Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: earl1937 on May 29, 2013, 12:15:16 PM
-
:airplane: My BIG wish is for Aces High to slow down the roll rate of the aircraft in the game! I see things in here all the time, that if you did it in a "real" aircraft, you would become a "lawn" dart very quickly. Of course, I realize this is a video game and is designed for the pleasure of many different skill level players. Another way they could slow down some of these wild gyrations of aircraft in a furball, is to black out the pilot when he exceeds a certain standard of roll rate. Of course this wish comes from my desire for AH to make the "game" a little more realistic in the flight characteristics of aircraft, but that is probably asking to much.
A good example of "can't be done" is when a "bandit" is on my six, 1.0k back and I start a loop, and while I am inverted at the top, I look down and the guy chasing me does what looks like a 90 degree change in direction to the vertical, catches me slow and on my back, shoots me down...He should have accelerate stalled his aircraft doing that and snap rolled down. If it was a "real" aircraft, he would have started a loop also to chase me, and while inverted on my back and slow, pop 50% flaps, do a left hand 360 degree turn and come out on his six or catch him inverted and shoot him down. A lot of aircraft were shot down in WW2 and Korea, using that tactic!
-
what makes you think the roll rates are not accurate? i'm asking because you're going to get some guys in this discussion that have done the research...
A good example of "can't be done" is when a "bandit" is on my six, 1.0k back and I start a loop, and while I am inverted at the top, I look down and the guy chasing me does what looks like a 90 degree change in direction to the vertical, catches me slow and on my back, shoots me down...He should have accelerate stalled his aircraft doing that and snap rolled down. If it was a "real" aircraft, he would have started a loop also to chase me, and while inverted on my back and slow, pop 50% flaps, do a left hand 360 degree turn and come out on his six or catch him inverted and shoot him down. A lot of aircraft were shot down in WW2 and Korea, using that tactic!
what you describe there has nothing to do with roll rate. if there is a 1000 yard gap, and you go into a loop or a hammerhead, i'm not going to follow you into the loop. if i can, while you're going up i'll close the gap then go vertical under you while you're stalling out at the top. if i've timed it correctly, you will be in my sights long enough for me to shoot you down. there are other tactics that can be accomplished to counter a loop maneuver and come out on the winning end as well.
-
what makes you think the roll rates are not accurate? i'm asking because you're going to get some guys in this discussion that have done the research...
what you describe there has nothing to do with roll rate. if there is a 1000 yard gap, and you go into a loop or a hammerhead, i'm not going to follow you into the loop. if i can, while you're going up i'll close the gap then go vertical under you while you're stalling out at the top. if i've timed it correctly, you will be in my sights long enough for me to shoot you down. there are other tactics that can be accomplished to counter a loop maneuver and come out on the winning end as well.
:airplane: Appreciate your comment, but with all the wild gyrations I see in here, roll rates can't be very accurate! You are right about different ways to combat a loop/360degree maneuver in this game, but you can't do it in a real aircraft and that, sir, is my point! In a real aircraft, to do the maneuver that I have seen many do, you would accurate stall the aircraft.
-
One film would be worth far more then this entire thread.
And you may find that the roll rates are far more accurate then you believe.
HiTech
-
:airplane: Appreciate your comment, but with all the wild gyrations I see in here, roll rates can't be very accurate! You are right about different ways to combat a loop/360degree maneuver in this game, but you can't do it in a real aircraft and that, sir, is my point! In a real aircraft, to do the maneuver that I have seen many do, you would accurate stall the aircraft.
Are you sure you're not seeing a snap spin and not a controlled roll? Is that, perhaps, what you wish to address?
-
:airplane: Appreciate your comment, but with all the wild gyrations I see in here, roll rates can't be very accurate!
you might want to do a search, probably in the aircraft and vehicles section. there have been a lot of discussions on roll rates and as far as i can remember from the last convo i looked at, they are very close to accurate, especially the 190s. a high roll rate doesn't necessarily allow for "wild gyrations".
