzer going all the time, then just before touchdown do the following:

a) slamm throttle to firewall
b) pull back on the stick to arrest sink rate (or even go to climb attitude)

Tell me the results
DW6

Last time when I did that, i did it with normal reaction..

I was coming to land, noticed that my speed was too slow, about to stall (below 100mph), I kicked in full throttle with wep and then I thought  "ops, im in a hog, that shouldn't be done", but nothing happend...
didn't enter into spin nor did I notice any big differences in torque..

Offline hblair

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4052
      • http://www.cybrtyme.com/personal/hblair/mainpage.htm
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #26 on: February 28, 2001, 07:47:00 AM »
HT explained this in another thread several months back. Anybody remember the name of the thread?


Offline Westy

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2871
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #28 on: February 28, 2001, 08:22:00 AM »
 Oh. AH has ground effects. Does WB's have ge? Honest question.

-Westy

Offline Ripsnort

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 27260
WB's torque, and AH lack of.
« Reply #29 on: February 28, 2001, 08:25:00 AM »
 
Quote
Originally posted by paintmaw:
I'm happy with this FM , but the hog could flip itself over if firewalled to hard
nicknamed "ensign eliminator"

Only if the rudder trim wasn't set in advance,actually, the F4F wildcat was worse than the F4U.