nozlen

A video that will help you fly a 109 without flopping.

76 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, vasduten1 said:

Bingo!

 

I believe that the lowered torque is what causes this flop, but is there NO way to find a middle ground?

@HATCH

Aces High has any easy mode, takeoff box you can check. Maybe CRS could do something akin - easy values on the ground, real values in the air.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it can't be just the torque, when it flops it doesn't just want to spin. it flaps it's wings and thrashes it's tail, absolutely uncontrollable, it can't even fall to re-stabilize like every other plane in your video.

there has to be more to it.

 

it's also exclusive to the 09's, allied effected by a torque reduction can flop and recover fine.

Edited by major0noob

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, major0noob said:

it can't be just the torque, when it flops it doesn't just want to spin. it flaps it's wings and thrashes it's tail, absolutely uncontrollable, it can't even fall to re-stabilize like every other plane in your video.

there has to be more to it.

 

it's also exclusive to the 09's, allied effected by a torque reduction can flop and recover fine.

This is also true.

 

People complain about the Hawks flopping, but I LOVE the way they handle.

I have fallen out of a flop in a 109, but that's SO rare.

Usually it's tail and wing flapping and being flung end over end... holy crap it's bad.

 

One has to fly SO conservatively or map extra weird trim controls as flight controls to not have a lot of these issues.

 

Hopefully part of the air lovin' that is supposedly coming includes making the 109 manageable and not an utter joke.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nozlen, I couldn't get the hang of the throttle thing, but what I did do was set the elevator trim to the y axis and invert it. I then cleared the y axis from the pitch. It doesn't turn as tight, BUT, it doesn't flop and handles very well. I am a noob and this seems the best way to quick fix for new pilots. Maybe I can set the pitch to a key or button. Or maybe leave the pitch connected to the y axis but only have it kick in when the joystick is maxed backwards for a tighter turn? I don't know how to do that yet but maybe you could take this idea and improve on it? Btw, I don't have a twisty stick, I have rudder pedals but don't use them(sad right?), but I wonder if I connect the rudder pedals to the rudder trim that might work. I will keep experimenting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Force a cross rotate turn using rudder, will force slats to open, which can induce the "flop".

Try not going left to right at slower speeds level, but roll  under for the turn, and do not give rudder input at same time if you just have to do a level left to right turn ,vice versa

few clicks neg trim helps too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you guys aern't getting it, the problem isn't flopping the 09.

it's when it flops your as good as dead, all other planes recover fine but the 09 always looses 80-150km/h and 200-1k alt.

 

compared to basically every other plane in the game loosing 20-50km/h and 100-200m alt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/9/2016 at 3:45 AM, major0noob said:

it's when it flops your as good as dead, all other planes recover fine but the 09 always looses 80-150km/h and 200-1k alt.,  compared to basically every other plane in the game loosing 20-50km/h and 100-200m alt.

Agreed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the Saturday update if you didn't see it:

BF-109 FLIGHT MODEL REVIEW

HATCH is working to improve the BF-109 flight model. For sometime we have been concerned with its performance and on a quick initial review, there are some noticeable discrepancies. While we won't go into too much detail, the major concern comes from its handling and the overall platform's instability (or flop).

This marks the beginning of likely several reviews on WWII Online's flight models. Stay tuned for more.

 

I would just like to add that the p-36 seems about 50kph less the the historical specs, so if you could take a look...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, biggles4 said:

BF-109 FLIGHT MODEL REVIEW

HATCH is working to improve the BF-109 flight model. For sometime we have been concerned with its performance and on a quick initial review, there are some noticeable discrepancies. While we won't go into too much detail, the major concern comes from its handling and the overall platform's instability (or flop).

This marks the beginning of likely several reviews on WWII Online's flight models. Stay tuned for more.

THANK GOODNESS!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BF-109 FLIGHT MODEL REVIEW

HATCH is working to improve the BF-109 flight model. For sometime we have been concerned with its performance and on a quick initial review, there are some noticeable discrepancies. While we won't go into too much detail, the major concern comes from its handling and the overall platform's instability (or flop).