You are right about different ways to combat a loop/360degree maneuver in this game, but you can't do it in a real aircraft and that, sir, is my point! In a real aircraft, to do the maneuver that I have seen many do, you would accurate stall the aircraft.
yes you can. what i described was pulling an immelmann against your loop.
here, a p51d pulling an immelmann, cuban 8 and split s...camera view from the tail.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAPQKqJf7wQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAPQKqJf7wQ)
-
you might want to do a search, probably in the aircraft and vehicles section. there have been a lot of discussions on roll rates and as far as i can remember from the last convo i looked at, they are very close to accurate, especially the 190s. a high roll rate doesn't necessarily allow for "wild gyrations".
yes you can. what i described was pulling an immelmann against your loop.
here, a p51d pulling an immelmann, cuban 8 and split s...camera view from the tail.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAPQKqJf7wQ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tAPQKqJf7wQ)
:airplane: With having taught aerobatics for roughly 3 years, almost full time, I think I know what a aircraft maneuver looks like and how to do them...If you do your immelmann turn, trying to counter my loop/360 maneuver, I think I would kill you 8 out of 10 times..my problem is 79 year old eyes, 1 with 10% vision and the other one is OK, but depth perception is erratic at best...that's why I fly bombers 98% of the time in the game!
-
One film would be worth far more then this entire thread.
And you may find that the roll rates are far more accurate then you believe.
HiTech
:airplane: Guess you are right, maybe the trouble is the "sticks" we use in the game allowing people to make such rapid changes in directions.
-
Are you sure you're not seeing a snap spin and not a controlled roll? Is that, perhaps, what you wish to address?
:airplane: Not at all! A snap "roll" is a controlled maneuver, but an accelerated stall, with an spin is not controlled, until the AOA recovers enough for the flight controls to become effective again. Next time you are flying in the game, try this: In order not to damage your "stick", slow the aircraft, say a LA-7 to minimum controllable airspeed, then abruptly pull the stick all the way back to "accelerate" the impending stall and see what happens. An accelerated stall is when the AOA of the wing exceeds the design limits of the wing lifting capability. This can be done at almost any speed, the faster the IAS, the more violent the resulting stall.
-
:airplane: With having taught aerobatics for roughly 3 years, almost full time, I think I know what a aircraft maneuver looks like and how to do them...If you do your immelmann turn, trying to counter my loop/360 maneuver, I think I would kill you 8 out of 10 times..my problem is 79 year old eyes, 1 with 10% vision and the other one is OK, but depth perception is erratic at best...that's why I fly bombers 98% of the time in the game!
lol, well then having taught aerobatics you understand timing, and in combat timing is everything. while you're bleeding off energy trying to pull the loop, depending on the plane your opponent is flying, he should be maintaing energy long enough to get under you. and while you're pretty much stalled out at the top of the loop, you're opponent would be beginning to bleed off energy pulling the nose up to line your airplane up in the sights and get a shot off before he stalls out at the top of the immelmann. of course, if he hasn't carried enough energy into his maneuver, he could stall out prematurely and end up in your sights flopping like a fish out of water. following someone into a loop is just asking to get shot down. it would probably be wiser to pull a chandelle then maybe a split s to get on you, rather than an immelmann, depending on the situation of course.
-
lol, well then having taught aerobatics you understand timing, and in combat timing is everything. while you're bleeding off energy trying to pull the loop, depending on the plane your opponent is flying, he should be maintaing energy long enough to get under you. and while you're pretty much stalled out at the top of the loop, you're opponent would be beginning to bleed off energy pulling the nose up to line your airplane up in the sights and get a shot off before he stalls out at the top of the immelmann. of course, if he hasn't carried enough energy into his maneuver, he could stall out prematurely and end up in your sights flopping like a fish out of water. following someone into a loop is just asking to get shot down. it would probably be wiser to pull a chandelle then maybe a split s to get on you, rather than an immelmann, depending on the situation of course.
:airplane: Appreciate your comments, but, if u do a split S, sir, you would be going towards the ground, not climbing up to attack me! LOL In a Chandell, you would be hanging in the sky like a leaf on a tree, don't understand how you think that would be the correct thing to do.
-
... like a leaf on a tree ....
(http://hijinksensue.com/comics/2007-10-08-serenity-2-firefly-wash.jpg)
-
Well, the roll rates match the NACA chart for the aircraft that are on it (P-38 w/boosted ailerons, P-39, P-40, P-47, P-51, Spitfire (clipped and unclipped), Fw190, Typhoon and A6M (maybe plus some I forgot)) so I don't know what can be done. Rolling an aircraft doesn't cause blackouts, so making it do so in the game would be highly unrealistic. I agree there are maneuvers being pulled in game that couldn't be done in reality, but I don't think the roll rates are the culprit.
