HF Flight Model Arena

[doright]

I'm sure this has been asked or even tried before but I'm interested what the results were.

What if there was an arena using a High(er) Fidelity flight model?

That is, a flight model that included having to use manual rudder correction for turning forces from gyroscopic, p-factor, and torque effects and possibly more realistic engine management. Adverse yaw is the only force of that type that you can see implemented.

If tried before, was this prior to twisty sticks becoming common, making widely accessible hardware less of a problem?

Is the huge pile of wrecked vintage aircraft that ground looped on takeoff just too sad to see?

Of course some of you that know what I fly will probably see the nefarious reason for my question.

[kvuo75]

I'm sure this has been asked or even tried before but I'm interested what the results were.

What if there was an arena using a High(er) Fidelity flight model?

That is, a flight model that included having to use manual rudder correction for turning forces from gyroscopic, p-factor, and torque effects and possibly more realistic engine management. Adverse yaw is the only force of that type that you can see implemented.

If tried before, was this prior to twisty sticks becoming common, making widely accessible hardware less of a problem?

Is the huge pile of wrecked vintage aircraft that ground looped on takeoff just too sad to see?

Of course some of you that know what I fly will probably see the nefarious reason for my question.

I don't get it. I had my first rudder axis in 1996, thrustmaster RCS, FLCS and TCS. one of the biggest wastes of money in my life.  

I now play with just a logitech 3dpro twisty

i'm pretty sure all those effects are modeled already also.

[FLS]

I'm sure this has been asked or even tried before but I'm interested what the results were.

What if there was an arena using a High(er) Fidelity flight model?

That is, a flight model that included having to use manual rudder correction for turning forces from gyroscopic, p-factor, and torque effects and possibly more realistic engine management. Adverse yaw is the only force of that type that you can see implemented.

If tried before, was this prior to twisty sticks becoming common, making widely accessible hardware less of a problem?

Is the huge pile of wrecked vintage aircraft that ground looped on takeoff just too sad to see?

Of course some of you that know what I fly will probably see the nefarious reason for my question.

Why do you think those effects are missing?   

[The Fugitive]

I'm sure this has been asked or even tried before but I'm interested what the results were.

What if there was an arena using a High(er) Fidelity flight model?

That is, a flight model that included having to use manual rudder correction for turning forces from gyroscopic, p-factor, and torque effects and possibly more realistic engine management. Adverse yaw is the only force of that type that you can see implemented.

If tried before, was this prior to twisty sticks becoming common, making widely accessible hardware less of a problem?

Is the huge pile of wrecked vintage aircraft that ground looped on takeoff just too sad to see?

Of course some of you that know what I fly will probably see the nefarious reason for my question.

Turn the "auto take off" off and turn the "combat trim" off and you will have the effects you are looking for. As for the "engine management" a number of pilots have pointed out that there isn't that much involved and wouldn't add anything to the game. HTC has also stated that they will not add things like engine management or other things that are just button pushes for the sake of pushing buttons.

[Tumor]

You could have a high(er) fidelity flight "sim" just by making pos/(and especially)neg G forces actually DO something... and bringing BACK consequences for stick stirring. 

[icepac]

If engine management were modeled, about 75% of the "pilots" of aces high would burn up the engine on every flight.

[Brakechk]

If engine management were modeled, about 75% of the "pilots" of aces high would burn up the engine on every flight.

I'd be in that 75%....I just throw a brick on the accelerator and go when flying to a fight...kinda like a plate race  .

Seriously though....and bear in mind I'm NOT a pilot so the only engine management I know refers to vehicles and lawnmowers....but wouldn't it basically mean you couldn't run around full throttle at will for extended periods?  Wouldn't that mean that you would then be taking longer to get to where you are going (the fight)?  I'm not really for anything that increases the mundane part of the game....I'm in it for the action...not the commute to the action.  I'm sure there is more to engine management than just throttle but like I said I'm not a pilot.  What would be the point other than making the game more "busy"?

Not being sarcastic with this post btw....the above is just my understanding of adding more detailed engine management.  From my perspective if I wanted this I would just go play something like a dedicated flight simulator vs a combat flight simulator.

