Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: Oldman731 on February 02, 2005, 12:05:57 PM
-
Last night I thought I'd try one of the 38Gs again. I met Soda, immediately pulled too tight, stalled and promptly entered a right-hand spin. Alt was probably around 5k. Some time later, despite my best efforts, we made a smoking hole in a nice meadow.
I'm certainly no hot-shot pilot, but it's a rare spin that I can't at least almost get out of within 5k. So I took off, climbed to 5k, and deliberately put it into a spin, figuring that this time I would be alert and ready for it. In fact, this time the smoking hole was created in the middle of a pretty green forest.
"Third try is the charm," I mumbled to myself, so I tried it again from 5k, with the same result (I was so angry by then that I took no notice of where the third smoking hole appeared, but likely it was a church).
While engaged in this exercise, I mentioned the issue to Jamusta, who was in the CT at the same time. He is a much better pilot than I am, with more experience in the 38G. So he started trying spin recovery. So far as I could tell, he was having the same results as I had when I checked out for the night.
So: What is the secret to spin recovery in the 38G? Anyone know?
- oldman
-
The P-38, (All models) suffers from a bizarre unrecoverable spin. There are those that will say "You just don't know how to fly it or you just don't know what you are doing", but that spin exists, I've tried to recover from as high as 15K and not pulled out.
I'll loosely repeat what the P-38 test pilots said about spin recovery here, and later, I'll post it directly from the book at home.
If you enter a spin, pull the throttles to idle, pull up the flaps if they are down, as this will delay recovery, and do not attempt recovery until after at least one full turn. Apply full opposite rudder against the spin and hold the column neutral. It should stop spinning after one to three turns. Then gently apply backward pressure on the yoke, and it will stay nose down and gain speed. Once it reaches about 150, push the yoke forward and build a little speed, then pull back gently, as you may cause another stall and a spin in the opposite direction.
Now, that is NOT a direct quote, but rather a paraphrase from what I learned from the test pilot reports, and from what P-38 combat pilots told me as well.
I know that many of the die heard P-38 pilots here have said the same thing about the spins. But evidently, those of us who fly it constantly, and research it thoroughly, know nothing at all about it.
-
Yep, everyone whose flown an AH 38 has probably experienced that spin.
Were you using flaps at the time? The auto retract can apparently trigger that spin if they suddenly retract.
Had one of those spins just the other night. Then again I'm not flying enough so that I suck even worse then usual so it's to be expected :)
Mossie has the same gawd awful spin too
Dan/Slack
-
i dunno, didn't seem too complicated to me... opposite aileron (with probably a little rudder) with a little nose down...
http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/170_1107368990_film46.zip
http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/170_1107369025_film47.zip
couldn't replicate an inverted spin to attempt recovery from.
connection *does* have a role in this, i.e., if you're losing packets or kind of laggy you end up over inputting, furthering the spin, pretty much like overcontrolling a skidding car.
having said this, i have entered non-recoverable spins from time to time in a variety of planes.
-
Yeah, as long as I have at least 4k of alt, I have no problem getting out of it.
The trick is the remember that your plane isn't necessarily flying straight, nor at any speed once you stop spinning.
It took me the longest time to figure out that I must be gentle pulling out after I'm not spinning anymore.
-
easiest way to get out of a spin is to turn OFF 1 engine so the plane rights itself if its a flat spin.
If its a spiraling spin (your nose goes up and down horizon as your plane spins on its axis) your best off letting go off the stick and lowering throttle to zero, then lowering elevator to the middle position.
The one thing that keeps a 38 spinning is the elevator when under combat trim. Disable combat trim always when flying the 38.
oh, and do NOT use flaps, those worsen the spin.
-
i dunno, didn't seem too complicated to me... opposite aileron (with probably a little rudder) with a little nose down...
If you have to use any aileron in a spin this is the worst thing to do. If buy using aileron in AHII P-38 or to shut the engines down to recover from a spin then the modeling is wrong. Buy using aileron this will aggravaite the problem due to yaw from asymmetric ailerons. I can also name a few other multi-engines in AHII that spin recovery is non existent also.
If anything use differential power add power to the lower wing it adds lift and helps in a spin. But dont use to much or you will spin in the oposit direction.