-
then abruptly pull the stick all the way back to "accelerate" the impending stall
I think I follow what you are saying Earl, but 1000 feet of separation is plenty of time for me to pull slowly back and if timed right, catch you at the top of your loop. Although At that point I would be very low on airspeed myself and if I missed I wouldn't be in a great position.
I never yank or even "abruptly" pull let alone when I have 1k feet to take my time in the pull.
As for the roll rate, I think sometimes lag has a little to do with how unnatural it looks to you.
-
HiTech's sig seems pretty apt here
-
:airplane: Appreciate your comments, but, if u do a split S, sir, you would be going towards the ground, not climbing up to attack me! LOL In a Chandell, you would be hanging in the sky like a leaf on a tree, don't understand how you think that would be the correct thing to do.
sorry Earl but you go ahead and keep pulling loops then wondering how people are using "wild gyrations" to shoot you down... :aok
-
HiTech's sig seems pretty apt here
:rofl
-
We sometimes see things in game that look "odd" due to lag/connection issues.
I don't have any big issues with flight models in AH...but I have enough B-17 time to say the roll rate is too high, and I have enough B-24 time to say the Liberator in AH is way too forgiving below 100IAS.
-
We sometimes see things in game that look "odd" due to lag/connection issues.
I don't have any big issues with flight models in AH...but I have enough B-17 time to say the roll rate is too high, and I have enough B-24 time to say the Liberator in AH is way too forgiving below 100IAS.
:airplane: Thanks, glad someone besides me has noticed that also...I keep forgetting that some of these guys who answer posts are not trained pilots as you and I, so I get some funny answers sometimes...but I enjoy the forum....fun at times
-
sorry Earl but you go ahead and keep pulling loops then wondering how people are using "wild gyrations" to shoot you down... :aok
:airplane: I don't always do loops, sir, depends on the situation
-
:airplane: Thanks, glad someone besides me has noticed that also...I keep forgetting that some of these guys who answer posts are not trained pilots as you and I, so I get some funny answers sometimes...but I enjoy the forum....fun at times
They might not all be trained pilots, but they do know the game mechanics and why some things appear the way they do better than some of us... Gyrene, Karnak, and Muzik pretty much summed it up... The roll rates match NACA. Sure people do unrealistic stuff a lot, but it's a game..and it's going to have unrealistic attributes as all games do. Another explanation, as stated, could be lag (or a number of things).
While I respect those of you that are real pilots, sometimes you also need to step down from your pedestal and talk to us non-pilots ;)
-
:airplane: I don't always do loops, sir, depends on the situation
Hiya, Earl. I'm glad you're active on the forum and part of the community, sir. :)
-
Hiya, Earl. I'm glad you're active on the forum and part of the community, sir. :)
don't mind arlo. Forgot to put him back in his cage :D
-
While I respect those of you that are real pilots, sometimes you also need to step down from your pedestal and talk to us non-pilots
He was doing that. As soon as he did, people started jumping down his throat.
We all have our own experiences. HiTech has his RV8 (or whichever one it is), Colmbo has many hours in B-17s and B-24s, as well as Cessna 182s and who knows what else. Earl1937 flew B-29s and has significant other real world experience that most of us do not. If he and Colmbo agree that roll rates are off, I would not dismiss that because of a chart I saw once. My own reading of this thread suggests that the amount of force a real world pilot is likely to exert against the stick, compared with what a gamer has to exert against his, may account for different perspectives.
- oldman
-
He was doing that. As soon as he did, people started jumping down his throat.
We all have our own experiences. HiTech has his RV8 (or whichever one it is), Colmbo has many hours in B-17s and B-24s, as well as Cessna 182s and who knows what else. Earl1937 flew B-29s and has significant other real world experience that most of us do not. If he and Colmbo agree that roll rates are off, I would not dismiss that because of a chart I saw once. My own reading of this thread suggests that the amount of force a real world pilot is likely to exert against the stick, compared with what a gamer has to exert against his, may account for different perspectives.
