PDA

View Full Version : We have the P51 but where's the torque?



XyZspineZyX
11-18-2003, 11:35 PM
I've been flying the P51 in a Normandy pre D-Day campaign, Its fantastic the West Front Maps and heavy bomber action really add another dimension to FB.

One problem though. I'm no flight model expert I dont normally post on flight model issues, but the almost complete absence of torque swing when I mash the throttle in the P51 just feels odd. I know the aircraft in FB dont swing much on takeoff apart from the I16 but with the P51 the lack of swing just doesn't feel right.

I can mash the throttle from idle to 110% and back with no real effect that cant be countered with a little bit of rudder and off I go. From reading accounts of flying real warbirds I shouldn't even be able to stay on the runway at full power on takefoff, the rudder effect just isn't strong enough to counter the massive torque (or slipstream/P-Factor effect) from the engine.

I can see that a wildly swinging aircraft is difficult to handle for people without rudder pedals, but couldn't realistic torque/slipstream/p-factor levels be an option in the difficulty settings?

MOG

XyZspineZyX
11-18-2003, 11:35 PM
I've been flying the P51 in a Normandy pre D-Day campaign, Its fantastic the West Front Maps and heavy bomber action really add another dimension to FB.

One problem though. I'm no flight model expert I dont normally post on flight model issues, but the almost complete absence of torque swing when I mash the throttle in the P51 just feels odd. I know the aircraft in FB dont swing much on takeoff apart from the I16 but with the P51 the lack of swing just doesn't feel right.

I can mash the throttle from idle to 110% and back with no real effect that cant be countered with a little bit of rudder and off I go. From reading accounts of flying real warbirds I shouldn't even be able to stay on the runway at full power on takefoff, the rudder effect just isn't strong enough to counter the massive torque (or slipstream/P-Factor effect) from the engine.

I can see that a wildly swinging aircraft is difficult to handle for people without rudder pedals, but couldn't realistic torque/slipstream/p-factor levels be an option in the difficulty settings?

MOG

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 02:20 AM
Right on Mogster!

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 03:00 AM
Where's the torque in the Bf-109? That plane was notorious for its dangerous take-off and landing characterisitics due to excessive torque.

Yeah add some torque, but do it properly and do it fir all planes.



Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/sighell.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 04:26 AM
S! Oleg and the Gang
Hey just curious about somthin.. Did I hear about a real life P-51 pilot that was supposed to take a look at the Mustang FM? If this was true, how did that go and what did he have to say?
Thanks.

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 05:17 AM
My thoughts exactly, Difficulty screen\Torque & Gyro Effects. Increase them so as to make all planes as hard to fly as their real life counterparts. If people find it too difficult they can switch torque and gyro off in the settings screen. I can see some frustrated players in the near future as they are vulched on their 10th take-off attempt lol. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

SkyChimp wrote:
- Where's the torque in the Bf-109? That plane was
- notorious for its dangerous take-off and landing
- characterisitics due to excessive torque.
-
- Yeah add some torque, but do it properly and do it
- fir all planes.
-
-
-
-
- Regards,
-
- SkyChimp
-
<img
- src="http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/sighell.j
- pg">
-
-

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:31 AM
Mogster wrote:
-
. I know the
- aircraft in FB dont swing much on takeoff apart from
- the I16 but with the P51 the lack of swing just
- doesn't feel right.
-

- MOG
-
-

I found the He-111 & the Ju-87 swing on takeoff, So much so that with the 111 i frequently crashed or had to take off from rough ground cause i could'nt stay on the runway, Full rudder did'nt help any, But when i shut off TORQUE & GYRO effects it still swung on take off, I found it's actually WIND & TURBULENCE that causes aircraft to swing on take off, Maybe if they tone down Wind & increase Torque the planes would be more controllable

"An attack against a unit of Flying Fortresses was something like controlled suicide...Sometimes 50, Sometimes 80 machine guns were firing at you... You attempted to close your eyes & continue to fire, Frightened to death, Frightened to death."

Oberst Johannes Steinhoff (176 kills)

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 09:58 AM
Yes...please more and realistic torque and propwash effects for all planes (except jets and rockets, of course /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif )

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 01:33 PM
Agree, bump !