[Karnak]

If engine management were modeled, about 75% of the "pilots" of aces high would burn up the engine on every flight.

Engine management was not nearly as finicky as you think. The guys who flew these things were mostly 18 to 24 year olds who were smart guys, but certainly not super humans.  The Spit V pilot who ran WEP for 30 minutes didn't burn his engine out.  The P-38 pilot whoswho said no WWII fighter had enough power and in combat he just put the engines to full and left them there didn't burn up his engines and Saburo Sakai didn't burn out his Zero's engine running full power in his fight against those fifteen Hellcats.

[ImADot]

I'm also not a pilot...

But I use the throttle and RPM to conserve fuel when I need to, and use the throttle during a fight depending on my needs. I do NOT feel the need to adjust the fuel mix (lean/rich) based on altitude or whatever else is done "for real", or any other "engine management" buttons need to be pushed at certain times based on "what is done in real life".

[doright]

Why do you think those effects are missing?   

Notice that I carefully did not state that those effects were missing, just that manual rudder inputs to correct for them are not required.

You can see adverse yaw at work by watching the ball as you roll into a turn. Rudder input in the same direction as the aileron is required to keep the ball centered. But, as you stop the roll and maintain the bank angle instead of some rudder required to keep coordinated flight 0 rudder input is required.

I do not use auto-takeoff or combat trim. From everything I've read you could not sit a the end of the runway, slam a P51s engine into WEP, and not expect a hasty runway departure despite full rudder input.

Now as you accelerate down the runway when the tail comes up gyroscopic effects start mercilessly pulling your nose a whole new direction, which just about the time you've got the corrected rudder input dialed in your in a stable stance again and gyroscopic effects have changed again.

But lets say you managed to get it off the ground and into a climb attitude. IRL right rudder pressure would be required to over come the p-factor trying to pull the nose around to the left. That same (or more) rudder pressure would be required anytime your dogfighting with the stall warning going off, since both stall and p-factor are dependent on angle of attack.

I'm really not advocating placing a huge hurdle of just being able to take off into the game, I was just trying to illustrate the complicated effects that we don't have to correct for as virtual pilots. However, having to correct for p-factor and having to keep turns coordinated or incur a drag penalty would add an interesting element to those interested in good stick and rudder work in addition to ACM skill.

[colmbo]

Notice that I carefully did not state that those effects were missing, just that manual rudder inputs to correct for them are not required.

Hmmm.  I find just the opposite, if you don't use rudder in game the airplane will wander.

You can see adverse yaw at work by watching the ball as you roll into a turn. Rudder input in the same direction as the aileron is required to keep the ball centered. But, as you stop the roll and maintain the bank angle instead of some rudder required to keep coordinated flight 0 rudder input is required.

Which is how it should be.  The rudder counters the drag from the down deflected aileron, once in the bank with ailerons neutral there is no longer a need for rudder.  Bank turns the airplane, not the rudder.

From everything I've read you could not sit a the end of the runway, slam a P51s engine into WEP, and not expect a hasty runway departure despite full rudder input.

  I've found over the years that many things are a bit exaggerated in aviation.    I expect you would not lose control of the airplane.  You'd have to tap some brake and stay right on top of her but no reason to think you'd go screaming off the side as most people believe. 

Now as you accelerate down the runway when the tail comes up gyroscopic effects start mercilessly pulling your nose a whole new direction, which just about the time you've got the corrected rudder input dialed in your in a stable stance again and gyroscopic effects have changed again.

Do you know which way your nose would be pulled?  If the prop turns clockwise from the cockpit it will go left.  Easily countered and is done reflexively.  Hours of flying makes it a habit -- when the throttle goes forward your right foot presses some rudder -- when the stick comes forward to lower the nose you tap in a bit of rudder -- end result the nose never wiggles because as an experienced pilot you anticipate these things a fix 'em before they happen.

I'm a bit surprised you're saying these things aren't present in game.  I'm constantly tweaking trim (I fly a lot using manual trim) when flying.  Are you a pilot in real life?

This is a game, the airplanes do not fly like real airplanes -- we're limited by the equipment we fly on.  I agree that many wouldn't be able to get the airplane from the hangar to the runway if things were made "real enough", but AH does a pretty good job of giving the impression of what it's like flying the airplanes.