- oldman
I would trust these charts more than these real world pilots. Why? Because, yes they've flown real life aircraft like the B29 and B17...Hell, I've flown Cessnas..that doesn't mean any of us know exactly how a Spit16 or 109F rolled in WWII :aok
-
earl. the plane flight models are fine. (yes I know your a b29 guy and I think that is amazing and I have enjoyed your posts on the subject)
what you are really asking for is to make the player feel the discomfort of certain maneuvers like a high neg g pushover (they would love how they felt after doing that over and over like they do in game), rolling so fast in one direction then reversing the roll the opposite direction with full stick deflection so fast you hit your head on the canopy (done this in a pits a few times)
I believe what is modelled in game is well done. what isn't modelled is what bothers you.
if you put in "pilot dosn't like it" limitations on a flight model that is designed to be as true as possible to the actual airframes capabilities it puts things in a more murky area than the current hard numbers approach.
and lets cut to the chase...
you got shot down before you posted or the bandit you were shooting at squirmed away. if the enemy died and you lived and shot the little wriggling sucker I don't think this thread would exist right now :)
remember the human equation to earl. Every dweeb that plays this game believes that they are the greatest cartoon airplane pilot in the world and anything that gets in the way of that perception must be ignored or explained away.
I am certain I am the greatest cartoon airplane pilot evar too.
-
I would not dismiss that because of a chart I saw once.
Sorry, but that is roadkill. It is not a chart I have seen once and vaguely remembered.
Here it is:
(http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/naca868-rollchart.jpg)
I will take tested data over rough recollections, thank you very much.
-
He was doing that. As soon as he did, people started jumping down his throat.
I was not discounting him or trying to criticize him.
Hiya, Earl. I'm glad you're active on the forum and part of the community, sir. :)
I concur with this.
Some of the responses were too much considering Earl is one of the most respectful posters in the forums. But maybe he's hiding a nasty troll personality, I've always had the feeling he's just waiting for a chance to bounce me.
-
I would trust these charts more than these real world pilots. Why? Because, yes they've flown real life aircraft like the B29 and B17...Hell, I've flown Cessnas..that doesn't mean any of us know exactly how a Spit16 or 109F rolled in WWII :aok
And I wouldn't argue with data (unless I doubted it's accuracy). I might argue that a particular AH aircraft doesn't match known data, or in the case of an in game aircraft I've flown (P-51, B-17, B-24) I might comment that my experience real life doesn't match in game performance, for instance the roll rate of the B-17. The B-17 is the only airplane I've flown real-life where I commonly used full aileron deflection during routine flight. Especially if maneuvering as for a show pass. In game I can do the same type flying and rarely need full aileron, I'm able to get as great or greater rates of roll with less control deflection then needed on the actual aircraft. Do I know how many degrees a second is the correct rate for a B-17? Nope. I wonder if that data exists?
-
:airplane: My BIG wish is for Aces High to slow down the roll rate of the aircraft in the game! I see things in here all the time, that if you did it in a "real" aircraft, you would become a "lawn" dart very quickly. Of course, I realize this is a video game and is designed for the pleasure of many different skill level players. Another way they could slow down some of these wild gyrations of aircraft in a furball, is to black out the pilot when he exceeds a certain standard of roll rate. Of course this wish comes from my desire for AH to make the "game" a little more realistic in the flight characteristics of aircraft, but that is probably asking to much.
A good example of "can't be done" is when a "bandit" is on my six, 1.0k back and I start a loop, and while I am inverted at the top, I look down and the guy chasing me does what looks like a 90 degree change in direction to the vertical, catches me slow and on my back, shoots me down...He should have accelerate stalled his aircraft doing that and snap rolled down. If it was a "real" aircraft, he would have started a loop also to chase me, and while inverted on my back and slow, pop 50% flaps, do a left hand 360 degree turn and come out on his six or catch him inverted and shoot him down. A lot of aircraft were shot down in WW2 and Korea, using that tactic!
:salute To all who responded to this thread! Didn't mean to start a fuss, its just that I see things in this game, if executed in a real aircraft, would be a blacked out pilot, or lose both wings and become a lawn dart. Maybe I just asked the wrong question...again, as always, just trying to post suggestions to improve the game and help Hi Tech pick up customers. Some of the guys I play in here with are starting to play a new game,(won't mention the name), because the aircraft are more realistic in flight than in AH. I realize that the size of the servers would limit the number of players who could play at one time, but I personally believe there is a vast reservoir of new players that would be in the game, but after a two week trail, a lot of them are moving on, looking for that realistic flight sim.