Read Straiga heres your Multi-engine images in V&A.
After reading this go fly a multi-engine and see if it mimics what you read.
In a stable airplane if you let the controls go the plane will recover by itself, when you have an unstable plane use oposit rudder in the direction of the turn, sometimes push the nose forward or nuetral, power idle, with some altitude. The turn should stop, any airspeed above stall, then a slight nose up elevator, nuetral rudder, and recovery from the spin should be possible. This is generally speaking some planes eat up a lot of altitude and some planes you just dont spin at all.
Any aft CG location in a plane is extreamly hard to recover from a spin, and will stall quicker than a center CG location.
Straiga
-
I've had both the tight spins which were extremely difficult to recover, and the spins with lots of altitude that recovered after 10k. Generally, 1 turn equalled 1,000 feet lost. With the unrecoverable spins, I went idle - then selected the engine in the direction of the spin, went full throttle with opposite rudder for spin recovery, when rotation stopped, full power on both - 150 and recover.
-
then selected the engine in the direction of the spin
Are you shure in the direction of the spin, this will make it worse.
The right engine left spinning turn? The left engine in a right spining turn? NO!
It should be left engine power to counter left turning spin or right engine right power to counter right turning spin.
In a P-38 with counter rotating props that rotate away from the fuselage from the 12 O'clock position, each prop with differential power will yaw the airplane. More power on the Right engine will yaw the plane to the left, more power on the left engine will the yaw the plane to the right, with equal force or leverage.
In a plane that both props rotate to the right from the pilots seat, the right engine will yaw the plane to the left with a greater force.
The left engine will yaw the plane to the right but with less force or leverage than the right engine.
But in either case the prop wash across the wing with one engine producing power will produce an asymmetric lift on that wing and will roll the plane in the oposit direction. Because of the asymmetric power this will also yaw the plane in the oposit direction, left engine right yaw and right engine left yaw. This is the same for the P-38.
Straiga
-
If you are spinning to the right - you select the right engine since it is going to try and torque you left. Remember, i'm saying for the 38 - not a conventional twin with a critical engine.
-
If you are spinning to the right - you select the right engine since it is going to try and torque you left.[/QUOTE
]
If spinning right add power on the right engine this will produce a yaw to the left. The prop wash airflow from that engine will produce lift on that right wing and will roll the plane to the left, because of asymmetric lift.
I was thinking you were saying right turn spin add power into the spin also as saying add left engine power in a right turn. Sorry my bad.
Straiga
-
Here is the passage from the Lockheed test pilots logs regarding P-38 spin characteristics and recovery. I have not altered it.
Spin Characteristics of the P-38
By Lockheed Engineering Test Pilot Herman R. “Fish Salmon
While visiting training bases we are frequently asked about the spin characteristics of the P-38. Such questions as “Have you ever spun a P-38?” and “How do you get a P-38 out of a spin?”, indicate that there is a little confusion about the spin characteristics of the Lightning.
Positive Spin Recovery Procedure
To begin, during flight test operations, I spin a P-38L 28 times over Muroc Army Air Field under every possible condition,, including a range of CG from 27% forward to 32% aftward, landing gear up and down, with dive flaps extended and not extended, on one engine, and with power on and off.
It doesn’t matter what configuration the Lightning is in when the spin is started, it always develops a steady nose down spin after the 4th turn, (if you allow it to go that far) from which recovery is a cinch.
Because of the 38’s excellent stall characteristics it is unlikely that you will find yourself in an inadvertent spin, but should the unexpected happen, or should you try spinning as an evasive maneuver, here are some solutions we discovered for easy, rapid recovery.
1. Don’t get excited---even if you are thrown about in the cockpit or find it difficult to orientate yourself with the ground.
2. Cut back power on both engines, and simultaneously kick full rudders against the spin.
3. Clean up the airplane by raising dive flaps, maneuvering flaps and landing gear if extended. (The plane will recover with flaps down but we found it takes about one turn longer).
4. Wait at least one half turn with rudders full against the spin and the elevators back, before moving the control column forward.
5. As the rate of rotation decreases, move the column forward toward the neutral position. If you have difficulty moving the column forward it indicates your rate of rotation is too fast. Don’t fight the column forward---just wait a little longer, still holding the rudder pedals against the stops.