[FLS]

Notice that I carefully did not state that those effects were missing, just that manual rudder inputs to correct for them are not required.

You can see adverse yaw at work by watching the ball as you roll into a turn. Rudder input in the same direction as the aileron is required to keep the ball centered. But, as you stop the roll and maintain the bank angle instead of some rudder required to keep coordinated flight 0 rudder input is required.

I do not use auto-takeoff or combat trim. From everything I've read you could not sit a the end of the runway, slam a P51s engine into WEP, and not expect a hasty runway departure despite full rudder input.

Now as you accelerate down the runway when the tail comes up gyroscopic effects start mercilessly pulling your nose a whole new direction, which just about the time you've got the corrected rudder input dialed in your in a stable stance again and gyroscopic effects have changed again.

But lets say you managed to get it off the ground and into a climb attitude. IRL right rudder pressure would be required to over come the p-factor trying to pull the nose around to the left. That same (or more) rudder pressure would be required anytime your dogfighting with the stall warning going off, since both stall and p-factor are dependent on angle of attack.

I'm really not advocating placing a huge hurdle of just being able to take off into the game, I was just trying to illustrate the complicated effects that we don't have to correct for as virtual pilots. However, having to correct for p-factor and having to keep turns coordinated or incur a drag penalty would add an interesting element to those interested in good stick and rudder work in addition to ACM skill.

I think your reading has given you the idea that gyroscopic precession and P-factor are stronger and more noticable then they actually are. All forces are applied to the CG and some forces have similar vectors which can make it difficult to assess any one force. The main torque you notice in takeoff and flight is the effect of the spiral slipstream from the prop twisting the fuselage and pushing the rudder over. As Colmbo noted, adverse yaw occurs from rolling not from turning, you may need a little rudder in the turn but not as much as when rolling into and out of the turn.
Gyroscopic precession is noticable when you push the nose down or pull up sharply, you'll see a little yaw as a result. P-factor is hard to notice because the propwash torque and gyroscopic precession can mask it but Hitech says it's in there and we have no reason to doubt it.

[tunnelrat]

I think your reading has given you the idea that gyroscopic precession and P-factor are stronger and more noticable then they actually are. All forces are applied to the CG and some forces have similar vectors which can make it difficult to assess any one force. The main torque you notice in takeoff and flight is the effect of the spiral slipstream from the prop twisting the fuselage and pushing the rudder over. As Colmbo noted, adverse yaw occurs from rolling not from turning, you may need a little rudder in the turn but not as much as when rolling into and out of the turn.
Gyroscopic precession is noticable when you push the nose down or pull up sharply, you'll see a little yaw as a result. P-factor is hard to notice because the propwash torque and gyroscopic precession can mask it but Hitech says it's in there and we have no reason to doubt it.

Can you/would you mind further expounding upon rudder and rolling for us newbs?  I get the concept, but I guess application is the trick... is this the same as "step on the ball"?

[doright]

...once in the bank with ailerons neutral there is no longer a need for rudder.

Wrong. Significantly less then for adverse yaw correction, but certainly not zero and increases with bank angle. (also depends on wingspan and aileron input required to maintain bank angle)

Are you a pilot in real life?

Yes. Rather low time SEL private pilot with zero tail-dragger but a lot of sailplane time where smooth coordinated flight really matters and you are very active on the rudders.

I'm a bit surprised you're saying these things aren't present in game.

Again I'm not saying they are not present, just that they are automatically corrected for (to varying degrees).

[FLS]

Can you/would you mind further expounding upon rudder and rolling for us newbs?  I get the concept, but I guess application is the trick... is this the same as "step on the ball"?

Yes, stepping on the ball is correct. You use rudder as you roll to correct adverse yaw.You can also use it to improve your roll rate.

Yes. Rather low time SEL private pilot with zero tail-dragger but a lot of sailplane time where smooth coordinated flight really matters and you are very active on the rudders.

Again I'm not saying they are not present, just that they are automatically corrected for (to varying degrees).

I don't believe anything is automatically corrected for. If you're used to the rudder work in a sailplane you might want to try the TA-152. It's high aspect wing requires noticably more rudder work then any other aircraft in AH.