-
:salute To all who responded to this thread! Didn't mean to start a fuss, its just that I see things in this game, if executed in a real aircraft, would be a blacked out pilot, or lose both wings and become a lawn dart. Maybe I just asked the wrong question...again, as always, just trying to post suggestions to improve the game and help Hi Tech pick up customers. Some of the guys I play in here with are starting to play a new game,(won't mention the name), because the aircraft are more realistic in flight than in AH. I realize that the size of the servers would limit the number of players who could play at one time, but I personally believe there is a vast reservoir of new players that would be in the game, but after a two week trail, a lot of them are moving on, looking for that realistic flight sim.
For WWII flight sims this is the most realistic (Flight Model wise) I think most of us have ever come across...What's the name of this game that has a more realistic FM than Aces High and how so?
-
For WWII flight sims this is the most realistic (Flight Model wise) I think most of us have ever come across...What's the name of this game that has a more realistic FM than Aces High and how so?
thats what I want to know....
roll rates are great in game....I think Fester summed it up perfectly...
because I am the best there is...........
you all couldn't fight your way out of a paper bag.......
ill take on anyone of you "real world" pilots and wipe the virtual skies with your pixellated blood......
:t
for those that are thin skinned it was a joke........or was it......hahahahahahaheheheheh eheheheohohohhehehehehehahaha
-
:rofl Ink is just bad... :lol
-
Colmbo, do you think the B-17sm B-24s and P-51s you've flown have the same peak performance as they did when first built? I ask because I've read of cables slightly stretching, engine performance slightly less, etc.
Interesting thread.
Boo
-
I wasn't going to say anything but I just can't get it out of my head...
Talking about unrealistic 'roll rates' and then proceeding to talk about looping and negative G's... With terminology usage like that, kinda makes me wonder what his aerobatic students learned.
It's true that the guys in our cockpits are built like the freaking Terminator. We can pull 5.9 G's all day with no adverse effects. While modeling the cumulative effects of the kinds of stresses on the body we all put the pilot through on a regular sortie might be more realistic, I'd heavily question whether it would be more fun. It'd be almost like a permanent pilot wound.
Wiley.
-
As for modeling pilot fatigue and stress, not possible. All pilots are in A-1 top shape, having passed their Chapter 1 and 4 physicals. Now, if we hooked up a heart monitor, did a BMI or some other test to all our cartoon pilots most would be flying that C-47 thing. :banana:
So yes, I chew nails and crap cast iron bricks. That being the case I can pull 7gs all day long baby!!
Boo
-
Colmbo, do you think the B-17sm B-24s and P-51s you've flown have the same peak performance as they did when first built? I ask because I've read of cables slightly stretching, engine performance slightly less, etc.
The B-24 and P-51 were both complete rebuilds. All of them are well maintained so things like control rigging is checked and adjusted as needed. Once spent an entire morning helping another of our pilots who is also an A&P adjust the throttle cables on the B-17 so that the throttle levers were "synched" throughout the throttle range. (Very unhandy if you have a throttle lever that has to be move differently for the same power setting as other throttles -- gets a bit clumsy).
As for engine performance today we are somewhat power limited since the only AvGas available is 100LL. For the B-17 and B-24 we could pull the same power as they did on wartime 100 octane, but the detonation margin is tighter so we didn't (unless we were really scared taking off :D). The Mustang was limited to 55" MP, wartime was 61 or 62" with WEP being even higher.
With the exception of somewhat limited power today I think the airplanes fly to the same level as a wartime airplane. Perhaps even a bit better since they are better maintained.
-
columbo have youflown the b29 in AH?
would you say the b29 flies more like the bombers you have flown in the way it handles? not talking speeds but response of controls and control inputs needed.
-
columbo have youflown the b29 in AH?
would you say the b29 flies more like the bombers you have flown in the way it handles? not talking speeds but response of controls and control inputs needed.
Yes I have flown the 29 in game. The first time I laughed and thought "there's that Boeing aileron response". I do think there is an issue noticeable with the 29 at speeds below 200 or so. I have experienced times where after rolling into a bank I was unable to roll back wings level. There is a noticeable drop in roll rate below a certain speed. I think what I've experienced might be an issue with the way trim is implemented.
-
Got interrupted. I work in an ER, GSW came in.