6. As the central column approaches neutral, the spin will stop and you will find yourself in a steep nose-down pitch attitude at low airspeed.
7. When speed increases to about 150mph, perform a gradual pullout. If you pull too sharply, you might stall and spin off in the opposite direction.
Thus the procedure for spin recovery in the ’38 is basically the same as that learned back in primary flying training. But there is one essential difference---YOU MUST WAIT FOR AT LEAST HALF A TURN AFTER KICKING RUDDERS AGAINST THE SPIN BEFORE MOVING THE CONTROL COLUMN FORWARD. This rule of thumb is absolutely imperative!
-
shut off both engines deploy your landing gear. this won't help in RL but here in AH it works just fine.
-
shut off both engines deploy your landing gear. this won't help in RL but here in AH it works just fine.
How would you like to play a video game like NASCAR and then turn your steering wheel to the left only to have the car move to the right. Driving a real car doesnt do this. This is the same thing as trying to fly a plane like it should fly, but it does something else because the modeling is incorrect. Why cant it be correct to begin with? The multi-engine modeling is incorrect. Especialy when only a single engine is running. So if is incorrect then other flight modeling might be wrong dont you think?
Do you think the Captains lying about a P-38 stall recovery in RL or do we get it modeled correctly to fly like it in RL.
Straiga
-
I don't think Cap's lying. But I don't think the article he came up represents the whole truth either.
Obviously all aircraf spin. Some much more harsh than other. Some spins could be easier to recover from, and others can be nearly impossible.
In my opinion, usually the circumstances we put our planes under, is much more harsh than it would ever be for real life pilots and real life planes.
We make sudden throttle adjustments, harsh stick inputs, pull over 5Gs on a whim, dog fight at speeds under 100mph, go into disorienting rolling scissors everytime, and stall our planes on purpose when in danger. We pull flaps when it was not recommended, lower gear to force overshoot, and drive the plane on WEP settings all the time.
However, compare the real life guncams and even the most desparate evasives are not more than timely scissors. The "stalls" and "spins" pilots in real life experience are hardly anything that suits the word 'aggravated'. One might strain himself to get a high angle deflection shot, and then bam! he pulled too much and the plane spins. This is usually the "spin" people refer to. They teach pilots how to get out from something like this.
I'd doubt even the instructors would teach someone to get out from an all-out flat spin with all normal airflow over the plane terminated, and the plane starts falling straight down while spinning on its yaw axis.
So unless someone has proof that the P-38 will never enter a flat spin... its all a moot point. The P-38s are already very hard to enter stall in the first place. I could pull left turns and right turns and loops with max stick deflection, and the plane would just 'mush' when it enters stall.
The only time I'd ever enter a flat spin in a AH P-38, is when I do a vertical and my recovery was wrong, and the plane swings nose-down in an irregular fashion... or, if I pull too tight while doing a split-S, and the plane enters an accelerated stall with the nose pitching upwards and 'tumbling down' due to disruption of normal airflow.
-
Herman Salmon: "Hi, I'm Lockheed engineering P-38 testpilot Herman Salmon, I fly the P-38 for Lockheed every day for a living. In preparation for this report, I went out over Lake Muroc and intentionally spun a P-38L 28 times, in every configuration I could think of. These are the results of those real life tests. The following is how you recovery from a spin in the lockheed P-38 Lightning, just as I did 28 times in one day, and just as I have over 4 years of flying the P-38 under every possible condition and in every possible configuartion"
Kweassa: "Hi I'm Kweassa Rivera, noted Aces High pilot and resident expert on the P-38 and how it should fly. I certainly know more than you could ever know about the P-38, and I think you are not telling the entire truth. I KNOW you are hiding something, and intentionally leaving out information. I'm going to investigate you and Lockheed, and open the vault containing your archives, live on national television, and expose you for the corporate stooge you are."
That just about sums THIS one up folks. :rolleyes: Once again, we talk about spin recovery, and Kweassa comes in and changes the subject to whether or not the P-38 will spin, how easy he thinks it should spin, and whether or not it resists spins too much while his plane of choice spins too easy.