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 03:34 PM
I completely agree. I flew the TF-51D Mustang in 5 g aerobatics including spins in both directions, hammerhead stalls, inverted, accelerated stalls, climbing accelerated stalls and stability tests among others.

In one typical maneuver at 10,000 feet, I reduced manifold pressure (throttle) to idle, put down the landing gear and lowered full flaps. Now I quickly added power...all this simulates a "go around"(aborted landing). The TF-51D does a violent, sudden, uncommanded torque roll...ie the airframe rotates around the propeller.

The Il-2 P-51 does not do this at all.

On the TF-51D takeoff from a standing start, there is no way to suddenly add power and maintain control- even with rudder trim added...the TF-51D veers violently,suddenly, uncontrollably to the left like a weather vane in a hurricane. It is very unnerving to be totally helpless. It happens so suddenly and forceably.

Il-2 does not do this.

Yes, I agree with you. Il-2, as an option, needs to add more torque forces- the spiraling slipstream torque effect being the most dominant one along with the others of asymmetric propeller loading ("P-factor"), equal and opposite reactions and precession.

The Mustang is simply uncontrollable in certain flight situations because of the torque forces.

The Spitfire Mk. 9 I flew in 4 g aerobatics displays similar tendencies to the Mustang... but just in a more toned down way.

Richard

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 04:17 PM
bump <<<

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 04:28 PM
The P-51 manual clearly states that jamming the throttle all the way forward on take-off will cause a loss of control of the aircraft.

But again, its not just the P-51.

The Bf-109 is hugely undermodelled in this regard. Its light weight, powerful engine and narrow landing gear made it especially suseptible to torque effects.

In fact, all planes are undermodelled when it comes to this.

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/sighell.jpg



Message Edited on 11/19/0306:35PM by SkyChimp

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 04:37 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- Again, its not just the P-51. The Bf-109 is hugely
- undermodelled in this regard. In fact, all planes
- are undermodelled when it comes to this.
-
- Regards,
-
- SkyChimp


This is correct, According to an interview with Gunther Rall he said that the 109 had alot of engine torque on takeoff that needed to be compensated for with alot of rudder, So i tested this in the game, I shut off WIND & TURBULENCE but left on TORQUE & GYRO effects & there was little to no Torque on takeoff, I hardly had to move the rudder at all.

"An attack against a unit of Flying Fortresses was something like controlled suicide...Sometimes 50, Sometimes 80 machine guns were firing at you... You attempted to close your eyes & continue to fire, Frightened to death, Frightened to death."

Oberst Johannes Steinhoff (176 kills)

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:08 PM
r.ordway,since you're around and seem to have the kind of flight experience i lack,could you add a few more precisions ?

1/does the real mustang have roll inertia ? None of Il2FB planes seem to have any.All the aircraft i flew,including light aerobatics CAP 10,had some,when returning stick to center the roll didn't stop instantly.I even had in some planes to apply counter ailerons to keep the bank,if not bank would increase slowly.I wonder if no roll inertia is a warbird carachteristic or a IL2FB FM glitch (CFS2 has roll inertia modelled AFAIR).

2/when you lower flaps in a real 51,without touching the stick at all,does the nose slightly drop or rise ? In all the planes i know it drops slightly initially (while altitude increses),then depending on the plane and flaps type nose rises ,little or more.What's your experience in the 51 ?

thanks very much for further enlightement /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:22 PM
/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif hehe well thanks for the P~51 update ordway, you didnt' mention lack of torque in the "New P~51" advertisement and it's pasted copy at ubi. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif Next time, fire the marketing department and write your own review /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif Sorry, it just didn't sound like a real life "pilot" wrote that.

lots of smiley faces here

You mentioned you dived TF51 up to "400km/hr," are you guys limited in pushing these old planes up to speed?

About torque, there does seem to be an "issue" with taking off I~153 at full throttle, as the wings tend to roll and if you have the rockets you blow up easy. But if you throttle up to 100% after the tail comes up you are safe, and that may have been kinda the way it was I dunno.