The B-24 has nice ailerons, good roll rate with moderate control forces. Elevators are very heavy, rudder as well...engine inop flight is a workout.
I like the AH FM for the most part. All the airplanes are too easy to fly but I guess it is an okay balance between game and sim. I fly it as a sim, for most part fly as I would in real life.
-
Yes I have flown the 29 in game. The first time I laughed and thought "there's that Boeing aileron response". I do think there is an issue noticeable with the 29 at speeds below 200 or so. I have experienced times where after rolling into a bank I was unable to roll back wings level. There is a noticeable drop in roll rate below a certain speed. I think what I've experienced might be an issue with the way trim is implemented.
:airplane: I also have experienced the problem of returning to level flight after a turn....Have had to use a lot of rudder to help the low wing back to level position. Just like the real one, most of the time, it is in the 30 to 35K range of altitude. They have done a pretty good job of modeling the 29 in the game, except for one thing! When in auto-climb and you start a manual climbing turn, the nose wants to drop way to much. Once you had the real one trimed for level climbing attitude, you could start a turn and the nose wouldn't hardly move down when starting the turn, but would have to apply extra back pressure on elevator to maintain climb attitude. What we usually did, was after setting up desired climb rate, engage auto-pilot, then use turn function to turn to new headings. You would lose a little airspeed doing it that way, because the auto-pilot tried to maintain the desired climb rate. Wasn't much point in making over a "standard rate" turn of 3 degrees per second, at any speed, and the ole bird was quite docile in handling.
In stand board rides, the only thing I ever dreaded was the demonstrated 2 engines out on one side thing! If I remember correctly, 1.5 VSO, plus 15 for the wife and kids, but if you used trim as you should and didn't have much of cross wind, it was a piece of cake. Never did any 2 engine go around at less than 10,000 feet, because of the danger of losing control close to the ground and the stand board check pilot not having enough room to recover before crashing. The trick is when they say "go around" at the 10,000 foot level, you applied smooth full power on both good engines and as much rudder as you could apply to keep wings level and gradually work your way into a climb attitude. Step one, apply full power and wep, raise landing gear, establish a positive rate of climb and start milking flaps up. With full flaps down as in landing config, you were doing good to get a 150 foot per min climb rate, but it depended on your gross weight as what you could establish, and temperature and of course, you were working at 10,000 feet as opposed to working at a lower altitude. They would usually tell you about 200 feet above 10,000 feet that a truck had been disable on runway and you had to go around. The "Puckering" factor when to maximum and if you didn't settle below 10,000 feet doing your go around, you passed.
Sorry guys, didn't mean to ramble! LOL
-
the b29 flightmodel feels very authentic to me. everything about it screams a seriously heavy aircraft with tons of intertia to overcome to get it to change its direction.
-
Not rambling at all. Very interesting reading, Earl.
-
When in auto-climb and you start a manual climbing turn, the nose wants to drop way to much. Once you had the real one trimed for level climbing attitude, you could start a turn and the nose wouldn't hardly move down when starting the turn, but would have to apply extra back pressure on elevator to maintain climb attitude.
so why don't you just trim it manually instead of using "auto climb", and see how the flight model behaves in a climbing turn.
you need to compare apples to apples.
I doubt your real B29's had "auto climb" as it is in the game :)
-
:airplane: I also have experienced the problem of returning to level flight after a turn....Have had to use a lot of rudder to help the low wing back to level position. Just like the real one, most of the time, it is in the 30 to 35K range of altitude. They have done a pretty good job of modeling the 29 in the game, except for one thing! When in auto-climb and you start a manual climbing turn, the nose wants to drop way to much. Once you had the real one trimed for level climbing attitude, you could start a turn and the nose wouldn't hardly move down when starting the turn, but would have to apply extra back pressure on elevator to maintain climb attitude. What we usually did, was after setting up desired climb rate, engage auto-pilot, then use turn function to turn to new headings. You would lose a little airspeed doing it that way, because the auto-pilot tried to maintain the desired climb rate. Wasn't much point in making over a "standard rate" turn of 3 degrees per second, at any speed, and the ole bird was quite docile in handling.