OF COURSE Kweassa knows FAR more than a man who had more hours in a REAL P-38 than Kweassa has in Aces High. And don't you forget it. He knows more about the P-38 and flying than Tony Levier, Corky Meyer, Jimmy Mattern, Herman Salmon, Milo Burcham, or ANY of the test pilots who flew 3000 to 5000 hours in the P-38 over five or six years. He knows more than Captain Stan Richardson Jr, an advanced P-38 combat instructor, and veteran of a full tour of combat in the P-38, with over 3000 hours in the P-38. He knows more than Erv Ethell, another combat veteran and advanced combat trainer in the P-38, again, with more than 3000 hours in the P-38 including a full combat tour and several kills.
-
Oh, and just for the record:
I never said the P-38 would never flat spin. I said with two healthy engines it was very difficult to make it happen. Was told this by men with a grand total of 15-20K hours in the P-38 between them.
I never said a P-38 wouldn't snap roll inverted into a spin. I said that the same people said they couldn't do it on two healthy engines. Learning this had nothing to do with AH by the way, I was helping research the death of Major Thomas B. McGuire.
I never said the P-38 was immune to the laws of physics or aerodynamics. I never said it was or should be a UFO. I never said I wanted it to be anything other than as close to real as was possible in a computer simulation
I never said the Folwers on a P-38 should be able to be deployed at any speed, nor that they should not be damaged by excessive speed. I did say they were not auto-retract in real life, and they should not be here. I also said that auto retract creates an artificial stall and spin that CANNOT be duplicated in real life UNLESS you pull the flaps up when you would not do so if you had any sense at all.
I never said the P-38 would not enter compression. I said that the same pilots mentioned earlier said it would not compress under 15K, and that with dive flaps they said they could dive from above 25K without undue drama, and that they said without flaps they said they still could dive from under 20K. I also said they said they had no trouble handling dive speeds of over 525MPH, or speeds of .69-.72 Mach.
And regarding the WHOLE truth, I think Herman Salmon said, in the article I posted (verbatim, just as he wrote it) that the P-38, regardless of what confiuration you stalled it in, would go nose down by the fourth revolution, by itself, if you let it go that far, and that he could always stop the spin with nothing more than opposite rudders and keeping the column neutral.
-
And YES Kweassa, BOTH Captain Stan Richardson Jr., AND Captain Erv Ethell, DID teach recovery from pure flat spins. As advanced combat instructors, it was part of their job to teach pilots to recover from EXACTLY that. So, your doubts are indeed ill founded, and your opinion is not based on fact.
I am finished with THIS dead horse as well.
-
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/204_1099100867_thread_direction.gif)
-
^ ^ ^
What does any of that have to do with cartoon modelling? This is a silly game and what may have occurred in RL has nooooooooo bearing. Just fly the spitV and you'll see. :D
-
I am a weirdo I guess, but actually I am finding the G easier to recover in?
-
*Shrugs* I've just only offered an opinion.
However, since you seem so anxious to turn this into a raving Jihad for your P-38, so you would antagonize everyone who does not think like you do, as you have done time and time again on every discussion about every characteristic of the P-38, why should anyone even bother listening seriously to your opinions when they know whatever questions or doubts they have would be eventually persecuted by you, your 'P-38 Bible', and your 'P-38 prophets'?
You want to drag Ethell into this? Well perhaps you aren't in the least bit competent enough to use the skills Ethell would to recover a from flat spinning P-38 - you should consider that as a possibility.
And by the way, since you seem so sure about everything, just for the record I'd like to see just where any of the instuctors mention recovering from an abnormal stall in the form of yax-axis rotating free-fall. Two engines or two-million engines, once normal airflow is terminated anything can happen to a plane.
-
Originally posted by Kweassa
*Shrugs* I've just only offered an opinion.
However, since you seem so anxious to turn this into a raving Jihad for your P-38, so you would antagonize everyone who does not think like you do, as you have done time and time again on every discussion about every characteristic of the P-38, why should anyone even bother listening seriously to your opinions when they know whatever questions or doubts they have would be eventually persecuted by you, your 'P-38 Bible', and your 'P-38 prophets'?
You want to drag Ethell into this? Well perhaps you aren't in the least bit competent enough to use the skills Ethell would to recover a from flat spinning P-38 - you should consider that as a possibility.