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:25 PM
Youch, I may have meant "400mi/hr." /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif I am feeling sloppy today.

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 06:39 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- The P-51 manual clearly states that jamming the
- throttle all the way forward on take-off will cause
- a loss of control of the aircraft.
-
- But again, its not just the P-51.
-
- The Bf-109 is hugely undermodelled in this regard.
- Its light weight, powerful engine and narrow landing
- gear made it especially suseptible to torque
- effects.
-
- In fact, all planes are undermodelled when it comes
- to this.


I second that. Flying those planes gets boringwhen I'm not forced to wath my manifold-pressure gauge during t/o and approach.
I think it was much more thrilling to push the throttle to the edge in a 109 than it's modelled like now...

Anyway, if this got some attention and the torque-effect gets increased, the 190 just has one "advantage" more. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Same goes for a/c with a good rudder-trim.

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig.jpg (http://www.virtual-jabog32.de)

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig2.jpg (http://www.jg68.de.vu)

When once you have tasted flight,
you will always walk the earth
with your eyes turned skyward;
to where you have been
and to where you always want to return.

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 07:16 PM
This game is weird, everytime i take the K4 up i get on runway hit gas and they thing will go to either side hard and i have to adjust with the rudder...? why do some people get diff effects than others?

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 07:16 PM
-- Flying those planes gets boring when I'm not forced to
-- wath my manifold-pressure gauge during t/o and approach.

Mainly because of the lack of a frontline air warfare environment in FB. This is more a "civil" peacetime pilot sim in disguise than anything. Wait a few years for a CPU and FB will be able to sim a frontline environment in which you will be like real life combat pilots and dream of auto pilot and full auto engine management. Real combat pilots didn't get "bored" with equipment that made their frontline missions easier. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 08:00 PM
A bump for anything that has to do with propeller drag torque, P-factor, gyroscopic torque, coupling and slipstream effects for all aircraft. A vote for a serious slow speed model /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
At least make stronger again what is already modeled.

XyZspineZyX
11-19-2003, 10:30 PM
What JaRa said.

*BUMPAGE*

JG5_UnKle

"Know and use all the capabilities of your airplane. If you don't sooner or later, somebody who does, will kick your ***"


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/victoria.stevens/jg5_logo.jpg

JG5_UnKle

"Know and use all the capabilities of your airplane. If you don't sooner or later, somebody who does, will kick your ***"


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/victoria.stevens/jg5_logo.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 12:03 AM
And we're already losing so many aircraft in coops during takeoff... /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 12:34 AM
I'm all for it, but toss this in the game and you will see numerous posts filled with cries of folks who can't get their craft off the ground.

Again, I'm all for it but I think Oleg and Co. continuously walk a thin line of playability VS realism. Keep in mind our SIM still has to be marketable.

Creates even more questions about the outcome of BOB.



"We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 01:26 AM
GR142_Astro wrote:
- I'm all for it, but toss this in the game and you
- will see numerous posts filled with cries of folks
- who can't get their craft off the ground.

-> realism option

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 02:59 AM
Great discussion. The FB flight models are superb except for their lack of torque affects...



----------------------------------------
I've been waiting for a simulator as good as IL-2 for 20 years...

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 03:09 AM
The Fw-190D has a lot of torque on take off. It will nearly flip your plane, but not quite. If you don't increase power slowly, you'll do right hand turns

Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/sighell.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 03:14 AM
Will give us a lot of P-38 pilots if we get tremendous torque effects... lol!

http://www.mechmodels.com/images/klv_ubisig1a.jpg


Oh yeah, I'm a P-63 whiner too! /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 03:29 AM
Korolov wrote:
- Will give us a lot of P-38 pilots if we get
- tremendous torque effects... lol!