In stand board rides, the only thing I ever dreaded was the demonstrated 2 engines out on one side thing! If I remember correctly, 1.5 VSO, plus 15 for the wife and kids, but if you used trim as you should and didn't have much of cross wind, it was a piece of cake. Never did any 2 engine go around at less than 10,000 feet, because of the danger of losing control close to the ground and the stand board check pilot not having enough room to recover before crashing. The trick is when they say "go around" at the 10,000 foot level, you applied smooth full power on both good engines and as much rudder as you could apply to keep wings level and gradually work your way into a climb attitude. Step one, apply full power and wep, raise landing gear, establish a positive rate of climb and start milking flaps up. With full flaps down as in landing config, you were doing good to get a 150 foot per min climb rate, but it depended on your gross weight as what you could establish, and temperature and of course, you were working at 10,000 feet as opposed to working at a lower altitude. They would usually tell you about 200 feet above 10,000 feet that a truck had been disable on runway and you had to go around. The "Puckering" factor when to maximum and if you didn't settle below 10,000 feet doing your go around, you passed.
Sorry guys, didn't mean to ramble! LOL
what a treat.... :aok
-
the only thing I ever dreaded was the demonstrated 2 engines out on one side thing!
Hehe. Unless you're farting helium you're going to land in the Liberator with two engines out. After the engine out work on my checkride my left leg was jello!! While working up for the checkride we did a simulated 3 engine ILS to some field in central Florida on one of those 90 degree, 99% humidity days and of course had to do the missed from DH. I got the sink stopped but then flew the length of the 7000' foot runway before we finally started to climb again. It takes about 18 seconds for the gear to retract and the hydraulic system can't handle gear and flaps at the same time so you dang sure better have gotten the flaps up to 20 degrees before starting the gear cycle. Slowly accel from the 120IAS approach speed to the 140 you want for climb.
Dang, I really do miss flying that airplane!!
-
Hehe. Unless you're farting helium you're going to land in the Liberator with two engines out. After the engine out work on my checkride my left leg was jello!! While working up for the checkride we did a simulated 3 engine ILS to some field in central Florida on one of those 90 degree, 99% humidity days and of course had to do the missed from DH. I got the sink stopped but then flew the length of the 7000' foot runway before we finally started to climb again. It takes about 18 seconds for the gear to retract and the hydraulic system can't handle gear and flaps at the same time so you dang sure better have gotten the flaps up to 20 degrees before starting the gear cycle. Slowly accel from the 120IAS approach speed to the 140 you want for climb.
Dang, I really do miss flying that airplane!!
:airplane: Unless one has had some 4 engine training or check out in something with 4 fans, most people wouldn't appreciate, as I do, your chance of a life time, to fly those old WW2 war birds, the 17G and the 24. We to had to do 3 engine ILS approaches to decision height, usually, 200 feet above the runway and then hear the dreaded words, "runway disabled, go around"! Fortunately, I had a lot more power at my disposal with which to carry out the missed approach procedure. (In case anyone is wondering, we didn't really shut down one engine, we just had the power reduced to zero thrust, to simulate a dead engine! on the 29, it was 12 inches manifold pressure and full RPM). As someone once said, the best time to know emergency procedures and the worst time to pratice them is during a "real" emergency!! :uhoh One thing you, out of a survival mood, always have a plan of some kind, which will enable you to survive in any emergency! I had mine one night in a C-46, which I was flying as copilot. Had went to work for freight outfit with C-46's, DC-6B's and "Connies". Having been told that I would be move up to DC-6B's after about of 100 hours in the C-46 to learn company procedures and etc. The Captain I had that night, was drinking, I smelled it on him in Kansas City before takeoff. It was confirmed when we lined up on the runway, he locked the tail wheel, pushed his seat back and said, "you got it all the way to Willow Run". Since I had about 10 hours in the a/c, 6 for type rating, and 1 trip, thought I could handle it OK, so pushed Throttles up and away we went. IFR all the way with thunderstorms and the whole nine yards, 1600 feet RVR at runway of intended landing. We had picked up a little ice when making the penetration and we had about a 20 to 25 knot crosswind, about 40 degrees across the runway. Wasn't getting any help out of the so called captain, he was asleep, I decided if the thing got away from me attempting the landing, I would just jerk the gear out from under it and take my chances on a belly landing! After all there was a fire department there and emergency equipment, but as it turned out, I dribbled the thing about 4,000 feet down the runway, got it stopped, unlocked the tail wheel, turned to taxi to terminal and all the Captain had to say was "Helluva a Landing". I left the company after that!