This marks the beginning of likely several reviews on WWII Online's flight models. Stay tuned for more.

farting-preacher-5.jpg

Hallelujah!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Biggles, the 109 is broken. not per se, it is just broken.

I was going to write out a long post but instead i'll just say is if you want to read how a 109 flew this is one of the best reports out there. This plane was first captured/tested by the french then later tested by the brits. read that and tell me the 109 isn't way off.

 

http://www.kurfurst.org/Tactical_trials/109E_UKtrials/Morgan.html

 

@Xoom ... thank you. Have a look at the spit's anemic rudder authority too (and damage model ;-)).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@HATCH Maybe we can also figure out why the 109's engine is audible when it's 500M behind any Allied plane?

 

I've flown a few times as Allied and was absolutely shocked and appalled that I could HEAR when any 109 was behind me. All I had to do was yank the stick and turn away from them. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sideout said:

Ahem........and while your in that Mode,  how about throwing in a ju88 and a Guppy!

S!

Let's not mistake, "reviewing current flight models," with bringing in new ones. New vehicles are not what we're referring to at the moment. Don't want any confusion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

2 hours ago, madrebel said:

Biggles, the 109 is broken. not per se, it is just broken.

I was going to write out a long post but instead i'll just say is if you want to read how a 109 flew this is one of the best reports out there. This plane was first captured/tested by the french then later tested by the brits. read that and tell me the 109 isn't way off.

 

http://www.kurfurst.org/Tactical_trials/109E_UKtrials/Morgan.html

 

@Xoom ... thank you. Have a look at the spit's anemic rudder authority too (and damage model ;-)).

I read much of the report, its interesting. I don't know what all changes they made in the audit that gave the 09 its pronounced flop, but a torque reduction did seem to be one of the changes, and from what I've read that ought to make a flop worse.

And the report is interesting as well in that the planes here used to behave as they state in the report when stalling under gs.

Spitfire: If the stick is pulled back too far on the Spitfire in a tight turn, the aircraft may stall rather violently, flick over on to its back, and spin.

Remember that? Exactly what the spit used to do, Ok it recovered almost immediately if the stick was released and so folks didn't spin much, but it sure flicked over. 

109: When the slots were fully open the aircraft could be turned quite steadily until very near the stall. If the stick was then pulled back a little more the aircraft suddenly shuddered, and either tended to come out of the turn or dropped its wing further, oscillating meanwhile in pitch and roll and rapidly losing height ; the aircraft immediately unstalled if the stick was eased forward.

That thar is a flop! Albeit easier to recover (like it used to be) and so probably a lot less than what we got now. Hopefully they can get it right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

no, that there is an extremely benign stall and stall recovery and all over the report is the further info of "never tends to spin". what we have is a flop and then spinning something the 109 should basically never do.

 

spits should have a relatively violent stall/spin if/when pushed too far. this is why the report says spit pilots were afraid to take their plane to the limit allowing the 109 to stay on their tail on numerous occassions. i don't remember the spitfire ever spinning in this game and always remember it being really easy to recover from a stall.

 

what seems to have occurred all those years ago was a tiny area on the model was designated as a lift surface. this are of the model was likely intentionally done that way to give the 109 the stability it should have had. when this was removed the 109 no longer was stable and to make sure the plane could at least be flown in game almost all the torque was removed. reducing torque would make a plane less likely to depart not more likely. if we still had the old torque values with the flop09 the thing wouldn't fly at all in game.

i'll be curious to see how it gets fixed.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Weeeeelll! Xoom evidently blew my first big surprise... Dag Nabit!! Anyway...

I have been following along and taking notes for when the time would come. A plane audit is HIGH on my "Want To Do List" but currently been a little busy with marketing and promotional things. Couple of things about all the birds in this game and with the 109 as compared to the other fighters in the context of this "control" thread. First off, all of the planes are built in specialized components for each, all the way down to airfoil design type and area, percentage of chord for control surfaces, and degrees of "throw" as per the design blueprints or testing reports from each plane. In other words, I don't tell the model control surface how much force to apply (in particular yaw or elevator control for the 109 rudder in this context) we build the airfoil to spec and add it to the model. Quick visual check on the current control surfaces and watching them make the plane react in the WWIIOL virtual world doesn't indicate anything obviously out of the ordinary as far as the control surfaces in operation go. But there is quite a bit more to it than that.