Yeah, and realistic stalls, too /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif



Regards,

SkyChimp

http://members.cox.net/rowlandparks/sighell.jpg

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 05:03 AM
I don't see any issue with players complaining about difficulty settings now for the simple reason that if the host thinks it is too difficult he will adjust the settings accordingly. If the gyro/torque settings are increased in the game FM to reflect R/L as close as possible in the near future, and peeps complain about it then the host has the option to tone it down. This is what we have right now and it's not causing much concern, so I don't see why it would create concern if the forces are increased. My opinion is that if you crashed on take off due to rough handling of the throttle you have just experienced what a large number of real life WWII pilots discovered when they stuffed up. This will just enhance the game from a marketing point of view, all ancient history now though.

..
GR142_Astro wrote:
- I'm all for it, but toss this in the game and you
- will see numerous posts filled with cries of folks
- who can't get their craft off the ground.
-
- Again, I'm all for it but I think Oleg and Co.
- continuously walk a thin line of playability VS
- realism. Keep in mind our SIM still has to be
- marketable.
-
- Creates even more questions about the outcome of
- BOB.
-
-
-
- "We will welcome them with bullets and shoes."

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 01:57 PM
GR142_Astro wrote:
- I'm all for it, but toss this in the game and you
- will see numerous posts filled with cries of folks
- who can't get their craft off the ground.
-
- Again, I'm all for it but I think Oleg and Co.
- continuously walk a thin line of playability VS
- realism. Keep in mind our SIM still has to be
- marketable.
-
- Creates even more questions about the outcome of
- BOB.

In theory (code base permitting) there is no reason
why it shouldn't be available as an option. It would
need an additional patch beyond 1.2 if it isn't there
already. Basically in addition to the current torque
option, and additional "no, really, torque" box.

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 02:19 PM
SkyChimp wrote:
- The Fw-190D has a lot of torque on take off.

Yes, but it won't flip if you don't make a major misstake.

But taking-off a 109 after a "long" night can be quite deadly /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig.jpg (http://www.virtual-jabog32.de)

http://franz.lampl.bei.t-online.de/toryusig2.jpg (http://www.jg68.de.vu)

When once you have tasted flight,
you will always walk the earth
with your eyes turned skyward;
to where you have been
and to where you always want to return.

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 08:25 PM
With the expantion of the FM calculations in BOB I wonder if we'll see an option to have more realistic torque levels? Its a shame but I cant see this issue being patched for FB to be honest.

Rowan sims always had fm's were the aircraft were a real handfull on the ground, I prefer Maddox FM's in the air but for takeoffs Rowan's felt much more real. Trying to get the Spit off the ground in Rowans BOB was a real experience. Without lots of concentration you either ended up upside down or heading towards the control tower.

MOG

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 09:53 PM
MAJOR BUMP

even cfs2 had some great torque effects in some AC.


lets bump till we get reply on high

eventually oleg will have to notice it.



"more torque please, sir"

XyZspineZyX
11-20-2003, 10:49 PM
uber-BUMP!

I'd like to emphasize again that the really interesting aspects of these effects are not only during takeoff, but rather during maneuvering. They can be used tactically to one's advantage or disadvantage. Not to mention that the FM would feel more alive and challenging with them /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

XyZspineZyX
11-21-2003, 11:22 AM
support realistic torque !!!

XyZspineZyX
11-21-2003, 07:24 PM
bump

XyZspineZyX
11-23-2003, 12:35 PM
bump

http://www.endlager.net/fis/pix/banners/fis_banner_07.gif


She turned me into a newt, but I got better.

XyZspineZyX
11-28-2003, 04:07 AM
Bump. Bump.

Pat.

XyZspineZyX
11-28-2003, 05:44 AM
i agreed i think there is no P-factor added to the fly model also would be grat for the game to have that /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif


but also I have found something for the book To fly and fight by Col clarence "Bud" Anderson page 108

"The P 51 have one little disturbing eccentricity. when the fuel tank behind the pilot was full, the center of gravity was a bit too far aft, which made the palne unstable. If you hauled back on the controls, turning tightly, the nose would come up too fast and the plane would try to flip over backwards. it would have stalled firts, of course, and you´d have to push forward on the stick to prevent it. "


mabe on the tf51 this efect is not present because is a two pilot tanden plane, the palne he was talking about is the p-51B-7 the D is not metined but could be affected too...


So here is another point of trick of the mustang. so i think the model needs some correction lets see.