And by the way, since you seem so sure about everything, just for the record I'd like to see just where any of the instuctors mention recovering from an abnormal stall in the form of yax-axis rotating free-fall. Two engines or two-million engines, once normal airflow is terminated anything can happen to a plane.
There is no jihad here except yours. Oldman asked for P-38 recovery instructions and stall characteristics. Neither he nor I asked for anything to be changed. I merely posted the report of a Lockheed engineering test pilot with THREE THOUSAND PLUS hours in a REAL P-38. YOU came in, as you always do and began your same old rant about the P-38 and what you THINK we were talking about, and decided what the test pilot wrote was not the whole truth.
I NEVER go into your 109, 190, Niki, or Ki84 threads and tell you how I think it should fly. In fact, the only time I ever posted in those threads is when you decide to make some childish insult about those who fly the P-38.
Why should anyone listen to YOUR opinion? You IGNORE facts from published reports by Lockheed test pilots and well known published P-38 combat pilots, and decide on your own that they are wrong, with NOTHING to base it on. What the Hell is "dragging Erv Ethel into this''supposed to mean? I didn't drag him into anything, I just stated what the man said about the plane, he flew combat, and advanced instruction,he is well known for it and often quoted by many noted authors on the subject. And I did not compare myself to him or anyone else.
You once again came into a thread about the P-38, and started an arguement with which you have no facts to win, the same way you do every time. And then you want to make the same statements about me you always do. You've made up your mind that the P-38 flies too good, and you need to attack anything about it anytime it is posted. YOU are the one who hijacked the thread, but you don't want to accept the blame for that either. You are the one who came in and refuted published Lockheed test pilot logs and reports quoted verbatim, and offered ZERO (no test pilot reports, no nothing, just your baseless opinion) factual basis for YOUR position. But it's all MY fault because I called you on it.
Like I said, there was no ''raving jihad'', and in fact no arguement at all, until you decided to enter the thread with the same old baseless BS, after I merely posted a verbatim quote from Herman Salmon. That's ALL I did. Posted a Lockheed report because Oldman asked about stall recovery. And what evidence do you have to refute said report? You've offered nothing. And WHY did you feel it was necessary to divert a thread about stall recovery of the P-38 to your same old arguement? Don't ask me, and don't blame me for responding.
-
Is there any part of this:
It doesn’t matter what configuration the Lightning is in when the spin is started, it always develops a steady nose down spin after the 4th turn, (if you allow it to go that far) from which recovery is a cinch.
that is NOT stated in clear plain English?
I was just wondering.
I don't know any P-38 ''prophets'', I don't even know what one is. I do know a few P-38 pilots though.
By the way, is there anyone here who has flown a real P-38, or knows a quoted and respected P-38 pilot, a test pilot who's logs and reports are published, or anyone of that nature with specific P-38 experience, who can provide any factual evidence to dispute the above statement in red by a Lockheed test pilot?
-
Originally posted by Wolfala
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/204_1099100867_thread_direction.gif)
I agee completely. I merely posted the Lockheed engineering test pilot's report, verbatim, as I promised. I had no intention of hijacking anything. However, there are some seagulls around who, whenever they see a thread about the Lockheed P-38 Lightning, feel compelled to fly in and crap all over the thread and see where they can drag it. Perhaps I should not respond to seagulls, but their crap stinks up everything.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
OF COURSE Kweassa knows FAR more than a man who had more hours in a REAL P-38 than Kweassa has in Aces High. And don't you forget it. He knows more about the P-38 and flying than Tony Levier, Corky Meyer, Jimmy Mattern, Herman Salmon, Milo Burcham, or ANY of the test pilots who flew 3000 to 5000 hours in the P-38 over five or six years.
Corky Meyer got more than 3000 hour in the 38 ?
I'm surprised.
-
Originally posted by straffo
Corky Meyer got more than 3000 hour in the 38 ?
I'm surprised.
