HF Flight Model Arena

[FLS]

What Hitech said is:

I have no reason to doubt him and dropped that line of inquiry. However, no auto damping (or auto correction) does not remove the possibility of scaling or attenuation of the yaw forces.

I'm willing to learn and test. I've double check that yes auto takeoff is not checked (hard to miss) and combat trim is off. I've blasted off using Wep in a F4U-D1 requiring modest right rudder input. I've noticed that yes some rudder correction is required when the the tail lifts and then again when it settled into a two point stance. I've also set the .target at 30deg altitude and used it as a solid reference for a slow speed full power climb attitude that requires surprisingly little rudder input (17% of half range with trim zeroed, no axis scaling) to hold considering the large 13' diameter propeller. I've also tried the RV8 and it took a bit more rudder to hold it in a similar attitude. I've also tried the B29 test I noted above.

I'm not debating whether this is appropriate for the regular arenas. What I am asking is if since twisty sticks have become common and numerous experienced AH pilots have rudder controls if an arena has been tried that gives those pilots the option to challenge both the flying skills along with their ACM.

Hitech answered your question and you decided that rephrasing the same question means that he didn't. So how much rudder input should have been required? All you're saying so far is that you don't know what it should be but you think it's not right as it is. Do you expect a plastic game controller to feel like flying a real aircraft?  You haven't shown anything wrong with the flight model or any area where it could be improved.  You've just posted that flying a computer simulation is easier than flying a real aircraft.

[Vinkman]

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.

If I recall correctly, Air fuel ratio, and Spark timing were Adjustable by the pilot. The Spark setting for max power would vary with Boost pressure, inlet air temprature, Air fuel ratio, and coolant temp. All of those factors vary with altidude. Most pilots would pick settings that allowed thier plane to run Wide Open Throttle and not detonate, but that was not Max rated power. To get there would require tweeking. The onset of Knock and detonation could be heard by the pilot and corrections could be make. I would agree that A:F was probably adjusted more at startup and for saving gas on long trips. But Spark timing is not something you could just set and forget, if you want to run Max power at different boost levels.

I've often wondered if when you see dog fights of bud Andersen roping a 109 in a Pony B that were close to equal E-state prior to the rope attempt, whether things like engine management came into play. Perhaps he was cooler under fire and set his engine up during the manuever for max performance, where the German, gambled that his current setting would be enough, and that taking his eye off the target was a greater risk than trying to squeak out a another 50 HP was. Or perhaps Andersen got lucky and he was in the sweet spot for his pony where as the German wasn't.

It could be something that would add realism, and new demention to the game just the way flaps do. Proper use of flaps and throttle will make your plane turn better, depending on the speed, and an ace pilot will learn to optimize those setting to get max performance out of his aircraft. A little engine management would do that also. For example many of the planes had controls to enable/control the superchargers. Imagine if you had to watch and throw the lever to get your second stage to engage at the proper alt in your T-Bolt, or Spitfire.

I think if the performance optimization actions could be added in a way like flap operation, I would be for it. 

[katanaso]

Along the lines of this thread, I'm curious as to how many folks try to do coordinated turns most or all of the time.  Real pilots and non-pilots alike.

[Oldman731]

Along the lines of this thread, I'm curious as to how many folks try to do coordinated turns most or all of the time.  Real pilots and non-pilots alike.

In the game I find I can rarely be sure my turns are coordinated, simply because I'm rarely looking out the front of the cockpit when I'm turning, and so can't see the ball.

In real life I thought we all tried very hard to stay coordinated except when deliberately slipping on an approach, but I read in this month's Rod Machado column that this may not be so:

"During a lecture on stick-and-rudder flying to several hundred pilots last year at AirVenture, one fellow informed the group that the CFIs at his FBO insist that all pilots keep their feet on the floorboard during all traffic pattern operations. It’s the total defeat of the feet. While failing to emphasize proper rudder and aileron coordination might just be lazy teaching, requiring that pilots not use the pedals in the pattern suggests a nearly complete lack of awareness about their function. Unfortunately, more than a few instructors make a similar recommendation. Yikes!"

http://www.aopa.org/members/files/pilot/2013/january/license.html

- oldman

[Karnak]

For example many of the planes had controls to enable/control the superchargers. Imagine if you had to watch and throw the lever to get your second stage to engage at the proper alt in your T-Bolt, or Spitfire.