The initial premise of this thread is basically instructions how to "de-tune" the joystick so that when you pull full deflection on the control stick, or rudder pedals, the planes elevator or rudder will not move to its max capable deflection. Another initial part of this thread is teaching pilots to use elevator trim rather than the elevator for changing AOA. Because the 109 has a variable incidence "flying tail" and this is a game with programmable "fly by wire" controls rather than trying to dogfight with the trim wheel as you would be if trying that in real life, the the trim "workaround" does help to pull AOA more slowly and in a far more limited fashion than the elevator can, and "detuning" the stick still lets you move the elevator up or down more quickly than the trim, but in the end, it is still just eliminating the full elevator potential. Bottom line is that both are artificial limitations to keep from accidental over control and the "detuning" specifically writes off some of the fidelity with control capabilities, primarily very close to, or at post departure flight regimes in the model. Better for newbies, limiting for experts... Still this "need" obviously has it's place here or we wouldn't be talking about it. Maybe one day we can figure out some sort of easy mode that does that limiting for you instead of having to do the trim and control thing. Better yet, I have always wanted to figure out what happened to that particular model that makes it behave so badly that people are afraid to push it to its absolute limits in fear of cartwheeling out of the sky... 

Part of the 109's "control problem" in relation to all of the other fighters that I do not want to change because it IS part of the historical design that makes the 109 the 109, specifically in relation to the spit in this instance, is that it has a higher wing loading than the spit, has operational leading edge slats to help compensate for that higher wing loading and to maintain aileron control at higher AOA than the spit and most all of the other planes, and at the same time, has around twice the rudder and somewhere around 30% more elevator throw control than the spit does... That has two primary consequences that has to do with being able to pull more AOA and yaw than the spit can simply because of the extra control authority in the elevator and rudder. In RL, most pilots would appreciate that because higher AOA can be the difference in a tighter instantaneous turn at the right speed, or even be the difference in the lead needed for a gun solution at the right time. Those attributes are good things, but they come at a cost. Because of the higher wing loading and ability to pull more controllable AOA, it is MUCH easier to push past the "edge" into accelerated stall territory where you pass the lift "sweet spot" and start piling on the drag and burning up your energy, getting worse the slower you go and the more AOA you pull slowing you down even faster and getting ever more detrimental right up to the point of stall and departure from controlled flight. Then to compound that, BANG! one of the slats opens or closes on you in an asymmetrical fashion and now you ALSO have an unexpected yawing moment thrown into the mix, right at the worst possible time when the airflow over your control surfaces might not be adequate to maintain control of the aircraft. All of that is historically accurate in the 109 design and I intend to make sure to keep it that way.

That said, there is a LOT more to the flight model that can, and I am sure quite frankly IS making the plane go from a "workable" yawing moment into that crazy vertical flop, and that is where I am going first. The long and short of it is that every single component that makes up the model, and I mean everything, from the engines/superchargers and propeller disk, fuselage, all the wing and airfoil components, the, guns and cannon, right down to the pilot, his armor plate, and the radiators, besides each applying mass or weight at their proper x, y, z, coordinates within each plane model, they also have x, y, and z, axis rotational inertia's based on their size shape and mass that have to be computed and entered into the model by hand and that all come together to determine the rotational inertia totals for the model. I have already run across a few anomalies here, and this is pretty much where I think we'll find the rest of our gremlins. I had always wanted to check into that since I first started building and auditing the planes after Mo. And I was solely responsible for the 109 and the way it flew from that time up until my departure in Dec 2005. Unfortunately I got "cut" before I could get around to fixing it, and as a result, that SoB has bothered me for the last 15 years... (You ended up getting the P38, FW190, and the C47, an Opel audit, a couple of new tanks, and a tank mass, inertia, and suspension audit instead if I remember correctly)