I did not say that Corky Meyer in particular had 3000 hours in the P-38. If you got that impression from what I wrote, it was NOT the impression that I intended. MANY of those pilots I listed DID have 3000 hours in the P-38, over a period of years. A lot of them flew the P-38 on production test hops, and for test purposes, for the entire production run, some starting as early as the initial development. Fly ANY plane for most of the day, 5-7 days a week, every week for 3-5 years, and you'll build up hours fast. Just from a couple of books I can list about a dozen pilots who worked for Lockheed that you've never heard of, that flew the P-38 on a near daily basis for the entire production run. Not to mention any number of USAAF/USAAC pilots who were trained in the type, and then stayed on to train others, moved on to advanced training as instructors, did one or more combat tours, and any combination of the above. There are a lot of pilots who started in the D, E, or F model, and were still flying the L model after the war ended. I know, or knew, several pilots who graduated flight school and went to combat units in 1942, who were still flying in 1945-46.
-
Hahem I perhaps got that impression from what I translated :)
You know from time to time I completly miss the point , but I wasw pretty sure Meyer was a Grumman test pilot so it looked strange.
-
Originally posted by straffo
Hahem I perhaps got that impression from what I translated :)
You know from time to time I completly miss the point , but I wasw pretty sure Meyer was a Grumman test pilot so it looked strange.
It is quite possible, and likely, that you got the impression because of the way I happened to write it. It probably IS my fault, and I'm certain that having to translate it did NOT help matters. I doubt any fault lies with you.
While Meyer was a Grumman pilot, I have read plenty about him flying other makes of planes, including the P-38, and evaluating them.
-
Originally posted by straffo
Hahem I perhaps got that impression from what I translated :)
You know from time to time I completly miss the point , but I wasw pretty sure Meyer was a Grumman test pilot so it looked strange.
That's because you're French damnit!!! psst you are right about Corky Meyers being a Grumman test pilot.
-
Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
The P-38, (All models) suffers from a bizarre unrecoverable spin. There are those that will say "You just don't know how to fly it or you just don't know what you are doing", but that spin exists, I've tried to recover from as high as 15K and not pulled out.
I know that many of the die heard P-38 pilots here have said the same thing about the spins. But evidently, those of us who fly it constantly, and research it thoroughly, know nothing at all about it.
I never really experienced these spins all that much while flying the L as I was usually able to catch the spin early enough to stop it. Though, sometimes when I wasn't quick enough, I would enter into a spin exactly how you and other P-38 sticks have described it. Flying the J model now, it's more pronounced and not as easy to catch it in time to prevent it. It almost seems that at low speeds there seems to be some type of torque effect that is causing these spins.
ack-ack
-
No, the torque is the snap stall happening. The wind flow over one wing is not always the exact same as wind flow over the other.
The only time it'll be perfect is if the air is perfect, you are perfectly level and you pull perfectly straight up.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
No, the torque is the snap stall happening. The wind flow over one wing is not always the exact same as wind flow over the other.
The only time it'll be perfect is if the air is perfect, you are perfectly level and you pull perfectly straight up.
Torque? The P-38 has zero net torque, not only do the props rotate in opposite directions, but the engines do as well. As long as both engines are healthy, and symmetrical power is applied, there is no torque to make a P-38 snap roll. That's why some pilots used differential throttling to both roll and turn. That's also why the P-38 turns and rolls at the same rate in either direction, and it can climb out in a turn and not stall as easily.
-
I never really experienced these spins all that much while flying the L as I was usually able to catch the spin early enough to stop it. Though, sometimes when I wasn't quick enough, I would enter into a spin exactly how you and other P-38 sticks have described it. Flying the J model now, it's more pronounced and not as easy to catch it in time to prevent it. It almost seems that at low speeds there seems to be some type of torque effect that is causing these spins.
Could it be asymmetric aileron? Does it feel more like a torque roll effect? Which 38s or any twins shouldnt have. If using aileron to level the wings at the point of stall this will only envoke a stall only use rudder.
Straiga
-
Wow Captain, did you even bother to read what I wrote?
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
Wow Captain, did you even bother to read what I wrote?
Yes, I did. Torque does not feel the same as assymetrical lift. If you are feeling something like torque, then there is a problem.
I am disagreeing with you that the "torque feeling" is just a "snap stall". And at the same time saying that there should be nothing that feels like torque, and why.