But you didn't have to do that as the Merlin's supercharger worked automatically (at least it did in Mossies so I can't fathom why it wouldn't in Spits).  There may have been a way to manually do it as well, but it was normally automatic.  In Mossies it could cause problems while climbing out as it wasn't uncommon for the engines to go to the second stage at altitudes hundreds of feet apart, causing a sudden imbalance of power as the first engine to do so gained power.

The Thunderbolt doesn't have a supercharger with a stage one or stage two.  It has a turbocharger.

[TequilaChaser]

Along the lines of this thread, I'm curious as to how many folks try to do coordinated turns most or all of the time.  Real pilots and non-pilots alike.

Not I ..... For certain situations/conditions I feel it to be appropriate to use/fly in a coordinated
flight manner... but more often then not when it comes to AH aerial combat, I find it not important
enough to be at the top of my list ... To "step on the ball" per say....

SA
E management
are much more important along with and including using uncoordinated flying

my 2 cents worth

TC

[Lusche]

Along the lines of this thread, I'm curious as to how many folks try to do coordinated turns most or all of the time.  Real pilots and non-pilots alike.

Ignoring the ball since 2005.

[doright]

In retrospect I knew I should have left "engine management" out. There is just such a huge number of different basic systems and versions of systems, and then systems assembled from combinations of those systems that it would be a nightmare not only for Hitech to implement but for pilots jumping from plane to plane.

But I'm a study sim kind of guy. I like button and switch simulators, studying the manuals and testing my ability to use what I've learned. But that in depth study really limits your plane choices. Not what I'm really looking for when I fly AH.

[doright]

Ignoring the ball since 2005.

Thank you. That is exactly the point of the whole topic.

Along the lines of this thread, I'm curious as to how many folks try to do coordinated turns most or all of the time.  Real pilots and non-pilots alike.

I must admit in the MA I use the rudder more often to uncoordinate the flight then to keep it coordinated. Really letting my feet get lazy and stupid. In the SEA racing league they I try very, very hard to keep every tiny stick movement coordinated and it can really make a significant difference.

[Vinkman]

But you didn't have to do that as the Merlin's supercharger worked automatically (at least it did in Mossies so I can't fathom why it wouldn't in Spits).  There may have been a way to manually do it as well, but it was normally automatic.  In Mossies it could cause problems while climbing out as it wasn't uncommon for the engines to go to the second stage at altitudes hundreds of feet apart, causing a sudden imbalance of power as the first engine to do so gained power.

The Thunderbolt doesn't have a supercharger with a stage one or stage two.  It has a turbocharger.

A turbocharger is a supercharger. The Thunderbolt has an engine (or first stage) mechanical supercharger that is driven by the engine. Exhaust gases run a Turbo-supercharger that works at higher altitude to raise the low pressure air to sea level pressure to be fed into the engine-stage mechanical supercharger that raises to above sea level pressures to effectively inclease the engine displacement. If you look at the control levers for the P-47, there is a level for the supercharger. I will have to research what it did. It may well have had an automatic mode. But some planes I think, required the second stage Superchargers to be "engaged". I'll see if I can figure out which ones.  

[Daddkev]

  Heya DoRight! Hope to see you in the MAs soon. We would love for you to come back to the races on Tues nights!  

[Nathan60]

Can i come too Kev? Now thta I finally got a new stick that doesnt go out of coalibratin every 2.35 nanoseconds I was thinking of  doing a few myself.

[Ack-Ack]

Along the lines of this thread, I'm curious as to how many folks try to do coordinated turns most or all of the time.  Real pilots and non-pilots alike.

All of my turns are coordinated.

ack-ack

[colmbo]

If I recall correctly, Air fuel ratio, and Spark timing were Adjustable by the pilot.

I don't know of any aircraft in which the pilot can adjust spark timing with the exception of some systems that retarded the spark to make starting easier.  Once started you have no control on spark advance.

[colmbo]

 Perhaps he was cooler under fire and set his engine up during the manuever for max performance,

Pretty easy to be "cool"....just set mixture for auto-rich, put the prop control all the way to high RPM and jam the throttle forward. You're not going to be putzing around with prop RPM or mixture since there is no reason to change them during the fight. 

Guys tend to way over-think power management in these airplanes --- all the levers forward = go fast.....all the levers back = go slow....and it's almost that simple.