Anyway, Xoom gave me the tools I needed to do that awhile back for another project (sorry, "top secret"), but in the need to bolster marketing to take advantage of the new capabilities you are seeing this new team produce, and Badger temporarily having RL override his WWIIOL time, I have been putting all my WWIIOL time into filling in for Badger and helping the new marketing team (friggin subscribe already people and let me get back to building vehicles and planes full time!!!! ;-)). But between that damn bird being a major friggin "itch" I have not been able to scratch for 15 years, and after running across these same old "floppy 109" threads while researching the last two community reports, I couldn't help myself. I was reading this thread and actually started replying to it regarding the 109 characteristics that are different than the other planes in the first part of this post and bam! I had to go look. Guilty as of last night and this morning cross referencing 135.3 109 FM files with the ones I still have on my "homework" hard drives from 2001-2005. I was sorta thinking about fixing it and then turning it in as a "oh, by the way" surprise, but like Xoom mentioned about the marketing meeting on soundcloud, I had the "presenter" screen and sorta got caught with "my hand in the cookie jar" still having a couple of flight model files open on my desktop. So I went ahead and showed/told him a few issues I had already found between last night and this mornings meeting. Fortunately he wasn't too perturbed at me for playin' 109 hooky before my marketing meeting... ;-)

So to make a long story short, I am indeed going to get her sorted out and get that "flop" wonkyness fixed. Once I get it sorted out in the E3, because they are all so closely related, it's trivial to apply the same changes to all of the current 109 models. But be warned, I do not intend to be changing ANY historical aspects like control surface throws, wing areas, overall weights or wing loading, climb rates, top speeds, or anything else of that nature. For instance, the spit mk1 will always have a little bit tighter "yank and bank" sustained turn radius than the 109e, but the majority of the "flop" will surely be eliminated, (remember, some of the initiators of unexpected yaw that I spoke of earlier like asymmetrical deployment of the slats, and the ability to pull high angles of AOA will definitely remain).  But I have already checked some and will be double checking all the other airfoils, frontal areas, and deployed slat drag, and indications are there that it might hold on to its energy a little better if not too pushed too far for too long beyond that AOA "sweet spot".

Merry Christmas!!! HO! HO! HO!   
 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for chiming in Hatch, best of luck.

 

 

 

 

 

I swear I'll get a paying account soon as I get more money, I swear!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Blah blah blah E3 blah blah blah" -*SKERRT!*

 

Hold on a sec... did you just accidentally reveal something about the E3?

WHAT?!?!?!

 

 

Seriously, though... I'm so glad you responded, and that you are working on it once again.

Nobody wants the historical aspects of the 109 to be changed at all -we just want it to not have four variables snowball and make it cartwheel at lower speeds while attempting a turn.

:)

The report above mentiins a sweet spot between 100-250mph where it actually out classes the Spits and Hurris and acts more akin to the H75 in maneuverability, as well as a glowing review of how it handles very well at low speeds to boot.

Now, there were a lot of torque issues, and NO adjustment allowable for rudder trim, which made the plane slip to the right at speeds greater than 100mph, and at higher speeds the pedals were so stiff to maintain that rudder correction it was described as "tiring". I think that's the sort of thing a noob would hate, but a vet pilot would love to see as a detail to be proud of.

Those 1100hp motors were indeed prone to creating a bunch of torque.

What they didn't do was make the plane audible as they got behind Allied pilots as they flew along at 200mph.

 

:P

 

Edited by vasduten1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post Hatch glad you chimed in and stated what you where doing.

 

OOh and nice cookie with the E3 comment. :D

Edited by nozlen

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The E3 isn't much different from the E4. the E4's biggest improvement was head armor for the pilot and the MG/FF/M rounds, which I don't think we have currently.

I realize that I am just going on about something that may be a typo...

I'm just excited that the aur game is being looked at AT ALL.

Wicked nice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I might add Hatch, I would not mention something as "Easy Mode" in this game, because you have (how do I say) certain people, that like nothing more then belittling their fellow pilot gamer's, and it would make new players leave quickly if they had to hear Capt. Awesome blab on about how noobs suck and he is the bestest of the best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.