Now, I may not have near as much seat time as a lot of people here, I'll quickly conceed that. But I HAVE had enough seat time to feel the difference in torque rolling a plane over and the feeling of one wing stalling first.
Again, I'm not saying the P-38 shouldn't spin out of a stall. In regards to what you posted I'm saying I disagree with what you posted because the "feel" is wrong.
A torque roll feeling is the feeling of one side pushing the other over. It feels all together different than an assymetrical lift stall, which feels like one side falling out from under you. I suppose it's subjective, seeing how we're talking about "feel". To me, at least, there's a huge difference between the feeling of torque pushing a plane over, and the feeling of falling that a stall gives. To me, a stall that spins you out because one wing stops flying feels sort of like that feeling you get on a rollercoaster as it drops away on a fast downhill run, only you feel it on one side. Torque feels a lot more like something pushing one side up and over.
Perhaps I should have explained myself better. Pardon me if I disagree on a subjective issue such as "feel".
-
I was describing what happens in layman's terms.
To the unexperienced it feels like there's a torque being applied to the plane.
-
Glad you asked that Oldman ?
PS. I have the same problem whenever I fly the damn thing - that's why I don't ;)
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
I was describing what happens in layman's terms.
To the unexperienced it feels like there's a torque being applied to the plane.
Sure. Okay. Like I said, it is a subjective thing, especially in a simulation that does not transfer motion to the body.
I will say that it acts like torque sometimes, it seems, by that I mean it SEEMS to snap to the right about 90% of the time.
I've learned to fly around it, like I've learned to fly around the auto retract, so I don't think about it as much anymore, and never bother to bring it up myself.
Had it not been for the fact that someone I KNEW posted the thread, I wouldn't have made much comment, if any. Like I posted in the last auto retract thread in the general forum. The whole thing is a dead horse.
-
Kweassa: "Hi I'm Kweassa Rivera, noted Aces High pilot and resident expert on the P-38 and how it should fly. I certainly know more than you could ever know about the P-38, and I think you are not telling the entire truth. I KNOW you are hiding something, and intentionally leaving out information. I'm going to investigate you and Lockheed, and open the vault containing your archives, live on national television, and expose you for the corporate stooge you are."
Thats to funny, Im LMMAO
Hey lasersailer184 you sail Laser? I have a olympic class 470 and Solying.
Hilts, good posts. I know theres something up with the 38 and other twins its aparent when the planes have a single engine failure then you really see whats going wrong, with the flight model.
Take a look at (Straiga here is your multi-engine images) in A&V then go fly single engine in a twin and see what happens it not even close.
Straiga
-
Originally posted by Straiga
Could it be asymmetric aileron? Does it feel more like a torque roll effect? Which 38s or any twins shouldnt have. If using aileron to level the wings at the point of stall this will only envoke a stall only use rudder.
Straiga
It definitely feels like it's a roll induced by torque.
ack-ack
-
Yeah, I sail Lasers and Laser 2's.
But ever since getting to college, they have us doing FJ's and 420's. Such POS boats in my opinion. So much flash and nothing gained in speed.
But I also do Lightnings, some bigger boats like Catalinas, Sunfish, JY15's.
-
I thought so laser. I was that close in collage to going to sail in the olympics. I single man my 470 from the trap. My old boats were a Shock 30 and Santana 525.
Later Straiga
-
i always just push the stick forward and full right rudder then full throttle , maybe that just works for me since i seem to get into spins goin the same rotation, usually doesnt gain control for like 10 spins or something and maybe just because i use the 38 for semi bz'ing i always have 5k beneath me but also hardly make it back since most attackers just watch from above laughing i guess and then obliterate me when i've gained control and am only doing 200mph on the deck and a sitting duck.
-
It definitely feels like it's a roll induced by torque.
This were I think the modeling is wrong have you read Straiga here is your mutli-engine images.
I have trying all along to get this point out multies are not greatly effected by engine torque. Porp slipstream and P-factor effect the airframe far more.
I you tryed to follow what has been written in the papers about single engine flying in a multi-engine and relate this to AHII you can actually see whats wrong with the modeling. There is hardly any yaw, rudder is also not used, airspeed should decline rapidly due to sideslip, VMC doesnt change with altitude. These are some things I have noticed. Try it and get back to me.
Later Straiga